Earth Capsule - Saving the World

Earth Capsule - Saving the World: "Earth Capsule is the largest, most unique time-capsule preservation project ever designed.

For $1 you can pass on to future generations the predictions, personal writings, historical accounts, love dedications, articles, and other writings that you consider to be most important. Nothing will be censored, nothing will be restricted, nothing will be read until the capsules are opened.
Earth Capsule has created a system that will preserve messages in two different ways:.
The City Capsule will be placed in a trusteeship to be unsealed in 50 years.
The BlueWater Capsule will be committed to the depths of the oceans, seas, and lakes and thus left to the fate of the tides.
By choosing to place your messages in multiple locations and in both kinds of capsules, you will best ensure that they will be preserved for the future. Also, because Earth Capsule will be donating a portion of proceeds to our charity partners, your participation in Earth Capsule will help preserve our heritage and pass on our collective wisdom to future generations.
Capsules will be sealed in 2007, so join in the Earth Capsule effort by contributing your thoughts and ideas to be preserved for the people of tomorrow.
History isn't just for historians... It's for all of us.
Click Here to Get Started >>>"

Visions of Peace Not Enough

"To wit, the prophets of Israel which prophesy concerning Jerusalem, and which see visions of peace for her, and there is no peace, saith the Lord GOD. Likewise, thou son of man, set thy face against the daughters of thy people, which prophesy out of their own heart; and prophesy thou against them," - Ezekiel (13:16-17 KJV)

”It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry (In the Virginia House of Burgesses.)

From a Yahoo! AP article, Slain American Hostage Was Bound, Shot:

Slain American Hostage Was Bound, Shot

The body of American Tom Fox, who was among four Christian peace activists kidnapped last year, was found near a west Baghdad railway line with gunshot wounds to his head and chest, the Iraqi Interior Ministry said Saturday.

A U.S. military official in Baghdad confirmed that American forces picked up Fox's remains on Thursday evening but had no condition on the body.

A police patrol was also on the scene, said Falah al-Mohammedawi, an official with the Interior Ministry, which oversees police. He said Fox was found with his hands tied and gunshots to his head and chest. There were also cuts on his body and bruises on his head, al-Mohammedawi said.

There was no immediate word on the whereabouts of Fox's fellow hostages: Canadians James Loney, 41; Harmeet Singh Sooden, 32; and Briton Norman Kember, 74. They were last seen in a video dated Feb. 28 that was broadcast Tuesday on Arab television. Fox did not appear in the brief footage.

The previously unknown Swords of Righteousness Brigades claimed responsibility for kidnapping the four workers, who disappeared Nov. 26. [My emphasis]

Da Vinci Code: Refutation Online

Thought this might be of interest to members of this forum.

From a Jesus Decoded .com page, Introduction:

Funding for this Web site was provided by the Catholic Communication Campaign, an activity of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops that develops media programming, public service announcements, and other resources to promote Gospel values. Donations of Catholic parishioners make possible the work of the CCC. For more information, visit our website at: www.usccb.org/ccc

Introduction [/] Causing people to see something they never saw before in a five-hundred-year-old work of art which is among the most famous and reproduced of all time is an accomplishment of genius, if that "something" is a valid new insight. If it is not, then this kind of achievement usually goes by other names.

The Da Vinci Code novel contains a claim that in Leonardo's mural The Last Supper, which portrays Jesus and his twelve apostles at the meal he took with them on the night before he died, one of the twelve is not the apostle John but actually a woman who is Mary Magdalene.

Forget the Gospel narratives through which Leonardo, like every other Christian, would have known about the Last Supper and which contain no mention of Mary Magdalene; forget the fact that this mural seems to have caused no sensation among the monks whose refectory it decorated and who would have been as likely to recognize a female form then as we are today; forget the many paintings of the Last Supper which show a handsome youth often leaning on Christ's shoulder or on his chest following the tradition that identified John with the unnamed "beloved disciple" of the fourth Gospel. If such a claim is put between the covers of a book, apparently it merits respectful consideration no matter how absurd.

What this novel does to Leonardo's Last Supper, it does to Christianity as such. It asks people to consider equivalent to the mainstream Christian tradition quite a few odd claims. Some are merely distortions of hypotheses advanced by serious scholars who do serious research. Others, however, are inaccurate or false.

Introduction Continued
One false claim is that the Emperor Constantine, for political reasons of his own, decided to make a god out of Jesus Christ who was solely a Jewish rabbi for whom neither he nor his first followers ever asserted a divine origin. This claim cannot be sustained on the basis of the existing evidence which demonstrates that Constantine did no such thing.

It also highlights the schizophrenia in the The Da Vinci Code about Jesus Christ. Only if Jesus is divine would we have any interest in the possibility that his descendant might walk the earth today. If he is not, such a descendant ceases to be a mythic figure and becomes only a kind of celebrity child, so many of whom have turned out to be disappointments to their parents.

Reporters have asked whether even a bestselling novel can seriously damage a Church of one billion believers. No, in the long run, it cannot. But that is not the point. The pastoral concern of the Church is for each and every person. If only one person were to come away with a distorted impression of Jesus Christ or His Church, our concern is for that person as if he or she were the whole world.

Due to the concern about many current media portrayals of Jesus Christ and the origins of Christianity, this Web site was developed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' (USCCB) Department of Communications, under the direction of the USCCB Committee on Communications, chaired by the Most Reverend Gerald F. Kicanas, in consultation with the USCCB Secretariat for Doctrine.

Monsignor Francis J. Maniscalco is a priest of the Diocese of Rockville Centre, New York who has served the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops since 1993, and since 1995 as Director of Communications [My ellipses and emphasis]

Unable to Forgive, Pastor Steps Down

"And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any:" (Mark 11:25 KJV).

"Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. (20) Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. (21) Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good." (Romans 12:19-21 KJV).

Pray for a lady who recognizes a moral shortcoming.

From a London Telegraph article, Vicar who can't forgive steps down from pulpit :

Vicar who can't forgive steps down from pulpit [/] By Richard Savill [/] (Filed: 07/03/2006)

A vicar whose daughter was killed in the London bombings has resigned because she finds it hard to forgive the men who carried out the suicide attacks. [/] The Rev Julie Nicholson, priest-in-charge of St Aidan with St George church, Bristol, said she was struggling to reconcile her feelings with her position. [/] Mrs Nicholson has not returned to her post since July 7 when her 24-year-old daughter Jenny, a gifted musician, was among more than 50 people killed. [/] She repeats the name of her daughter's killer, Mohammed Sidique Khan, bitterly every day.

"I rage that a human being could choose to take another human's life. I rage that someone should do this in the name of a God," she said. "I find that utterly offensive. [/] "We have heard a lot about things causing certain groups of people offence and I would say that I am hugely offended that someone should take my daughter in the name of a religion or a God. [/] "I have a certain amount of pity, the fact that four young people felt that this was something they had to do. But I certainly don't have any sense of compassion.

"Can I forgive them for what they did? No, I cannot. And I don't wish to. I said in the early weeks and still now say the name of my daughter's murderer, Mohammed Sidique Khan, every day. [/] "I believe that there are some things in life which are unforgiveable by the human spirit. We are all faced with choice and those four human beings on that day chose to do what they did." [/] She added: "I will leave potential forgiveness for whatever is after this life. I will leave that in God's hands. I take Jenny with me every inch of the way so, although physically her body has gone from this world, the essence of her is very much in the world. And as long as I have life then the spirit of Jenny will have life."

Mrs Nicholson said: "Forgiving another human being for violating your child is almost beyond human capabilities. It is very difficult for me to stand behind an altar and celebrate the Eucharist and lead people in words of peace and reconciliation and forgiveness when I feel very far from that myself." [/] She added: "If someone were to say to me that my ability to forgive Jenny's killer would end the violence I could probably find the courage to do it. But I am not sure in my heart I would believe it."

Of her decision to step down, she said: "Part of my recovery was a search for a way through all this. I have really, really struggled. I have always been very in awe and humbled by those who stand up and say from a faith perspective, 'I forgive'. I read more books on forgiveness in the months after Jenny died than I have ever done. [/] "A lot of the imagery I worked with is of Mary at the foot of the cross and forgiveness doesn't come into it at all. If Jenny had survived, however awful her injuries, and had said 'Mummy, I forgive them' then I would have had to as well. But she didn't, she died."

Mrs Nicholson will remain an ordained priest. She has moved to a community youth project involving the arts, a subject that was close to her daughter's heart. [/] The Bishop of Bristol, the Rt Rev Michael Hill, a friend of the family, said: "I think these situations in life shake the faith of everybody because they immediately bring into focus the 'why' question. Unfortunately, there's no simple Elastoplast answer to that."

Mrs Nicholson, who has two younger children, Tom, 16, and Lizzie, 22, has been filming a BBC programme for Easter in which she will talk to people about how their faith was affected by the bombings.

Miss Nicholson studied for a master's degree in advanced musical studies at Bristol University. She had been head chorister at St Mary's in Henbury, in Bristol, and had moved to Reading to live with her boyfriend, James White. She was travelling to work at the music publisher Rhinegold when the bomb exploded at Edgware Road. [/] Her funeral was held at Bristol Cathedral. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Irish Clergy Sexual Abuse: 102 Suspects

This may actually be an indicator of how much the Irish economy has improved in recent decades.

Using conservative economic principles: cutting taxes, flat tax, etc.

The diocesan treasuries, while still not as big as those in the United States, seem to have been targeted by lawyers looking for their cut of the judgments awaiting victims.

One should note that a primary reason that the Roman Catholics have been hit by this sort of thing is that their financial assets, including much valuable real estate, are held at the diocesan level rather than at the local church level, and thus make convenient big bucks targets.

Contrariwise one should also note the rather well documented, in America at least, infiltration of the priesthood by homosexuals and secular agnostics.

As one whose boyhood Scoutmaster (who was not a Catholic) was quietly run out of town for abusing Cub Scouts, I regret the Catholics being singled out in this manner.

From a Washington Post article, 102 Irish Priests Suspected of Abuse :

102 Irish Priests Suspected of Abuse [/] By SHAWN POGATCHNIK [/] The Associated Press [/] Wednesday, March 8, 2006; 10:25 AM

DUBLIN, Ireland -- The Roman Catholic archdiocese of Dublin said Wednesday that 102 of its priests are suspected of sexually or physically abusing at least 350 children since 1940 _ the biggest such admission to date in Ireland. [/] The office of Archbishop Diarmuid Martin said it was publishing its findings ahead of this month's expected formation of a government-appointed commission to investigate the history and handling of such abuse in Ireland. [/] This predominantly Catholic nation has been rocked by waves of church sex-abuse scandals since 1994.

The archdiocese said it conducted a two-year review of the personnel files of more than 2,800 priests who have worked in the Dublin archdiocese, either as parish priests or in religious orders, during the past 66 years. [/] It found that eight priests in Dublin were convicted of abuse, while 32 priests have been sued for damages by 105 victims at a cost to the archdiocese of $7 million. That figure includes about $2 million in legal bills for both sides.

But the report said costs were expected to increase significantly because 40 cases remained unsettled, while church authorities had positively identified at least 350 abuse victims and "a possible further 40 persons who may have been abused but who it is not yet possible to identify or trace." [/] Martin, a veteran Vatican diplomat appointed here in 2003, [Dublin Archbishop Martin] said he believed the archdiocese would have to sell off some of its properties to cover the mounting compensation bill. He called that a necessary sacrifice to right past wrongs, as much as was possible. [/] "It's very frightening for me to see that in some of these cases, so many children were abused. It's very hard to weigh that up against anything," Martin said. [/] "On the other hand, I know that the vast majority of priests don't abuse, that they do good work, that they're extremely upset and offended by what's happened."

On the Net: http://www.dublindiocese.ie [My ellipses and emphasis]

Insult Response: Baptized vs. Muslim

The morally ideal response to insult as taught by example by the primary moral teacher of each culture.

From an American Thinker article, Insulting and threatening Jesus and Muhammad :

Insulting and threatening Jesus and Muhammad [/] January 15th, 2006

If you were to start a new religious movement or an entirely new religion, people would hurl insults at you, guaranteed. Those who cherish the status quo may even threaten your life. But how would you respond? Would you show patience and take it? Would you walk away? Would you return the insults, calling them names? Would you engage in a verbal sparring match, disarming your opponents with your wit?

Or would you do the unthinkable? Would you get a gun and kill the insulters? Or would you send a follower to kill an opponent stealthily in the night?

Two founders of religious movements, which eventually became world religions, heard insults and serious challenges thrown at them by skeptics and mockers. Sometimes their lives were threatened. Though Jesus and Muhammad sometimes reacted in the same way, showing patience and walking away, in the final analysis, their reactions were different. [/] How did each one react, specifically?

Muhammad/Muhammad's reactions are analyzed in chronological sequence, after his Hijrah or Emigration from Mecca to Medina in AD 622. It is then that he grows in military power and conquests - and in violence. […]

After the Battle of Badr (AD 624) [/] […] Muhmmad was now strong enough to commit the following acts of violence and persecution without a substantial fear of reprisal.

(1) […] The story-telling polytheist was captured, and on Muhammad's return journey back to Medina, Ali, Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law, at Muhammad's order, beheaded him instead of getting some possible ransom money. He was one of two prisoners who were executed and not allowed to be ransomed by their clans-all because he wrote poems and told stories critiquing Muhammad. […]

(2) A similar story can be told about Uqba bin Abu Muayt. He too harassed and mocked Muhammad in Mecca and wrote derogatory verses about him. He too was captured during the Battle of Badr, and Muhammad ordered him to be executed. "But who will look after my children, O Muhammad?" Uqba cried with anguish. "Hell," retorted the Prophet coldly. Then the sword of one of his followers cut through Uqba's neck. […]

(3) Asma bint Marwan was a poetess who belonged to a tribe of Medinan pagans, and whose husband was named Yazid b. Zayd. She composed a poem blaming the Medinan pagans for obeying a stranger (Muhammad) and for not taking the initiative to attack him by surprise. Perhaps in March 624, when the Allah-inspired prophet heard what she had said, he asked, "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?" A member of her husband's tribe volunteered and crept into her house that night. She had five children, and the youngest was sleeping at her breast. The assassin gently removed the child, drew his sword, and plunged it into her, killing her in her sleep. […]

(4) Abu Afak, a centenarian elder of Medina, belonging to a group of clans who were associated with the god Manat (though he may have been a Jew), wrote a derogatory poem about Muhammad, extolling the ancestors of his tribe who were strong enough to overthrow mountains and to resist submitting to an outsider (Muhammad) who divides two large Medinan tribes with religious commands like "permitted" and "forbidden." Before the Battle of Badr, Muhammad let him live. After the battle, in April 624, the prophet queried, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" That night, Salim b. Umayr "went forth and killed him." […]

(5) Muhammad did not just assassinate individuals. Expulsion was at his disposal. […]

[…] (7) It is on the heels of this assassination of Kab that Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish merchant, was assassinated, perhaps also in September 624. With the success of the five conspirators, Muhammad said, "Kill any Jew that falls into your power." Shortly afterwards, Muhayyisa b. Masud leaped upon and killed Ibn Sunayna. His only crime was being Jewish. […]

After the Battle of Uhud (AD 625) [/] After the Battle of Uhud in March 625, which the Muslims lost, Muhammad was stung. He and his Muslim community suffered a loss of prestige, though the community did not crumble, but quickly recovered and grew, so the loss was not material.

[…] (9) In July-August 625, in revenge for an ambush on some Muslim missionaries, Muhammad sent Amr bin Umayya and a companion to assassinate a leader of the Meccans. The assassins failed in their attempt. They had to flee under pursuit. Umayyah hid in a cave, but not before murdering a man along the way. As the pursuit was dying down, a tall, one-eyed, unnamed Bedouin entered the cave, driving some sheep. Umayyah and the Bedouin introduced each other. After they settled down, the shepherd sang a simple two-line song in defiance of Muslims and Islam. Then he fell asleep, snoring. Umayyah recounts what he did in retaliation for insulting Islam: . . . "I went to him and killed him in the most dreadful way that anybody has ever been killed. I leaned over him, stuck the end of my bow into his good eye, and thrust it down until it came out of the back of his neck." He fled back to Muhammad, who said, "Well done!" The account ends: The prophet "prayed for me [Umayyah] to be blessed." […]

(10) In May 626 Muhammad succeeded in assassinating a Jew, Sallam bin Abi'l-Huqayq (Abu Rafi), of the Nadir tribe, who had been banished a year earlier. He sent a Muslim who had a Jewish foster-mother and spoke Hebrew; who managed to gain entrance into Abu Rafi's house at night with four companions and easily kill him. They hid until the search died down and then returned to Medina, with the blessing of Muhammad-he was the one who sent out the hit squad.

[…] After the Battle of the Trench (AD 627) [/] The Battle of the Trench in 627 saw a confederation of Meccans and their allies marching north to Medina. They were fed up with the Prophet's continual harassment of their trade. But Muhammad had dug trenches around Medina to neutralize Mecca's superior cavalry. Wisely, the Muslims never confronted the enemy head on. After about a month, the attackers returned south, no side suffering serious losses. So Muhammad's power, though always growing, increases exponentially in Medina, even more so than after the Battle of Badr in 624.

(12) In fact, Muhammad is so powerful that shortly after the Battle of the Trench he lays seize to Jewish strongholds in Medina, captures them, decapitates 600 male Jews of the Qurayzah tribe, enslaves their woman and children, though he keeps a beautiful Jewess for himself, and confiscates all of their property, which was considerable (Sura 33:25-27). […]

After the Conquest of Mecca (early AD 630) [/] (13) An apostate named Abdullah bin Khatal enjoyed the company of two singing-girls in Mecca. One was murdered after the conquest because she had sung satirical verses about Muhammad, which Abdullah had composed. Incidentally, he was also killed, though he clung to the curtains of the Kabah shrine. The other singing girl was not killed because of her repentance. […]

To sum up, Muhammad assassinated, banished, enslaved, or slaughtered three classes of non-Muslims: individual poets or poetesses; individual political leaders, and entire communities in Medina, the Jewish tribes of Qaynuqa, Nadir, and Qurayza (not to mention the wars). [/] What did Jesus do?

Jesus [/] Jesus did not engage in violence and retaliation, so only four examples of insults, challenges, and threats are analyzed, along with his reactions. The examples are arranged in chronological and textual order, mostly from the Gospel of Luke.

(1) In the immediate context of Jesus' baptism by John and the temptation by Satan, in which Jesus turned down all the kingdoms of the world, including by military conquests, he returned to his hometown, Nazareth (Luke 4:14-30). […] But Jesus laid down a challenge. His message will also be for Gentiles, especially if those in his hometown reject him. He pointed to two Gentiles who had received blessings from God through Elijah: a widow from Sidon who was given miraculous provision and the resurrection of her recently deceased son (1 Kings 17:7-24); and Naaman, a Syrian military commander, who was healed of leprosy (2 Kings 5:1-27).

How did the listeners react to Jesus' words? They were furious and tried to kill him: […]

We should absorb two things-what he did and what he did not do. What [Jesus] did was simply walk away, either by his commanding presence or by a miracle (or both), though the text is not explicit. It was not his time to die (cf. John 7:30). But the second thing is equally important. He did not memorize the faces of the instigators of the mob, in order to send an assassin to kill them (or one of them), stealthily in the night, as a clear message-"Don't mess with me!" […]

(2) […] Samaritans were particularly hostile to Jews who were on their way to observe religious festivals in Jerusalem. It was at least a three-day journey from Galilee to Jerusalem through Samaria, and Samaritans refused overnight shelter for the pilgrims. Because of this antipathy, Jews traveling between Galilee and Jerusalem frequently went on the east side of the Jordan River. (note on Luke 9:52)

To this rejection how did Jesus react? He did not have time, because James and John, nicknamed Sons of Thunder (Mark 3:17), reacted for him: [/] When the disciples James and John saw this [rejection], they asked, "Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven and destroy them?" (Luke 9:54). [/] This call for the fire of God, echoing Elijah's divine punishment (2 Kings 1:9-16), was no idle threat. In addition to seeing up close a lot of healings and exorcisms with authority, the disciples had also seen Jesus calm a storm. […] If the wind and waters obeyed him, then why not fire from heaven? This is why he rebuked James and John immediately [Luke 9:55-56 KJV But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. (56) For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.

Besides this rebuke, it is important to note what Jesus did not do. He did not stealthily assassinate an individual leader of the Samaritan village or destroy the entire community. He showed divine restraint at the hostility thrown at him by these Samaritans, who were despised by the larger culture and who returned the contempt.

Jesus was proclaiming the year of favor from the Lord, not a season of vengeance. This season is reserved only for the Last Day, during divine judgment of the entire world (Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43; 25:31-46).

(3) This happened in the last week of Jesus' life. He had predicted his own death-he was sent to die, after all (Luke 9:22, 43-45; 12:50; 13:32-33; 18:31-34). He has made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Luke 19:18-44). Now hostility against him heated up because the large crowds favored him, among other reasons, such as his criticism of the authorities. It is in this context that the teachers of the law and the chief priests kept a close watch on him to catch him in committing treason against Rome or in breaking the law, so they could arrest him and turn him over to "the power and authority of the governor" (Luke 20:20).

So the leaders asked him whether it was lawful to pay taxes to Caesar. Apparently, they saw him as a political revolutionary who opposed Roman occupation. Would he endorse the taxation of his fellow Jews for the benefit of unclean Gentiles? However, they did not know that he was a king, but that his kingdom was not of this world. So he replied with these famous words that are often quoted, though people may not know the exact reference and context (Luke 20:20-26; cf. Matthew 22:15-22; Mark 12:13-17).

24 "Show me a denarius. Whose portrait and inscription are on it?" 25 "Caesar's," they replied. He said to them, "Then give to Caesar what is Caesars, and to God what is God's." 26 They were unable to trap him in what he said there in public. And astonished by his answer, they became silent.

One way to disarm the opposition is by wisdom in a rejoinder. Jesus replied to their trap with a logic that silenced the teachers and chief priests. He did not send Simon the Zealot, one of the Twelve, to follow an antagonistic leader, mingle in the large amalgam of pilgrims during the Feast of Passover, sneak up on him, stab him, and disappear in the crowd again. These kinds of assassinations were not unknown in the decades before the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. But violence was not necessary. God was with Jesus.

(4) The fourth and final example of insults and threats takes place during Jesus' arrest and trial. All the way through this baptism by fire or ordeal leading to death, he resisted violence, so the will of God would be fulfilled.

First, Jesus rebuked Peter for using a sword during the arrest of Jesus, in the Garden of Gethsemane. A crowd of enforcers intruded into Jesus and the disciples' time of prayer. Sizing up the threat, the disciples ask Jesus, "Lord, should we strike with the swords?" Before Jesus could answer, Simon Peter cut off the right ear of the servant (Malchus) of the high priest. But Jesus said, "No more of this!" And he healed the servant's ear (Luke 22:51).

Then Jesus informed Peter that he could call on more than twelve legions of angels to deliver him (Matthew 26:52-54):

52 "Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him [Peter], for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think that I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that it must happen this way?"

Jesus was destined to fulfill those aspects of the Old Testament that predicted the death of the Messiah, such as Isaiah 53. Calling on angels to deliver him would thwart this fulfillment.

Finally, while Pontius Pilate questioned Jesus, he told the governor that his disciples (and the large crowds) do not fight for his release because his kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36).

36 Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

In all of these passages about the last week of his life, Jesus remained true to his original calling. He resisted the temptation by the devil to receive all the kingdoms and realms of the whole world if he would only worship Satan (Luke 4:1-13). But when Peter cut off an enemy's ear, it seems that the disciple still did not grasp that God was ushering in a new era of salvation, which does not include raids, wars, and conquests-hitting people with swords. God could have sent more than twelve legions of angels to rescue his Son, but God's true kingdom is a spiritual one, which gets worked out in the people of God throughout history.

Jesus was sent to proclaim the season of favor from the Lord; he was not commissioned to assassinate individuals, to rain fire down on whole communities, or even to call on the legions of angels to destroy the Roman Empire. The kingdoms of this world will be judged and overthrown at the Last Day. Now is the era of favor and salvation.

Conclusion [/] Let's step back and look at the big picture: the overarching mission of the two founders.

It is asserted that Muhammad was called to lead people towards a new law that superceded the paganism of Arabia in the seventh century. He was another lawgiver, like Moses. He intended to establish a new order here on earth. In contrast, Jesus was a spiritual leader whose kingdom was not of this earth. He was not a new lawgiver like Moses. Jesus was "heavenly minded."

What if the law of Muhammad absorbed his pagan social environment too fully? He ordered the hands of male and female thieves to be cut off. He ordered the hands and feet of highway robbers to be cut off, along with crucifixion. He allowed sex with slave-girls and female prisoners of war. He and his community practiced the slave trade. He even tortured some hapless victims, such as an old woman. He reinstituted stoning for adultery, in his own way. He beat alcoholics. And as we have seen in this present article, he ordered assassinations and wars. So what kind of mission was this, anyway?

For the ten years that Muhammad lived in Medina (AD 622-632), he either went out on or sent out seventy-four raids and wars, ranging from small assassination hit squads to full-scale, large battles. After his death of a fever in 632, his leading Companions followed his example, waging wars on Arab pagans, forcing them either to convert or die. After that, Islamic armies stormed out of the Arabian Peninsula and conquered territories, north, east, and west. For the next four centuries Islam embarked on its own Crusades, long before the Europeans responded with their own. What kind of mission was this, anyway?

As for the mission of Christ, he gave us principles of dignity. Society can draw from them in practical ways, such as helping and restoring alcoholics and adulterers instead of whipping and stoning them. Jesus seeks to transform sinners from the inside out. He paid for their sins by his atoning death on the Cross, so they do not have to suffer from old, harsh punishments. He offers everyone inner freedom. All peoples have the choice to follow him. If they do not, then they are free to go their own way. Christians do not (or should not) harass and persecute them by legal or other means.

Further, Satan tempted Jesus to grab all of the kingdoms of the world, by ways other than God's. In his times, these ungodly ways included military conquests and political control. He blessedly turned down Satan's offer. So it is true that his kingdom is not of this world. After his propitiatory death and resurrection, he told his disciples to preach his message of love around the Roman Empire. His disciples carried out his nonviolent mission, and for the next few centuries they transformed the empire by proclamation alone.

Thus, the two missions of the two founders are different indeed.

James M. Arlandson may be reached at jamesmarlandson@hotmail.com [My ellipses and emphasis]

Confession of a Sleazo-Con

("Sleazo-con" is a coinage of David Brooks, the token conservative at the New York Times. Brooks uses Abramoff as the prime example in the linked defining article.)

The man, that no one important can quite remember meeting, talks, appropriately enough, to Vanity Fair.
From a Drudge Report flash, ABRAMOFF: 'I WAS A KILLER':

ABRAMOFF: 'I WAS A KILLER' [/] Wed Mar 08 2006 10:36:14 ET

"You're really no one in this town unless you haven't met me," Jack Abramoff tells Vanity Fair contributing editor David Margolick. Such lies are not just lies, but dumb to boot-"This is not an age when you can run away from facts. I had to deal with my records, and others will have to deal with theirs."

An insider tells Margolick that Abramoff blames competing Republican lobbyists and Arizona Senator John McCain-with whom Abramoff says he's had a contentious relationship-for his downfall. Abramoff tells Margolick that McCain staffers deliberately humiliated him, doling out embarrassing e-mails to the press. [/] "Mr. Abramoff flatters himself," Mark Salter, McCain's administrative assistant, tells Margolick. "Senator McCain was unaware of his existence until he read initial press accounts of Abramoff's abuses, and had never laid eyes on him until he appeared before the committee." [/] Abramoff says, "As best I can remember, when I met with him, he didn't have his eyes shut. I'm surprised that Senator McCain has joined the chorus of amnesiacs."

Abramoff is well aware of his peril: "In a different era I'd be killed on the street or have poison poured into my coffee," he tells Margolick. [/] Abramoff embarrassingly admits to gaining 50 pounds due to stress and tells Margolick that sending him to prison is "stupid," saying, "Let me teach English, history, music. Or let me sweep floors at the reservation. Instead you'll be paying to feed me to sit in a jail."

"I was a killer. I killed for my clients, and it eventually killed me," Abramoff tells Margolick. "Or I eventually killed me. And there were a lot of other hands on the knife."

"My so-called relationship with Bush, Rove, and everyone else at the White House has only become important because, instead of just releasing details about the very few times I was there, they created a feeding frenzy by their deafening silence. The Democrats are going overboard, virtually insisting I was there to plan the invasion of Iraq. This is why this non-story grabbed headlines for weeks."

Abramoff discusses his relationship with: [/] President Bush, who claims not to remember having his picture taken with Abramoff. According to Abramoff, at one time, the president joked with Abramoff about his weight lifting past: "What are you benching, buff guy?"

Tom DeLay, who once referred to Abramoff as one of his closest friends. Abramoff explains his working relationship with DeLay, saying, "I didn't spend a lot of time lobbying Tom for things, because the things I worked on were usually consistent with the conservative philosophy." Abramoff has "admired Tom DeLay and his family from the first meeting with him," he tells Margolick. "We would sit and talk about the Bible. We would sit and talk about opera. We would sit and talk about golf," Abramoff recalls. "I mean, we talked about philosophy and politics."

Ken Mehlman, who recently claimed he didn't really know Abramoff. According to documents obtained by Vanity Fair, Mehlman exchanged e-mail with Abramoff, and did him political favors (such as preventing Clinton administration alumnus Allen Stayman from keeping a State Department job), had Sabbath dinner at Abramoff's house, and offered to pick up Abramoff's tab at Signatures, Abramoff's own restaurant.

Newt Gingrich, whose spokesman Rick Tyler tells Margolick that "Before [Abramoff's] picture appeared on TV and in the newspapers, Newt wouldn't have known him if he fell across him. He hadn't seen him in 10 years." A rankled Abramoff says "I have more pictures of [Newt] than I have of my wife." Abramoff shows Margolick numerous photographs: "Here's Newt. Newt. Newt. Newt. More Newt. Newt with Grover [Norquist, the Washington conservative Republican Über-strategist and longtime Abramoff friend] this time. But Newt never met me. Ollie North. Newt. Can't be Newt ... he never met me. Oh, Newt! What's he doing there? Must be a Newt look-alike.... Newt again! It's sick! I thought he never met me!"

Senator Conrad Burns, of Montana, who was one of the largest single recipients of Abramoff loot, has blanketed the airwaves calling Abramoff a liar, claiming that he never influenced the senator. Abramoff says: "Every appropriation we wanted [from Burns's committee] we got. Our staffs were as close as they could be. They practically used Signatures as their cafeteria. I mean, it's a little difficult for him to run from that record."

Ronald Reagan, whom he met as a College Republican. "It was like meeting the king," Abramoff tells Margolick.

[...] "I was moving a mile a minute and didn't conceive that I could be doing something wrong, and as I got near to the edge I either concealed it or I convinced myself that I wasn't having a problem. I was basically so busy winning that I didn't see what I was doing. They say, 'Stop and smell the roses'? I didn't stop and smell the dung heap. Unfortunately, now I'm paying for it dearly."

[...] "Most lobbyists meet with a committee chairman, staff, a few members. We'd meet with the whole leadership of the House and Senate, the entire committee on both sides, then create a roster of who might ideologically support the idea and get them in the war.... We'd get people firing constantly on the decision-makers. And we'd outwork everyone in the media.... Most Washington lobbyists are lazy, people of limits, people who move glacially slow. I felt my job was to go out there and save the world.... I thought it was immoral to take someone's money and not win for them. And we basically didn't lose."

[...] "There were times when I helped the country and the causes that I love and obviously times when I hurt them. The exposure of my lobbying practice, the absurd amount of media coverage, and the focus-for the first time-on this sausage-making factory that we call Washington will ultimately help reformthe system, or at least so I hope. The only thing that a clever lobbyist cannot manipulate is the absence of something to lobby for or fight against."

[...] "The entire Indian country has come together in a big kumbaya of hatred for me. It just tears at my soul." [/] Developing... [My ellipses and emphasis]

Hypocrisy On Parade

From an American Spectator article, Hollywood Crashes and Yearns :

Another Perspective [/] Hollywood Crashes and Yearns [/] By James Bowman [/] Published 3/7/2006 12:07:30 AM

[…] But Crash had something more than nostalgia for the comforting moral and political certainties of that revolutionary time. [Crash] had the monumental smugness of those who, like the Academy itself this year, think it a virtue in itself to be "aware" of social problems and who, in thinking about such problems, fancy their own sophistication as moralists, their own concerns for "society's victims," [to be greater] than [those of] their less enlightened fellow picture-goers.

Crash, like the Oscars themselves, blatantly appeals to the taste of the "movie community" for self-congratulation. Movie people swallow [Crash's] intolerable preachiness and easy didacticism because they think it is good for them, not because it is good in itself, let alone entertaining. They watch themselves watching Crash and think, not for the first time, "What fine fellows we are for thus showing that we care about racial prejudice in society." That word again!

In Crash, as much as in Brokeback Mountain, they want "society" back so that they can have something to rebel against. Until then, they have to play at being rebels and revolutionaries as well as serious moralists and political activists. Each pose is as false as the others, but by handing out awards to themselves for their serious-mindedness, the progressives of the movie community are able to sustain themselves -- and quite a lot of other people too -- in the illusion for just a bit longer.

James Bowman , The American Spectator's movie critic, is a resident scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and media essayist for the New Criterion. [My ellipses and emphasis]

Wear "Anger" As "Badge of Honor"?

From a Breitbart.com AP article, Sen. Clinton Says Wear 'Anger' As Honor :

Sen. Clinton Says Wear 'Anger' As Honor [/] Mar 06 5:48 PM US/Eastern

By BETH FOUHY [/] AP Political Writer [/] NEW YORK [/] 3211f770e1bf@news.ap.org

[…] Democrats, particularly Democratic women, who run for public office are "going to draw some unfriendly fire," Clinton said at a breakfast fundraiser hosted by black and Hispanic women supporters. "People will be attacking you instead of your ideas, they may impugn your patriotism, they may even say you're angry."

"If they do that, wear it as a badge of honor, because you know what? There are lots of things that we should be angry and outraged about these days," she said. […] [My ellipses and emphasis]

From the Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter 4, Verse 26 (KJV):

Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: [My emphasis]

Interesting.

Quotations for March 17th

From: The Confession (beginning and end):

I am Patrick, a sinner, most unlearned, the least of all the faithful, and utterly despised by many. [...]

I pray those who believe and fear God, whosoever deigns to look at or receive this writing which Patrick, a sinner, unlearned, has composed in Ireland, that no one should ever say that it was my ignorance if I did or showed forth anything however small according to God's good pleasure; but let this be your conclusion and let it so be thought, that - as is the perfect truth - it was the gift of God. This is my confession before I die.

From: The Letter to the Soldiers of Coroticus (last three paragraphs):

Where, then, will Coroticus with his criminals, rebels against Christ, where will they see themselves, they who distribute baptized women as prizes - for a miserable temporal kingdom, which will pass away in a moment? As a cloud or smoke that is dispersed by the wind, so shall the deceitful wicked perish at the presence of the Lord; but the just shall feast with great constancy with Christ, they shall judge nations, and rule over wicked kings for ever and ever. Amen.

I testify before God and His angels that it will be so as He indicated to my ignorance. It is not my words that I have set forth in Latin, but those of God and the apostles and prophets, who have never lied. "He that believes shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be condemned," God hath spoken.

I ask earnestly that whoever is a willing servant of God be a carrier of this letter, so that on no account it be suppressed or hidden by anyone, but rather be read before all the people, and in the presence of Coroticus himself. May God inspire them sometime to recover their senses for God, repenting, however late, their heinous deeds - murderers of the brethren of the Lord! - and to set free the baptized women whom they took captive, in order that they may deserve to live to God, and be made whole, here and in eternity! Be peace to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. Amen.