Jennifer Bryson on Islam in Germany's public schools

Even after disagreeing with Jennifer Bryson's seriously unreasonable discussion of why one should respect Islam, I found this article to be important, not only for the people and government of Germany but for the US as well. Thank God for the 1st Amendment. May we preserve it under the growing threat of Islam in America. http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/6535

Islam: The spirit of Antichrist and the present and coming apostasy

Islam is in the news daily, of course, but I wonder how many grasp the grave dangers facing those who love freedom and the Lord Jesus Christ on account of this religion that threatens our very lives.

After having received an "other gospel" supposedly from the angel Gabriel, Mohammed began spreading this damnable heresy throughout his part of the world. By slaughtering thousands of Jews, Christians, and pagans who refused his preposterous religion, the false prophet was able to persuade others, Jews, Christians, and pagans, to embrace his new religion. The threat of the immediate execution of entire families and villages drove thousands and later millions into the fold of the false god Allah, having loved this life and this world more than the God they once professed faith in. These apostates succumbed to the "spirit of Antichrist" as others had done hundreds of years before them (1 Jn. 2:18-27; 4:1-6; Gal. 1:6-9).

The apostasy continued to spread throughout the Middle East, devouring more men and women and children who had at some time professed to believe in Jesus Christ. Many of the churches founded by the apostles in that region ceased to exist due to the coming of Islam. And in our own day we see the spirit of Antichrist working relentlessly on all continents, gaining converts among the simple, disillusioned masses of a dark and lost world. And the apostasy? It still happens.

In her book, "They Must Be Stopped," Brigette Gabriel writes, "Today, there are approximately 6 million Coptic Christians in Egypt who face a lifetime of religious persecution from their Islamic government. The Egyptian government has imposed the jizya on Christians only, and as a result many Coptic Christians have been forced to renounce their faith and become Muslims because they could not afford to pay such a high tax" (p.188).

This is an omen, if you will, of things to come globally. The great apostasy is one of the final signs before the Lord Jesus Christ returns for His Bride, the Church, and pours out His wrath on Satan and all his followers (2 Thess. 2:1-12). And with the powerful tool of intimidation and its history of carrying out death to infidels, Islam, a religion of the spirit of Antichrist, is going to play a leading part in the renunciation of faith in God. Converting to Islam, uttering the shahabad, may be the "mark of the beast" (Rev. 13).

They still go "out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us." They would have "continued with us" because they genuinely belonged to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul wrote of these and other false teachers saying, "let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9). Let them be accursed indeed as they lead millions of souls into eternal damnation. However, that is not the end of the matter for all Muslims; "But God..." (Eph. 2:1-4; 1 Cor. 6:11).

"Should we respect Islam?": An evaluation of Jennifer Bryson's article

The question, "should we respect Islam?" was posed to me by a Twitter friend via direct message. The topic has been tossed around since 9/11, and being a student of current events concerning Islam and a disciple of Jesus Christ, the question piqued my interest. When I replied to my friend with an emphatic "no," he sent me a link to an interesting article by one Jennifer Bryson who digs deep into the word "respect" clearly hoping to temper the vitriolic attitude held by many who are actively opposed to Islam. That article can be found on Justin Taylor's blog, found here: http://theologica.blogspot.com/2009/06/should-we-respect-islam.html.

Jennifer Bryson is a very learned young American whose education and experience in the world of Islamic studies and world history makes her opinions on those subjects invaluable. She is a student of history (a "real" student of history, not like our revisionist President Obama) who has studied at Yale and Stanford and built up an impressive resume (just google her name and check out her bio). Jennifer has applied her learning in the real world of Islamic terrorism, having worked for The Department of Defense on different occassions providing important info for the DD's anti-terrorism staff. However, having said all that, I disagree with her approach to the question of respect as it regards Islam.

First, Bryson defers to an "academic work complete with social science jargon and detailed flow-charts" from "the University of Hamburg in Germany and the Rotterdam School of Management in Holland." This work of academia proposes two distinct applications of the term "respect," "appraisal respect, respecting a public leader for his or her political stances, and recognition respect, "respecting the right to life of a human being because of recognition of basic human dignity." The result of this study conducted by these two schools is a rather convoluted and unnecessary re-defining of the word. Webster's works for me. As well educated as Jennifer Bryson may be in the history of the Middle East, she seems to be more influenced by liberal academia than by the reality that is Islam, and in particular, radical Islam.

"Another aspect of their research that is helpful for working through the controversy about 'respecting Islam' is their focus on interpersonal relations.' " This is funny ... ha ha funny. Only professors in ivory towers would ever come to the conclusion that respect for one's enemies should take into consideration their "interpersonal relations." But I must admit that Muslims do frequently complain about "hurt feelings." It is not their fault then for burning things and killing people being that their feelings got hurt. And with the Muslim males attitude toward women, maybe the jihadists hated their mothers.

"With this in mind, I think shifting discussion away from 'respecting Islam' to 'respecting Muslims' changes the dynamic in a way that could foster fruitful discussions instead of generating more controversy." Truth thrives on controversy, not pandering. And in the case of our understanding Radical Islam or Islam in general with its stated goal of global domination, it is indeed wading in on the controversy, not denying it or wishing it would go away, that is necessary for the future existence of freedom in the West and the possibility of freedom in Asia, Africa, and Australia. We are way beyond discussing interpersonal relations with folks who want to kill us. Telling a terrorist "I feel your pain" will not "foster fruitful discussions." I can hear the Islamic jihadists laughing even now at the silly American liberals who are forever spouting such nonsense while at the same time bending over backwards.

"With this in mind, I think shifting the discussion away from 'respecting Islam' to 'respecting Muslims' changes the dynamic in a way that could foster fruitful discussions instead of generating more controversy." This is the epitome of naivete. Bryson echoes the absurdities of Obama in his pandering speech in Cairo. The only difference between Bryson's article and Obama's speech is that Bryson is sincere and knowledgeable, even if she buries her knowledge in the naive world of liberalism.

Fruitful discussions with whom? Terrorists? They are the ones in control of the so-called Muslim world; they are the ones calling the shots ... literally. There is no one else to talk to that could possibly make any difference; and the terrorists won't buy it. The jihadists who have infiltrated the entire West, just waiting for the right moment to strike? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or the ayatollah, or Osama, or the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon?

"Shifting the discussion away from respecting Islam to respecting Muslims changes the dynamic," but again, for whom? It changes the dynamic only in the minds of the cowardly liberal American; it does nothing to change the dynamic in the Muslim world. It is as asinine an idea as it would have been to shift attention away from Nazism to Nazis. It is an absurd idea.

This seems to be saying "Let's not think about what they do, let's think about who they are as human persons. Maybe they just really need to talk." In Jennifer's own words: "By contrast, the phrase 'respecting Muslims' shifts the discussion away from abstraction and toward the plane of human dignity and interpersonal relations. In the case of some Muslims throwing acid on the faces of Muslim girls trying to attend school, I can --even if I do so gnashing my teeth -- respect the humanity in the acid-throwers without having to agree with them or condone their actions."

Obviously any clear thinking sane person would demand justice in such incidents rather than wishing for a fruitful discussion. We cannot rightly respect men who throw acid in the faces of little girls for innocently desiring an education. This is a horrific example of "man's inhumanity to man."

In the United States an infidel male best not speak to Muslim women in the mall unless one wants to encounter the wrath of a Muslim man, whether that Muslim man be the Muslim woman's husband, brother, or simply a stranger, a Muslim male unknown to that Muslim woman who happens to witness the infidel's damnable act. Islamic interpersonal relationships exclude contact with male infidels, Muslim male relatives, or male Muslim strangers by Muslim women unless that Muslim woman is in the company of a male family member at the time.

Jennifer's "we should not feel obliged to respect a position that claims the authority of Islam if that position is without merit" necessarily excludes any Muslim woman who wants access to a mosque; that position is without merit according to the accepted authorities of Islam, the Qur'an and the hadith. We must, therefore, according to Bryson's reasoning, respect the Islamic position on women.

Jennifer Bryson's attempts at legitimizing respect for Islam are convoluted. She panders to Islam in the same manner as Obama and Bush. Bush with his ridiculous "Islam is a religion of peace" crap.

Jennifer not only opts for redefining the word "respect" but throws more fuel on the fires of the jihadists/Islamic terrorists/murderers positions and aspirations who learned after 9/11 that American liberals, politicians, and ignorant masses no longer have the backbone to defend themselves when push comes to shove. Thus explaining how we can bend over backwards to the extreme in our vain efforts at placating Islam.

Answering the Federal Vison heresies; Keith Throop responds to Piper's endorsement of Doug Wilson

It is one of those aberrant teachings that come along every so often that somehow finds a home in the midst of evangelicals. And my friend Keith Throop does a great job of questioning a pastor/teacher/author I admire very much, John Piper, for his endorsement of one of this teachings proponents. http://reformedbaptist.blogspot.com/

An ugly window sticker: "Choice: what a beautiful right"

Coming home from the store just now I was behind one of my new neighbors. I recognized the SUV because of the "window stickers" covering the rear window. The day our new neighbors moved in I wanted to stand behind their vehicle and stare at the stickers, but that would have looked a bit queer. They are the kind of stickers that just drive a conservative up the wall.

The sticker that got my attention today is "Choice: what a beautiful right." And taken in context of the other stickers, I feel it is safe to assume that this person is a political/religious liberal, to say the least. I also extrapolated from the context that the "choice" sticker is referring to a so-called "woman's right to choose to have an abortion."

"Choice: what a beautiful right." The sheer ugliness of the practice being endorsed by this sticker and by the owner of this SUV painted an image in my mind of savages butchering their babies, daring anyone to interfere. It is no different than approving the similar practice in China of throwing female newborns out of the house where they will die of starvation or at the hands of some beast. And to think about what happens in an abortion reinforces the picture of savagery. There is absolutely nothing beautiful about such a choice.

The stickers are displayed in such an "in your face" manner that I found them very offensive, disturbing, and even threatening. The messages alone are in your face enough. But the above-the-eye-level display in the large print editions of these stickers is designed to get your attention and to tell those who disagree, "f#%k off!" And that is precisely the message intended.

There is nothing "beautiful" about these stickers with one exception, the person's right to display them. This is, after all, America, land of the free, land of the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression, and the land of those who freely abuse their freedoms. I consider murdering unborn children an abuse of our freedoms. It is absolutely ludicrous, absurd, and asinine to think that murder under any name is a right granted a woman and her doctor under the Constitution.

Two or three of the other stickers have to do with religion. One is the now familiar "COEXIST" sticker encircled by the symbols of several world religions, e.g., Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, and Christianity. Another one says, ironically enough, "Freedom of religion means every religion."

I say the "Freedom of religion" sticker is ironic because one of the religions symbolized around the COEXIST sticker is Islam, a religion that declares openly that it aspires to be the only religion on earth, either subjugating all other adherents of other religions under Islam, converting them, or killing them (us, me, perhaps you) if they resist. They do not want to co-exist.

This window display unfortunately reflects the mind-set of a large number of Americans. Human nature being what it is, fallen, depraved, insane, selfish, godless, and mad, can be expected to believe the notions expressed by these stickers. And except we proclaim and manifest the gospel of Jesus Christ to this world engrossed in darkness that only the grace of God can penetrate, I do not see things getting any better. And I see people perishing along the broad way, blissful in their ignorance and seething in their hatred for the light that is Jesus Christ and His people.

"Do not be deceived": 1 Corinthians 6:9: Part 3

Thus far we have seen that Christians while possessing and being possessed by the Holy Spirit, can still be deceived. We can be deceived because we are yet in these flesh and blood bodies. And we can be deceived because the deceptive messages sent by deceivers are very often attractive and pleasant to the ear. The experiences of the churches in Corinth and Galatia provide living illustrations of these two truths. And contained in the first letter to the Corinthians we find another example of such deception, the Hebrew children in the wilderness (10:11).

Many American Christians who have genuinely come to faith in Jesus Christ have been deceived in the same manner as the Corinthians; they have been deceived into believing that the unrighteous will inherit the kingdom of God; it is very appealing to the flesh to think that our homosexual neighbors and acquaintances will not go to hell.

Many liberal Christians have been convinced by their denominational loyalties that homosexuals are welcomed by God into the fold. They have been told by their leaders that "we all live in sin. What difference does the sin itself make?" When this is, in fact, contrary to what the word of God teaches; we do not "live in sin," we have "died to sin" (Roms. 6:1-2).

And God has not changed His mind about sin. He has, however, satisfied His demand for righteousness from the ungodly through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ who did for us, the ungodly, what we could not possibly have done for ourselves; Jesus lived a sinless life and His sinless life is accounted to all who have come to faith in Him as though we had lived sinless lives ourselves. Thus God "justifies the ungodly" by faith.

We do sin, but not because we live in sin. We sin because we are yet in these corrupt and corruptible bodies. And there is a huge difference between the two ideas. To live in sin means to be yet dead in sin and separate from the Lord Jesus Christ. But being "in Christ" delivers us from living in sin having died to that old manner of life and now we find ourselves by God's grace free and alive in Christ (Roms. 6:1-11; 8:1-9; Eph. 2:1-10; Gal. 2:19-21).

The deception perpetuated by unregenerate church leaders that the unrighteous will inherit the kingdom of God may deceive true believers for a while, but it can also do as the Pharisees, scribes, and hypocrites did in the Lord's day, leading the unregenerate away from the truth and into eternal damnation (Mt. 23).

"Do not be deceived": 1 Corinthians 6:9: Part 2

How is it that we Christians, possessing the Holy Spirit and sometimes "filled with the Spirit" are yet susceptible to the voices of "strangers?" (Jn. 10:1-6). When Jesus said in the passage just cited that His sheep will not follow strangers, how is it that we sometimes do? The answer is two-fold.


One, it is because the voice of the false sheep, the false teachers, the false prophets is so attractive and appealing and pleasing to the human ear and ego, that even the very "elect" will hear them out for a short while (Mt. 24:24). And, two, it is because we are yet in these corruptible flesh and blood bodies.



The church at Corinth had fallen into sin in such a way through deceptive voices that some were on the brink of denying the resurrection. Chapter 15 addresses this essential matter of faith and the fact that it was being challenged by certain false teachers.

Furthermore, the Corinthians had accepted the lifestyle of one who was having intimate relations with his father's wife. They abused the Lord's Supper, the gifts of the Spirit and there were those who felt superior to those whom they saw as being inferior to themselves because they spoke in tongues and some did not. And yet the apostle could still say about these Corinthians "To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all who in every place call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours." And "...all are yours, And you are Christ's, and Christ is God's." And if you remember chapter 5 of this epistle you will recall that Paul did not deny that the one committing incest was actually a believer.


How can it be that we, the church of Jesus Christ, can not only be susceptible to such deception but fall into deception without discerning that we have? The answer? We live a life that is tainted by a corrupt nature; we are yet in a corrupt state (Roms. 8:20-22; 1 Cor. 15:50-57). And in this corrupt state we are susceptible to the deceit of the false teachers.

The only weapon against the effects of corruption for the Christian is the truth of God's word.