A CHRISTIAN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION OF THE RECEPTION OF REFUGEES

There are numerous admonitions to love the alien, stranger, or foreigner:

·       “When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God. (Leviticus 19:33-34)

·       “And I [Moses] charged your judges at that time, ‘Hear the cases between your brothers, and judge righteously between a man and his brother or the alien who is with him. You shall not be partial in judgment. You shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not be intimidated by anyone, for the judgment is God’s.’” (Deuteronomy 1:16-17)

·       “He [God] executes justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the sojourner, giving him food and clothing. Love the sojourner, therefore, for you were sojourners in the land of Egypt.” (Deuteronomy 10:18-19)

These teachings were even reiterated by Jesus (Matthew 25:41-43). However, justice had to be administered justly, according to the Law God gave to Moses:

·       If a stranger shall sojourn with you and would keep the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised. Then he may come near and keep it; he shall be as a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person shall eat of it. There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.” (Exodus 12:48-49; Numbers 9:14)

The “one law” of this nation is based upon the Constitution. Yes, we are to love our neighbor, but what if the refugees insist on living under their own law – the sharia – and then strive to impose it on the rest of the nation, as Islam seeks to do. This is something that would not have been tolerated in ancient Israel. Perhaps, it shouldn’t be here.

Ibn Khaldun, a 15th century Tunisian historian, has spoken for the majority of the Islamic world by writing:

·       In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force... The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense... Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.

This teaching is derived straight from the Holy Koran:

·       “Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah’s religion (Islam) reigns supreme, (Koran Surah 8:37)

·       “When the Sacred Months are over, kill those who ascribe partners [like Jesus] to God wheresoever ye find them; seize them, encompass them, and ambush them; then if they repent and observe prayer and pay the alms, let them go their way’.” (Koran 4:5)

·       “…kill the disbelievers wherever we find them” (Koran 2:191) and “murder them and treat them harshly” (Koran 9:123), and “Strike off the heads of the disbelievers” (Koran 8:12, cp. 8:60).

Do most Muslims believe this way? Evidently! Surveys have demonstrated that the majority of Muslims seek a worldwide Caliphate, which will place everyone under Islamic dominion.

It is clear that true Muslims do not respect our Constitution and the laws it embodies. They believe that they can only live under sharia. Why then do they come here? They might truly be oppressed, but they also believe in the Koran’s teachings about immigration Jihad:

·       Koran Surah 4:100-01: He who forsakes his home in the cause of Allah [Jihad], finds in the earth Many a refuge, wide and spacious: Should he die as a refugee from home for Allah and His Messenger, His reward becomes due and sure with Allah. And Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. When ye travel through the earth, there is no blame on you if ye shorten your prayers, for fear the Unbelievers May attack you: For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies.

Believing Muslims regard all “unbelievers” as “open enemies.” Therefore, they will not be grateful for the shelter and hospitality that they are now receiving in the West. Instead, they will conjure up all forms of distortions to convince themselves that we are evil.

They also deceptively use “friendship” in order to advance the Islamic agenda. Meanwhile, a believing Muslim is not allowed to truly befriend the non-Muslim:

·       Koran 3:27 Let not the believers take the disbelievers for friends rather than believers. And whoever does this has no connection with Allah unless it is done [deceptively] to guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully.

·       Koran 5:54 O ye who believe, take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other.

How do Muslims interpret these verses? This comes from the following fatwa which quotes the Koran in support:

·       “Undoubtedly the Muslim is obliged to hate the enemies of Allaah and to disavow them, because this is the way of the Messengers and their followers. Allaah says:

o   [60:4] “Indeed there has been an excellent example for you in Ibraaheem (Abraham) and those with him, when they said to their people: ‘Verily, we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allaah, we have rejected you, and there has started between us and you, hostility and hatred for ever until you believe in Allaah Alone’”

·       “Based on this, it is not permissible for a Muslim to feel any love in his heart towards the enemies of Allaah who are in fact his enemies too. Allaah says”:

o   [60:1] “O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists) as friends, showing affection towards them, while they have disbelieved in what has come to you of the truth”

·       “But if a Muslim treats them with kindness and gentleness in the hope that they will become Muslim and will believe, there is nothing wrong with that, because it comes under the heading of opening their hearts to Islam. But if he despairs of them becoming Muslim, then he should treat them accordingly.”

Consequently, in view of Islamic deception, there are no reliable means to vet Muslim immigrants.

What does it mean to treat the non-Muslim “accordingly?” The many Koranic teachings on Jihad tell us:

·       Koran 2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran)

·       2:216 - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."

·       3:151 - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions [like Jesus] with Allah, for which He had sent no authority".

·       4:89 - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

·       8:12 - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them."

·       9:5 - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."

These are not verses about self-defense, but about worldwide conquest. What about the “peaceful” Koranic verses. As any Islamic scholar knows, those verses were uttered before Muhammad had an army. In his earlier years, the only way to win converts was through preaching a message of peace and acceptance. However, these verses have been replaced (the doctrine of “abrogation”) by later verses, according to the Koran:

·       2.106  “If we abrogate any verse or cause it to be forgotten, We will replace it by a better one or one similar.” [also 13.39]

In view of the threat and reality of Islam, are Christians mandated to be concerned? God is concerned. He cares deeply about justice and the protection of the innocent, so much so that He instituted a criminal justice system in the hearts of humanity:

·       Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. (Romans 13:1-5)

What does it mean for us to “be in subjection?” For one thing, we must uphold justice and the protection of the innocent. For this reason, we do not empty the prisons because people argue that “God is love.” This would not be an act of love towards the innocent, but an act of hatred.

Because we “love our neighbor as ourself,” we are required to seek their protection and welfare. We, therefore, do not want to see released criminals hunting them down or turning them into sex-slaves. This would not serve their welfare.

Therefore, to love requires us to judge. (Of course, we must first judge ourselves, as Jesus had taught us – Matthew 7:1-5). It is to make critical decisions about who we incarcerate, who we release, and who we allow into our house and our country.

WHERE DO WE GO WHEN WE DIE?

One blogger has erroneously argued from the Old Testament that, when we die, we unconsciously sleep in the grave until the resurrection. For example, he cited:

·       For in death there is no remembrance of you; in Sheol who will give you praise? (Psalm 6:5)

Indeed, before the Cross, the OT saints were not able to go into the presence of God, whose righteousness had not yet been satisfied by the death of His Son. It was this death that had brought the ultimate payment and cleansing even to the OT saints:

·       For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. (Hebrews 9:13-15; ESV)

It is only when our conscience has been cleansed that we can come into the presence of our Lord:

·       let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. (Hebrews 10:22)

Without the Cross and this cleansing, the souls of OT believers could not be with the Lord:

·       And all these [the OT saints], though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect. (Hebrews 11:39-40)

All of this changed at the Cross when the veil of the Temple had been torn asunder, signifying that the way into the presence of the Lord was now open! Consequently, the souls of OT saints, which had been in the grave, now emerged (and I think rose to be with the Lord):

·       And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many. (Matthew 27:51-53)

Where then did these saints go afterwards? It would seem that had gone to be with the Lord in their spirit along with the NT saints (Rev. 6:9-11; 7:9-17; 14:13), who are now our witnesses:

·       Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of [OT saints described in chapter 11] witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us. (Hebrews 12:1)

The New Testament gives us explicit evidence that our soul goes to be with our Lord at death. Jesus’ parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man portrays the fate of two souls after death and before the resurrection. While Lazarus went to be with the saints, the rich man went to a place of torment (Luke 16).

Jesus assured the thief on the cross:

·       “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:43)

This would be without his physical body. Nevertheless, he would be with Jesus in a place of conscious and blissful paradise.

When Stephen was being stoned to death, he cried out “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit” (Acts 7:59). This exemplary saint had been convinced that he was going to be with the Lord in spirit.

Paul wrote of his confidence that, when he’d die, he’d go to be with the Lord:

·       For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell.  I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better. But to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your account. Convinced of this, I know that I will remain and continue with you all, for your progress and joy in the faith. (Philippians 1:21-25)

·       Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord. (2 Corinthians 5:8)

To be away from the body meant to be consciously with the Lord. Often, when the term “sleep” is used, it refers to being with the Lord:

·       who died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep we might LIVE WITH HIM. (1 Thessalonians 5:10; 4:13-17)

We only sleep from the perspective of the world. Instead, to “sleep” is now to actually “live” in His presence.

I find these verses comforting. More importantly, the fact that we go to be with the Lord at death is Biblical.

FINE-TUNING: A FINE ARGUMENT FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

I CANNOT IMPROVE ON WHAT GERALD SCHROEDER HAS WRITTEN: (http://www.geraldschroeder.com/FineTuning.aspx). I LIFTED THE FOLLOWING FROM: http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1277-fine-tuning-of-the-universe. I JUST SLIGHTLY MODIFIED THE LAYOUT:

“According to growing numbers of scientists, the laws and constants of nature are so "finely-tuned," and so many "coincidences" have occurred to allow for the possibility of life, the universe must have come into existence through intentional planning and intelligence.

In fact, this "fine-tuning" is so pronounced, and the "coincidences" are so numerous, many scientists have come to espouse The Anthropic Principle, which contends that the universe was brought into existence intentionally for the sake of producing mankind. Even those who do not accept The Anthropic Principle admit to the "fine-tuning" and conclude that the universe is "too contrived" to be a chance event.

In a BBC science documentary, "The Anthropic Principle," some of the greatest scientific minds of our day describe the recent findings which compel this conclusion.

Dr. Dennis Scania, the distinguished head of Cambridge University Observatories:

·       If you change a little bit the laws of nature, or you change a little bit the constants of nature -- like the charge on the electron -- then the way the universe develops is so changed, it is very likely that intelligent life would not have been able to develop.

Dr. David D. Deutsch, Institute of Mathematics, Oxford University:

·       If we nudge one of these constants just a few percent in one direction, stars burn out within a million years of their formation, and there is no time for evolution. If we nudge it a few percent in the other direction, then no elements heavier than helium form. No carbon, no life. Not even any chemistry. No complexity at all.

Dr. Paul Davies, noted author and professor of theoretical physics at Adelaide University:

·       "The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge, and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off even slightly. You see," Davies adds, "even if you dismiss man as a chance happening, the fact remains that the universe seems unreasonably suited to the existence of life -- almost contrived -- you might say a 'put-up job'."

When Sir Fred Hoyle was researching how carbon came to be, in the "blast-furnaces" of the stars, his calculations indicated that it is very difficult to explain how the stars generated the necessary quantity of carbon upon which life on earth depends. Hoyle found that there were numerous "fortunate" one-time occurrences which seemed to indicate that purposeful "adjustments" had been made in the laws of physics and chemistry in order to produce the necessary carbon. Hoyle sums up his findings as follows:

·       A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintendent has monkeyed with the physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. I do not believe that any physicist who examined the evidence could fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce within stars. Adds Dr. David D. Deutch: If anyone claims not to be surprised by the special features that the universe has, he is hiding his head in the sand. These special features ARE surprising and unlikely.

Universal Acceptance Of Fine Tuning:

Besides the BBC video, the scientific establishment's most prestigious journals, and its most famous physicists and cosmologists, have all gone on record as recognizing the objective truth of the fine-tuning. The August '97 issue of "Science" (the most prestigious peer-reviewed scientific journal in the United States) featured an article entitled "Science and God: A Warming Trend?" Here is an excerpt:

·       The fact that the universe exhibits many features that foster organic life -- such as precisely those physical constants that result in planets and long-lived stars -- also has led some scientists to speculate that some divine influence may be present.

In his best-selling book, "A Brief History of Time", Stephen Hawking (perhaps the world's most famous cosmologist) refers to the phenomenon as "remarkable."

·       The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers (i.e. the constants of physics) seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life". "For example," Hawking writes, "if the electric charge of the electron had been only slightly different, stars would have been unable to burn hydrogen and helium, or else they would not have exploded. It seems clear that there are relatively few ranges of values for the numbers (for the constants) that would allow for development of any form of intelligent life. Most sets of values would give rise to universes that, although they might be very beautiful, would contain no one able to wonder at that beauty.

Hawking then goes on to say that he can appreciate taking this as possible evidence of "a divine purpose in Creation and the choice of the laws of science (by God)" (ibid. p. 125).

Professor Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in high energy physics (a field of science that deals with the very early universe), writing in the journal "Scientific American", reflects on:

·       how surprising it is that the laws of nature and the initial conditions of the universe should allow for the existence of beings who could observe it. Life as we know it would be impossible if any one of several physical quantities had slightly different values.

Although Weinberg is a self-described agnostic, he cannot but be astounded by the extent of the fine-tuning. He goes on to describe how a beryllium isotope having the minuscule half life of 0.0000000000000001 seconds must find and absorb a helium nucleus in that split of time before decaying. This occurs only because of a totally unexpected, exquisitely precise, energy match between the two nuclei. If this did not occur there would be none of the heavier elements. No carbon, no nitrogen, no life. Our universe would be composed of hydrogen and helium. But this is not the end of Professor Weinberg's wonder at our well-tuned universe. He continues:

·       One constant does seem to require an incredible fine-tuning -- The existence of life of any kind seems to require a cancellation between different contributions to the vacuum energy, accurate to about 120 decimal places.

This means that if the energies of the Big Bang were, in arbitrary units, not: 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000, but instead: 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000001, there would be no life of any sort in the entire universe because as Weinberg states:

·       the universe either would go through a complete cycle of expansion and contraction before life could arise, or would expand so rapidly that no galaxies or stars could form.

Michael Turner, the widely quoted astrophysicist at the University of Chicago and Fermilab, describes the fine-tuning of the universe with a simile:

·       The precision is as if one could throw a dart across the entire universe and hit a bulls eye one millimeter in diameter on the other side.

Roger Penrose, the Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, discovers that the likelihood of the universe having usable energy (low entropy) at the creation is even more astounding,

·       namely, an accuracy of one part out of ten to the power of ten to the power of 123. This is an extraordinary figure. One could not possibly even write the number down in full, in our ordinary denary (power of ten) notation: it would be one followed by ten to the power of 123 successive zeros! (That is a million billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion zeros.)

Penrose continues,

·       Even if we were to write a zero on each separate proton and on each separate neutron in the entire universe -- and we could throw in all the other particles as well for good measure -- we should fall far short of writing down the figure needed. The precision needed to set the universe on its course is to be in no way inferior to all that extraordinary precision that we have already become accustomed to in the superb dynamical equations (Newton's, Maxwell's, Einstein's) which govern the behavior of things from moment to moment.

Cosmologists debate whether the space-time continuum is finite or infinite, bounded or unbounded. In all scenarios, the fine-tuning remains the same.

It is appropriate to complete this section on "fine tuning" with the eloquent words of Professor John Wheeler:

·       To my mind, there must be at the bottom of it all, not an utterly simple equation, but an utterly simple IDEA. And to me that idea, when we finally discover it, will be so compelling, and so inevitable, so beautiful, we will all say to each other, "How could it have ever been otherwise?"

ONLY THE MOST COURAGEOUS ACT OF BLIND FAITH CAN AVOID THE OBVIOUS CONCLUSION: AN ALL-KNOWING AND ALL-POWERFUL DESIGNED IT ALL!