By Reese Currie, Compass Distributors

A successful attack on American soil had to happen eventually, and what a terribly successful attack it was. A small number of terrorists, in a typical act of cowardice, killed thousands of Americans by ramming two Boeing 767's into the twin towers of the World Trade Center.

I have personally had a lot to think about since this attack, and while this certainly won't be my most structured article ever, I would like to address a few of the things going through my mind. So many things are bothering me about what is being said in the wake of this attack that I want to address them all at once.

I have been of course asked about prophetic implications of this attack. In fact, the person who first told me that the World Trade Center had been hit with airplanes immediately sprang into a typical pre-tribulational pre-millennialist interpretation of the events. Which, to be frank with you, shows just how much he cares about the thousands of families who lost loved ones in the attack. He forgot all about them.

The religion of a Jack Van Impe is disgusting, when you think about it. He sees horrible world events, and has not even the slightest concern for the pain of the people involved. Rather, he makes up questions for his sidekick to ask him so he can appear "wise" while fanatically applying ancient Scriptures to modern world events, whether or not they really apply, with no regard at all for the human suffering involved.

I daresay that Jesus would be much more concerned with the human suffering than the prophetic implications. Remember the story of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:30-37? Jesus ends the story with a question, "Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?" The next verse concludes the story, "And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise."

Jesus, I think, would have us put our priority on being neighbors, not being false prophets like Jack Van Impe. So many Christians live in paralysis because they think every significant world event spells the apocalypse. Some earlier panics included the Gulf War and the Year 2000. Consistently, money-mongering opportunists give Christianity a bad name by proclaiming false fulfillments of prophecy and raking in millions from the people they dupe.

Suppose this war does spell the end of the world. It doesn't matter! What matters is that we are living Christian lives day by day and trying to be the salt and light in our world. Consider the fact that, as far as we know from the gospels, Jesus spent a three-year ministry on earth healing and teaching, and spent all of one night talking about apocalyptic things. Why don't we go and do likewise?

One thing I would like to address about prophecy, however, is the theory of the "pre-tribulation rapture" that is so prevalent today. Most of today's evangelicals and fundamentalists are expecting what is called the "pre-tribulation rapture." This means that Jesus will come back before the great tribulation they presume is part of the end-times, gather them up, and then return seven years later, at the end of the tribulation, to bring about the end of the world. This highly popular theory was first espoused by 19th century Plymouth Brethren theologian John N. Darby, and it is being greatly propagated by Tim LaHaye and the "Left Behind" series of books (and the "Left Behind" movie). As well, it is the theory propagated by Jack Van Impe, Jerry Falwell, and most of the evangelical denominations in our nations.

The people who believe this theory truly let the Scriptures speak from silence. For instance, they claim this rapture occurs in the silence between Revelation 3 and 4. Why don't we look at what Jesus actually said about it? Mark 13:24-27 says, "But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken. And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven."

Jesus Himself plainly says that He will not be coming back until after the tribulation. I know hardly anyone who believes what Jesus said on this, because the false pre-tribulation view is so prevalent, being taught by so many churches. Everyone who believes it has been set up to be totally unprepared for tribulation when it comes. Jesus Himself warned that as many Christians are in the world at the time will have to endure to the end of it. In Matthew 24:13, "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."

That Christians would have to endure the tribulation was the view of the early, pre-Catholic church, as one can verify by checking out church father Iraeneus' Against Heresies, Book 4, written in the second century AD. Iraeneus was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John. He's significantly more authoritative on the matter than John Darby, Jack Van Impe or Tim LaHaye. If anyone was reading their Scriptures today and paying attention to what they actually say, they wouldn't fall for the latter day views of John N. Darby. I've never encountered anything more axiomatic on Christianity than the statement, "If it's true, it's not new, and if it's new, it's not true." Don't fall for a 150-year-old false doctrine when the view of the church 1900 years ago was otherwise!

I was reading an article recently that stated, "Like other world religions, Islam abhors violence unless it is morally justified, as in the defence of life, property, honour and rights." This statement is simply not true. The Qur'an consistently encourages violence against non-Muslims until there are no people but Muslims left alive. Surah 8:38-39 says, "Say to the Unbelievers [meaning, non-Muslims], if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do."

Some of the liars on television are claiming that fighting is referring to "argument" and not murder. Surah 9:5 leaves no doubt what is meant by fighting. "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."

Surah 9:29 says, "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

Surah 2:190-191 says, "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith."

The fact is, there is more than ample justification in the Qur'an for murdering people who do not accept Islam. Islam, simply put, is a murderous religion. Certainly there are many "liberal" Muslims who do not accept the basic tenets of their religion in this regard, but to deny it is a part of the religion itself is simply dishonest. In fact, the Qur'an itself states that people who will not murder in this fashion are not real Muslims. Surah 9:44 says, "Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day ask thee for no exemption from fighting with their goods and persons. And Allah knoweth well those who do their duty."

Surah 9:81-84 states this view very clearly: "Those who were left behind (in the Tabuk expedition) rejoiced in their inaction behind the back of the Messenger of Allah. They hated to strive and fight, with their goods and their persons, in the cause of Allah. They said, 'Go not forth in the heat.' Say, 'The fire of Hell is fiercer in heat.' If only they could understand! Let them laugh a little: much will they weep: a recompense for the (evil) that they do. If, then, Allah bring thee back to any of them, and they ask thy permission to come out (with thee), say: 'Never shall ye come out with me, nor fight an enemy with me: for ye preferred to sit inactive on the first occasion: Then sit ye (now) with those who lag behind.' Nor do thou ever pray for any of them that dies, nor stand at his grave; for they rejected Allah and His Messenger, and died in a state of perverse rebellion."

Islam teaches that there is a great reward in the afterlife for those who murder "infidels", that is, whoever is not a Muslim. It is on this basis that terrorists are willing to give their lives in suicidal acts of murder, such as the attack on the World Trade Center. This belief is based on Surah 47:4-6, "Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost. Soon will He guide them and improve their condition, And admit them to the Garden which He has announced for them."

It is interesting to note that there is no actual justification here for suicide attacks. "Those who are slain" would seem to imply Muslims who had been killed by someone else--not in suicide.

However, you may find it interesting to learn that even if we accept suicide attacks, the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center are going straight to hell under the laws of their own book. Surah 4:93 states, "If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (For ever): And the wrath and the curse of Allah are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him." A believer here is a Muslim believer. Do you think the terrorists did not know they would be killing Muslims as well as Christians and Jews when they crashed those planes into the World Trade Center?

It is also interesting that Muslim fundamentalists in Pakistan and the ruling Taliban in Afghanistan are eager to war against other Muslims, denying what the Qur'an plainly states about the fate of those who knowingly kill other Muslims. In typical, self-contradictory Qur'an fashion, there is a way of killing other Muslims in war, but it requires payments to the family of the deceased, or the release of slaves, or a two month fast, conditions that I'm sure the Taliban and other terrorist groups will not be performing.

It's odd that people are taking it upon themselves to try to hurt Muslims worldwide who had nothing whatsoever to do with the act of terrorism in the United States. One dim bulb in Canada even thought that lighting a Hindu temple on fire was somehow striking a blow against Muslim terrorism. In actual fact, the Hindus probably suffer more Muslim terrorism than anyone but the Jews. Many Hindus suffer terrorism in the disputed Kashmir region contested by India and Pakistan.

I have a little more understanding for the bus-stoning incident in Australia, not because I condone it, but because I understand the Australian sentiment against Islam. I visited Australia a few years ago and learned that Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world, with 210,000,000 people, draws Australia as part of their map. Australia has not yet experienced Muslim aggression, but considering Indonesia's attitude, it's only a matter of time. Still, Muslim schoolchildren had nothing to do with the attack in New York, and targeting them only guarantees a continuation of Muslim aggression into another generation.

The first "Christian" wars against Islam were the Crusades, orchestrated by the Roman Catholic Church. The Crusades today are considered horrible acts of religious bigotry, but that's not really how it all started. For centuries, Muslims had controlled the Holy Land and Christians could travel there all the time on pilgrimages with no problems. In the eleventh century, the Christians began to experience some persecution from the Muslims, but even this did not arouse the anger of the Roman Catholic Church. Then, a fanatical Islamic group called the Seljuk Turks wrested Jerusalem away from the more moderate Muslims, and then invaded Asia Minor, capturing the Eastern Emperor in 1071.

After continued pleas from the Eastern Emperor Alexius I, and continued persecution of Christian pilgrims, pope Urban II finally declared a "holy war" in 1095. The pope offered the forgiveness of past sins to any who would go fight for Jerusalem and a large army of what the pope called "aforetime robbers" answered the call, knowing they were terrible sinners and hoping for forgiveness.

The Seljuk Turks were already fighting with one another at this time, and the first Crusade was a smashing success against a divided enemy, establishing the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. Interestingly enough, there was so much killing that the crusaders at Solomon's temple actually rode in a river of blood up to the reigns of their horses. Had Jack Van Impe been alive in that day, he would have proclaimed the end for sure. Horrible atrocities were committed against Muslims and Jews, sparking a jihad (holy war) from the Muslims.

The Muslims fought to reclaim Jerusalem until finally defeating the last remnant of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem in 1291. In the intervening time, more crusades were called to call up reinforcements. The second crusade was practically a non-event. In the third crusade, the pope went further out on a limb to guarantee salvation for the crusaders in terms of granting a "total remission", which was the first "indulgence" offered by the Roman Catholic Church.

On the fourth crusade, only other Christians fell victim. These Crusaders attacked the Christian town of Zara without having been authorized to do so, and were immediately excommunicated by pope Innocent III. The excommunicants then pressed onward to take Constantinople. Innocent decried this attack, but also took the opportunity to install an archbishop there sympathetic to Roman interests. Basically, the crusades fell victim to infighting and lack of interest.

At that time, the Roman Catholic Church was in a position not unlike that of the PLO a few years ago. They were power brokers for the nations that shared their religion. The popes claimed to be the sun and the kings of Europe, moons, receiving their "light" or "power to lead" from the pope.

Some day, if there is to be enough time left in this world, we will probably find that the zealousness of today's Muslim countries will wane, not unlike that of the Catholic countries in the Europe of the Middle Ages. Really, there are only seven countries in the world today that are considered to be sponsors of terrorism by the United States State Department. Of these countries, five are Muslim, one is technically Roman Catholic, and one is for the most part neo-Confucianism with some Buddhist and Christian denominations involved as well.

Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, and Libya are the Muslim nations. Of these, Iran and Syria have aligned themselves with the United States against terrorism. The Sudan is a nasty nation, the only one in the world that still employs crucifixion as a form of capital punishment. Anyone identified as being a Christian in the Sudan faces death by crucifixion. Libya and Iraq are obviously nations that are still stinging from punishments received from the United States, Libya during Ronald Reagan's presidency and Iraq during George Bush Sr.'s presidency.

Cuba is the Roman Catholic nation. It's turn back toward Catholicism coincides with a lack of interest in sponsoring new terrorism. It remains on the State Department's list only because it continues to harbor former terrorists and protects them from prosecution. Cuba has lent its support to the United States in this matter.

North Korea is the one dominated by neo-Confucianism. North Korea is beginning to lean on its Christian minority in hopes of peacefully reuniting with South Korea. The value of terrorism is waning to them, and Britian at the moment is trying to get them to side with the United States against terrorism.

The point is, the political will of nations to be troublemakers on the international scene is simply not age-during. Even PLO leader Yasser Arafat has found that laying down his guns has gotten him farther than terrorism ever did, netting him a highly controversial Nobel Peace Prize. Countries and groups can't maintain being in trouble all the time, no matter how deep their pockets, the will of the people to keep getting pummeled just isn't there.

I think there is a real argument for winning the battle with Christian love on this basis, letting the hatred die out naturally rather than continuing a cycle of retribution, revenge, and hatred. Jesus said, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:38-39).

People might say that it's a crazy notion to be espousing a non-violent response, but consider what will happen if we respond looking for revenge. Suppose the United States goes in to occupy Afghanistan. They will necessarily kill civilians, by accident or otherwise. This will rile Muslim hatred and will probably result in "jihad." The result of the operation would be the perpetuation of terrorism, not the end of it. It's the Crusades all over again.

The blood of the 6,000-plus dead in the World Trade Center screams from the ground for revenge, but listen to Scripture: "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord" (Romans 12:19).

There are not enough faithful people in America to let God do this, I suppose, but we Christians really should be thinking about stepping aside so God can look after this situation. Set up better security, sure. Defend ourselves against attack, sure. Even bring the terrorists to justice if possible, sure, as that may prevent further attacks. This seems to be the direction that U.S. President George W. Bush is taking, and we should be thankful for that. Let's not get into revenge. Revenge is a dangerous game and frankly, we're as hypocritical as the Taliban ever was if we indulge in it. Let's live up to our Christian principles instead, and show them that Christian nations really do live as Christians. (The unfortunate truth, of course, is that we don't; but this may well be the time to repent and start doing so.)

One last thing that comes to mind is that the fundamentalist writers I have been reading have been claiming that this attack was deserved because America has drifted so far from Christian principles. It's supposedly a punishment from God and our wake-up call to repent. Well, repentance is always a good thing, but I hear Jesus' words, "Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish" (Luke 13:4-5).

I honestly think it's a stupid thing to think that the World Trade Center fell as God's punishment to America. Don't forget when Abraham bartered with God for the lives of those who lived in Sodom and Gomorrah, God ultimately said that if there were even ten people living there who were righteous, He would not destroy it. The fundamentalists who say the World Trade Center collapsed as punishment are basically saying that there weren't ten people in it who had been justified by Christ. I only know a couple of people who worked in the World Trade Center, and they were not Christians, but it's hard to believe that not even ten out of the 6,000 dead were Christians!

God does not take a shotgun approach to justice. In Ezekiel 18:20-21, we read, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die."

It is plainly a misunderstanding of Scripture to think that the innocent are killed in God's justice.

The same types of people claim that AIDS is God's justice against homosexuals. Frankly, if it was, then everyone else would be immune. I think if Jesus was physically present, He would heal homosexuals and others of AIDS, just as He healed those hated by society, like the lepers and prostitutes, the last time He was here, and upon their healing telling them to "go and sin no more" as He did with the woman caught in adultery. Jesus won people with love, not hatred. Again, let us go and do likewise.

It was written by some wise sage that the first casualty of war is the truth. I've been all over the board today, I realize, and have doubtless offended all sorts of people but I think perhaps we need to get re-centered on the truth of this situation. There are opportunities for Christian service in everything, except Christians today are too transfixed by apocalyptic theories to do much good for anyone. Other Christians seem to view their service as lying in favor of horrible religions like Islam, a religion which is a curse on humanity and that will be wiped from the earth upon Christ's actual return. Other Christians are taking inappropriate actions like violence against Muslims and intellectual "self-flagellation" based on the fallacious belief that bad things don't happen to good people. I don't know what the book of Job was for, if not to stop people from thinking that way.

It seems that Christians at large are doing everything in the wake of this crisis except that which is productive to the faith, which is, to stand for and live for the Truth as personified in Jesus Christ.

Thoughts on the War on Terrorism is Copyright © 2001 by Compass Distributors