Why couldn't there be more love?- song
Monday, July 1, 2013
What Have You Done with Your Life?
By D.Brandt Berg
Download Audio (8.5MB)
Just before going to sleep last night we had been discussing the events of the day and its accomplishments, as well as perhaps some lacks, and I had said to Maria, “I hope I’m doing my best. I hope I’m doing what the Lord wants me to do and what’s best for His work, and I hope our publications are being a blessing. I want to be sure that they’re of the Lord and according to His will and what He wants.”
It’s good to take stock of things at the end of the day and to reflect momentarily on the day and its accomplishments, perhaps sometimes even on its failures, and to assess whether you have really made any progress that day in God’s work and His will and what He wants you to do.
Has it been a day that the Lord hath made? Has it been a day in which you have done His will and He’s had His way? Has it been a day that you’re thankful for because you’re sure the Lord is pleased with it, and therefore you’re pleased with what has occurred and what you have done that day?
As we go to sleep at night, it’s a good thing to reflect on these things and assess these values as to whether you are obeying the Lord and pleasing Him, that He might say of you for that day, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord”—in peaceful, contented sleep, thankful and satisfied that you have done your best that day and you can rest in peace.
This is very much the same attitude which we older folks often have as we approach the end of life’s day and the night of our sleep in death and our temporary rest from our labors, before the dawning of that great new day when Jesus comes! We think back over our lives and we remember our deeds and our words, and we wonder if we have done our best for Jesus.
I used to sing that old song, “I wonder have I done my best for Jesus, when He has done so much for me,” a beautiful old song of assessing life’s values and accomplishments when we sometimes wonder if we have really done our best for Him and have accomplished what He wanted us to do.
Has it truly been a life lived for Him, by His power and His strength and His guidance in His will, having the fruits of His Spirit and the fruits of His Word: souls born into the kingdom of God forever; little ones instructed in His Word; older ones growing in the nurture and the admonition of the Lord and taught to serve Him and live for Him?
“What have you done with your life?” is the question, and it’s often the question that I have asked myself at the end of the day as I lie down to rest for the night. It’s the question we ask ourselves toward the end of our lifetime as we prepare to rest from this life’s labors: “What have I done with my life?”
Many who have had life-after-death experiences have testified that as they faced the angel of death and judgment at the bright light at the end of the long tunnel of the darkness of death, the question which nearly all of them say is asked as they face God’s angel of judgment is, “What have you done with your life?”
It’s a good question to ask ourselves at the end of each day: “What have I done with my life this day? What did I do for Jesus?” As another old song goes:
What will you do with Jesus?
Neutral you cannot be;
Someday your heart will be asking,
“What will He do with me?”
What have I done with Jesus and what will He do with me? What have I done with my life, and what will He do about the way I have lived? What will be my reward for faithful service to Him? Have I pleased Him? Have I satisfied Him? Have I done my best for Jesus? Or what will be my shame for failures, shortcomings, disobediences, and getting out of His will and not following Him closely enough, not accomplishing what He wanted me to accomplish?
Jesus says, “Herein is My Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit.”1 The Lord intended for every Christian to bear fruit like himself, another Christian, more Christians. Just as you plant any kind of fruit, if you plant an apple, you get a whole tree full of apples. Or a pear, you get a tree full of pears. Or a mango, you get a tree full of mangoes. Or a coconut tree, you get a tree full of coconuts! Every Christian was intended to bury his life in the soil of God’s service and take up his cross and follow Jesus and to bear fruit, more Christians like himself, or even better!
For Jesus Himself said, “Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone. Yet if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.”2 And if we will go out and die daily for the Lord in His service, we shall bring forth much fruit, more Christians to preach the Gospel to more of the lost and lead them to the Lord!
That’s the least that He can expect of our lives and our salvation. He died to save us; why should we not give our lives to save others? In fact, the apostle says, “Herein is the love of God manifest in us, that as Jesus died for us, so we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.”3
He asks every one of us now, “What have you done with your life?” And He will ask each of us someday when we have to stand face to face with that question at the judgment, “What have you done with your life?”
That’s the question that will be asked each of us and that we should ask ourselves every day, and that God’s going to ask when we come to the end of life’s day and face Him:
“Only one life; ’twill soon be past.
Only what’s done for Christ will last.”
“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.”
“Then said Jesus unto His disciples, If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.”4 “And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for My name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.”5 “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.”
God bless and keep you and make you a blessing to many. You’ll never be sorry! For God is love, and He loves you and will take good care of you to the end. Then you’ll hear His “Well done, good and faithful servant; enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.”6 Forever—with all the souls you helped love into His kingdom eternally!
I wonder have I done my best for Jesus,
Who died upon the cruel tree?
To think of His great sacrifice at Calvary!
I know my Lord expects the best from me.
The hours that I have wasted are so many
The hours I’ve spent for Christ so few;
Because of all my lack of love for Jesus,
I wonder if His heart is breaking too.
I wonder have I cared enough for others,
Or have I let them die alone?
I might have helped a wand’rer to the Saviour,
The seed of precious Life I might have sown.
No longer will I stay within the valley,
I’ll climb to mountain heights above;
The world is dying now for want of someone.
To tell them of the Saviour’s matchless love.
How many are the lost that I have lifted?
How many are the chained I’ve helped to free?
I wonder, have I done my best for Jesus,
When He has done so much for me?7
Originally published October 1982. Updated and republished July 2013.
Read by Bryan Clark.
1 John 15:8.
2 John 12:24.
3 1 John 3:16.
4 Matthew 16:24.
5 Matthew 19:29.
6 Matthew 25:23.
7 By Ensign Edwin Young and Harry E. Storrs (1923).
Download Audio (8.5MB)
Just before going to sleep last night we had been discussing the events of the day and its accomplishments, as well as perhaps some lacks, and I had said to Maria, “I hope I’m doing my best. I hope I’m doing what the Lord wants me to do and what’s best for His work, and I hope our publications are being a blessing. I want to be sure that they’re of the Lord and according to His will and what He wants.”
It’s good to take stock of things at the end of the day and to reflect momentarily on the day and its accomplishments, perhaps sometimes even on its failures, and to assess whether you have really made any progress that day in God’s work and His will and what He wants you to do.
Has it been a day that the Lord hath made? Has it been a day in which you have done His will and He’s had His way? Has it been a day that you’re thankful for because you’re sure the Lord is pleased with it, and therefore you’re pleased with what has occurred and what you have done that day?
As we go to sleep at night, it’s a good thing to reflect on these things and assess these values as to whether you are obeying the Lord and pleasing Him, that He might say of you for that day, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord”—in peaceful, contented sleep, thankful and satisfied that you have done your best that day and you can rest in peace.
This is very much the same attitude which we older folks often have as we approach the end of life’s day and the night of our sleep in death and our temporary rest from our labors, before the dawning of that great new day when Jesus comes! We think back over our lives and we remember our deeds and our words, and we wonder if we have done our best for Jesus.
I used to sing that old song, “I wonder have I done my best for Jesus, when He has done so much for me,” a beautiful old song of assessing life’s values and accomplishments when we sometimes wonder if we have really done our best for Him and have accomplished what He wanted us to do.
Has it truly been a life lived for Him, by His power and His strength and His guidance in His will, having the fruits of His Spirit and the fruits of His Word: souls born into the kingdom of God forever; little ones instructed in His Word; older ones growing in the nurture and the admonition of the Lord and taught to serve Him and live for Him?
“What have you done with your life?” is the question, and it’s often the question that I have asked myself at the end of the day as I lie down to rest for the night. It’s the question we ask ourselves toward the end of our lifetime as we prepare to rest from this life’s labors: “What have I done with my life?”
Many who have had life-after-death experiences have testified that as they faced the angel of death and judgment at the bright light at the end of the long tunnel of the darkness of death, the question which nearly all of them say is asked as they face God’s angel of judgment is, “What have you done with your life?”
It’s a good question to ask ourselves at the end of each day: “What have I done with my life this day? What did I do for Jesus?” As another old song goes:
What will you do with Jesus?
Neutral you cannot be;
Someday your heart will be asking,
“What will He do with me?”
What have I done with Jesus and what will He do with me? What have I done with my life, and what will He do about the way I have lived? What will be my reward for faithful service to Him? Have I pleased Him? Have I satisfied Him? Have I done my best for Jesus? Or what will be my shame for failures, shortcomings, disobediences, and getting out of His will and not following Him closely enough, not accomplishing what He wanted me to accomplish?
Jesus says, “Herein is My Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit.”1 The Lord intended for every Christian to bear fruit like himself, another Christian, more Christians. Just as you plant any kind of fruit, if you plant an apple, you get a whole tree full of apples. Or a pear, you get a tree full of pears. Or a mango, you get a tree full of mangoes. Or a coconut tree, you get a tree full of coconuts! Every Christian was intended to bury his life in the soil of God’s service and take up his cross and follow Jesus and to bear fruit, more Christians like himself, or even better!
For Jesus Himself said, “Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone. Yet if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.”2 And if we will go out and die daily for the Lord in His service, we shall bring forth much fruit, more Christians to preach the Gospel to more of the lost and lead them to the Lord!
That’s the least that He can expect of our lives and our salvation. He died to save us; why should we not give our lives to save others? In fact, the apostle says, “Herein is the love of God manifest in us, that as Jesus died for us, so we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.”3
He asks every one of us now, “What have you done with your life?” And He will ask each of us someday when we have to stand face to face with that question at the judgment, “What have you done with your life?”
That’s the question that will be asked each of us and that we should ask ourselves every day, and that God’s going to ask when we come to the end of life’s day and face Him:
“Only one life; ’twill soon be past.
Only what’s done for Christ will last.”
“He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.”
“Then said Jesus unto His disciples, If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.”4 “And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for My name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.”5 “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.”
God bless and keep you and make you a blessing to many. You’ll never be sorry! For God is love, and He loves you and will take good care of you to the end. Then you’ll hear His “Well done, good and faithful servant; enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.”6 Forever—with all the souls you helped love into His kingdom eternally!
I wonder have I done my best for Jesus,
Who died upon the cruel tree?
To think of His great sacrifice at Calvary!
I know my Lord expects the best from me.
The hours that I have wasted are so many
The hours I’ve spent for Christ so few;
Because of all my lack of love for Jesus,
I wonder if His heart is breaking too.
I wonder have I cared enough for others,
Or have I let them die alone?
I might have helped a wand’rer to the Saviour,
The seed of precious Life I might have sown.
No longer will I stay within the valley,
I’ll climb to mountain heights above;
The world is dying now for want of someone.
To tell them of the Saviour’s matchless love.
How many are the lost that I have lifted?
How many are the chained I’ve helped to free?
I wonder, have I done my best for Jesus,
When He has done so much for me?7
Originally published October 1982. Updated and republished July 2013.
Read by Bryan Clark.
1 John 15:8.
2 John 12:24.
3 1 John 3:16.
4 Matthew 16:24.
5 Matthew 19:29.
6 Matthew 25:23.
7 By Ensign Edwin Young and Harry E. Storrs (1923).
Egypt prepares for worst ahead of Sunday protest
By Brian Rohan, AP, Jun 29, 2013
CAIRO (AP)—As the streets once again fill with protesters eager to oust the president and Islamists determined to keep him in power, Egyptians are preparing for the worst: days or weeks of urban chaos that could turn their neighborhoods into battlegrounds.
Households already beset by power cuts, fuel shortages and rising prices are stocking up on goods in case the demonstrations drag on. Businesses near protest sites are closing until crowds subside. Fences, barricades and walls are going up near homes and key buildings. And local communities are organizing citizen patrols in case security breaks down.
For yet another time since President Mohammed Morsi took office last year, his palace in Cairo’s upscale Heliopolis neighborhood is set to become the focus for popular frustration with his rule. Some protests outside the capital have already turned deadly, and weapons—including firearms—have been circulating more openly than in the past.
"We’re worried like all Egyptians that a huge crowd will come, and it will get bloody," said Magdy Ezz, owner of a menswear shop across from the walled complex, a blend of Middle Eastern and neoclassical architecture. Besides ordinary roll-down storm shutters, storefronts on the street are sealed off with steel panels.
"We just hope it will be peaceful. But it could be a second revolution," he said. “If it lasts, we’ll have to keep the store closed. But it’s not like business has been booming here anyway, especially since the problems last year."
Last winter, the area saw some of Cairo’s deadliest street violence since the 2011 uprising, with Islamists attacking a sit-in, anarchists throwing gasoline bombs, and police savagely beating protesters.
Morsi’s opponents aim to bring out massive crowds starting Sunday, saying the country is fed up with Islamist misrule that has left the economy floundering and security in shambles. They say they have collected 15 million signatures—around 2 million more than the number of voters who elected Morsi—calling for him to step down, and they hope the turnout will push him to do just that.
Morsi’s Islamist allies say they will defend the mandate of the country’s first freely elected president, some with their “souls and blood" if necessary, while hard-liners have vowed to “smash" the protests.
Both camps say they intend to be peaceful, but demonstrations could rapidly descend into violence—especially if the two sides meet. Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood group has said five of its members were killed in clashes with protesters in Nile Delta provinces over the past days. On Friday, two people were killed in clashes in the port city of Alexandria and at least five Brotherhood offices were torched, while the nation’s highest religious authority, Al-Azhar, warned against “civil war."
Security has been redoubled at the presidential palace in Heliopolis. Walls set up last year still block some traffic access, and curved concrete slabs designed to prevent climbing now protect the main gates. Shipping containers also line much of the perimeter, and nearby apartment buildings have blocked off their parking lots and side streets with barbed wire. On Friday, authorities built a new wall of concrete blocks to surround the complex.
Peter Soliman, a communications student who lives in the neighborhood, said most residents don’t know what to expect.
"Of course, parents are worried about their children going out to demonstrate by the palace, especially if the Brotherhood shows up," he said. “People fear things will turn bloody and divide the country."
In the city center, concrete walls continue to block off the Interior Ministry and southern access routes to Tahrir Square, epicenter of the uprising that overthrew longtime autocrat Hosni Mubarak. Protesters began gathering at the square ahead of the weekend, saying they plan to dig in for a protracted conflict.
The nearby Semiramis Hotel is taking no chances, even though Tahrir is expected to be a sideshow compared to Sunday’s march to the palace. The site of repeated clashes between stone-throwing youths and riot police this past year, the luxury hotel has just finished fortifying itself with a spiked metal fence topped with razor-sharp blades.
To the south, in the leafy Garden City neighborhood—an area that has sometimes seen spillover violence from Tahrir—some residents were securing their homes.
Metalworker Sameh Haddad used an arc welder to put the final touches on an apartment building’s new wrought iron gate before hurrying to other appointments. “For once, business has been great," he said.
CAIRO (AP)—As the streets once again fill with protesters eager to oust the president and Islamists determined to keep him in power, Egyptians are preparing for the worst: days or weeks of urban chaos that could turn their neighborhoods into battlegrounds.
Households already beset by power cuts, fuel shortages and rising prices are stocking up on goods in case the demonstrations drag on. Businesses near protest sites are closing until crowds subside. Fences, barricades and walls are going up near homes and key buildings. And local communities are organizing citizen patrols in case security breaks down.
For yet another time since President Mohammed Morsi took office last year, his palace in Cairo’s upscale Heliopolis neighborhood is set to become the focus for popular frustration with his rule. Some protests outside the capital have already turned deadly, and weapons—including firearms—have been circulating more openly than in the past.
"We’re worried like all Egyptians that a huge crowd will come, and it will get bloody," said Magdy Ezz, owner of a menswear shop across from the walled complex, a blend of Middle Eastern and neoclassical architecture. Besides ordinary roll-down storm shutters, storefronts on the street are sealed off with steel panels.
"We just hope it will be peaceful. But it could be a second revolution," he said. “If it lasts, we’ll have to keep the store closed. But it’s not like business has been booming here anyway, especially since the problems last year."
Last winter, the area saw some of Cairo’s deadliest street violence since the 2011 uprising, with Islamists attacking a sit-in, anarchists throwing gasoline bombs, and police savagely beating protesters.
Morsi’s opponents aim to bring out massive crowds starting Sunday, saying the country is fed up with Islamist misrule that has left the economy floundering and security in shambles. They say they have collected 15 million signatures—around 2 million more than the number of voters who elected Morsi—calling for him to step down, and they hope the turnout will push him to do just that.
Morsi’s Islamist allies say they will defend the mandate of the country’s first freely elected president, some with their “souls and blood" if necessary, while hard-liners have vowed to “smash" the protests.
Both camps say they intend to be peaceful, but demonstrations could rapidly descend into violence—especially if the two sides meet. Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood group has said five of its members were killed in clashes with protesters in Nile Delta provinces over the past days. On Friday, two people were killed in clashes in the port city of Alexandria and at least five Brotherhood offices were torched, while the nation’s highest religious authority, Al-Azhar, warned against “civil war."
Security has been redoubled at the presidential palace in Heliopolis. Walls set up last year still block some traffic access, and curved concrete slabs designed to prevent climbing now protect the main gates. Shipping containers also line much of the perimeter, and nearby apartment buildings have blocked off their parking lots and side streets with barbed wire. On Friday, authorities built a new wall of concrete blocks to surround the complex.
Peter Soliman, a communications student who lives in the neighborhood, said most residents don’t know what to expect.
"Of course, parents are worried about their children going out to demonstrate by the palace, especially if the Brotherhood shows up," he said. “People fear things will turn bloody and divide the country."
In the city center, concrete walls continue to block off the Interior Ministry and southern access routes to Tahrir Square, epicenter of the uprising that overthrew longtime autocrat Hosni Mubarak. Protesters began gathering at the square ahead of the weekend, saying they plan to dig in for a protracted conflict.
The nearby Semiramis Hotel is taking no chances, even though Tahrir is expected to be a sideshow compared to Sunday’s march to the palace. The site of repeated clashes between stone-throwing youths and riot police this past year, the luxury hotel has just finished fortifying itself with a spiked metal fence topped with razor-sharp blades.
To the south, in the leafy Garden City neighborhood—an area that has sometimes seen spillover violence from Tahrir—some residents were securing their homes.
Metalworker Sameh Haddad used an arc welder to put the final touches on an apartment building’s new wrought iron gate before hurrying to other appointments. “For once, business has been great," he said.
The Trials of Running a Syrian Refugee Camp
By Takis Würger, Der Spiegel, June 28, 2013
Kilian Kleinschmidt walks into the camp armed with a 6-inch stainless steel hook. “I hate refugee camps," he says. He is holding the hook in his hand like a dagger.
It is getting dark, and a military policeman tells Kleinschmidt that under no circumstances should he go into the camp at night. Kleinschmidt walks through the gate in silence.
The Zaatari Camp houses 116,000 refugees who fled to Jordan from the war in Syria. They live in trailers and tents with the letters UNHCR imprinted on them in blue. The UNHCR, or United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, is Kleinschmidt’s employer. The refugees arrive in buses from the border in this stretch of desert in northern Jordan, and their numbers are growing by the day. The local Bedouins say that before the refugees came, the only resident of this desert was the devil. Not even scorpions lived there.
Kleinschmidt’s job is to ensure that the refugees survive in the Zaatari Camp. He wants to give them back their dignity, and he is supposed to create order in the camp. Kleinschmidt is German. A German can restore order—at least that’s the gist of the plan.
The refugees receive water, food, shelter, toilets and warm blankets for the night. They could be satisfied. Instead, they stormed a trailer where detergent was being distributed, and broke an aid worker’s foot with a rock. Kleinschmidt was caught in the middle of a battle between the military police and refugees, and his throat still hurts from the tear gas. Refugees also pulled a police officer from his obstacle-clearing tank and beat him on the head with a rock.
Every day, four buses stop at the camp to collect people who want to travel back to Syria. The refugees stand in line in the morning, and when the buses arrive, they fight over seats, because they would rather live in a war zone than in Zaatari. For Kleinschmidt, the camp is a place where the devil still lives today.
In March, the UNHCR assigned him to rescue Zaatari from chaos. He was flown in from Kenya, put in a trailer in an area secured with fences, barbed wire and guards, and given a stack of business cards that read “Senior Field Coordinator," indicating that he was in charge at the camp.
Kleinschmidt spent 10 days touring the premises. Speaking to the people there, he determined that the aid workers had managed to save the lives of all the refugees and satisfy their basic needs, but no one had been able to make the refugees happy. Kleinschmidt thought about it and concluded that Zaatari must have two problems. The first is the refugees, and the second is the aid workers.
Before Kleinschmidt embarked on his nighttime walk, he passed through the camp where a number of aid organizations are located. He walked by the trailers housing the offices of: UNICEF, UNHCR, the German Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW), the International Medical Corps, Mercy Corps, Save the Children, International Relief & Development, the World Food Programme, the Norwegian Refugee Council, the United Nations Population Fund, the Noor Al Hussein Foundation, the Jordan Health Aid Society, Oxfam, the International Rescue Committee, Relief International, Reach, Japan Emergency NGO, and the Japan International Cooperation Agency.
It was night and almost all the trailers were empty. The workers had finished their work for the day.
Everything had been different a day earlier. The parking lot was full of SUVs. Aid workers who didn’t normally work in the camp had arrived from the Jordanian capital Amman. The European Union Commissioner for Enlargement had announced a visit. Politicians are important to aid organizations, because they have access to money and bring along journalists who tell stories that are heard by people with money.
Kleinschmidt shook the EU commissioner’s hand and said: “Welcome to Zaatari. I’m the mayor here."
The commissioner, accompanied by the military police, visited a school built by UNICEF. He was followed by many young people who spoke excellent English and wore the vests of their aid organizations like parade uniforms. A few women were wearing heels, which sank into the desert sand. Kleinschmidt, wearing a dusty shirt, stood in the crowd and said: “Most of the vests will have left by this afternoon."
He too has a sky-blue UNHCR vest. It hangs on a chair in his office, and he sometimes uses it to wipe the sweat from his face. He believes that aid workers wear vests to dazzle people with big letters.
Kleinschmidt is a little like a bulldozer, flattening everything he doesn’t like in the camp. But his job is actually to do the opposite, by both developing and keeping the peace in Jordan’s largest camp for Syrian refugees.
On the day of the EU commissioner’s visit, two young women stood in the crowd of aid workers, wearing brown vests with UNESCO stitched onto them in blue letters. UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, is known for dealing with global cultural heritage. Kleinschmidt had never seen the women and had no idea what sort of cultural heritage they could be concerned about in Zaatari. “What are you doing here?" he asked.
"We’re doing a mentoring program for children," said one of the women, handing him a business card with the words “Project Manager" on it. Kleinschmidt replied: “It would be nice to know exactly what you’re doing here, because I’m the camp manager."
One would think that the camp manager is someone who manages this camp. But it’s all much more difficult than it sounds, says Kleinschmidt.
He doesn’t know how many aid workers are in the camp. According to a list on the UNHCR website, 139 organizations are helping the people in Zaatari. Doctors Without Borders is there, and so are Electricians Without Borders and Gynecologists Without Borders. Clowns Without Borders, which performs in crisis zones to cheer people up, has already left.
Private donors from Saudi Arabia brought in several hundred residential trailers without discussing it with Kleinschmidt or his team first. South Korea spent $20,000 (€15,300) on a soccer field that no one uses. There is a Dutch guitar group, although Kleinschmidt has no idea what they are doing there. And the Korean ambassador in Jordan plans to offer Taekwondo lessons for the children in Zaatari soon.
An aid worker says: “Imagine UNHCR was Nike. We build an athletic shoe and have suppliers make the individual parts of the shoe. Each part of the shoe comes from a different supplier, the sole, the laces, the leather, and each supplier works according to his own designs. Try to imagine what that shoe ends up looking like."
Kleinschmidt was brought in because he has the reputation for solving impossible tasks. Some worship him for his work, while others feel that he would be better suited for the Foreign Legion. He wears a chain around his neck with a silver pendant his wife designed. The symbol means “warrior," says Kleinschmidt.
He used to be a pacifist and wanted to work at a vineyard. After graduating from high school in Berlin, he drove to southern France to pick grapes. Then he and his friends bought a herd of goats and made cheese. Then he learned to slate roofs. He also raised a few rabbits and made pâté. He fell in love and got married, and he and his wife had a daughter together. When the marriage ended, Kleinschmidt bought a motorcycle and drove into the Sahara.
In a bar in Mali, he met a man and a woman who were aid workers, and after many glasses of whisky they asked Kleinschmidt whether he’d like to help them build a school in the desert.
He says that he has learned the meaning of freedom, adventure and purpose. He became an aid worker, and in the course of his life, he says he has heard many nice responses to the question of why people choose this profession, but few honest ones.
He went to Uganda, South Sudan, Kenya, Somalia, Kosovo, Sri Lanka and Pakistan, and he was amazed to survive it all. He chose to subordinate everything else in his life to his work. Kleinschmidt himself lives like a refugee.
In the mid-1990s, his boss called him from UNHCR headquarters in Geneva and said that 100,000 Hutu refugees were lost in the forest in Congo and afraid of being slaughtered by the Tutsi. Kleinschmidt put together a team, flew to Congo, found an old railroad built by the former Belgian colonial rulers, had it repaired and drove into the bush with a steam locomotive pulling the train. He found the refugees and rescued many of them.
Kleinschmidt falls silent when asked why he does what he does. “I just do it," he finally replies. He does it because he is obsessed, and there can be many reasons for that, but two are especially obvious: he is obsessed with saving lives, and he is also obsessed with risking his own life.
Today, at 50, Kleinschmidt has a stepson and five children with three different women, spread across Europe and Africa. He no longer drinks whiskey or smokes cigarettes, but he does see a military psychologist regularly to cleanse his soul. It stands to reason that there is little in the realm of the living or the dead that could still shock Kleinschmidt, but the camp in Zaatari has done it. “These are the most difficult refugees I’ve ever seen," he says.
He marches past a fenced complex where newly arrived refugees are sitting. He could sit down with the women and listen.
One woman says: “My neighborhood in Damascus was bombed, and people were murdered."
Another says: “First I fled to Lebanon. There were Hezbollah fighters who tried to break into my house."
One woman says: “My father is in prison. I don’t know if he’s still alive."
Another says: “They said on TV that my husband is a terrorist. His nickname is ‘The Bird.’ He was arrested."
Another says: “They told my husband to go to the police station and bring along sweets. He never returned."
There are probably 116,000 explanations for the rage of the 116,000 refugees in Zaatari, but Kleinschmidt believes he has been able to isolate three important explanations.
First: These people come from a country where the elite are their enemies. Now they have fought for their freedom and don’t want the next set of elites to tell them how many lentils they are allowed to eat. Second: Many refugees believe that the international community owes them something, because it isn’t stopping the killing in Syria. Third: The mafia.
Kleinschmidt is only gradually able to identify the criminals that are working against him on the other side of the barbed wire, but he thinks he knows what they want. They want to keep the camp in an unstable state, and for free trade to remain forbidden so that smuggling continues to be worthwhile. They also want to prevent the aid organizations from installing a power grid, so that they can continue to sell illegally tapped electricity. And they want police to fear entering the camp, so that the mafia can go about its business without interruption.
There are men in Zaatari who take advantage of chaos to acquire power—some of them mean well and some are evil. One of them, perhaps the most powerful, is called Abu Hussein.
He is sitting in a trailer on a sofa with a floral pattern, serving strong Turkish coffee. His wife places nine ashtrays on the table. There are two Nokia mobile phones on the carpet, one red and one pink. Hussein’s children are sitting in an adjacent trailer, where an air-conditioner keeps the temperature at around 18 degrees Celsius (64 degrees Fahrenheit), watching “Hero Turtles" on TV. “If I wanted to, I could have the entire camp burning in five minutes," says Hussein.
The 48-year-old keeps his beard neatly trimmed, and his hair is either blow-dried into shape or possesses some sort of natural tension that keeps it elevated from his head. He says that before becoming the most powerful man in Zaatari, he lived in the Syrian city of Daraa, where he worked in a school, teaching a subject called “Air-Conditioning and Heating." When the people revolted against Syrian President Bashar Assad, Hussein joined the rebel fighters and became commander of a special unit of the Free Syrian Army, the “Falcons of the Tribe of the Prophet Mohammed." The Falcons specialized in mines, says Hussein. “I killed people."
Then he got scared and fled. When he reached Zaatari on Aug. 5 of last year, he was the 60th refugee to arrive at the camp, when a cold desert wind was blowing, he says. Hussein asked the aid workers for blankets for the women and children. When one of them refused, Hussein said that he had killed 73 people and that number would reach 74 if the worker didn’t comply with his request. The aid worker gave him the blankets. From then on, he says, he was “the Akeed," or ruler.
As ruler, Hussein is accustomed to controlling the conversation. It’s difficult to ask him a question and get a straightforward answer. Or perhaps he is too clever to respond directly to the questions.
What do people give him for being the boss?
"The only ruler is Allah."
But doesn’t he, Abu Hussein, have a say here?
"I control 21 streets. My men patrol day and night. I have 10 barbers who will give free shaves to anyone who wants one."
What do the people give him in return?
"Just their love."
How can a refugee like him afford three trailers and an air-conditioner?
"Politics is like an ocean. Not everyone can swim in it."
What is his assessment of the work by the aid organizations?
Hussein takes a few drags from his cigarette and then inhales deeply, as if he were about to go diving. Then he slams his fist on the carpet, so hard that the coffee pot shakes. He begins to shout. “I went to the World Food Programme and said that I wanted a piece of cheese. They told me that someone in Geneva had to make that decision. I wonder who is sitting in Geneva deciding whether I can eat a piece of cheese?"
He continues to shout for half an hour, talking about corruption and Jews and cheese. He complains about the fact that some of the male aid workers have ponytails. Finally, he shouts that Mister Kilian is the only halfway decent one of the lot.
Kleinschmidt paid a visit to Hussein one day to find out whether he was dealing with just another braggart. Five men wearing red Palestinian scarves on their heads sat with them. One of them said: “I’ve seen you walking through the camp at night. I’ve thought about having you kidnapped."
Kleinschmidt, who was there with a colleague, smiled and thanked Hussein for the invitation. The colleague was a young Irishman who had only been working in the camp for a few days and eyed the beverages in Hussein’s trailer as if they were hand grenades. There is a diarrhea epidemic in Zaatari. Kleinschmidt chugged two cups of coffee from the same cup as Hussein and ate two pastries stuffed with spinach. Hussein said: “We have the feeling that the aid workers are heartless."
Hussein lives in a trailer that cost $3,000. The air-conditioner runs with electricity he is tapping from the Italian hospital. The water for his tea is from canisters provided by UNICEF. He hasn’t worked, paid or thanked anyone for any of it.
Kleinschmidt concealed what he was really thinking. Before the meeting, he had said that what mattered wasn’t the content of the discussion, but the fact that it took place at all. He drank tea and listened. After two hours, Hussein said: “You are a clever man, Mister Kilian. We should work together."
Kleinschmidt says that this camp can only become a place where refugees can regain their dignity if he manages to get all the anarchists out there to respect him.
He works 18 hours a day so that the aid workers respect him. He doesn’t give orders, but instead tries to convince them of his idea, which is to view Zaatari as a city and not as a camp. He divided the city into 12 administrative districts and sent a member of his staff to each district to meet with the street bosses every day. He visited the military police commanders at home, ate lamb with them and convinced them to begin deploying night patrols. He had a ditch dug to prevent the smugglers from getting into the camp, and when that didn’t work, he had excavators build a two-meter earth wall.
He met with politicians and explained to them that he needed more money, which he got. He gave interviews, waved his steel hook and argued that journalists should be brought to Zaatari. Most of the workers with the other organizations now give him reports on their activities. His colleagues have started spending nights in the camp with him. More and more of them are leaving their offices and following Kleinschmidt to the other side of the barbed wire.
He takes walks at night so that the refugees will respect him, and so that people will see that he is one of them. He had streetlights installed in the section of the camp where the refugees arrive, to make sure they can see where they’re going. He has hot tea served to the new arrivals. He announced that the refugees would soon be given vouchers to buy their own groceries in supermarkets. He believes that in three months no one will have to live in a tent anymore. And, when he recently met with a group in the most dangerous of the 12 administrative districts, a few men said that they would like to plant olive trees.
One could see Kilian Kleinschmidt as a Rambo-like figure and disagree with his management consultant approach to the refugee camp. But before he came to Zaatari, no one there would have thought to plant an olive tree.
In the evenings, when the other aid workers are already asleep, Kleinschmidt says that he misses his wife so much that it hurts. He hopes to return home soon, to his children and his grandson. He says that he has applied for an office job in Strasbourg, but fears he’ll eventually be sent to another crisis zone.
When he feels unobserved, he puts his hands on childrens’ heads and listens to the concerns of their mothers. In the end, he points out that the hook he carries around is merely a tent hook. He would never hit a person with it, he says, and only carries it to counter his own nervousness. He really only keeps it with him in the company of journalists, who like to photograph him with it, he adds.
Kleinschmidt understands that donors want a strong man, so he plays along. He also understands that the aid workers need a leader, so he gives them one. He understands that the refugees only accept him if he behaves like a mayor in their presence.
What he doesn’t admit to anyone in the camp is that when he calls his wife in the evening, he sometimes tells her how burned-out and shaken he feels. He tells her that he doesn’t know if he can last another week. He says: “I hate refugee camps, because they deprive people of their dignity."
On a holiday in June, when he was in Amman, he received a text message from a colleague in Zaatari. He receives text messages every day, but they’re normally about how many stone-throwing incidents there were or what the refugees have stolen. But this message consisted of only three letters: NTR. Nothing to report.
Kilian Kleinschmidt walks into the camp armed with a 6-inch stainless steel hook. “I hate refugee camps," he says. He is holding the hook in his hand like a dagger.
It is getting dark, and a military policeman tells Kleinschmidt that under no circumstances should he go into the camp at night. Kleinschmidt walks through the gate in silence.
The Zaatari Camp houses 116,000 refugees who fled to Jordan from the war in Syria. They live in trailers and tents with the letters UNHCR imprinted on them in blue. The UNHCR, or United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, is Kleinschmidt’s employer. The refugees arrive in buses from the border in this stretch of desert in northern Jordan, and their numbers are growing by the day. The local Bedouins say that before the refugees came, the only resident of this desert was the devil. Not even scorpions lived there.
Kleinschmidt’s job is to ensure that the refugees survive in the Zaatari Camp. He wants to give them back their dignity, and he is supposed to create order in the camp. Kleinschmidt is German. A German can restore order—at least that’s the gist of the plan.
The refugees receive water, food, shelter, toilets and warm blankets for the night. They could be satisfied. Instead, they stormed a trailer where detergent was being distributed, and broke an aid worker’s foot with a rock. Kleinschmidt was caught in the middle of a battle between the military police and refugees, and his throat still hurts from the tear gas. Refugees also pulled a police officer from his obstacle-clearing tank and beat him on the head with a rock.
Every day, four buses stop at the camp to collect people who want to travel back to Syria. The refugees stand in line in the morning, and when the buses arrive, they fight over seats, because they would rather live in a war zone than in Zaatari. For Kleinschmidt, the camp is a place where the devil still lives today.
In March, the UNHCR assigned him to rescue Zaatari from chaos. He was flown in from Kenya, put in a trailer in an area secured with fences, barbed wire and guards, and given a stack of business cards that read “Senior Field Coordinator," indicating that he was in charge at the camp.
Kleinschmidt spent 10 days touring the premises. Speaking to the people there, he determined that the aid workers had managed to save the lives of all the refugees and satisfy their basic needs, but no one had been able to make the refugees happy. Kleinschmidt thought about it and concluded that Zaatari must have two problems. The first is the refugees, and the second is the aid workers.
Before Kleinschmidt embarked on his nighttime walk, he passed through the camp where a number of aid organizations are located. He walked by the trailers housing the offices of: UNICEF, UNHCR, the German Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW), the International Medical Corps, Mercy Corps, Save the Children, International Relief & Development, the World Food Programme, the Norwegian Refugee Council, the United Nations Population Fund, the Noor Al Hussein Foundation, the Jordan Health Aid Society, Oxfam, the International Rescue Committee, Relief International, Reach, Japan Emergency NGO, and the Japan International Cooperation Agency.
It was night and almost all the trailers were empty. The workers had finished their work for the day.
Everything had been different a day earlier. The parking lot was full of SUVs. Aid workers who didn’t normally work in the camp had arrived from the Jordanian capital Amman. The European Union Commissioner for Enlargement had announced a visit. Politicians are important to aid organizations, because they have access to money and bring along journalists who tell stories that are heard by people with money.
Kleinschmidt shook the EU commissioner’s hand and said: “Welcome to Zaatari. I’m the mayor here."
The commissioner, accompanied by the military police, visited a school built by UNICEF. He was followed by many young people who spoke excellent English and wore the vests of their aid organizations like parade uniforms. A few women were wearing heels, which sank into the desert sand. Kleinschmidt, wearing a dusty shirt, stood in the crowd and said: “Most of the vests will have left by this afternoon."
He too has a sky-blue UNHCR vest. It hangs on a chair in his office, and he sometimes uses it to wipe the sweat from his face. He believes that aid workers wear vests to dazzle people with big letters.
Kleinschmidt is a little like a bulldozer, flattening everything he doesn’t like in the camp. But his job is actually to do the opposite, by both developing and keeping the peace in Jordan’s largest camp for Syrian refugees.
On the day of the EU commissioner’s visit, two young women stood in the crowd of aid workers, wearing brown vests with UNESCO stitched onto them in blue letters. UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, is known for dealing with global cultural heritage. Kleinschmidt had never seen the women and had no idea what sort of cultural heritage they could be concerned about in Zaatari. “What are you doing here?" he asked.
"We’re doing a mentoring program for children," said one of the women, handing him a business card with the words “Project Manager" on it. Kleinschmidt replied: “It would be nice to know exactly what you’re doing here, because I’m the camp manager."
One would think that the camp manager is someone who manages this camp. But it’s all much more difficult than it sounds, says Kleinschmidt.
He doesn’t know how many aid workers are in the camp. According to a list on the UNHCR website, 139 organizations are helping the people in Zaatari. Doctors Without Borders is there, and so are Electricians Without Borders and Gynecologists Without Borders. Clowns Without Borders, which performs in crisis zones to cheer people up, has already left.
Private donors from Saudi Arabia brought in several hundred residential trailers without discussing it with Kleinschmidt or his team first. South Korea spent $20,000 (€15,300) on a soccer field that no one uses. There is a Dutch guitar group, although Kleinschmidt has no idea what they are doing there. And the Korean ambassador in Jordan plans to offer Taekwondo lessons for the children in Zaatari soon.
An aid worker says: “Imagine UNHCR was Nike. We build an athletic shoe and have suppliers make the individual parts of the shoe. Each part of the shoe comes from a different supplier, the sole, the laces, the leather, and each supplier works according to his own designs. Try to imagine what that shoe ends up looking like."
Kleinschmidt was brought in because he has the reputation for solving impossible tasks. Some worship him for his work, while others feel that he would be better suited for the Foreign Legion. He wears a chain around his neck with a silver pendant his wife designed. The symbol means “warrior," says Kleinschmidt.
He used to be a pacifist and wanted to work at a vineyard. After graduating from high school in Berlin, he drove to southern France to pick grapes. Then he and his friends bought a herd of goats and made cheese. Then he learned to slate roofs. He also raised a few rabbits and made pâté. He fell in love and got married, and he and his wife had a daughter together. When the marriage ended, Kleinschmidt bought a motorcycle and drove into the Sahara.
In a bar in Mali, he met a man and a woman who were aid workers, and after many glasses of whisky they asked Kleinschmidt whether he’d like to help them build a school in the desert.
He says that he has learned the meaning of freedom, adventure and purpose. He became an aid worker, and in the course of his life, he says he has heard many nice responses to the question of why people choose this profession, but few honest ones.
He went to Uganda, South Sudan, Kenya, Somalia, Kosovo, Sri Lanka and Pakistan, and he was amazed to survive it all. He chose to subordinate everything else in his life to his work. Kleinschmidt himself lives like a refugee.
In the mid-1990s, his boss called him from UNHCR headquarters in Geneva and said that 100,000 Hutu refugees were lost in the forest in Congo and afraid of being slaughtered by the Tutsi. Kleinschmidt put together a team, flew to Congo, found an old railroad built by the former Belgian colonial rulers, had it repaired and drove into the bush with a steam locomotive pulling the train. He found the refugees and rescued many of them.
Kleinschmidt falls silent when asked why he does what he does. “I just do it," he finally replies. He does it because he is obsessed, and there can be many reasons for that, but two are especially obvious: he is obsessed with saving lives, and he is also obsessed with risking his own life.
Today, at 50, Kleinschmidt has a stepson and five children with three different women, spread across Europe and Africa. He no longer drinks whiskey or smokes cigarettes, but he does see a military psychologist regularly to cleanse his soul. It stands to reason that there is little in the realm of the living or the dead that could still shock Kleinschmidt, but the camp in Zaatari has done it. “These are the most difficult refugees I’ve ever seen," he says.
He marches past a fenced complex where newly arrived refugees are sitting. He could sit down with the women and listen.
One woman says: “My neighborhood in Damascus was bombed, and people were murdered."
Another says: “First I fled to Lebanon. There were Hezbollah fighters who tried to break into my house."
One woman says: “My father is in prison. I don’t know if he’s still alive."
Another says: “They said on TV that my husband is a terrorist. His nickname is ‘The Bird.’ He was arrested."
Another says: “They told my husband to go to the police station and bring along sweets. He never returned."
There are probably 116,000 explanations for the rage of the 116,000 refugees in Zaatari, but Kleinschmidt believes he has been able to isolate three important explanations.
First: These people come from a country where the elite are their enemies. Now they have fought for their freedom and don’t want the next set of elites to tell them how many lentils they are allowed to eat. Second: Many refugees believe that the international community owes them something, because it isn’t stopping the killing in Syria. Third: The mafia.
Kleinschmidt is only gradually able to identify the criminals that are working against him on the other side of the barbed wire, but he thinks he knows what they want. They want to keep the camp in an unstable state, and for free trade to remain forbidden so that smuggling continues to be worthwhile. They also want to prevent the aid organizations from installing a power grid, so that they can continue to sell illegally tapped electricity. And they want police to fear entering the camp, so that the mafia can go about its business without interruption.
There are men in Zaatari who take advantage of chaos to acquire power—some of them mean well and some are evil. One of them, perhaps the most powerful, is called Abu Hussein.
He is sitting in a trailer on a sofa with a floral pattern, serving strong Turkish coffee. His wife places nine ashtrays on the table. There are two Nokia mobile phones on the carpet, one red and one pink. Hussein’s children are sitting in an adjacent trailer, where an air-conditioner keeps the temperature at around 18 degrees Celsius (64 degrees Fahrenheit), watching “Hero Turtles" on TV. “If I wanted to, I could have the entire camp burning in five minutes," says Hussein.
The 48-year-old keeps his beard neatly trimmed, and his hair is either blow-dried into shape or possesses some sort of natural tension that keeps it elevated from his head. He says that before becoming the most powerful man in Zaatari, he lived in the Syrian city of Daraa, where he worked in a school, teaching a subject called “Air-Conditioning and Heating." When the people revolted against Syrian President Bashar Assad, Hussein joined the rebel fighters and became commander of a special unit of the Free Syrian Army, the “Falcons of the Tribe of the Prophet Mohammed." The Falcons specialized in mines, says Hussein. “I killed people."
Then he got scared and fled. When he reached Zaatari on Aug. 5 of last year, he was the 60th refugee to arrive at the camp, when a cold desert wind was blowing, he says. Hussein asked the aid workers for blankets for the women and children. When one of them refused, Hussein said that he had killed 73 people and that number would reach 74 if the worker didn’t comply with his request. The aid worker gave him the blankets. From then on, he says, he was “the Akeed," or ruler.
As ruler, Hussein is accustomed to controlling the conversation. It’s difficult to ask him a question and get a straightforward answer. Or perhaps he is too clever to respond directly to the questions.
What do people give him for being the boss?
"The only ruler is Allah."
But doesn’t he, Abu Hussein, have a say here?
"I control 21 streets. My men patrol day and night. I have 10 barbers who will give free shaves to anyone who wants one."
What do the people give him in return?
"Just their love."
How can a refugee like him afford three trailers and an air-conditioner?
"Politics is like an ocean. Not everyone can swim in it."
What is his assessment of the work by the aid organizations?
Hussein takes a few drags from his cigarette and then inhales deeply, as if he were about to go diving. Then he slams his fist on the carpet, so hard that the coffee pot shakes. He begins to shout. “I went to the World Food Programme and said that I wanted a piece of cheese. They told me that someone in Geneva had to make that decision. I wonder who is sitting in Geneva deciding whether I can eat a piece of cheese?"
He continues to shout for half an hour, talking about corruption and Jews and cheese. He complains about the fact that some of the male aid workers have ponytails. Finally, he shouts that Mister Kilian is the only halfway decent one of the lot.
Kleinschmidt paid a visit to Hussein one day to find out whether he was dealing with just another braggart. Five men wearing red Palestinian scarves on their heads sat with them. One of them said: “I’ve seen you walking through the camp at night. I’ve thought about having you kidnapped."
Kleinschmidt, who was there with a colleague, smiled and thanked Hussein for the invitation. The colleague was a young Irishman who had only been working in the camp for a few days and eyed the beverages in Hussein’s trailer as if they were hand grenades. There is a diarrhea epidemic in Zaatari. Kleinschmidt chugged two cups of coffee from the same cup as Hussein and ate two pastries stuffed with spinach. Hussein said: “We have the feeling that the aid workers are heartless."
Hussein lives in a trailer that cost $3,000. The air-conditioner runs with electricity he is tapping from the Italian hospital. The water for his tea is from canisters provided by UNICEF. He hasn’t worked, paid or thanked anyone for any of it.
Kleinschmidt concealed what he was really thinking. Before the meeting, he had said that what mattered wasn’t the content of the discussion, but the fact that it took place at all. He drank tea and listened. After two hours, Hussein said: “You are a clever man, Mister Kilian. We should work together."
Kleinschmidt says that this camp can only become a place where refugees can regain their dignity if he manages to get all the anarchists out there to respect him.
He works 18 hours a day so that the aid workers respect him. He doesn’t give orders, but instead tries to convince them of his idea, which is to view Zaatari as a city and not as a camp. He divided the city into 12 administrative districts and sent a member of his staff to each district to meet with the street bosses every day. He visited the military police commanders at home, ate lamb with them and convinced them to begin deploying night patrols. He had a ditch dug to prevent the smugglers from getting into the camp, and when that didn’t work, he had excavators build a two-meter earth wall.
He met with politicians and explained to them that he needed more money, which he got. He gave interviews, waved his steel hook and argued that journalists should be brought to Zaatari. Most of the workers with the other organizations now give him reports on their activities. His colleagues have started spending nights in the camp with him. More and more of them are leaving their offices and following Kleinschmidt to the other side of the barbed wire.
He takes walks at night so that the refugees will respect him, and so that people will see that he is one of them. He had streetlights installed in the section of the camp where the refugees arrive, to make sure they can see where they’re going. He has hot tea served to the new arrivals. He announced that the refugees would soon be given vouchers to buy their own groceries in supermarkets. He believes that in three months no one will have to live in a tent anymore. And, when he recently met with a group in the most dangerous of the 12 administrative districts, a few men said that they would like to plant olive trees.
One could see Kilian Kleinschmidt as a Rambo-like figure and disagree with his management consultant approach to the refugee camp. But before he came to Zaatari, no one there would have thought to plant an olive tree.
In the evenings, when the other aid workers are already asleep, Kleinschmidt says that he misses his wife so much that it hurts. He hopes to return home soon, to his children and his grandson. He says that he has applied for an office job in Strasbourg, but fears he’ll eventually be sent to another crisis zone.
When he feels unobserved, he puts his hands on childrens’ heads and listens to the concerns of their mothers. In the end, he points out that the hook he carries around is merely a tent hook. He would never hit a person with it, he says, and only carries it to counter his own nervousness. He really only keeps it with him in the company of journalists, who like to photograph him with it, he adds.
Kleinschmidt understands that donors want a strong man, so he plays along. He also understands that the aid workers need a leader, so he gives them one. He understands that the refugees only accept him if he behaves like a mayor in their presence.
What he doesn’t admit to anyone in the camp is that when he calls his wife in the evening, he sometimes tells her how burned-out and shaken he feels. He tells her that he doesn’t know if he can last another week. He says: “I hate refugee camps, because they deprive people of their dignity."
On a holiday in June, when he was in Amman, he received a text message from a colleague in Zaatari. He receives text messages every day, but they’re normally about how many stone-throwing incidents there were or what the refugees have stolen. But this message consisted of only three letters: NTR. Nothing to report.
Israel lawmaker emerging as main foil to Netanyahu
By Aron Heller, AP, Jun 29, 2013
TEL AVIV, Israel (AP)—Danny Danon says he has no problem with his party leader, Israel’s prime minister—so long as he doesn’t make peace.
The ambitious deputy defense minister isn’t a household name internationally yet, but at home he has emerged as an unlikely opponent to Benjamin Netanyahu and his strongest opposition within the hawkish ruling Likud Party.
A soft-spoken lawmaker with a penchant for sharp suits, Danon is suddenly a major stumbling block toward Palestinian statehood as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry embarks on his latest push to restart long-dormant peace talks.
While Netanyahu attempts to convince the world of his peaceful intentions and sincere commitment to establishing a Palestinian state as part of a final peace settlement, Danon has repeatedly defied the prime minister’s stance while generating the type of political power that could hinder Netanyahu’s ability to make concessions.
Danon, 42, is among a group of young hard-liners who rose to prominence during a Likud primary vote last year. These officials, including Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin, Knesset speaker Yuli Edelstein, deputy transportation minister Tzipi Hotovely and coalition whip Yariv Levin, oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state and are strong proponents of building settlements in east Jerusalem and the West Bank.
Danon, a secular father of three, is the most vocal and has become the brightest star and strongest counterforce within the party. He has also generated an impressive following in America, particularly among Christian evangelicals. His recent English-language book—“Israel: the will to prevail"—outlines his vision of further Israeli control over the West Bank. It won’t find many fans in the Obama administration, but it did receive high praise from two of Danon’s closest American allies: former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee and conservative TV personality Glenn Beck.
The front page of Friday’s mass-daily Yediot Ahronot points to Danon’s surge to prominence at home. Under the headline “Between Kerry and Danon," a cartoon shows Danon and others pinning Netanyahu to the ground. The paper’s humor column has a mock quote from Kerry saying he is optimistic his visit can help promote a “brave and effective negotiation between Netanyahu and Danny Danon."
Political commentator Hanan Kristal said Danon is trying to position himself as a potential future alternative to Netanyahu.
"Danon is Bibi from 10 years ago," he said, referring to Netanyahu by his nickname. “He (Danon) is a Likudnik and he is saying what a lot of them believe. He just says it clearly and without mincing words."
Netanyahu has distanced himself from Danon, insisting his comments do not reflect government policy, but he hasn’t fired him either as some have suggested he should.
TEL AVIV, Israel (AP)—Danny Danon says he has no problem with his party leader, Israel’s prime minister—so long as he doesn’t make peace.
The ambitious deputy defense minister isn’t a household name internationally yet, but at home he has emerged as an unlikely opponent to Benjamin Netanyahu and his strongest opposition within the hawkish ruling Likud Party.
A soft-spoken lawmaker with a penchant for sharp suits, Danon is suddenly a major stumbling block toward Palestinian statehood as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry embarks on his latest push to restart long-dormant peace talks.
While Netanyahu attempts to convince the world of his peaceful intentions and sincere commitment to establishing a Palestinian state as part of a final peace settlement, Danon has repeatedly defied the prime minister’s stance while generating the type of political power that could hinder Netanyahu’s ability to make concessions.
Danon, 42, is among a group of young hard-liners who rose to prominence during a Likud primary vote last year. These officials, including Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin, Knesset speaker Yuli Edelstein, deputy transportation minister Tzipi Hotovely and coalition whip Yariv Levin, oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state and are strong proponents of building settlements in east Jerusalem and the West Bank.
Danon, a secular father of three, is the most vocal and has become the brightest star and strongest counterforce within the party. He has also generated an impressive following in America, particularly among Christian evangelicals. His recent English-language book—“Israel: the will to prevail"—outlines his vision of further Israeli control over the West Bank. It won’t find many fans in the Obama administration, but it did receive high praise from two of Danon’s closest American allies: former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee and conservative TV personality Glenn Beck.
The front page of Friday’s mass-daily Yediot Ahronot points to Danon’s surge to prominence at home. Under the headline “Between Kerry and Danon," a cartoon shows Danon and others pinning Netanyahu to the ground. The paper’s humor column has a mock quote from Kerry saying he is optimistic his visit can help promote a “brave and effective negotiation between Netanyahu and Danny Danon."
Political commentator Hanan Kristal said Danon is trying to position himself as a potential future alternative to Netanyahu.
"Danon is Bibi from 10 years ago," he said, referring to Netanyahu by his nickname. “He (Danon) is a Likudnik and he is saying what a lot of them believe. He just says it clearly and without mincing words."
Netanyahu has distanced himself from Danon, insisting his comments do not reflect government policy, but he hasn’t fired him either as some have suggested he should.
Sunday, June 30, 2013
A Guerra Entre os Mundos!
Mananciais No.8
Uma convocação a todos aqueles que realmente querem mudar o mundo para melhor!
Pelo Pai David
Cada pessoa que atendeu ao chamado de Jesus para segui-lO e levar Sua luz aos outros está envolvido numa guerra entre os mundos! Lutamos juntos pela nossa fé, verdade e liberdade. Comprometemo-nos a dar, por amor, as nossas vidas pelos nossos irmãos no mundo inteiro. Estamos convencidos que todos os pobres devem ter casa, comida, roupas, liberdade para trabalhar em paz, com saúde e felizes, e assim obterem o que necessitam. Dedicamo-nos para que todos tenham liberdade de viver uma vida feliz em cooperação, de cada um segundo a sua capacidade, e a cada um segundo a sua necessidade.1
Estas são algumas de nossas metas comuns: fim da carência, da escravidão, da dor, do mal e do medo. Ninguém pode ser feliz com fome, subnutrido ou doente. Não há espaço para o sentimento de realização onde tiranos oprimem e exploram as pessoas, forçadas a trabalho excessivo e vÃtimas de abusos cruéis. Não há satisfação em uma vida sob os tormentos da guerra e conflitos, ameaçada pelo horrÃvel pesadelo de uma insegurança perpétua.
Acreditamos que todos esses males são causados pela falta de amor do homem por Deus e pelo seu semelhante, bem como pela sua desobediência à s leis de amor, fé, paz e harmonia instituÃdas por Deus. Essas leis são as crenças básicas de nossa fé e da de todos os que, de fato, crêem em Deus e no Seu amor.
Além de sabermos pelo que e contra o que estamos lutando, também temos que saber comodevemos lutar. A nossa guerra não é travada com armas, exércitos e soldados. Não se trata de um conflito de homem contra homem, nação contra nação, raça contra raça, ricos contra pobres, socialismo contra capitalismo. Não é uma guerra entre sistemas polÃticos e económicos, sociedades, tribos e culturas, religiões e fés. Não é uma disputa com base no ódio, no rancor, na matança e na carnificina, na vingança e em represálias, em tortura, agonia e morte! Não é uma batalha pela conquista de corpos, bens, ou territórios, nem fomentada pelo orgulho do homem.
Essas guerras mundanas do homem raramente resolvem alguma coisa, nem os problemas básicos da humanidade. Tipicamente, o que se vê é apenas mais sofrimento, agonia, dor, fome, escravidão, rancor, vingança, conflitos, tortura, privação, destruição, desperdÃcio, miséria e morte! A maioria das guerras egoÃstas e perversas do homem acaba numa mera troca de senhores e de escravos, num cÃrculo vicioso infindável de males, resultando em um número cada vez menor de ricos e um número maior de pobres, todos extremamente infelizes, com vidas horrÃveis, aterrorizados pelo medo.
A nossa é uma guerra espiritual, travada em fé e amor, para conquistar mentes, corações e espÃritos, e para salvar tanto as almas como os corpos dos homens. É uma guerra para libertar os homens dos males do espÃrito, da mente e do coração, os quais os tornam egoÃstas, desafeiçoados, perversos, cruéis e duros.
A desumanidade do homem para com o seu semelhante deve-se ao fato de ele não saber como ser feliz, e por mal conhecer o amor, a fé e o poder de Deus, bem como as Suas leis amorosas criadas para nos dar felicidade eterna.
Lutamos pela liberdade das mentes, dos corações e dos espÃritos dos homens, para que não estejam sujeitos ao mal, e para livrar as suas almas da servidão que lhes é imposta pelo Diabo e que nos causa todo este sofrimento! Estamos numa guerra entre os mundos, entre o bem e o mal, Deus e o Diabo, a bondade e a maldade, a carne e o espÃrito, os anjos e os demónios, o amor e o ódio, a vida e a morte, a alegria e a tristeza. É uma guerra universal, na qual os bons espÃritos do Céu e os maus espÃritos do Inferno disputam por nossas almas e corpos, tanto neste plano quanto no espiritual.
Portanto, devemos não só defender os direitos humanos, mas também travar a guerra espiritualmaior, usando as muito mais poderosas armas da fé, do amor e da compaixão, associadas a palavras amáveis e atos de bondade. Temos que libertar os homens do medo através da fé; do ódio, através do amor; da tristeza, através da alegria; da guerra, através da paz; da pobreza, através da abundáncia; e da morte com a felicidade celestial eterna!
A pena é mais poderosa do que a espada. A nossa guerra é uma guerra de palavras e de idéias para cativar as mentes dos homens com fé e esperança! O nosso desejo é saciar-lhes o coração com amor, paz e alegria a fim de libertar os seus espÃritos, bem como praticar atos de amor e bondade que libertem os seus corpos da dor! Por conseguinte, travamos uma guerra de palavras contra as idéias do mal, de fé contra o medo e de esperança contra a dúvida. Precisamos inspirar as pessoas a crerem em Deus, no Seu amor e no Seu plano para o maravilhoso futuro do homem no Reino de Deus na Terra, governado pelos justos, no qual não haverá mais angústia, pranto, dor nem morte. Haverá luz, saúde, felicidade, paz e abundáncia para todos!
Precisamos ensinar-lhes as Palavras de Deus que dão vida e que nos foram transmitidas pelos Seus santos profetas, no Seu livro sagrado, a BÃblia. Assim, para sempre terão a vida, o amor e a felicidade que Ele dá.
Impérios poderosos cujas conquistas se deram pela espada, surgiram e se desvaneceram, mas as Palavras amorosas e vivificadoras que Jesus deixou permanecem para sempre e continuam sendo fonte de alegria, paz, amor, vida e esperança para bilhões de pessoas de geração em geração! Alexandre, Ghengis Khan, Napoleão, Hitler e outros apareceram e sumiram, mas as palavras e as idéias dos profetas de Deus vivem eternamente!
Elas ignoram as fronteiras polÃticas, culturais, étnicas e ideológicas. Tampouco estão limitadas pelo tempo, pelo espaço, pelo homem, pela guerra ou pela força das armas. Elas englobam toda a humanidade e unem as mentes, os corações e espÃritos em fé e amor por Deus e pelo próximo, para o bem de todos.
Os filósofos, mestres, profetas e homens ungidos por Deus raramente governaram impérios, mas conquistaram multidões com as suas palavras, fé e idéias, cativando-lhes os corações, mentes e almas e libertando-ospara sempre. Ao longo dos milênios, Deus tem acumulado bilhões de seguidores e o Seu Reino eterno tem conquistado o domÃnio do espÃrito eterno dos homens, de longe maiores e mais duradouros que os meros impérios materiais conquistados pela espada!
Não podemos forçar as pessoas a serem boas. Não podemos legislar a justiça. Aquele que é convencido à força, permanece com a mesma opinião. Devemos influenciar as suas idéias, conquistar os corações, inspirar o espÃrito das pessoas e salvar as suas almas, para que escolham, por livre e espontánea vontade, fazerem o bem e não o mal! Para se entregar em amor, uma mulher tem que ser conquistada e não forçada!
O mundo não poderá ser mudado sem que antes a mentalidade do homem seja mudada, o que não ocorrerá a menos que se lhe mude primeiro o coração, o que nunca acontecerá sem a inspiração do EspÃrito de Deus, para que não apenas o seu corpo, mas também a sua alma seja salva.
Devemos nos empenhar para salvar o homem por completo, não apenas o seu corpo e o meio ambiente. Ele nunca será feliz com um coração angustiado, uma mente atribulada, um espÃrito deprimido e uma alma impenitente. Temos que trabalhar para resgatar o ser humano como um todo e não apenas parte dele. Precisamos lutar para salvar as pessoas para a eternidade e não só para estes dias aqui na Terra!
Isso é algo que somente o poder, a vida, a luz, o amor e as Palavras de Deus podem fazer! Temos que dar as Suas Palavras a todos os homens em toda a Terra. Temos que comunicar aos olhos, à s mentes e pensamentos de todos, em todos os lugares, os ideais, a esperança, a fé, o amor e os planos de Deus para as Suas criaturas. Somente dessa forma os corações poderão ser mudados, os espÃritos inspirados, as almas salvas e os corpos resgatados, para que assim as pessoas possam se amar umas à s outras e viver juntas para sempre!
É preciso que tenhamos uma visão mundial para a salvação de toda a humanidade, não só da nossa própria nação. Não devemos nos limitar à s insignificantes dificuldades do momento ou aos problemas desta vida, de um povo, de uma nação, de uma raça, de uma cultura, de uma religião, de um ponto de vista polÃtico, ou de um sistema económico.
Se a salvação é para alguém, então deve ser para todos. O mesmo vale à felicidade: todos devem ser felizes, sem exceção. Embora noventa e nove ovelhas estivessem no redil, o pastor só ficou satisfeito quando a última, que estava perdida, foi encontrada e resgatada. Faltava algo e elas não podiam ser completamente felizes enquanto uma ainda estivesse infeliz e perdida.1
Temos que procurar e encontrar todas as ovelhas perdidas do Senhor e lhes dar as Suas Palavras que vão lhes transmitir vida, amor e fé. Temos que trazer todas as ovelhas para o redil de Deus, para que possam pertencer a um só aprisco, com um só Pastor para sempre.
Devemos dizer a todos, embora nem todos dêem ouvidos, aceitem ou sejam salvos. Devemos a mensagem de Deus e Sua vida de amor a todos, mas principalmente à queles que vão acreditar e recebê-la. Deus apenas alimenta as almas famintas, mas os que já se julgam alimentados e pensam não precisar d’Ele nem de uma mudança de vida, Ele despede vazios!2 Portanto, não perca tempo discutindo com os que não querem ver. O maior cego é o que não quer enxergar. Alimente agora os famintos, dê vista aos que anseiam pela luz e ame os desprezados.
Se Deus está do nosso lado, ninguém poderá prevalecer contra nós, por mais poderoso ou numeroso que seja! Tenha fé em Deus! “Se Deus é por nós, quem será contra nós?”1 Se fizer o bem, quem poderá detê-lo? Ninguém pode resistir ao poder de Deus nem à s Suas forças do Céu, se Ele estiver do seu lado e você do dEle, fazendo o que é certo.2
Vamos lutar e vencer. A vitória é nossa! Glória a Deus! Talvez percamos algumas batalhas, mas estamos ganhando a guerra e em breve o mundo será nosso, para Deus e para o Seu Reino. Nunca desista e não se deixe desanimar. Tenha fé e bom ánimo, porque Deus está do seu lado e você não vai falhar! Vamos ganhar inevitavelmente, porque Deus está conosco e lutamos uma guerra santa, justa e legÃtima. Um combate de fé e amor por Deus e pelos outros. “O amor nunca falha”, porque “Deus é amor.”3
Jesus disse que o Céu e a Terra passarão, mas as Suas Palavras jamais passarão.4 Permanecem no Céu para sempre e ninguém jamais poderá negá-las ou se opor a elas. Então, use e divulgue as Palavras e o amor de Deus, em palavra e em obras, por todos os meios ao seu alcance, para dar às pessoas luz, esperança, vida, amor, paz, abundáncia, satisfação e também felicidade celestial para sempre!
Não é loucura dar uma vida que não se pode guardar em troca de um amor que nunca se perderá!
Se você ainda não recebeu o Amor e a Salvação que Jesus oferece, e o poder do EspÃrito Santo para poder se unir a esta guerra santa para conquistar as almas e os corações dos homens, faça apenas esta simples oração:
Querido Jesus eu Lhe peço que me mude, que perdoe todos os meus pecados, entre no meu coração e me dê a Vida Eterna de presente. Por favor me encha com o Seu EspÃrito Santo e me dê o poder para partilhar o Seu Amor e Salvação com os outros. Peço em Seu Nome. Amém.
http:// www.afamilia.org
E-mail: familia@afamilia.org
1 Cf. João 15:13; 2 CorÃntios 8:14; Atos 4:35; 11:29
1 Cf. Mateus 18:12-14; Cf.Lucas 1:53
2 Lucas 15:3-7; João 10:1-16
1 Romanos 8:31
2 Cf. Atos 5:38-39
31 CorÃntios 13:8;
4 Cf. Mateus 24:35 1 João 4:8
Copyright © 2004 por A FamÃlia
Uma convocação a todos aqueles que realmente querem mudar o mundo para melhor!
Pelo Pai David
Cada pessoa que atendeu ao chamado de Jesus para segui-lO e levar Sua luz aos outros está envolvido numa guerra entre os mundos! Lutamos juntos pela nossa fé, verdade e liberdade. Comprometemo-nos a dar, por amor, as nossas vidas pelos nossos irmãos no mundo inteiro. Estamos convencidos que todos os pobres devem ter casa, comida, roupas, liberdade para trabalhar em paz, com saúde e felizes, e assim obterem o que necessitam. Dedicamo-nos para que todos tenham liberdade de viver uma vida feliz em cooperação, de cada um segundo a sua capacidade, e a cada um segundo a sua necessidade.1
Estas são algumas de nossas metas comuns: fim da carência, da escravidão, da dor, do mal e do medo. Ninguém pode ser feliz com fome, subnutrido ou doente. Não há espaço para o sentimento de realização onde tiranos oprimem e exploram as pessoas, forçadas a trabalho excessivo e vÃtimas de abusos cruéis. Não há satisfação em uma vida sob os tormentos da guerra e conflitos, ameaçada pelo horrÃvel pesadelo de uma insegurança perpétua.
Acreditamos que todos esses males são causados pela falta de amor do homem por Deus e pelo seu semelhante, bem como pela sua desobediência à s leis de amor, fé, paz e harmonia instituÃdas por Deus. Essas leis são as crenças básicas de nossa fé e da de todos os que, de fato, crêem em Deus e no Seu amor.
Além de sabermos pelo que e contra o que estamos lutando, também temos que saber comodevemos lutar. A nossa guerra não é travada com armas, exércitos e soldados. Não se trata de um conflito de homem contra homem, nação contra nação, raça contra raça, ricos contra pobres, socialismo contra capitalismo. Não é uma guerra entre sistemas polÃticos e económicos, sociedades, tribos e culturas, religiões e fés. Não é uma disputa com base no ódio, no rancor, na matança e na carnificina, na vingança e em represálias, em tortura, agonia e morte! Não é uma batalha pela conquista de corpos, bens, ou territórios, nem fomentada pelo orgulho do homem.
Essas guerras mundanas do homem raramente resolvem alguma coisa, nem os problemas básicos da humanidade. Tipicamente, o que se vê é apenas mais sofrimento, agonia, dor, fome, escravidão, rancor, vingança, conflitos, tortura, privação, destruição, desperdÃcio, miséria e morte! A maioria das guerras egoÃstas e perversas do homem acaba numa mera troca de senhores e de escravos, num cÃrculo vicioso infindável de males, resultando em um número cada vez menor de ricos e um número maior de pobres, todos extremamente infelizes, com vidas horrÃveis, aterrorizados pelo medo.
A nossa é uma guerra espiritual, travada em fé e amor, para conquistar mentes, corações e espÃritos, e para salvar tanto as almas como os corpos dos homens. É uma guerra para libertar os homens dos males do espÃrito, da mente e do coração, os quais os tornam egoÃstas, desafeiçoados, perversos, cruéis e duros.
A desumanidade do homem para com o seu semelhante deve-se ao fato de ele não saber como ser feliz, e por mal conhecer o amor, a fé e o poder de Deus, bem como as Suas leis amorosas criadas para nos dar felicidade eterna.
Lutamos pela liberdade das mentes, dos corações e dos espÃritos dos homens, para que não estejam sujeitos ao mal, e para livrar as suas almas da servidão que lhes é imposta pelo Diabo e que nos causa todo este sofrimento! Estamos numa guerra entre os mundos, entre o bem e o mal, Deus e o Diabo, a bondade e a maldade, a carne e o espÃrito, os anjos e os demónios, o amor e o ódio, a vida e a morte, a alegria e a tristeza. É uma guerra universal, na qual os bons espÃritos do Céu e os maus espÃritos do Inferno disputam por nossas almas e corpos, tanto neste plano quanto no espiritual.
Portanto, devemos não só defender os direitos humanos, mas também travar a guerra espiritualmaior, usando as muito mais poderosas armas da fé, do amor e da compaixão, associadas a palavras amáveis e atos de bondade. Temos que libertar os homens do medo através da fé; do ódio, através do amor; da tristeza, através da alegria; da guerra, através da paz; da pobreza, através da abundáncia; e da morte com a felicidade celestial eterna!
A pena é mais poderosa do que a espada. A nossa guerra é uma guerra de palavras e de idéias para cativar as mentes dos homens com fé e esperança! O nosso desejo é saciar-lhes o coração com amor, paz e alegria a fim de libertar os seus espÃritos, bem como praticar atos de amor e bondade que libertem os seus corpos da dor! Por conseguinte, travamos uma guerra de palavras contra as idéias do mal, de fé contra o medo e de esperança contra a dúvida. Precisamos inspirar as pessoas a crerem em Deus, no Seu amor e no Seu plano para o maravilhoso futuro do homem no Reino de Deus na Terra, governado pelos justos, no qual não haverá mais angústia, pranto, dor nem morte. Haverá luz, saúde, felicidade, paz e abundáncia para todos!
Precisamos ensinar-lhes as Palavras de Deus que dão vida e que nos foram transmitidas pelos Seus santos profetas, no Seu livro sagrado, a BÃblia. Assim, para sempre terão a vida, o amor e a felicidade que Ele dá.
Impérios poderosos cujas conquistas se deram pela espada, surgiram e se desvaneceram, mas as Palavras amorosas e vivificadoras que Jesus deixou permanecem para sempre e continuam sendo fonte de alegria, paz, amor, vida e esperança para bilhões de pessoas de geração em geração! Alexandre, Ghengis Khan, Napoleão, Hitler e outros apareceram e sumiram, mas as palavras e as idéias dos profetas de Deus vivem eternamente!
Elas ignoram as fronteiras polÃticas, culturais, étnicas e ideológicas. Tampouco estão limitadas pelo tempo, pelo espaço, pelo homem, pela guerra ou pela força das armas. Elas englobam toda a humanidade e unem as mentes, os corações e espÃritos em fé e amor por Deus e pelo próximo, para o bem de todos.
Os filósofos, mestres, profetas e homens ungidos por Deus raramente governaram impérios, mas conquistaram multidões com as suas palavras, fé e idéias, cativando-lhes os corações, mentes e almas e libertando-ospara sempre. Ao longo dos milênios, Deus tem acumulado bilhões de seguidores e o Seu Reino eterno tem conquistado o domÃnio do espÃrito eterno dos homens, de longe maiores e mais duradouros que os meros impérios materiais conquistados pela espada!
Não podemos forçar as pessoas a serem boas. Não podemos legislar a justiça. Aquele que é convencido à força, permanece com a mesma opinião. Devemos influenciar as suas idéias, conquistar os corações, inspirar o espÃrito das pessoas e salvar as suas almas, para que escolham, por livre e espontánea vontade, fazerem o bem e não o mal! Para se entregar em amor, uma mulher tem que ser conquistada e não forçada!
O mundo não poderá ser mudado sem que antes a mentalidade do homem seja mudada, o que não ocorrerá a menos que se lhe mude primeiro o coração, o que nunca acontecerá sem a inspiração do EspÃrito de Deus, para que não apenas o seu corpo, mas também a sua alma seja salva.
Devemos nos empenhar para salvar o homem por completo, não apenas o seu corpo e o meio ambiente. Ele nunca será feliz com um coração angustiado, uma mente atribulada, um espÃrito deprimido e uma alma impenitente. Temos que trabalhar para resgatar o ser humano como um todo e não apenas parte dele. Precisamos lutar para salvar as pessoas para a eternidade e não só para estes dias aqui na Terra!
Isso é algo que somente o poder, a vida, a luz, o amor e as Palavras de Deus podem fazer! Temos que dar as Suas Palavras a todos os homens em toda a Terra. Temos que comunicar aos olhos, à s mentes e pensamentos de todos, em todos os lugares, os ideais, a esperança, a fé, o amor e os planos de Deus para as Suas criaturas. Somente dessa forma os corações poderão ser mudados, os espÃritos inspirados, as almas salvas e os corpos resgatados, para que assim as pessoas possam se amar umas à s outras e viver juntas para sempre!
É preciso que tenhamos uma visão mundial para a salvação de toda a humanidade, não só da nossa própria nação. Não devemos nos limitar à s insignificantes dificuldades do momento ou aos problemas desta vida, de um povo, de uma nação, de uma raça, de uma cultura, de uma religião, de um ponto de vista polÃtico, ou de um sistema económico.
Se a salvação é para alguém, então deve ser para todos. O mesmo vale à felicidade: todos devem ser felizes, sem exceção. Embora noventa e nove ovelhas estivessem no redil, o pastor só ficou satisfeito quando a última, que estava perdida, foi encontrada e resgatada. Faltava algo e elas não podiam ser completamente felizes enquanto uma ainda estivesse infeliz e perdida.1
Temos que procurar e encontrar todas as ovelhas perdidas do Senhor e lhes dar as Suas Palavras que vão lhes transmitir vida, amor e fé. Temos que trazer todas as ovelhas para o redil de Deus, para que possam pertencer a um só aprisco, com um só Pastor para sempre.
Devemos dizer a todos, embora nem todos dêem ouvidos, aceitem ou sejam salvos. Devemos a mensagem de Deus e Sua vida de amor a todos, mas principalmente à queles que vão acreditar e recebê-la. Deus apenas alimenta as almas famintas, mas os que já se julgam alimentados e pensam não precisar d’Ele nem de uma mudança de vida, Ele despede vazios!2 Portanto, não perca tempo discutindo com os que não querem ver. O maior cego é o que não quer enxergar. Alimente agora os famintos, dê vista aos que anseiam pela luz e ame os desprezados.
Se Deus está do nosso lado, ninguém poderá prevalecer contra nós, por mais poderoso ou numeroso que seja! Tenha fé em Deus! “Se Deus é por nós, quem será contra nós?”1 Se fizer o bem, quem poderá detê-lo? Ninguém pode resistir ao poder de Deus nem à s Suas forças do Céu, se Ele estiver do seu lado e você do dEle, fazendo o que é certo.2
Vamos lutar e vencer. A vitória é nossa! Glória a Deus! Talvez percamos algumas batalhas, mas estamos ganhando a guerra e em breve o mundo será nosso, para Deus e para o Seu Reino. Nunca desista e não se deixe desanimar. Tenha fé e bom ánimo, porque Deus está do seu lado e você não vai falhar! Vamos ganhar inevitavelmente, porque Deus está conosco e lutamos uma guerra santa, justa e legÃtima. Um combate de fé e amor por Deus e pelos outros. “O amor nunca falha”, porque “Deus é amor.”3
Jesus disse que o Céu e a Terra passarão, mas as Suas Palavras jamais passarão.4 Permanecem no Céu para sempre e ninguém jamais poderá negá-las ou se opor a elas. Então, use e divulgue as Palavras e o amor de Deus, em palavra e em obras, por todos os meios ao seu alcance, para dar às pessoas luz, esperança, vida, amor, paz, abundáncia, satisfação e também felicidade celestial para sempre!
Não é loucura dar uma vida que não se pode guardar em troca de um amor que nunca se perderá!
Se você ainda não recebeu o Amor e a Salvação que Jesus oferece, e o poder do EspÃrito Santo para poder se unir a esta guerra santa para conquistar as almas e os corações dos homens, faça apenas esta simples oração:
Querido Jesus eu Lhe peço que me mude, que perdoe todos os meus pecados, entre no meu coração e me dê a Vida Eterna de presente. Por favor me encha com o Seu EspÃrito Santo e me dê o poder para partilhar o Seu Amor e Salvação com os outros. Peço em Seu Nome. Amém.
http:// www.afamilia.org
E-mail: familia@afamilia.org
1 Cf. João 15:13; 2 CorÃntios 8:14; Atos 4:35; 11:29
1 Cf. Mateus 18:12-14; Cf.Lucas 1:53
2 Lucas 15:3-7; João 10:1-16
1 Romanos 8:31
2 Cf. Atos 5:38-39
31 CorÃntios 13:8;
4 Cf. Mateus 24:35 1 João 4:8
Copyright © 2004 por A FamÃlia
Is Jesus God?
http://y-jesus.com/wwrj/3-is-jesus-god/1
Have you ever met a man who is the center of attention wherever he goes? Some mysterious, indefinable characteristic sets him apart from all other men. Well, that’s the way it was two thousand years ago with Jesus Christ. But it wasn’t merely Jesus’ personality that captivated those who heard him. Those who witnessed his words and life tell us that something about Jesus of Nazareth was different from all other men.
Jesus’ only credentials were himself. He never wrote a book, commanded an army, held a political office, or owned property. He mostly traveled within a hundred miles of his village, attracting crowds who were amazed at his provocative words and stunning deeds.
Yet Jesus’ greatness was obvious to all those who saw and heard him. And while most great people eventually fade into history books, Jesus is still the focus of thousands of books and unparalleled media controversy. And much of that controversy revolves around the radical claims Jesus made about himself—claims that astounded both his followers and his adversaries.
It was primarily Jesus’ unique claims that caused him to be viewed as a threat by both the Roman authorities and the Jewish hierarchy. Although he was an outsider with no credentials or political powerbase, within three years, Jesus changed the world for the next 20 centuries. Other moral and religious leaders have left an impact—but nothing like that unknown carpenter’s son from Nazareth.
What was it about Jesus Christ that made the difference? Was he merely a great man, or something more?
These questions get to the heart of who Jesus really was. Some believe he was merely a great moral teacher; others believe he was simply the leader of the world’s greatest religion. But many believe something far more. Christians believe that God has actually visited us in human form. And they believe the evidence backs that up.
After carefully examining Jesus’ life and words, former Cambridge professor and skeptic, C. S. Lewis, came to a startling conclusion about him that altered the course of his life. So who is the real Jesus? Many will answer that Jesus was a great moral teacher. As we take a deeper look at the world’s most controversial person, we begin by asking: could Jesus have been merely a great moral teacher?
Great Moral Teacher?
Even those from other religions acknowledge that Jesus was a great moral teacher. Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi, spoke highly of Jesus’ righteous life and profound words.[1] Likewise, Jewish scholar Joseph Klausner wrote, “It is universally admitted … that Christ taught the purest and sublimest ethics … which throws the moral precepts and maxims of the wisest men of antiquity far into the shade.”[2]
Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount has been called the most superlative teaching of human ethics ever uttered by an individual. In fact, much of what we know today as “equal rights” actually is the result of Jesus’ teaching. Historian Will Durant, a non-Christian, said of Jesus that “he lived and struggled unremittingly for ‘equal rights’; in modern times he would have been sent to Siberia. ‘He that is greatest among you, let him be your servant’—this is the inversion of all political wisdom, of all sanity.”[3]
Many, like Gandhi, have tried to separate Jesus’ teaching on ethics from his claims about himself, believing that he was simply a great man who taught lofty moral principles. This was the approach of one of America’s Founding Fathers, President Thomas Jefferson, who cut and pasted a copy of the New Testament, removing sections he thought referred to Jesus’ deity, while leaving in other passages regarding Jesus’ ethical and moral teaching.[4] Jefferson carried around his cut and pasted New Testament with him, revering Jesus as perhaps the greatest moral teacher of all time.
In fact, Jefferson’s memorable words in the Declaration of Independence were rooted in Jesus’ teaching that each person is of immense and equal importance to God, regardless of sex, race, or social status. The famous document sets forth, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights …”
But one thing Jefferson didn’t answer: If Jesus falsely claimed to be God he couldn’t have been a good moral teacher. But did Jesus really claim deity? Before we look at what Jesus claimed, we need to examine the possibility that he was simply a great religious leader?
Great Religious Leader?
Surprisingly, Jesus never claimed to be a religious leader. He never got into religious politics or pushed an ambitious agenda, and he ministered almost entirely outside the established religious framework.
When one compares Jesus with the other great religious leaders, a remarkable distinction emerges. Ravi Zacharias, who grew up in a Hindu culture, has studied world religions and observed a fundamental distinction between Jesus Christ and the founders of other major religions.
“In all of these, there emerges an instruction, a way of living. It is not Zoroaster to whom you turn; it is Zoroaster to whom you listen. It is not Buddha who delivers you; it is his Noble Truths that instruct you. It is not Mohammad who transforms you; it is the beauty of the Koran that woos you. By contrast, Jesus did not only teach or expound His message. He was identical with His message.”[5]
The truth of Zacharias’ point is underscored by the number of times in the Gospels that Jesus’ teaching message was simply “Come to me” or “Follow me” or “Obey me.” Also, Jesus made it clear that his primary mission was to forgive sins, something only God could do.
In The World’s Great Religions, Huston Smith observed, “Only two people ever astounded their contemporaries so much that the question they evoked was not ‘Who is he?’ but ‘What is he?’ They were Jesus and Buddha. The answers these two gave were exactly the opposite. Buddha said unequivocally that he was a mere man, not a god—almost as if he foresaw later attempts to worship him. Jesus, on the other hand, claimed … to be divine.[6]
And that leads us to the question of what Jesus really did claim for himself; specifically, did Jesus claim to be divine?
Did Jesus Claim To Be The God Of Abraham & Moses?
Jesus continually referred to himself in ways that confounded his listeners. As Piper notes, Jesus made the audacious statement, “Before Abraham was, I AM.”[11] He told Martha and others around her, “I AM the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he is dead, yet shall he live.”[12] Likewise, Jesus would make statements like, “I AM the light of the world,”[13] “I AM the only way to God,”[14] or, “I AM the “truth.”[15] These and several other of his claims were preceded by the sacred words for God, “I AM” (ego eimi)[16]. What did Jesus mean by such statements, and what is the significance of the term, “I AM”?
Once again, we must go back to context. In the Hebrew Scriptures, when Moses asked God His name at the burning bush, God answered, “I AM.” He was revealing to Moses that He is the one and only God who is outside of time and has always existed. Incredibly, Jesus was using these holy words to describe himself. The question is, “Why?”
Since the time of Moses, no practicing Jew would ever refer to himself or anyone else by “I AM.” As a result, Jesus’ “I AM” claims infuriated the Jewish leaders. One time, for example, some leaders explained to Jesus why they were trying to kill him: “Because you, a mere man, have made yourself God.”[17]
Jesus’ usage of God’s name greatly angered the religious leaders. The point is that these Old Testament scholars knew exactly what he was saying—he was claiming to be God, the Creator of the universe. It is only this claim that would have brought the accusation of blasphemy. To read into the text that Jesus claimed to be God is clearly warranted, not simply by his words, but also by their reaction to those words.
C. S. Lewis initially considered Jesus a myth. But this literary genius who knew myths well, concluded that Jesus had to have been a real person. Furthermore, as Lewis investigated the evidence for Jesus, he became convinced that not only was Jesus real, but he was unlike any man who had ever lived. Lewis writes,
“Then comes the real shock,’ wrote Lewis: ‘Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He always existed. He says He is coming to judge the world at the end of time.”[18]
To Lewis, Jesus’ claims were simply too radical and profound to have been made by an ordinary teacher or religious leader. (For a more in-depth look at Jesus’ claim to deity, see “Did Jesus Claim to be God?”
What Kind Of God?
Some have argued that Jesus was only claiming to be part of God. But the idea that we are all part of God, and that within us is the seed of divinity, is simply not a possible meaning for Jesus’ words and actions. Such thoughts are revisionist, foreign to his teaching, foreign to his stated beliefs, and foreign to his disciples’ understanding of his teaching.
Jesus taught that he is God in the way the Jews understood God and the way the Hebrew Scriptures portrayed God, not in the way the New Age movement understands God. Neither Jesus nor his audience had been weaned on Star Wars, and so when they spoke of God, they were not speaking of cosmic forces. It’s simply bad history to redefine what Jesus meant by the concept of God.
Lewis explains,
Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was a part of God, or one with God….But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant the Being outside the world, who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you have grasped that, you will see that what this man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.[19]
Certainly there are those who accept Jesus as a great teacher, yet are unwilling to call him God. As a Deist, we’ve seen that Thomas Jefferson had no problem accepting Jesus’ teachings on morals and ethics while denying his deity.[20] But as we’ve said, and will explore further, if Jesus was not who he claimed to be, then we must examine some other alternatives, none of which would make him a great moral teacher. Lewis, argued, “I am trying here to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say.”[21]
In his quest for truth, Lewis knew that he could not have it both ways with the identity of Jesus. Either Jesus was who he claimed to be—God in the flesh—or his claims were false. And if they were false, Jesus could not be a great moral teacher. He would either be lying intentionally or he would be a lunatic with a God complex.
Could Jesus Have Been Lying?
Even Jesus’ harshest critics rarely have called him a liar. That label certainly doesn’t fit with Jesus’ high moral and ethical teaching. But if Jesus isn’t who he claimed to be, we must consider the option that he was intentionally misleading everyone.
One of the best-known and most influential political works of all time was written by Niccolò Machiavelli in 1532. In his classic, The Prince, Machiavelli exalts power, success, image, and efficiency above loyalty, faith, and honesty. According to Machiavelli, lying is okay if it accomplishes a political end.
Could Jesus Christ have built his entire ministry upon a lie just to gain power, fame, or success? In fact, the Jewish opponents of Jesus were constantly trying to expose him as a fraud and liar. They would barrage him with questions in attempts to trip him up and make him contradict himself. Yet Jesus responded with remarkable consistency.
The question we must deal with is: What could possibly motivate Jesus to live his entire life as a lie? He taught that God was opposed to lying and hypocrisy, so he wouldn’t have been doing it to please his Father. He certainly didn’t lie for his followers’ benefit, since all but one were martyred rather than renouncing his Lordship (see “Did the Apostles believe Jesus is God?” . And so we are left with only two other reasonable explanations, each of which is problematic.
Benefit
Many people have lied for personal gain. In fact, the motivation of most lies is some perceived benefit to oneself. What could Jesus have hoped to gain from lying about his identity? Power would be the most obvious answer. If people believed he was God, he would have tremendous power. (That is why many ancient leaders, such as the Caesars, claimed divine origin.)
The rub with this explanation is that Jesus shunned all attempts to move him in the direction of seated power, instead chastising those who abused such power and lived their lives pursuing it. He also chose to reach out to the outcasts (prostitutes and lepers), those without power, creating a network of people whose influence was less than zero. In a way that could only be described as bizarre, all that Jesus did and said moved diametrically in the other direction from power.
It would seem that if power was Jesus’ motivation, he would have avoided the cross at all costs. Yet, on several occasions, he told his disciples that the cross was his destiny and mission. How would dying on a Roman cross bring one power?
Death, of course, brings all things into proper focus. And while many martyrs have died for a cause they believed in, few have been willing to die for a known lie. Certainly all hopes for Jesus’ own personal gain would have ended on the cross. Yet, to his last breath, he would not relinquish his claim of being the unique Son of God. New Testament scholar, J. I. Packer, points out that this title asserts Jesus’ personal deity.[22]
A Legacy
So if Jesus was above lying for personal benefit, perhaps his radical claims were falsified in order to leave a legacy. But the prospect of being beaten to a pulp and nailed to a cross would quickly dampen the enthusiasm of most would-be superstars.
Here is another haunting fact. If Jesus were to have simply dropped the claim of being God’s Son, he never would have been condemned. It was his claim to be God and his unwillingness to recant of it that got him crucified.
If enhancing his credibility and historical reputation was what motivated Jesus to lie, one must explain how a carpenter’s son from a poor Judean village could ever anticipate the events that would catapult his name to worldwide prominence. How would he know his message would survive? Jesus’ disciples had fled and Peter had denied him. Not exactly the formula for launching a religious legacy.
Do historians believe Jesus lied? Scholars have scrutinized Jesus’ words and life to see if there is any evidence of a defect in his moral character. In fact, even the most ardent skeptics are stunned by Jesus’ moral and ethical purity.
According to historian Philip Schaff, there is no evidence, either in church history or in secular history that Jesus lied about anything. Schaff argued, “How, in the name of logic, common sense, and experience, could a deceitful, selfish, depraved man have invented, and consistently maintained from the beginning to end, the purest and noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality?”[23]
To go with the option of liar seems to swim upstream against everything Jesus taught, lived, and died for. To most scholars, it just doesn’t make sense. Yet, to deny Jesus’ claims, one must come up with some explanation. And if Jesus’ claims are not true, and he wasn’t lying, the only option remaining is that he must have been self-deceived.
Could Jesus Have Been Self-Deceived?
Albert Schweitzer, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1952 for his humanitarian efforts, had his own views about Jesus. Schweitzer concluded that insanity was behind Jesus’ claim to be God. In other words, Jesus was wrong about his claims but didn’t intentionally lie. According to this theory, Jesus was deluded into actually believing he was the Messiah.
Lewis considered this option carefully. He deduced that if Jesus’ claims weren’t true, then he must have been insane. Lewis reasons that someone who claimed to be God would not be a great moral teacher. “He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell.”[24]
Most who have studied Jesus’ life and words acknowledge him as extremely rational. Although his own life was filled with immorality and personal skepticism, the renowned French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–78) acknowledged Jesus’ superior character and presence of mind, stating, “When Plato describes his imaginary righteous man…he describes exactly the character of Christ. …If the life and death of Socrates are those of a philosopher, the life and death of Jesus Christ are those of a God.”[25]
Bono concludes that a “nutcase” was the last thing one could label Jesus.
“So what you’re left with is either Christ was who He said He was—or a complete nutcase. I mean, we’re talking nutcase on the level of Charles Manson….I’m not joking here. The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside down by a nutcase, for me that’s far-fetched….”[26]
So, was Jesus a liar or a lunatic, or was he the Son of God? Could Jefferson have been right by labeling Jesus “only a good moral teacher” while denying his deity? Interestingly, the audience who heard Jesus—both believers and enemies—never regarded him as a mere moral teacher. Jesus produced three primary effects in the people who met him: hatred, terror, or adoration.
The claims of Jesus Christ force us to choose. As Lewis stated, we cannot put Jesus in the category of being just a great religious leader or good moral teacher. This former skeptic challenges us to make up our own minds about Jesus, stating,
“You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”[27]
In Mere Christianity, Lewis explores the options regarding the identity of Jesus, concluding that he is exactly who he claimed to be. His careful examination of the life and words of Jesus led this great literary genius to renounce his former atheism and become a committed Christian.
The greatest question in human history is, “Who is the real Jesus Christ?” Bono, Lewis, and countless others have concluded that God visited our planet in human form. But if that is true, then we would expect him to be alive today. And that is exactly what his followers believe.
Did Jesus Really Rise From The Dead?
The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ actually spoke and acted like they believed he physically rose from the dead after his crucifixion. If they were wrong then Christianity has been founded upon a lie. But if they were right, such a miracle would substantiate all Jesus said about God, himself, and us.
But must we take the resurrection of Jesus Christ by faith alone, or is there solid historical evidence? Several skeptics began investigations into the historical record to prove the resurrection account false. What did they discover?
Click here to take a look at the evidence for the most fantastic claim ever made—the resurrection of Jesus Christ!
Have you ever met a man who is the center of attention wherever he goes? Some mysterious, indefinable characteristic sets him apart from all other men. Well, that’s the way it was two thousand years ago with Jesus Christ. But it wasn’t merely Jesus’ personality that captivated those who heard him. Those who witnessed his words and life tell us that something about Jesus of Nazareth was different from all other men.
Jesus’ only credentials were himself. He never wrote a book, commanded an army, held a political office, or owned property. He mostly traveled within a hundred miles of his village, attracting crowds who were amazed at his provocative words and stunning deeds.
Yet Jesus’ greatness was obvious to all those who saw and heard him. And while most great people eventually fade into history books, Jesus is still the focus of thousands of books and unparalleled media controversy. And much of that controversy revolves around the radical claims Jesus made about himself—claims that astounded both his followers and his adversaries.
It was primarily Jesus’ unique claims that caused him to be viewed as a threat by both the Roman authorities and the Jewish hierarchy. Although he was an outsider with no credentials or political powerbase, within three years, Jesus changed the world for the next 20 centuries. Other moral and religious leaders have left an impact—but nothing like that unknown carpenter’s son from Nazareth.
What was it about Jesus Christ that made the difference? Was he merely a great man, or something more?
These questions get to the heart of who Jesus really was. Some believe he was merely a great moral teacher; others believe he was simply the leader of the world’s greatest religion. But many believe something far more. Christians believe that God has actually visited us in human form. And they believe the evidence backs that up.
After carefully examining Jesus’ life and words, former Cambridge professor and skeptic, C. S. Lewis, came to a startling conclusion about him that altered the course of his life. So who is the real Jesus? Many will answer that Jesus was a great moral teacher. As we take a deeper look at the world’s most controversial person, we begin by asking: could Jesus have been merely a great moral teacher?
Great Moral Teacher?
Even those from other religions acknowledge that Jesus was a great moral teacher. Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi, spoke highly of Jesus’ righteous life and profound words.[1] Likewise, Jewish scholar Joseph Klausner wrote, “It is universally admitted … that Christ taught the purest and sublimest ethics … which throws the moral precepts and maxims of the wisest men of antiquity far into the shade.”[2]
Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount has been called the most superlative teaching of human ethics ever uttered by an individual. In fact, much of what we know today as “equal rights” actually is the result of Jesus’ teaching. Historian Will Durant, a non-Christian, said of Jesus that “he lived and struggled unremittingly for ‘equal rights’; in modern times he would have been sent to Siberia. ‘He that is greatest among you, let him be your servant’—this is the inversion of all political wisdom, of all sanity.”[3]
Many, like Gandhi, have tried to separate Jesus’ teaching on ethics from his claims about himself, believing that he was simply a great man who taught lofty moral principles. This was the approach of one of America’s Founding Fathers, President Thomas Jefferson, who cut and pasted a copy of the New Testament, removing sections he thought referred to Jesus’ deity, while leaving in other passages regarding Jesus’ ethical and moral teaching.[4] Jefferson carried around his cut and pasted New Testament with him, revering Jesus as perhaps the greatest moral teacher of all time.
In fact, Jefferson’s memorable words in the Declaration of Independence were rooted in Jesus’ teaching that each person is of immense and equal importance to God, regardless of sex, race, or social status. The famous document sets forth, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights …”
But one thing Jefferson didn’t answer: If Jesus falsely claimed to be God he couldn’t have been a good moral teacher. But did Jesus really claim deity? Before we look at what Jesus claimed, we need to examine the possibility that he was simply a great religious leader?
Great Religious Leader?
Surprisingly, Jesus never claimed to be a religious leader. He never got into religious politics or pushed an ambitious agenda, and he ministered almost entirely outside the established religious framework.
When one compares Jesus with the other great religious leaders, a remarkable distinction emerges. Ravi Zacharias, who grew up in a Hindu culture, has studied world religions and observed a fundamental distinction between Jesus Christ and the founders of other major religions.
“In all of these, there emerges an instruction, a way of living. It is not Zoroaster to whom you turn; it is Zoroaster to whom you listen. It is not Buddha who delivers you; it is his Noble Truths that instruct you. It is not Mohammad who transforms you; it is the beauty of the Koran that woos you. By contrast, Jesus did not only teach or expound His message. He was identical with His message.”[5]
The truth of Zacharias’ point is underscored by the number of times in the Gospels that Jesus’ teaching message was simply “Come to me” or “Follow me” or “Obey me.” Also, Jesus made it clear that his primary mission was to forgive sins, something only God could do.
In The World’s Great Religions, Huston Smith observed, “Only two people ever astounded their contemporaries so much that the question they evoked was not ‘Who is he?’ but ‘What is he?’ They were Jesus and Buddha. The answers these two gave were exactly the opposite. Buddha said unequivocally that he was a mere man, not a god—almost as if he foresaw later attempts to worship him. Jesus, on the other hand, claimed … to be divine.[6]
And that leads us to the question of what Jesus really did claim for himself; specifically, did Jesus claim to be divine?
Did Jesus Claim To Be The God Of Abraham & Moses?
Jesus continually referred to himself in ways that confounded his listeners. As Piper notes, Jesus made the audacious statement, “Before Abraham was, I AM.”[11] He told Martha and others around her, “I AM the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he is dead, yet shall he live.”[12] Likewise, Jesus would make statements like, “I AM the light of the world,”[13] “I AM the only way to God,”[14] or, “I AM the “truth.”[15] These and several other of his claims were preceded by the sacred words for God, “I AM” (ego eimi)[16]. What did Jesus mean by such statements, and what is the significance of the term, “I AM”?
Once again, we must go back to context. In the Hebrew Scriptures, when Moses asked God His name at the burning bush, God answered, “I AM.” He was revealing to Moses that He is the one and only God who is outside of time and has always existed. Incredibly, Jesus was using these holy words to describe himself. The question is, “Why?”
Since the time of Moses, no practicing Jew would ever refer to himself or anyone else by “I AM.” As a result, Jesus’ “I AM” claims infuriated the Jewish leaders. One time, for example, some leaders explained to Jesus why they were trying to kill him: “Because you, a mere man, have made yourself God.”[17]
Jesus’ usage of God’s name greatly angered the religious leaders. The point is that these Old Testament scholars knew exactly what he was saying—he was claiming to be God, the Creator of the universe. It is only this claim that would have brought the accusation of blasphemy. To read into the text that Jesus claimed to be God is clearly warranted, not simply by his words, but also by their reaction to those words.
C. S. Lewis initially considered Jesus a myth. But this literary genius who knew myths well, concluded that Jesus had to have been a real person. Furthermore, as Lewis investigated the evidence for Jesus, he became convinced that not only was Jesus real, but he was unlike any man who had ever lived. Lewis writes,
“Then comes the real shock,’ wrote Lewis: ‘Among these Jews there suddenly turns up a man who goes about talking as if He was God. He claims to forgive sins. He says He always existed. He says He is coming to judge the world at the end of time.”[18]
To Lewis, Jesus’ claims were simply too radical and profound to have been made by an ordinary teacher or religious leader. (For a more in-depth look at Jesus’ claim to deity, see “Did Jesus Claim to be God?”
What Kind Of God?
Some have argued that Jesus was only claiming to be part of God. But the idea that we are all part of God, and that within us is the seed of divinity, is simply not a possible meaning for Jesus’ words and actions. Such thoughts are revisionist, foreign to his teaching, foreign to his stated beliefs, and foreign to his disciples’ understanding of his teaching.
Jesus taught that he is God in the way the Jews understood God and the way the Hebrew Scriptures portrayed God, not in the way the New Age movement understands God. Neither Jesus nor his audience had been weaned on Star Wars, and so when they spoke of God, they were not speaking of cosmic forces. It’s simply bad history to redefine what Jesus meant by the concept of God.
Lewis explains,
Now let us get this clear. Among Pantheists, like the Indians, anyone might say that he was a part of God, or one with God….But this man, since He was a Jew, could not mean that kind of God. God, in their language, meant the Being outside the world, who had made it and was infinitely different from anything else. And when you have grasped that, you will see that what this man said was, quite simply, the most shocking thing that has ever been uttered by human lips.[19]
Certainly there are those who accept Jesus as a great teacher, yet are unwilling to call him God. As a Deist, we’ve seen that Thomas Jefferson had no problem accepting Jesus’ teachings on morals and ethics while denying his deity.[20] But as we’ve said, and will explore further, if Jesus was not who he claimed to be, then we must examine some other alternatives, none of which would make him a great moral teacher. Lewis, argued, “I am trying here to prevent anyone from saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say.”[21]
In his quest for truth, Lewis knew that he could not have it both ways with the identity of Jesus. Either Jesus was who he claimed to be—God in the flesh—or his claims were false. And if they were false, Jesus could not be a great moral teacher. He would either be lying intentionally or he would be a lunatic with a God complex.
Could Jesus Have Been Lying?
Even Jesus’ harshest critics rarely have called him a liar. That label certainly doesn’t fit with Jesus’ high moral and ethical teaching. But if Jesus isn’t who he claimed to be, we must consider the option that he was intentionally misleading everyone.
One of the best-known and most influential political works of all time was written by Niccolò Machiavelli in 1532. In his classic, The Prince, Machiavelli exalts power, success, image, and efficiency above loyalty, faith, and honesty. According to Machiavelli, lying is okay if it accomplishes a political end.
Could Jesus Christ have built his entire ministry upon a lie just to gain power, fame, or success? In fact, the Jewish opponents of Jesus were constantly trying to expose him as a fraud and liar. They would barrage him with questions in attempts to trip him up and make him contradict himself. Yet Jesus responded with remarkable consistency.
The question we must deal with is: What could possibly motivate Jesus to live his entire life as a lie? He taught that God was opposed to lying and hypocrisy, so he wouldn’t have been doing it to please his Father. He certainly didn’t lie for his followers’ benefit, since all but one were martyred rather than renouncing his Lordship (see “Did the Apostles believe Jesus is God?” . And so we are left with only two other reasonable explanations, each of which is problematic.
Benefit
Many people have lied for personal gain. In fact, the motivation of most lies is some perceived benefit to oneself. What could Jesus have hoped to gain from lying about his identity? Power would be the most obvious answer. If people believed he was God, he would have tremendous power. (That is why many ancient leaders, such as the Caesars, claimed divine origin.)
The rub with this explanation is that Jesus shunned all attempts to move him in the direction of seated power, instead chastising those who abused such power and lived their lives pursuing it. He also chose to reach out to the outcasts (prostitutes and lepers), those without power, creating a network of people whose influence was less than zero. In a way that could only be described as bizarre, all that Jesus did and said moved diametrically in the other direction from power.
It would seem that if power was Jesus’ motivation, he would have avoided the cross at all costs. Yet, on several occasions, he told his disciples that the cross was his destiny and mission. How would dying on a Roman cross bring one power?
Death, of course, brings all things into proper focus. And while many martyrs have died for a cause they believed in, few have been willing to die for a known lie. Certainly all hopes for Jesus’ own personal gain would have ended on the cross. Yet, to his last breath, he would not relinquish his claim of being the unique Son of God. New Testament scholar, J. I. Packer, points out that this title asserts Jesus’ personal deity.[22]
A Legacy
So if Jesus was above lying for personal benefit, perhaps his radical claims were falsified in order to leave a legacy. But the prospect of being beaten to a pulp and nailed to a cross would quickly dampen the enthusiasm of most would-be superstars.
Here is another haunting fact. If Jesus were to have simply dropped the claim of being God’s Son, he never would have been condemned. It was his claim to be God and his unwillingness to recant of it that got him crucified.
If enhancing his credibility and historical reputation was what motivated Jesus to lie, one must explain how a carpenter’s son from a poor Judean village could ever anticipate the events that would catapult his name to worldwide prominence. How would he know his message would survive? Jesus’ disciples had fled and Peter had denied him. Not exactly the formula for launching a religious legacy.
Do historians believe Jesus lied? Scholars have scrutinized Jesus’ words and life to see if there is any evidence of a defect in his moral character. In fact, even the most ardent skeptics are stunned by Jesus’ moral and ethical purity.
According to historian Philip Schaff, there is no evidence, either in church history or in secular history that Jesus lied about anything. Schaff argued, “How, in the name of logic, common sense, and experience, could a deceitful, selfish, depraved man have invented, and consistently maintained from the beginning to end, the purest and noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality?”[23]
To go with the option of liar seems to swim upstream against everything Jesus taught, lived, and died for. To most scholars, it just doesn’t make sense. Yet, to deny Jesus’ claims, one must come up with some explanation. And if Jesus’ claims are not true, and he wasn’t lying, the only option remaining is that he must have been self-deceived.
Could Jesus Have Been Self-Deceived?
Albert Schweitzer, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1952 for his humanitarian efforts, had his own views about Jesus. Schweitzer concluded that insanity was behind Jesus’ claim to be God. In other words, Jesus was wrong about his claims but didn’t intentionally lie. According to this theory, Jesus was deluded into actually believing he was the Messiah.
Lewis considered this option carefully. He deduced that if Jesus’ claims weren’t true, then he must have been insane. Lewis reasons that someone who claimed to be God would not be a great moral teacher. “He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell.”[24]
Most who have studied Jesus’ life and words acknowledge him as extremely rational. Although his own life was filled with immorality and personal skepticism, the renowned French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–78) acknowledged Jesus’ superior character and presence of mind, stating, “When Plato describes his imaginary righteous man…he describes exactly the character of Christ. …If the life and death of Socrates are those of a philosopher, the life and death of Jesus Christ are those of a God.”[25]
Bono concludes that a “nutcase” was the last thing one could label Jesus.
“So what you’re left with is either Christ was who He said He was—or a complete nutcase. I mean, we’re talking nutcase on the level of Charles Manson….I’m not joking here. The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside down by a nutcase, for me that’s far-fetched….”[26]
So, was Jesus a liar or a lunatic, or was he the Son of God? Could Jefferson have been right by labeling Jesus “only a good moral teacher” while denying his deity? Interestingly, the audience who heard Jesus—both believers and enemies—never regarded him as a mere moral teacher. Jesus produced three primary effects in the people who met him: hatred, terror, or adoration.
The claims of Jesus Christ force us to choose. As Lewis stated, we cannot put Jesus in the category of being just a great religious leader or good moral teacher. This former skeptic challenges us to make up our own minds about Jesus, stating,
“You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”[27]
In Mere Christianity, Lewis explores the options regarding the identity of Jesus, concluding that he is exactly who he claimed to be. His careful examination of the life and words of Jesus led this great literary genius to renounce his former atheism and become a committed Christian.
The greatest question in human history is, “Who is the real Jesus Christ?” Bono, Lewis, and countless others have concluded that God visited our planet in human form. But if that is true, then we would expect him to be alive today. And that is exactly what his followers believe.
Did Jesus Really Rise From The Dead?
The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ actually spoke and acted like they believed he physically rose from the dead after his crucifixion. If they were wrong then Christianity has been founded upon a lie. But if they were right, such a miracle would substantiate all Jesus said about God, himself, and us.
But must we take the resurrection of Jesus Christ by faith alone, or is there solid historical evidence? Several skeptics began investigations into the historical record to prove the resurrection account false. What did they discover?
Click here to take a look at the evidence for the most fantastic claim ever made—the resurrection of Jesus Christ!
Os evangelhos gnósticos
http://y-jesus.org/portuguese/more/ggh-evangelhos-gnosticos/
Eles são a verdadeira história de Jesus?
Existem textos secretos sobre Jesus?
Em 1945, foi feita uma descoberta no note do Egito, próximo à cidade de Nag Hammadi. Cinquenta e duas cópias de textos antigos, chamados de evangelhos gnósticos, foram encontradas em 13 códices de papiro envoltos em couro (livros escritos à mão). Eles foram escritos em copto e pertenciam a uma biblioteca de um monastério.Alguns estudiosos gnósticos chegaram até a afirmar que esses textos recentemente descobertos são a história verdadeira de Jesus em vez do Novo Testamento. Mas será que a fé deles nesses documentos bate com as evidências históricas? Vamos olhar com mais detalhes para ver se conseguimos separar a verdade da ficção.
“Conhecedores” Secretos
Os evangelhos gnósticos foram atribuÃdos a um grupo conhecido como (para nossa surpresa) os Gnósticos. Seu nome vem da palavra grega gnosis que significa “conhecimento”. Essas pessoas pensavam ter conhecimentos secretos e especiais, ocultos das pessoas comuns. Com a propagação do cristianismo, os Gnósticos combinaram algumas doutrinas e elementos do cristianismo com suas próprias crenças, transformando o Gnosticismo em uma simulação. Talvez tenham feito isto para aumentar o número de fiéis e tornar Jesus um garoto-propaganda para sua causa. Contudo, para que sua linha de pensamento fosse compatÃvel com o cristianismo, Jesus precisava ser reinventado, retirando sua humanidade e sua divindade absoluta.
Em A História do Cristianismo de Oxford, John McManners escreveu sobre a mistura de cristianismo e crenças mÃticas dos gnósticos. O gnosticismo foi (e ainda é) uma teosofia com muitos ingredientes. Ocultismo e misticismo oriental combinam-se com astrologia e mágica. … Eles integram os ensinamentos de Jesus e acomodam-nos em sua própria interpretação (como no Evangelho de Tomás), oferecendo aos seus membros uma forma alternativa ou rival de cristianismo.[1]
Primeiros CrÃticos
Uma pequena linha filosófica gnóstica já crescia no primeiro século, apenas décadas depois da morte de Jesus. Os apóstolos, em seus ensinamentos e escritos, condenaram fortemente essas crenças como opostas à verdade de Jesus, de quem foram testemunha. Veja, por exemplo, o que o apóstolo João escreveu perto do fim do primeiro século:
Quem é o mentiroso? Senão aquele que nega que Jesus é o Cristo? É o anticristo esse mesmo que nega o Pai e o Filho. (1 João 2:22, NVI).
Seguindo os ensinamentos dos apóstolos, os lÃderes da igreja primitiva condenam unanimemente os gnósticos como um culto. O padre Ireneu, escrevendo 140 anos antes do ConcÃlio de Niceia, confirmou que os gnósticos eram condenados pela igreja como hereges. Ele também rejeitou seus “evangelhos”. Porém, com relação aos quatro evangelhos do Novo Testamento, ele diz: “Não é possÃvel que os evangelhos sejam em quantidade maior o menor do que são”. [2] O teólogo cristão OrÃgenes escreveu no inÃcio do terceiro século mais de cem anos antes de Niceia:
Conheço um certo evangelho chamado “O Evangelho segundo Tomás” e um “Evangelho segundo Matias” e muitos outros que li, já que não devemos ser considerados de nenhuma maneira ignorante pelos que imaginam ter algum conhecimento sobre esses. Contudo, dentre todos esses aprovamos somente os reconhecidos pela igreja, que são os únicos quatro evangelhos que devem ser aceitos.[3]
Autores Misteriosos
Com relação aos evangelhos gnósticos, cada livro leva o nome de uma personagem do Novo Testamento: O Evangelho de Filipe, o Evangelho de Pedro, o Evangelho de Maria e assim em diante. Mas será que eles foram mesmo escritos por seus supostos autores? Vamos dar uma olhada. Os evangelhos gnósticos são datados de 110 a 300 anos depois de Cristo e nenhum acadêmico crÃvel acredita que algum deles poderia ter sido escrito por seus homônimos. No abrangente A Biblioteca de Nag Hammadi de James M. Robinson, vemos que os evangelhos gnósticos foram escritos por “autores desconhecidos e independentes”.[4] O estudioso do Novo Testamento Norman Geisler escreve: “Os escritos gnósticos não foram escritos pelos apóstolos, mas por homens do século dois (ou posterior) com intenções de usar a autoridade apostólica para divulgar seus próprios ensinos. Nos dias de hoje chamamos isto de fraude e falsificação”.[5]
Mistérios versus história
Os evangelhos gnósticos não são relatos históricos da vida de Jesus, mas sim declarações esotéricas, envoltas em mistério, que deixam de fora detalhes históricos como nomes, locais e eventos. Este é um contraste marcante com os evangelhos do Novo Testamento que contém diversos fatos históricos sobre a vida, ministério e palavras de Jesus. Em quem você preferiria acreditar: em alguém que diz “ei, tenho alguns fatos secretos que foram revelados pra mim misteriosamente” ou em alguém que diz “pesquisei todas as evidências e história e aqui estão elas para que você possa formar sua opinião”? Mantendo esta pergunta em mente, considere as duas afirmações a seguir, a primeira do Evangelho Gnóstico de Tomé (cerca de 110 a 150 d. c.) e a segunda do Evangelho de Lucas do Novo Testamento (cerca de 55 a 70 d. c.).
Esses são os ditos ocultos que o Jesus vivente falou e Judas Tomé, o gêmeo registrou.[6]
Muitos já se dedicaram a elaborar um relato dos fatos que se cumpriram entre nós, conforme nos foram transmitidos por aqueles que desde o inÃcio foram testemunhas oculares e servos da palavra. Eu mesmo investiguei tudo cuidadosamente, desde o começo, e decidi escrever-te um relato ordenado, ó excelentÃssimo Teófilo, para que tenhas a certeza das coisas que te foram ensinadas. (Lucas 1:1-4, NVI)
Você gostou da abordagem aberta e direta de Lucas? E acha que o fato de ter sido escrito mais próximo dos eventos originais favorece sua confiabilidade? Se sim, também foi isso que a igreja antiga pensou. E a maioria dos estudiosos concorda com a visão da igreja antiga de que o Novo Testamento é a história autêntica de Jesus. O estudioso do Novo Testamento Raymond Brown comentou dos evangelhos gnósticos: “não conhecemos nenhum novo fato verificável sobre o ministério de Jesus, apenas algumas novas declarações que podem ter sido dele”.[7] Portanto, mesmo que os textos gnósticos tenham impressionado alguns estudiosos, sua data tardia e autoria questionável não se comparam ao Novo Testamento. Tal contraste entre o Novo Testamento e os textos gnósticos é devastante para os que apoiam teorias de conspiração. O historiador do Novo Testamento F. F. Bruce escreveu: “não há obra de literatura antiga no mundo que goza de tamanha riqueza de comprovação textual do que o Novo Testamento”.[8]
Existem textos secretos sobre Jesus?
Em 1945, foi feita uma descoberta no note do Egito, próximo à cidade de Nag Hammadi. Cinquenta e duas cópias de textos antigos, chamados de evangelhos gnósticos, foram encontradas em 13 códices de papiro envoltos em couro (livros escritos à mão). Eles foram escritos em copto e pertenciam a uma biblioteca de um monastério.Alguns estudiosos gnósticos chegaram até a afirmar que esses textos recentemente descobertos são a história verdadeira de Jesus em vez do Novo Testamento. Mas será que a fé deles nesses documentos bate com as evidências históricas? Vamos olhar com mais detalhes para ver se conseguimos separar a verdade da ficção.
“Conhecedores” Secretos
Os evangelhos gnósticos foram atribuÃdos a um grupo conhecido como (para nossa surpresa) os Gnósticos. Seu nome vem da palavra grega gnosis que significa “conhecimento”. Essas pessoas pensavam ter conhecimentos secretos e especiais, ocultos das pessoas comuns. Com a propagação do cristianismo, os Gnósticos combinaram algumas doutrinas e elementos do cristianismo com suas próprias crenças, transformando o Gnosticismo em uma simulação. Talvez tenham feito isto para aumentar o número de fiéis e tornar Jesus um garoto-propaganda para sua causa. Contudo, para que sua linha de pensamento fosse compatÃvel com o cristianismo, Jesus precisava ser reinventado, retirando sua humanidade e sua divindade absoluta.
Em A História do Cristianismo de Oxford, John McManners escreveu sobre a mistura de cristianismo e crenças mÃticas dos gnósticos. O gnosticismo foi (e ainda é) uma teosofia com muitos ingredientes. Ocultismo e misticismo oriental combinam-se com astrologia e mágica. … Eles integram os ensinamentos de Jesus e acomodam-nos em sua própria interpretação (como no Evangelho de Tomás), oferecendo aos seus membros uma forma alternativa ou rival de cristianismo.[1]
Primeiros CrÃticos
Uma pequena linha filosófica gnóstica já crescia no primeiro século, apenas décadas depois da morte de Jesus. Os apóstolos, em seus ensinamentos e escritos, condenaram fortemente essas crenças como opostas à verdade de Jesus, de quem foram testemunha. Veja, por exemplo, o que o apóstolo João escreveu perto do fim do primeiro século:
Quem é o mentiroso? Senão aquele que nega que Jesus é o Cristo? É o anticristo esse mesmo que nega o Pai e o Filho. (1 João 2:22, NVI).
Seguindo os ensinamentos dos apóstolos, os lÃderes da igreja primitiva condenam unanimemente os gnósticos como um culto. O padre Ireneu, escrevendo 140 anos antes do ConcÃlio de Niceia, confirmou que os gnósticos eram condenados pela igreja como hereges. Ele também rejeitou seus “evangelhos”. Porém, com relação aos quatro evangelhos do Novo Testamento, ele diz: “Não é possÃvel que os evangelhos sejam em quantidade maior o menor do que são”. [2] O teólogo cristão OrÃgenes escreveu no inÃcio do terceiro século mais de cem anos antes de Niceia:
Conheço um certo evangelho chamado “O Evangelho segundo Tomás” e um “Evangelho segundo Matias” e muitos outros que li, já que não devemos ser considerados de nenhuma maneira ignorante pelos que imaginam ter algum conhecimento sobre esses. Contudo, dentre todos esses aprovamos somente os reconhecidos pela igreja, que são os únicos quatro evangelhos que devem ser aceitos.[3]
Autores Misteriosos
Com relação aos evangelhos gnósticos, cada livro leva o nome de uma personagem do Novo Testamento: O Evangelho de Filipe, o Evangelho de Pedro, o Evangelho de Maria e assim em diante. Mas será que eles foram mesmo escritos por seus supostos autores? Vamos dar uma olhada. Os evangelhos gnósticos são datados de 110 a 300 anos depois de Cristo e nenhum acadêmico crÃvel acredita que algum deles poderia ter sido escrito por seus homônimos. No abrangente A Biblioteca de Nag Hammadi de James M. Robinson, vemos que os evangelhos gnósticos foram escritos por “autores desconhecidos e independentes”.[4] O estudioso do Novo Testamento Norman Geisler escreve: “Os escritos gnósticos não foram escritos pelos apóstolos, mas por homens do século dois (ou posterior) com intenções de usar a autoridade apostólica para divulgar seus próprios ensinos. Nos dias de hoje chamamos isto de fraude e falsificação”.[5]
Mistérios versus história
Os evangelhos gnósticos não são relatos históricos da vida de Jesus, mas sim declarações esotéricas, envoltas em mistério, que deixam de fora detalhes históricos como nomes, locais e eventos. Este é um contraste marcante com os evangelhos do Novo Testamento que contém diversos fatos históricos sobre a vida, ministério e palavras de Jesus. Em quem você preferiria acreditar: em alguém que diz “ei, tenho alguns fatos secretos que foram revelados pra mim misteriosamente” ou em alguém que diz “pesquisei todas as evidências e história e aqui estão elas para que você possa formar sua opinião”? Mantendo esta pergunta em mente, considere as duas afirmações a seguir, a primeira do Evangelho Gnóstico de Tomé (cerca de 110 a 150 d. c.) e a segunda do Evangelho de Lucas do Novo Testamento (cerca de 55 a 70 d. c.).
Esses são os ditos ocultos que o Jesus vivente falou e Judas Tomé, o gêmeo registrou.[6]
Muitos já se dedicaram a elaborar um relato dos fatos que se cumpriram entre nós, conforme nos foram transmitidos por aqueles que desde o inÃcio foram testemunhas oculares e servos da palavra. Eu mesmo investiguei tudo cuidadosamente, desde o começo, e decidi escrever-te um relato ordenado, ó excelentÃssimo Teófilo, para que tenhas a certeza das coisas que te foram ensinadas. (Lucas 1:1-4, NVI)
Você gostou da abordagem aberta e direta de Lucas? E acha que o fato de ter sido escrito mais próximo dos eventos originais favorece sua confiabilidade? Se sim, também foi isso que a igreja antiga pensou. E a maioria dos estudiosos concorda com a visão da igreja antiga de que o Novo Testamento é a história autêntica de Jesus. O estudioso do Novo Testamento Raymond Brown comentou dos evangelhos gnósticos: “não conhecemos nenhum novo fato verificável sobre o ministério de Jesus, apenas algumas novas declarações que podem ter sido dele”.[7] Portanto, mesmo que os textos gnósticos tenham impressionado alguns estudiosos, sua data tardia e autoria questionável não se comparam ao Novo Testamento. Tal contraste entre o Novo Testamento e os textos gnósticos é devastante para os que apoiam teorias de conspiração. O historiador do Novo Testamento F. F. Bruce escreveu: “não há obra de literatura antiga no mundo que goza de tamanha riqueza de comprovação textual do que o Novo Testamento”.[8]
Why Russia evacuated its naval base in Syria
By Fred Weir, CS Monitor, June 27, 2013
Moscow—In a surprise move, Russia has pulled all its military and nondiplomatic civilian personnel out of Syria. That includes a complete evacuation of the naval supply station in the Mediterranean port of Tartus, which is often discussed as one of Russia’s key reasons for its long and stubborn support of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.
"We have neither servicemen nor civilians in Syria anymore. Or Russian military instructors assigned to units of the Syrian regular Army, for that matter," a Russian defense ministry spokesperson is quoted as telling the Moscow business daily Vedomosti yesterday.
The Tartus naval supply station, Russia’s only military base outside the former USSR, has been effectively closed, Russian deputy foreign minister and special Middle East envoy Mikhail Bogdanov confirmed in an interview with a Turkish newspaper. He insisted that the base, which housed about 70 fulltime military technicians to service visiting Russian warships, was of no strategic importance to Russia.
"It’s just a technical facility for maintaining ships sailing in the Mediterranean," he said.
That answer seems a trifle inadequate. The obvious question is: Why abandon Tartus now, given that the Russian naval presence in the Mediterranean has never been so large?
Earlier this month Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia will maintain a permanent naval flotilla in the region for the first time since the collapse of the USSR more than 20 years ago. “This is a strategically important region and we have tasks to carry out there to provide for the national security of the Russian Federation," he said.
The Russian Navy has been holding almost nonstop maneuvers in the eastern Mediterranean for more than a year, and currently has a 16-warship task force in the area.
"The first and likeliest reason for the closure is that Russia doesn’t want to risk the lives of 70 military personnel stationed at Tartus," says Vladimir Sotnikov, expert with the official Institute of Oriental Studies in Moscow.
"Now that the battlefield initiative in Syria’s civil war is in the hands of the Assad regime, Russia might fear some [rebel] provocations against our people. Another possible reason may be to help promote the Geneva-2 talks. We have information that Russia, the United Nations and the US have agreed to a format for the talks. So, perhaps Russia wants to dispel impression that its position is based on some desire to hold on to this station," Mr. Sotnikov says.
"In any case, Russian ships have the opportunity to go to Cyprus for supplies and maintenance, and it’s safer for them to do so right now," he adds.
Russia has also been steadily evacuating the estimated 30,000 Russian citizens living in Syria since early this year, and yesterday the Ministry of Emergency Services reported that it had extracted another 130 Russians from Latakia in northwest Syria and flown them back to Russia.
Other Russian analysts agree that, whatever the reasons for Russia’s personnel pullout, it probably doesn’t signal any change of the pro-Assad position that Mr. Putin most recently reiterated at last week’s G8 summit in Northern Ireland.
"Russia’s position hasn’t changed. In fact it’s getting tougher," says Sergei Strokan, a foreign affairs columnist with the pro-business Moscow daily Kommersant.
"The reasons behind this evacuation probably come down to security. That base’s importance has been greatly overrated in Western reporting. It just isn’t that big a deal. So, I guess the thinking is, why risk some major incident that the rebels might stage by attacking Russians at this sensitive moment when all the hopes are pinned on a new Geneva peace conference?"
Ecuador unilaterally scraps U.S. trade deal
| By Juan Forero, Washington Post, June 27, 2013 BOGOTA, Colombia—The leftist government of Ecuador, under pressure from the Obama administration for considering a request for sanctuary from the American intelligence leaker Edward Snowden, announced Thursday that it will back out of a preferential trade pact with the United States that top Ecuadoran officials say is being used to blackmail their country. The move, which President Rafael Correa’s government described as unilateral, came a day after the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee pledged to do all he could to block trade benefits for Ecuador should it grant Snowden political asylum. "Our government will not reward countries for bad behavior," Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said in a statement Wednesday. “Trade preferences are a privilege granted to nations, not a right." Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor who is presumed to be in Moscow, has asked for asylum in Ecuador. While the government has made no decision in response to the request, Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño voiced sympathy for the 30-year-old fugitive in lengthy comments Monday. At a news conference Thursday, Minister of Communications Fernando Alvarado pushed back at perceived efforts to influence Ecuador’s decision. It “doesn’t accept pressure or threats from anybody, and it doesn’t trade its principles or give them up for commercial interests, no matter how important," the Quito-based newspaper El Comercio quoted him as saying. Alvarado said his country “unilaterally and irrevocably renounces those trade preferences" and defiantly quipped that Ecuador would provide $23 million to the Obama administration for human rights training. |
