If it is possible, live peaceably: Faith shown during recent attacks
Published: November 17, 2009
Updated: November 17, 2009
Roughly one in every four people in the world, about 1.6 billion, are Muslim. Nearly 2.5 million Muslims live in the United States. One of them, U.S. Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, shouted “Alahu Ahkbar!” and then murdered 13 unarmed adults and one unborn baby at Fort Hood, Texas.
“If it is possible,” the Bible tells us at Romans 12:18, “as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men.”
We could live in peace with the vast bulk of Muslims, but there are millions of jihadist Muslims, like American-born Hasan, embedded in nations all around the world who want to remove from us the choice of peace.
We can not choose to ignore the 14,000 terrorist attacks by jihadists reported in news sources worldwide since 9/11.
We can’t ignore the 8 percent of U.S. Muslims (representing 200,000 people within our borders) who told Pew Foundation researchers that suicide bombings of civilians are sometimes justified if used to “defend Islam”.
Kimberly Munley could not ignore the shots she heard being fired by Hasan.
She is a military wife and mother of two, but Munley is also an ex-soldier herself, a weapons and marksman expert, a firearms instructor, a SWAT team member, and on Nov. 5 she was on-duty as a Fort Hood police sergeant.
Chuck Medley, Fort Hood’s director of emergency services, reports: “She fired on [Hasan] twice and drew the attention toward her. He immediately spun around and charged her.”
Kim Munley was wounded in both legs and her wrist, but she kept firing. Hasan was finally brought down by four bullets fired by Munley and her fellow police officer, Sgt. Mark Todd.
“If she had not responded the way she had, we would have had an extremely high number of dead and injured,” Medley said, pointing out the hundreds of remaining bullets Hasan had not yet used. “People are healthy, alive and walking around today because of the action that this officer took. She’s a hero.”
Soldiers are brave when they go into battle, but their chaplains have to be even braver. Chaplains serve with them in combat zones —and never carry a weapon.
On the Sunday following the killings, U.S. Army Chaplain Col. Frank Jackson demonstrated the depth and source of his courage when he prayed with the soldiers worshipping at Fort Hood’s 1st Cavalry Memorial Chapel, saying, “And Lord, teach us to love and pray for those who rise up against us and pray for those who do us harm. We pray for Maj. Hasan, asking that You do the work that only You can do in his life.”
Kim Munley followed Christ’s instruction that: “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends.” (John 15:13)
Chaplain Jackson obeyed the lesson Christ taught to His disciples: “I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:43-45)
It depends upon us, then, to be willing to replicate and multiply the heroics of both Kim Munley and Chaplain Jackson in the hope that we might eventually live peaceably, if it is possible, with the 1.6 billion Muslims around the world and the 2.5 million Muslims in the U.S.
Sharman’s column appears each Tuesday.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
OK, well I will stop pestering you for facts to back up a big statement you just made, and just have to continue to believe that your personal opinion of Sharman is just that.
I’ve read him for a long time, I’ve read many other things he’s written besides on here, and I’ve only found one thing we disagree on, and that is health care. And I did not hesitate to say so when he wrote about it, so you saying that all I’ve ever done is verify his “facts” while not doing any further research also makes you look not credible.
OW, you act like Sharman has only been writing a short time. Back in the day he was very opinionated and got trapped multiple times for having bad facts and statistics These dasy he has changed his tactics so that now he rarely offers solutions or even his own opinion. At the same time he uses some very strange interpretations of what few facts he does provide. I’ve told you multiple times that putting his facts together with other easily obtainable facts often leads to an entirely different interpretation than what he offers.
In the past I have tried to get you to look beyond the facts he offered and went as far as telling you what to look for. You have steadfastly refused. If you won’t do research on your own you why would anyone expect that you would consider anything offered? All you’ve ever done is verify his “facts” while not doing any further research. Since then I have not been at all interested in proving anything to you I might say or insinuate about Sharman.
EL, you said: “He has also quoted stats from studies done by guys that had just happened to have been kicked out of certain professional groups because the standards for the study were so flawed they might be considered outright lies.“
Would you mind showing us the proof on the above statement?
OW, if it was just one I might. That example just happens to be the most glaring. He has also quoted stats from studies done by guys that had just happened to have been kicked out of certain professional groups because the standards for the study were so flawed they might be considered outright lies.
Now, before you get all wadded up note I have stated nothing but suspicions based on the past. The work is there. Do as much homework on Sharman as you do on some of the other subject and just maybe you may be suspicious too.
I will never fully trust this man to be anything other than extremely biased and extermely partisan so until you can give a reason why I should feel differently I will stick with my opinion.
EL, when are you going to stop pointing out a math error made years and years ago by Sharman? And it is quite easy to check figures out nowadays, so if you dispute something, show us.
And you really need to find some “proof” or some other way to take what he has just written, the article at hand, and list disputing facts, so we can all stay on current issues.
If you guys had studied the writings of J Michael Sharman you would know that ANY time he starts quoting numbers (statistics/percentages) things will be questionable because he has demonstrated a minimal understanding of them. I’ve seen him stand by his interpretation of percentages when even an eighth grader knew he was wrong.
Also, being that it is Sharman, I am going to assume that their is some biased and partisan message in here although it’s not as obvious as he usually makes it.
If I didn’t want to stay on here aggrivating rjma and El Debibble, this is where I would tell rjma exactly what he his.
rjma only disagrees with Sharman because one is a left wing bombthrower, and one is a right wing bombthrower.
If Sharman’s column today had said simply “Today is Tuesday, Nov 17th, 2009, rjma would have responded that today was actually “Tuesday, November 17, 2009”, or “Tue, Nov. 17, 09”.
rjma -
Do you’re going to let your statement “stand”. You, who incessantly DEMAND that other people back up THEIR assertions with facts and evidence, are going to let your unsupported statement “stand”. That must be quite convenient for you.
You claimed Mr. Sharman said something in his article which I was pretty sure he did not say. I asked you to back up your claim and point out where in his article he made the statement which you attributed to him. You are now refusing to do so and are trying to provide “cover” for yourself with talk about our lack of knowledge regarding what Mr. Sharman was “trying to imply”. ‘rjma’, you did not assert that he “implied” something - you asserted that he SAID it.
Much as I have resisted reaching such a conclusion, I am beginning to think some of the others who post here are correct when they say you are snide, insufferably arrogant and completely unable to admit when you are wrong. (BTW – for the record, “snide” in and of itself doesn’t bother me in the least). I have attempted to debate the various “issues of the day” with you in good faith. I have even had some fun doing research and fact-checking regarding statements which I knew you would challenge.
However, your passive-aggressive argument style and, more annoyingly, your hypocrisy, have become quite tiresome. If you refuse to hold yourself to the same high standards of “debate” which you demand of others then it is a pointless waste of time for anyone to have a discussion with you, or to even recognize your presence here.
Creating an inconsistency is simply wrong and causing division where none was intended, as an inconsistency would have a way of canceling each other out, such as ones belief about something is one way in public and another way in private. That’s not the case here.
For example, I deeply love my children and grandchildren, and while loving and praying for them, I will also cause them sorrow by a punishment for the purpose of teaching them, but that doesn’t mean I don’t love them.
I’m going to let my statements stand. We can’t really know what Mr. Sharman was trying to imply. I will say that I join him in urging others to pray for their enemies and Jesus suggested.
But I am mystified how you can get so worked up about my questioning that the Chaplain Corp has been selected by God. Why does that make me unpleasant?
You do know that there are Muslim chaplains in the Army chaplain corps. Who selected them? I’m really glad you brought this up. I had no idea. They even have Jewish and Buddhist ones too.
Advertisement