The story, by Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune, opens with the following two paragraphs:
CHICAGO - Every day for nearly 30 years, Walid Elkhatib has sold doughnuts. Glazed, chocolate frosted, Bavarian Kreme and other varieties. As a Dunkin' Donuts franchisee, he expanded the menu to include breakfast sandwiches, such as egg and cheese bagels.
But he drew the line at serving sandwiches with sausage, ham or bacon because his Muslim faith forbids him from eating or handling pork -- a departure from company policy that led Dunkin' Donuts in 2002 to threaten it would take away his two Chicago-area franchises.
So here is the gist of the matter. For 30 years Walid Elkhatib has been a voluntary participant in a franchise owned and controlled by Dunkin’ Donuts. He has been enabled to establish a business and build a clientele using the name owned by Dunkin’ Donuts. He agreed to operate by their rules. But now that the company has grown and has added menu items that Mr. Khatib discriminates against according to his racial and religious tenets, now he wants to force the company to abide by his beliefs. He wants the US courts to force this company to accept Islam’s discrimination as company policy.
Now Mr. Elkhatib has every right to operate his own business and practice this Muslim discrimination against those who do not believe that pork is forbidden. He has every right to own and operate a donut shop that practices according to Islamic rules and commandments. He has every right to hold to his racial and religious tenets in his business practices.
However, he is not content to do this. He wants the US courts to intervene and to give him the power to violate his contract with Dunkin’ Donuts. He wants the US courts to step in and take over Dunkin’ Donuts to make it comply with the religion of Islam.
This is very disturbing, even frightening. According to the article his anti-American and unconstitutional case has been permitted to continue in the courts for FIVE YEARS.
This case should never even have made it past his attorney’s desk, let alone to be entered into the legal process.
This is how Islam wars against peace loving people who are well established as a people so as to be indomitable by force. When able, Islam advances upon weaker people by force. But when a people is too strong, they make treaties and contracts that present the facade of peaceable relations, until by little bites they chew their way into a position of dominance. Then they force their ways upon the people.
Lying and deceit are not forbidden to Muslims who are dealing with non-Muslims. In fact, their god himself declares that he leads people astray according to his own pleasure, and permits his people to do likewise in their dealings with non-Muslims. Actually, this strategy is commanded when it appears to be expedient.
This court case truly should cause Americans to be alarmed. For unlike the practices of the Bible upon which the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution are constructed, Islam is not tolerant of others. While the biblical tenets incorporated into the Constitution forbid actions that do harm to others and also militate against stealing away the rights of others that do not injure the commonwealth, Islam only protects those who embrace Allah as their god.
Walid Elkhatib demonstrates no concern whatsoever for the well-being of Dunkin’ Donuts and his fellow franchise owners. If Dunkin’ Donuts is forced by the courts to allow Walid Elkhatib to violate their policies, their company will no longer have any control over how the franchise participants operate. Menu items will no longer be consistent throughout the company. Ingredients will no longer be uniformly used. Soon the name of Dunkin’ Donuts will become nothing more than a reflection of what once was.
As Mr. Elkhatib is fully aware, the name is what makes a franchise valuable. It is the reason that he purchased franchise rights rather than using his own name. How many people would be enticed to stop at a restaurant named, Elkhatib’s Donuts?
No, he knows the value of a franchise name. He knows the power of national recognition, power gained through the united efforts of those who produced the same menu items made of the same ingredients according to the same standards and offered at the same prices throughout the company. Now he wants to steal that name from all the others in the company. He wants the courts to take what Dunkin’ Donuts represents and force it into conformity with the nation of Islam.
The really frightening reality of this matter is that Mr. Elkhatib will probably get his way. After all, this has been the pattern of the US courts since at least the 1960's. This has been the way that much of America has adopted for a very long time.
Just look at the names that are used on the many churches that claim to be Christian. How many are there? Yet they all claim the name of Christian. Even the YMCA and the YWCA still use the name of Christian, but it really has no part whatsoever in what these organizations do. Most churches are of that same mold. They use the name of Christian, and then perhaps also some denominational name, but the practices of the local congregations do not hold to any consistent form.
Since, then, so many Americans have permitted the name that supposedly is of everlasting importance to them to be misused and disenfranchised in such ways, who will object if the same is done to Dunkin’ Donuts? Moreover, who will stand up and say “No” to the Islamic war machine that is being established in the nation, little by little edifying the fortresses that will be used to destroy the “Liberty and Justice for all” that our pledge of allegiance has declared in conformity with our founding documents?
4 comments:
This is prob'ly way off, but I can't help but think of passages such as: Rev. 13:16-17.
May our Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ keep us in the ONE true faith.
MG
Dear MG,
I would not say that you are way off, but it is difficult to know how visions are to be understood, for they use figurative language that draws upon knowledge of the entire record of the holy Scriptures. I wanted to do some reading before responding to your comment. Having done so, it seems to me that the best place to begin is by reminding you that the Apocalypse or the Revelation is given to the Church for her comfort and encouragement during the tribulations of the Last Days. This should be our primary focus when we read the Revelation given to John to record for the churches in all the world for the comfort and encouragement of the saints.
The Revelation serves the continual two-edged sword’s work of proclaiming Law and Gospel side by side. The Law continually gives warning to all for the need for repentance so that total reliance upon the Gospel may be recognized for what it really is, freedom from fear, from sin, from death, from the power of the devil, from the danger of being deceived as the woman was, from the danger of handing over the crown of glory on account of the deception as Adam did.
In chapter 22 the angel declares the Lord’s command that the words of the prophecy of this book are not to be sealed because the time is at hand. To Daniel the command was given to seal the book of prophecy. The difference is that the One who is worthy to open the seals has come and has revealed all that is necessary to His Church.
The opening words of this book are: “The Revelation of Jesus Christ . . .” The closing words are: “He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.”
This is the meaning of the Revelation. While the various details of the events of history that are opened by Jesus for the Church to know are important, they are revealed for the purpose of keeping the hearts, minds, and souls of the saints in the communion and safety of the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. The primary point is that all of the tribulations that are to come are already known by God, so that He has given His Scriptures to show us that all things are in His hands and are being worked for good to those who love Him, those who are called according to His purpose (salvation). As we see various things happening we can see that the Lord has indeed foretold them, and we may trust that we are kept by the peace of God that surpasses all understanding in the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Now, concerning your thoughts regarding the Islamic deception and threat being revealed in Revelation 13:16-17, it certainly has some correlations. It certainly is not wrong to see Islam as included in the second beast. However, the second beast serves the first beast, in the authority of the first beast, leading all who follow it to worship the first beast. If the first beast is civil government, Islam fits this description, but it is not as neat of a fit as some other possibilities.
Luther counted the second beast as the papacy. He saw the Roman Empire as the head of the civil government that was mortally wounded by Constantine’s conversion, which for a very brief time gave the sense of peace from the persecution of the Church by the civil government. But then he says that the papacy took for itself the two horns of civil and spiritual government and worked more harm to the Church than any of the previous antichristian governments. Luther saw the pontiff’s mark of ordination and approval of the orders as the mark of the beast.
I find Luther’s understanding to be hard to supplant with a better understanding. However, I did notice another possible meaning.
Since both seven and ten are figurative numbers for completion and perfection, they may or may not be meant to give numerical representation. This is especially true of the number ten.
Seven heads could be seven rulers or lords that serve the first beast in promoting the name of blasphemy. Ten horns (powers) could be the full number of those who hold the position of lords. One of the seven heads receives a mortal wound, but does not die, but recovers. I find an interesting correlation between the Seven Sacraments of the Papacy and the seven heads. If the Papacy is the first beast, raising up the name of the Church of Rome as that which is above all, a name of blasphemy in setting itself above the Scriptures, above Christ who is the Word and God, then the Seven Sacraments could be the seven lords. One of these sacraments was dealt a mortal wound by the Reformation, the sacrament of the orders. With the restoration of the Gospel to the Church, the rule of the orders over the Church suffered a mortal wound, yet it did not die but rose up again, continuing to suppress the true Gospel and withholding the blood of the New Testament from the laity. The ten horns could be the full number of popes to fill the office of Antichrist.
Then comes the second beast, rising up not from the sea, but from the earth. The first beast came up from the sea. The creatures of the sea were created by God before man and were separate from man. The first beast came from what God had created apart from man, possibly meaning the Church. The water could relate to Baptism, and from the water by which God gives life, the papacy sprang, within the Church, born of the water. No one realized that this was a beast with evil intentions because it came up from the water, the sea. But the second beast comes up from the earth, the dwelling of man. In the previous chapter the earth befriended the Church by opening up and swallowing the flood which the dragon had spewed forth from its mouth to wash the Church away. But now, from this same earth comes a second beast. The first beast came from the water (Baptism?). The second beast comes from the earth, from the dwelling and workplace of men, where they think that they dwell in safety, possibly even the church bodies of men (or as many like to phrase it: organized religion)?
Could the second beast be Vatican II, which took the power of the sacrament of the orders and expanded it so that some of the authority was given back into the hands of the laity? Vatican II was done in the view of the first beast and with its authority. Vatican II tells those who follow it to make an image to the first beast that was wounded by the sword (the Word) and to worship it. In the Old Testament, Elijah is the prophet who called for fire to come from heaven. He called upon the Lord to provide fire for the altar in order to show who the real God is. The altar was completely consumed by the fire. Vatican II burned up the old altar of the papacy, where the ordained by the pope ruled the worship, and gave much of the worship over to the laity again. By this the laity were deceived into believing that the Word and especially the Gospel was restored to the Church of Rome.
In verse 16, a mark is required to be given to all, both on the right hand and on the forehead. The right hand has always had at least two things associated with it, power and fellowship. The right hand is used in Scriptures even for the highest level of power, God’s right hand, at which the risen Lord Jesus sits. The right hand of fellowship is also throughout the Scriptures, also used for making promises or taking oaths.
I could go on with comparisons, but verse 18 gives me pause. Luther was quite convinced regarding his understanding, and may indeed be correct. However, not all the scrolls had been opened, meaning that parts of history had not yet been unfolded. Vatican II certainly was not part of Luther’s knowledge. Is Vatican II the second beast? I don’t know. But it does seem to have similarities.
Verse 18 helps set things into proper perspective. It literally reads:
Here the wisdom is, the one having the understanding, let him calculate the number (arithmetic or accounting) of the beast, for a number (arithmetic or accounting) of a man it is, also the number of him, 666 (chi xi sigma in the textus receptus) (hexakosoi hexakonta hex in UBS).
This reads slightly differently than the usual translations, but keeps more directly with the word flow of the Greek. But it brings out some interesting points.
First, “Here the wisdom is.” Wisdom or Sophia is sometimes used for the Son of God, Jesus, the Christ. Proverbs 9:10 says: “Fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom and knowledge of the holy one is understanding.”
Could it be that we are to understand verse 18 in this manner:
Here is Jesus Christ. The one in whom we have understanding, the one in whom all understanding is. Let HIM calculate the number of the beast. For it is an accounting of Man (mankind). Also the accounting of him (the beast). The number of that which falls short of God’s creation, 666. (777 would be the number of the Sabbath Day, the day of rest and peace through communion with God.)
Could it be that verse 18 is meant to warn us against trying too hard to understand the last days? Could it be that in every time of history where persecution is set against the Church that we are to turn to the one who is Wisdom, who is Understanding, the only one worthy to open the book and loose the seals (Rev. 5), who alone is the one to whom the accounting must be given? Could it be that we are simply to acknowledge Him, and all that falls short to account as not of Him so that we are not deceived by it? Could this be mainly an admonishment to hold to the administration of the Word and the Sacraments in the purity in which Christ has given them, and to count all else as from the devil and as serving the devil?
If this is the case, then certainly your accounting of this matter would be sound, and any accounting that leads a person to rely solely upon Jesus Christ and Him crucified would be a correct accounting.
Have you read the book "Because they Hate" by Brigitte Gabriel? It is a very eye opening account of the Muslim takeover of Lebanon in the 70s. The Muslims are using our political correctness against us and we need to wake up. Especially us Kansans! I attend Butler College and the muslims that attend there are African, the ones attending WSU are Arabic. There is a mosque in NE Wichita. I was thinking about going over there and asking them some questions and also asking if I could sit in on one of their meetings. I want to know what they are telling their people. One time I posted a comment about how we Christians aren't doing thus and so and someone responded and said that Christians are worse than Muslims. This is how the world sees us.
Dear Alexandria,
You asked:
Have you read the book "Because they Hate" by Brigitte Gabriel?
I have not read this book, but the title sounds descriptive of what the Quran and other writings of Muhammad teach.
However, I would not say that the Muslims consider themselves to be hateful. They are like many people who have been deluded by a system of legalistic doctrine and practice, who act on the basis of their legalism. The reaction from the person that responded that Christians are worse than Muslims may be based upon observation of the actions of legalistic Christians.
The title “Because they Hate” is based upon hatred of others, I presume. However, the real hatred is against Christ, the true God. Since legalists are trusting in their own attempts at following what they believe to be right, they cannot abide a God who says that all the attempts at righteousness performed by every person is the world is to be counted as nothing but bloodied/dirty cloths to be buried. They cannot endure the words or presence of the God who says that He alone is righteous and that people can be righteous only by the means that He works for them. Thus even as they crucified the God of grace, they also attack and kill others. But Muslims certainly are not alone in this. Other non-Christians as well as false Christians also fall into this camp.
The thing that makes the hatred promoted by Islam so powerful is that these dear people are truly convinced that they are following the will of God. Moreover, they are devoted to their god, to the point of being willing to sacrifice everything.
If only they would heed the God who is willing to sacrifice Himself in order to redeem the world from the violence of sin. If only those who claim to be Christians would truly heed this God of grace, mercy, and peace.
Post a Comment