(The following article was sent to the Editor of CNSNews.com on 1-14-2003.)

I don't agree with most of what former Attorney General Clark has to say, but when he recently compared Jesus to Mohammed, it was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. I'd like to pose some questions to Mr. Clark regarding some very uninformed comments he made that are outlined in the CNS News article, "Former Attorney General Casts Christ as Terrorist":

Comment #1: "The Christian Church overwhelmingly -- there are exceptions -- who choose to call Mohammed a terrorist. They could call Jesus a terrorist too," said Clark. "I mean, he was pretty tough on money lenders a time or two."

If you knew your Bible at all, Mr. Clark, you would realize that Jesus had His reasons for being "pretty tough on money lenders". Actually, Jesus was referring to money exchangers who were buying and selling on holy temple grounds, which showed blatant disrespect to God:

Matthew 21:12: And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves.

Jesus became angry only when people showed blatant disregard/disrespect for YHWH (God the Father). How could you possibly compare that to the things which that murdering, thieving pedophile, Mohammed did? Prior to making this blanket statement, you should have done some research which would have led you to the following conclusions. Unlike the "prophet" Mohammed, Jesus:

• Was God incarnate.
  
  
• He offered Himself as a final sin sacrifice so that mortal man could have everlasting life.
  
  
• Preached God's Word without twisting Scripture.
  
  
• Was literate.
  
  
• He never pillaged, plundered, or murdered innocent people whenever he ran low on food, funds, or supplies.
  
  
• He never had sex with, or married a seven year old child.
  
  
• He never had visions during epileptic fits that miraculously became words from "God" which were compiled into a confusing jumble of notes that, to this day, don't make any sense.
  
  
• He never stole or twisted Scripture from the Old Testament in order to come up with a brand new religion that completely negated God's Word, or negated who God originally said He was.

Comment #2: "The greatest moral force there by far is Islam because it is present in the prisons. They're the ones that are respected, they're the ones that are up at 5 a.m. and worshiping, they're the ones that are praying five times a day and not ashamed to submit themselves to what they believe is a greater power."

It's nice to know you admire our prison population, but with all due respect, Mr. Clark, you don't know what you are talking about! Islam is our greatest moral force because it is present in prisons? So, what you are saying is that the Christian and Jewish populations aren't moral because they don't bow down to a Pagan god five times a day? In all honesty, Mr. Clark, if these people were so cotton pickin' "moral" they wouldn't be in prison in the first place, so this was a rather ignorant statement on your part.

What you have done, in essence, is to show your approval of a religion that was spawned out of the belligerence of a mere mortal man who stopped at nothing in order to do the will of a god he discovered during his epileptic visions; and whose god promotes violence against, and murder of, anyone who refuses to convert to Islam (Quran 2:191: murder them and treat them harshly; Q. 9:123: slay them; Q.9: 5: fight with them; Q. 8: 65: even if they are Christians and Jews, humiliate them and impose on them a penalty tax...). While most Muslims -- like most believers in Jesus, are probably a peace-loving people -- it is clear their god is not. The Qur'an takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and tells clearly that no other religion except Islam is accepted (Q.3: 85). Is this really who you want to side with?

Comment #3: When asked if Americans in general, and Christians in particular, should be wary of Muslims and the Islamic religion, you, Mr. Clark, cited the need for trust among people of different faiths: "We have to live together," said Clark. "You can't do that by being leery of a billion and a half people who are very devoted to what they believe in."

While this is an admirable goal, does that mean that it's right for public officials to make uninformed and ignorant statements that side with Islam while slamming Christianity/Messianic Judaism? Does that mean, just because a billion and a half people believe in a Pagan god who promotes murder, mayhem, and violence, the rest of us should lie down and play dead? I don't think so!

From the things you've publicly stated, it is clear that you have no clear knowledge of God or religion. In the future, perhaps you'd do well to stick to the cut-throat, back-stabbing, immoral business of politics and refrain from discussing things you know even less about.

May God forgive the awful things you said against Him.

Sincerely,

The Refiner's Fire