Feed aggregator

I recently published an article detailing the pervasive anti-Semitic environment at Sarah Lawrence College (SLC), where I have been a faculty member for the past fifteen years. In it, I presented troubling facts about the rise of anti-Semitism on the New York-based campus and shared my perspective on SLC’s handling of these issues.

Rather than engaging with the facts I presented, however, many members of the SLC community chose to dismiss the evidence and instead attack me for my political views. This response reflects poorly on SLC and undermines public confidence in the integrity of higher education in America, an institution already in steep decline.

As a Jew, writing about anti-Semitism is never easy, but some truths must be shared. It is undeniable that several Jewish Zionist students have left the school or switched to fully remote learning due to—at the very least—their perception that SLC has failed to effectively address a toxic environment of threats, intimidation, and harassment.

Understandably, they worry about their safety and the disruption of their learning environment.

By being forced off campus or leaving the school entirely, these students have been denied the same opportunities to engage and thrive on campus as others, solely because of their faith and heritage.

Finally, SLC has indeed allowed a workplace environment to develop where students can disrupt my teaching and academic work and attack me for my faith and Jewish Zionist heritage.

After presenting these facts, I shared my perspective on SLC’s response to these campus issues—specifically, its decision not to settle the Title VI investigation and its choice of leadership. My views are open to debate and disagreement; thoughtful dialogue is both welcome and essential to a healthy intellectual and academic environment.

However—unsurprisingly—that did not happen.

Instead, when my aforementioned article was posted in an alumni group on Facebook, the first response came from a former student who urged the community to stop discussing me—then proceeded to call me “a right-wing hack” and a “pest” on campus.

This alum couldn’t be bothered to engage with any of the ideas in the article and instead resorted to attacking me—employing a deeply dangerous and horrifying trope once used by the Nazi regime to justify the persecution of Jews and, ultimately, the Holocaust. I’ve been called many things over the years, but it was shocking to be labeled a “pest”—a term historically invoked to justify the extermination of Jews. As the Antisemitism Policy Trust notes, “The pest … is perceived as something which will eat away at society and rot the wood of societal values; it must be eradicated.”

Of course, no one commented on the disgusting use and intention behind the word “pest” as it applied to me.

This alum couldn’t be bothered to engage with any of the ideas in the article and instead resorted to attacking me—employing a deeply dangerous and horrifying trope once used by the Nazi regime to justify the persecution of Jews and, ultimately, the Holocaust. I’ve been called many things over the years, but it was shocking to be labeled a “pest”—a term historically invoked to justify the extermination of Jews. As the Antisemitism Policy Trust notes, “The pest … is perceived as something which will eat away at society and rot the wood of societal values; it must be eradicated.”

Of course, no one commented on the disgusting use and intention behind the word “pest” as it applied to me.

As a social science professor, I have no interest in telling students what to think. I aim to teach them how to think—how to question, establish facts, and critically engage with all ideas. Intellectual progress and societal betterment come from viewpoint diversity and the rigorous scrutiny of ideas. Yet, the reactions to my concerns about Sarah Lawrence College and the real danger of hatred towards its Jewish community members show how the school has devolved into an illiberal environment, where empathy is replaced by hostility and a desire to harm those with differing views and foundational beliefs.

Those numerous alumni who have engaged in anti-Semitic behavior serve as a stark reminder that SLC has not instilled the critical thinking skills necessary to foster a truly open and tolerant society.

https://www.thecollegefix.com/bulletin-board/jewish-professor-called-pest-for-antisemitism-criticism/

The first eleven chapters of Genesis are ignored, mythologized, or given a non-literal meaning by many who nevertheless call themselves Christians. Yet the Genesis account of the origin of the universe and all that is within it, including man, is foundational to everything else the Bible says, including the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Christian faith. That is, of course, precisely why the Bible begins this way. John M. Cimbala, a mechanical engineer who earned his Ph.D. in Aeronautics at California Institute of Technology, explains the importance of the opening chapters of Genesis:

“I was raised in a Christian home [but] eventually rejected the entire Bible and believed that we descended from lower creatures; there was no afterlife and no purpose in life but to enjoy the short time we have on this earth. My college years at Penn State were spent as an atheist. . . . Fortunately, and by the grace of God, I began to read articles and listen to tapes about scientific evidence for creation [and] realized that the Bible might actually be true! It wasn’t until I could believe the first page of the Bible that I could believe the rest of it.”

Of course, we would readily admit that there are and always have been bad-actors in the church, and in fact, all of us as human beings, Christian or not, we are seriously flawed. But that is a very poor reason to reject the salvation the Lord provides, the only remedy for our flawed (sinful) condition. Often the unbeliever’s finger pointing at flawed people in the church, sinners all, is used as an excuse to reject what they desperately seek to reject for other reasons — namely their own sinfulness. And we probably all remember the childhood saying that when one finger is pointing at someone else, three fingers are pointing back at the accuser. There is also the tried and true “rubber and glue” adage to keep in mind. So, we posit this convenient rejection is very often motivated more by how someone wants to live than whether Christianity is true.

We must point out that Voltaire and other atheists in the past lambasted Christianity while safely swimming in the cultural pool of the very faith they despised. They did not taste the world that their ideas would create, and never had to suffer the repercussions of their most genial visions. And their ideas have caused massive chaos and suffering in this world.

—Don/Joy Veinot (Founders of Midwest Christian Outreach, Apologists, and authors.)

Rebellion against God is not new. Eve was persuaded to believe God was holding something back from her. She disobeyed Him and partook of the forbidden fruit. Man was commanded to multiply and spread out on the face of the earth , but in Genesis 11, they decided they would prefer to stay where they were and build a monument to ... themselves. Even though they had direct evidence of God, they chose self-worship over the worship of the Creator. The Apostle Paul outlines the process of man's rejection and God's response: 

Therefore, God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. (Romans:1:24-25 [24] Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
See All...)

The process hasn't changed much between then and now, but we have ab updated new and better scheme to persuade others to follow with a view to becoming their own saviors. In "Critical Freedom: Critical Theory and The Messianic Light," Anthony Costelllo writes: 

Karl Marx, the great prophet of liberation for modern man, considered man’s alienation inextricably connected to his labor. For Marx man was, at bottom, homo faber–man, the maker of things. Further, since man was not created by God, he was not only the maker of tools and artifacts, but, in a sense, the maker of himself. Marx didn’t mean man literally creates himself, in the strict metaphysical sense (man, for Marx, is an accident of nature), but he did mean that in the course of history man defines and redefines what he is and what he is to become.

In so doing, man first shapes himself and then subsequently labors to create the world in the way he sees fit. 

The attempt to be your own personal messiah sells well, but sadly, it leads them down the road away from the true Messiah to eternal destruction.  Those they have influenced are a mission field!

https://mailchi.mp/62ba88a928f4/spiritual-politics?e=169825fd77

This is exactly what the Bible declares: “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” The book of Genesis gives some of the details surrounding the creation of the universe and of man and all living things on Earth, including sin and death and the worldwide flood. That judgment from God through water is verified by worldwide geological evidence today—much of it in the form of marine fossils on the tops of very high mountains.

Logic alone is sufficient to rule out pantheism, the belief that God created the universe out of Himself and it is therefore equal to God. It could not be an extension of or part of Him, or it would not be subject to the law of entropy. By itself, this fact refutes the idea of the “Star Wars Force” or of any other theory that turns God into unthinking, purposeless energy. By claiming that everything is God, pantheism reduces God to matter that is incapable of thought and is helpless in and of itself. If everything and everyone is God, then nothing is God, because the concept of God has lost its meaning. The only sensible conclusion is that God created everything out of nothing and that the cosmos was, is, and always will be separate and distinct from its Creator.

Inspiration looked different for various Scriptures.

“Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Write in a book all the words that I have spoken to you” (Jeremiah 30:2).

Christians believe the Bible is the Word of God, but we also acknowledge the role of human authors like Moses, King David, the Apostle Paul, and many others. How is the Bible both the Word of God and the product of human authors?

If we look carefully at Scripture, we can see that God used various ways to inspire Scripture. He wrote the Ten Commandments himself on tablets of stone. Other times, he dictated a prophecy or declaration which the human author was instructed to write down, verbatim. When King Jehoiakim destroyed the first copy of a prophecy from Jeremiah, God laughed at the rebellious king and reinspired it, telling Jeremiah to write it down again!

Most Scripture, however, was not dictated by God. Instead, God used the intellect, vocabulary, and reasoning of the human author, but the Holy Spirit superintended the process to ensure the final product was free of error and communicated exactly what God wanted it to. So for instance, historical books like Genesis, 1 Samuel, and the Gospel of John accurately convey what happened at various points in history, and Paul’s epistles give accurate teaching regarding how believers can live a life that is pleasing to God.

Sometimes, God even used the research skills of authors to compile preexisting records and testimony into a final product that is Scripture, even if the preexisting records were not. We can see this in 1 Chronicles where the compiler notes, “Now the records are ancient” (1 Chronicles 4:22).

The psalms are clearly the outpouring of the heart of the psalmist, but God ensured that they are a model of how believers can worship and commune with God in a variety of good and bad circumstances.

If God had wanted to, he could have dictated all of Scripture without using human authors. But just as he chooses to use believers to spread the gospel message to those who have not yet heard, he also chose to use human authors to compose and preserve his Word.

https://answersingenesis.org/bible-study/scripture-its-from-god/

Men will behave one way if they truly believe they were created by a God of infinite love who, nevertheless, holds them accountable for their attitudes, secret thoughts, and deeds on Earth and will either punish or reward them eternally after death. They will behave another way altogether if they think they were formed by blind forces that are impersonal and cannot judge, and that when they are dead, that is the end.

Court ruling kills atheist group’s lawsuit seeking to restrict college students’ religious rights

A federal court recently ended a four-year-old court battle waged by an atheist advocacy group seeking to reverse a Trump-era regulation barring universities from restricting students groups’ religious freedoms on college campuses.

The U.S. District Court for the District Court of Columbia on Jan. 15 ruled in favor of Trump’s 2020 “Free Inquiry Rule,” which allows student groups to have leaders who reflect the organization’s beliefs.

The Secular Student Alliance had sued Biden’s Department of Education in 2021 seeking to overturn the rule, arguing it is discriminatory.

“The rule gives religious student clubs the absolute right to use religion to discriminate while still receiving official university recognition and funding,” the alliance previously stated.

The court tossed the lawsuit after the education department admitted it had no plans for “publication of a final rule prior to the change in presidential administration on January 20, 2025.”

“We have a sense of freedom now, as if the wind is at our back,” said Corey Miller, president of Ratio Christi, a nationwide Christian campus apologetics ministry that had filed a friend-of-the-court brief in defense of the rule with the assistance of Alliance Defending Freedom.

“We can now have confidence that we’ll be treated fairly, inclusively, at the universities, which were largely started by Christians and for Christ,” Miller told The College Fix via email. “All we are asking for is equal freedom under the law. Sometimes we have to give continuing education to university administrators and remind them what the law of the land is.”

https://www.thecollegefix.com/court-ruling-kills-atheist-groups-lawsuit-seeking-to-restrict-college-students-religious-rights/

There are two extremes that the Church must continually face; either of which could prove fatal. Like driving down a road while punching in phone numbers on a cell phone it is easy to lose one’s concentration and veer off the center of the road. I almost hit the curb the other day doing that very thing.

The first extreme is for churches to start criticizing one another. There is no perfect church and we must remember Jesus’ prayer for unity that they all be one. If there was a perfect church it would not be perfect if we joined it. So, to argue about worship styles, music, how often we celebrate the Lord’s Supper, or just how last day events are going to work out I think is hurtful to the church at large.

The other extreme that many Christians have fallen into is that we just mind our own business. We really don’t care what the church down the road teaches. After all, who are we to judge? Our job is to preach the truth and not worry about others. Right? This attitude of non-involvement allows false teachers to pull thousands, yes, millions, into cult and quasi-cult organizations which compromise the gospel which was once for all delivered to the saints.

Therefore, on the one hand we must be careful not to condemn other churches which have a different style of worship and differences in other peripheral beliefs, yet on the other hand, Scripture is clear that we must confront false teachers who compromise the basic fundamental of Christianity—the gospel of Christ.

If you compare the book of Galatians to Paul’s other books, it will become immediately evident that Paul considered the Galatian problem to be of greater magnitude than any other problem he addressed in any of his letters.

First, we note that there are no words of endearment. If one compares, for example, Paul’s letter to the Corinthians we find that he addresses the Corinthians as “sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling” (1 Cor:1:2Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our LORD, both theirs and ours:
See All...). Paul goes on to commend them saying, “you were enriched in Him, in all speech and all knowledge (1 Cor:1:5That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
See All...). “you are not lacking in any gift, awaiting eagerly the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor:1:7So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
See All..., 8). However we know that the church in Corinth was not very “saintly” in their behavior. There were factions, with jealousy and strife (1 Cor. 4). There was “immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife” (1 Cor. 5). The Corinthians were taking one another to court (1 Cor. 6). There was false teaching about marriage (1 Cor. 6) and the list goes on and on.

Yet Paul could call them “saints in Christ Jesus!” Why? Because the problem of the Corinthians was one of behavior, immaturity and misunderstanding and not a blatant compromise of the gospel. When writing to the Galatians, however, there are no words of assurance or endearment. There is no mention of “saints” anywhere in the book of Galatians. There are terms of endearment in all of Paul’s other letters but not here. Why?—Because of the magnitude of the problem! We can justly conclude that for Paul the problem is Galatia was much worse than the situation in Corinth.

Paul comes right to the point and tells the Galatians that they are teaching a false gospel. “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ” (Gal:1:6I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
See All...,7).

The Greek makes it very clear that the “gospel” the Galatian false teachers were promoting was a gospel of a totally different kind from the true gospel of Christ. Paul goes on in the strongest language to condemn anyone who would teach this false gospel. “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!” (Gal:1:8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
See All..., 9)

Paul, why such strong, condemning language? Why?—Because of the magnitude of the problem!

—Dale Ratzlaff (1936–2024, Former Adventist Pastor and Founder, Life Assurance Ministries, for former Adventists).

[TBC: For the full article, here is the link:] https://blog.lifeassuranceministries.org/2025/01/16/do-adventists-preach-another-gospel/

The all-important question is whether the soul and spirit of man, which resided in the body, continue to exist even after the body is dead. If we don’t know how life arose, can we be sure what happens to it when it abandons the body in death? That is the most important question we face. The answer to it all hangs on the question of origins.

Young radicals trashed campuses in 2024 as part of their campaign against the Jewish state. For months, the nation’s colleges and universities saw day to day life disrupted by the anti-Israel activists who harassed and attacked Jewish students, spread anti-Semitic propaganda, glorified terrorism, and assaulted police officers. 

Now, the recently published Young Zionist Voices presents the views of those on the other side of the campus divide: Jewish students and alumni steadfastly opposing the anti-Semitic “Campus Tentifada” and “classic schoolyard bully dynamics,” as Eylon Levy, a former spokesperson for the Israeli government, states in the Foreword to the book. 

The young Jewish activists featured in the book are not a monolith. They represent voices from across the political and religious spectrums within Judaism, and, as Hazony points out, many of the essays “contradict each other” in certain points. Yet their differences bring into focus what unites them: a strong Jewish identity, a burning love of Israel, and a desire to stand up to anti-Semitic bullies, all part of a mission that transcends their political and theological disagreements. 

A common theme across the stories in the collection is how pervasive and virulent anti-Semitism is on campuses. Shabbos Kestenbaum, the Harvard University student who sued his school for its atmosphere of unchecked anti-Semitism, draws parallels between the current campus climate and Kristallnacht–the massive 1938 Nazi pogrom that murdered Jews and burned their businesses, homes, and synagogues to the ground. 

Kestenbaum warns that the anti-Semitism in higher education is “how a Kristallnacht begins.” He writes: “In my time at Harvard, swastikas were drawn in undergraduate dorms, a Jewish student was spat on, an Israeli student was asked to leave class because her nationality made classmates ‘uncomfortable,’ another Israeli was assaulted at the business school, a staff member taunted me with a machete and challenged me to debate the Jewish involvement in the 9/11 terrorist attacks, our hostage posters were defaced almost daily, and professors published antisemitic cartoons without facing discipline.”

A common refrain heard from many anti-Israel activists is that Israelis are “settler-colonialists.” They deny Jews’ historic connection to Eretz Yisrael–the land of Israel–by portraying Zionists as imperialists coming from abroad to dispossess indigenous natives. 

A University of Michigan Diversity, Equity, and inclusion (DEI) staffer named Rachel Dawson, for example, was recently fired after it was discovered she allegedly made comments that Jews–whom she apparently called “wealthy and privileged” people who “control” the university–have “no genetic DNA that would connect them to the land of Israel.”

But Bella Ingber, a New York University Psychology student, would beg to differ. 

Ingber states that Zionism and Judaism are inextricably connected. She mentions a trip to Israel in which she visited Biblical sites: “It seemed that no matter where I walked, where I looked, where I stood, the Jewish historical presence–both physical and spiritual–was there, irrefutable, supported by centuries of evidence.”

https://www.campusreform.org/article/book-review-young-zionist-voices-/27255

[TBC: History, Archeology, and most important of all, Scripture reports the presence of Israel in what is known as Israel. And, it is correctly pointed out that, “While the Romans expelled the majority of Jews in 70 CE, the Jewish people have always had a remnant in the land of Israel. A portion of the Jewish population remained in Israel throughout the years of Jewish exile while the rest settled around the world and became the Jewish diaspora. In particular, Jewish communities existed throughout much of this period in what is known as the Four Holy Cities: Jerusalem, Hebron, Safed (Tzfat), and Tiberias.]