By GEORGE MERRITT, Associated Press Sunday, December 9, 2007
ARVADA, Colo. -- A gunman killed two staff members at a missionary training center early Sunday after being told he couldn't spend the night, and about 12 hours later four people were shot at a busy megachurch in Colorado Springs.
Colorado Springs police Lt. Fletcher Howard said a suspect had been detained in the shootings at the New Life Church, but a church member who was locked down at the church Sunday afternoon said a security guard had shot and killed the gunman. Authorities in Arvada, a Denver suburb about 65 miles north, said no one had been captured in the shootings there. It was not immediately known whether the shootings were related, but Arvada authorities said they were sharing information with Colorado Springs investigators. The program that runs mission training in Arvada has a small office at the New Life Church's World Prayer Center. A gunman in a black trench coat and a high-powered rifle entered the church's main foyer about 1 p.m. and began shooting, according to the church member, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the police department had asked that it release all information. The church's 11 a.m. service had recently ended, and hundreds of people were milling about when the gunman opened fire. Nearby were parents picking up their children from the nursery. The gunman was killed by a member of the church's armed security staff, the source said. Four people were shot, and the source did not know whether the shooter was one of the four. A SWAT team was searching the building for an explosive device, but the source could not confirm any details. Howard, who had characterized the shootings as occurring outside the church, declined to say whether the suspect had been shot. Three people were taken to Penrose Community Hospital in Colorado Springs, where they were listed in critical, fair and good condition, said hospital spokeswoman Amy Sufak. The first shooting happened at about 12:30 a.m. at the Youth With a Mission center in Arvada, a Denver suburb, police spokeswoman Susan Medina said. A man and a woman were killed and two men were wounded, Medina said. All four were staff members with the center, said Paul Filidis, a Colorado Springs-based spokesman with Youth With a Mission. Arvada Police Chief Don Wick said the suspect spent several minutes speaking with people inside the dorm. Peter Warren, director of Youth With a Mission Denver, said the man asked whether he could spend the night. Several youths called on Tiffany Johnson, the center's director of hospitality. "The director of hospitality was called. That's when he opened fire," Warren said. Johnson, 26, was killed. Warren said he didn't know whether any of the students or staff knew the gunman. "We don't know why" he came to the dormitory, Warren said. Witnesses told police that the gunman was a 20-year-old white male, wearing a dark jacket and skull cap, who left on foot. He may have glasses or a beard. Police with dogs searched the area through the night, and residents of nearby homes were notified by reverse 911 to be on the lookout. Medina said residents were asked to look out their windows for any tracks left in the snow during the night. About 4 inches of snow had fallen in the area in the past day. New Life Senior Pastor Brady Boyd said security at the church had been beefed up after the shootings in Arvada, but he did not elaborate and did not take questions. "Fortunately for New Life Church, we had a plan in place that was put into play immediately," he said. "Our prayers right now are for the people that were injured and their families. New Life was founded by the Rev. Ted Haggard, who was fired last year after a former male prostitute alleged he had a three-year cash-for-sex relationship with him. Haggard, then the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, admitted committing undisclosed "sexual immorality." The New Life church is one of Colorado's largest with about 10,000 members. In addition to Johnson, killed in Arvada was Philip Crouse, 23. Youth With a Mission said Johnson was from Minnesota and Crouse was from Alaska. The missionary center identified the wounded as Dan Griebenow, 24, of South Dakota, and Charlie Branch, 22, whose hometown wasn't immediately known. One of the men was in critical condition, and the other was stable, police said. About 45 people were evacuated from the Youth with a Mission dormitory and moved to an undisclosed location. The missionary center is on the grounds of the Faith Bible Chapel. Cheril Morrison, wife of chapel pastor George Morrison, said Crouse had just hung up Christmas lights at her home and that Johnson was "an amazingly beautiful person." Mimi Martin, who lives near the center, said she received the warning call at about 9 a.m. warning neighbors to keep their doors and windows locked. "Why would anybody want to hurt those kids?" Martin said. Darv Smith, director of a Youth With a Mission center in Boulder, said people ranging from their late teens to their 70s undergo a 12-week course that prepares them to be missionaries. He said the center trains about 300 people a year. Filidis said staffers are usually former missionaries themselves and that the "mercy ministries" performed by trainees include orphanage work. He said he didn't know where the group being trained in Arvada was going to be sent. Youth With a Mission was started in 1960 and now has 1,100 locations with 16,000 full-time staff, Smith said. The Arvada center was founded in 1984. ------ Contributing to this report were AP Religion Writer Eric Gorski and writer Colleen Slevin in Denver, and writer Judith Kohler in Colorado Springs.
Carl Strock THE VIEW FROM HERE Turn the other cheek? Not today Carl Strock can be reached at 395-3085 or by e-mail at carlstrock@dailygazette.com.
One group of people who never fail to crack me up are Christians. Take the bloody episode the other day in Colorado Springs, at the New Life Church, a megachurch founded by Ted Haggard, if you remember him. What happened? Some crackpot walked into the church firing a gun, and an armed security guard mowed him down. Very well, you say. But then the security guard gave thanks to God for keeping her hand steady, and the new head pastor, who replaced Haggard, praised her for saving a great many lives, which she probably did. These are the same people who insist that the Bible is “the authoritative Word of God … inspired, infallible and inerrant” (according to their Web site), presumably including the clear and much-quoted instruction from Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior, to “love your enemies” and to “turn the other cheek.” The same people who beat others over the head with this lofty ethical teaching and insist that without it we would descend to the level of brutes. The same people who make such a big fuss about Christian compassion and Christian love. But lo: When someone comes in the door shooting at them, they do just what us heathens do — they shoot back. And they take the precaution of engaging an armed guard, too, when trouble is in the air, to make sure they’re ready, which they did in this case. The hilarious thing is, the discrepancy doesn’t faze them. And if you question them, as some bloggers have been doing, they will simply dig up a bloodthirsty quote from the Old Testament about arming yourself against your enemies and be as pleased as if they were the very footsoldiers of a supernatural being, which of course they think they are. Also, I’ve noticed, they are ready in any emergency to credit their supernatural being with whatever turns out in their favor while conveniently ignoring the rest of the story. Thus, in the Colorado Springs case, they were full of admiration for the power of God in steadying the hand of the security guard, but it apparently didn’t occur to them to wonder who steadied the crackpot attacker’s hand, allowing him to slaughter four innocents. This little problem, and others, popped up in readers’ responses to the story in the Denver Post, which I have been perusing online. “My problem is how in the heck God helped her kill this guy when He could have prevented it in the first place,” one reader wondered. Christians are impervious to this sort of analysis. If God could help the guard shoot the attacker (apparently her bullets didn’t actually kill him; one of his own bullets did), couldn’t he have simply stopped the attacker ahead of time? And if he is responsible for one steady-handed shooting, isn’t he also responsible for the others? “I think if we were able to understand God, he certainly wouldn’t be powerful enough to save us,” offered one budding theologian on the Denver Post’s Web site. They are the most self-satisfied people in the world. Look at the New Life Church’s Web site, under Statement of Faith, and you will find this serving of gruel: “Heaven is the eternal dwelling place for all believers in the gospel of Jesus Christ”— meaning them. “After living one life on earth, the unbelievers” — meaning the rest of us — “will be judged by God and sent to hell where they will be eternally tormented with the devil and the fallen angels.” Can a people complacent enough to believe such a thing be troubled by the discrepancy between shooting an attacker and simultaneously insisting that one ought to turn the other cheek? I don’t believe they can.
But then the security guard gave thanks to God for keeping her hand steady, and the new head pastor, who replaced Haggard, praised her for saving a great many lives, which she probably did.
Kind of like steroid filled sports player box of rocks praying to God to win a game........
As for turning the other cheek....I think it means not to take on the 'bad feelings' of another person and becoming lost in their world view......like ignoring people like Britney Spears, Manson, Pink, Hillary Clinton etc.....they shouldn't be studied so much that they take up so much space in our heads......
Were Jim Morrison, Jimmy Hendrix, Janice Joplin etc artists????-----they were freakin' druggies with wacked out minds....do we study them?--you betcha.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Any time anybody puts ANYTHING to their beliefs, the press in general calls it a litmus test for every single person of the same belief all around the world. And not just Christians. Remember what the media was saying 9/12/01? Essentially that all Muslims were the worst thing. Now, it's the Christians. Now, they usually will hang out when it is a Christian and give it more play to show the evil within the Christian Church, but they always show the horrible things.
The media will always show the horrible things about religion cause they must feel that if they print the positive side than it will be assumed that they are promoting it..GOD FORBID!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
OK, Carl, I will take the bait (Dec. 13 column, “Turn the other cheek? Not today”): Once again, Strock has challenged the Christian faith, this time in regard to the recent shootings in Colorado Springs. He takes issue with the security guard’s claim that God steadied her hand when she tried to stop the shooter. He sees an inconsistency in the belief that God would help her aim, but not stop the shooting from happening in the first place. God gives us the freedom to choose how we will behave. The gunman did not want God to stop him, he chose to act the way he did. The security guard did ask God to help her. Ultimately, God did intervene, and topped the gunman through the actions of the guard who sought his help. God gives us the freedom to choose to follow him — or not. Strock also questions the Bible’s instruction to “turn the other cheek.” This teaching is given in the context of seeking revenge. We are not to retaliate against another when they seek to hurt us. The difference is motivation. The security guard did not aim her gun for the purpose of “payback,” but to protect others from harm. MARY BETH KNAPP Princetown
The media is just a pendulum.....we just tend to say "they said this they said that." Who cares what they say.....it's the sheep that are to look up and take heed.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Re the Dec. 13 Carl Strock column, “Turn the other cheek? Not today”: Mr. Strock failed to grasp what Jesus meant concerning “turning the other cheek.” This passage in the Sermon on the Mount has to do with responding to personal insult. The use of force by the security guard in the Colorado church shooting had nothing to do with personal affront. Force was used to preserve life. Justice is not a heathen idea that is incongruent with the ethics of Christianity. To assert such a viewpoint is to misunderstand men and women of faith who serve in the military, in law enforcement and on the bench in the judicial system — who may be called upon to take a life to preserve life. Justice and love are both integral to the Christian faith. It would have been selfi sh, and not loving, for the guard to turn a deaf ear or stand idly by when it was in her power to stop the bloodshed. At the moment of the shooting, it was not a question of acting contrary to one’s faith (as Strock suggested), but rather a question of being courageous or cowardly. Thankfully, for the sake of others, she was brave. WAYNE BRANDOW Galway The writer is pastor of the Bible Baptist Church of Galway.
I think what Mr.Strock was trying to show is that other religions have views about life sacred that would be more important to them and when they tout them as "God did this for me because I am(whatever religion)" , the Christians blow them out of the water with the likes of"They dont know any better"(what is better, other than what you already know) or "They were trampled because God thought they were evil"(we dont even know what a sex offender is)....etc etc......
As for turning the other cheek---it just means keeping the world out of my heart and head---people are different and I can barely know myself much less a crazed irrational(to my outside understanding) shooter.....I believe Tom Cruise is more right than wrong about psychology/psychiatry and the drugs/therapies that evolve out of not really knowing another mans heart/mind........
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
It’s hard to act like Jesus with a shooter on the rampage
As a Christian woman not affiliated with a church, I can certainly understand Carl Strock’s derision of Christians in our age of megachurches (now with armed guards!) as the face of Christianity. In his Dec. 13 column, he observes, “When someone comes in the door shooting at them, they do just what us heathens do — they shoot back.” Yes, love of life and self overrides everything in a moment of crisis (not to mention daily living). Self-preservation is a powerful instinct, and we are all capable of unthinkable actions given the right circumstances. Christians should be humbled by this fact, realizing the war is not with other people but our own flesh and baser instincts. How unlike Jesus, who in his moment of crisis, implored Peter to put down his sword and was led away like a lamb to slaughter. As Christians, we profess to believe Jesus is alive and living in us through the Holy Spirit. But in order for this to happen, we have to “die to self” so the Holy Spirit can manifest itself. Until people can see Christ and not Christians, this dance of hypocrisy and derision will persevere. I have found it to be a full-time endeavor to die to self. Any transformation has been the fruit of a quiet life of solitude, prayer, contemplation and study. It’s difficult to “look away from all that districts unto Jesus” (Hebrews 12:2) in our modern day churches with their building funds, prosperity preaching and political agendas. I take comfort from Emily Dickinson, who was once described as the patron saint of biblical commentary in the poetic mode: I know that He exists, Somewhere — in Silence — He has hid his rare life From our gross eyes. There, but for the grace of God, go I. ROBIN BUNNELL Esperance
Carl Strock THE VIEW FROM HERE Turn the other cheek? Look again Carl Strock can be reached at 395-3085 or by e-mail at carlstrock@dailygazette.com.
Well, the Christians are coming at me, so I suppose I ought to keep my head down, but I will recklessly stick it up one more time and see what happens. I said a week ago it was funny that the fundamentalist believers out in Colorado Springs were thanking God for steadying the hand of their security guard, allowing her to shoot down a deranged attacker, while at the same time professing belief in the “inerrancy” of the Bible, which includes a clear injunction from Jesus to turn the other cheek. It wasn’t the first time I had such a thought. I have it every time I hear believers assert that the Bible is perfectly true right down to the most fabulous particulars about how many animals sailed on Noah’s Ark. Why aren’t they protesting our war against Islamic terrorists? I wonder. Aren’t we supposed to turn the other cheek to those who strike us first? Isn’t that part of the Bible just as “inerrant” as the creation tale? The incident at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs gave me the opportunity to bring it up. A guy shot and killed two church members at a camp some distance from the church, then traveled to the church, shot and killed two more people outside and then busted inside, whereupon a security guard, a church volunteer, shot him three times and stopped him, and thanked God for helping her. I asked, isn’t there just the tiniest contradiction there? Well, how the believers huffed and puffed at the suggestion. “A bigoted old man,” one reader called me in an e-mail, promising never to read my column again. But what I liked best were the explanations. My favorite appeared as a letter in this newspaper a few days ago, from a Baptist minister. He confidently declared that I “failed to grasp what Jesus meant.” He said the instruction to turn the other cheek “has to do with responding to personal insult” and that shooting back at an attacker is simply “a question of being courageous or cowardly.” To contend otherwise, he said, is “to misunderstand men and women of faith who serve in the military,” which I thought was especially funny. Another writer declared that the turn-the-other-cheek teaching “is given in the context of seeking revenge.” She said, “the difference is motivation … the security guard did not aim her gun for the purpose of ‘payback’ but to protect others from harm,” therefore it was OK. Isn’t it wonderful how they know these things? And how do they know them? Well, I suppose the same way Thomas Aquinas or Reinhold Niebuhr or any other theologian has known what he claims to have known — by closing their eyes, turning their face heavenward and receiving divine guidance. It’s not something you can look up. What’s funny is that the fundamentalist believers are not interested in inventive explanations or rationalizations when it comes to the old creation tales. They insist on taking those at face value. But when it comes to a clear and unambiguous ethical instruction, it’s something else. Oh, no, they say, Jesus didn’t mean it that way, he meant something else, which I, in my pathetic ignorance, fail to grasp. Well, students, here’s the relevant passage from the book of Matthew, chapter 5, King James Version: “Ye have heard that it hath been said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.” And from the book of Luke, chapter 6: “Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you. Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also.” Do you see anything in either rendering that allows you to gun down a malefactor who is coming at you? Do you see anything to indicate that it has only to do with personal insult? Anything to indicate that motivation is crucial, so that if you shoot someone not for payback but to protect others it’s OK? Anything to suggest that serving in the military and going to war is the right thing to do? Anything to support the contention that courage vs. cowardice is the crucial point. I don’t. Not at all. In fact, the exact opposite. Why don’t these supposedly Bible-believing Christians accept the words of Jesus for what they plainly are? I guess for the same reason that the rest of the world doesn’t accept them: They’re impractical, that’s all. That’s why they explain them away, which they have been doing since the days of St. Augustine, at least, coming up with umpteen fanciful reasons why that particular teaching and many other passages in the Bible must mean something else — which, however, they are not prepared to do with the childish creation stories. So they’re an entertaining bunch, these Christians, and I get the biggest kick out of them. In response to some readers, I do understand that not all Christians are biblical literalists who squirm out of the passages that inconvenience them, but I use the label the way the squirmy literalists use it themselves, calling themselves “Christians” as if they had a monopoly on the religion. I use it with a touch of irony, I hope. And I feel free to do this, whereas I don’t do it with other equally nonsensical religions, because I think they have opened the door to it by trying to force their beliefs on the rest of us and by constantly beating their breasts in public and making a big show of their faith, including at the highest levels of government. When I hear a candidate for president asserting belief in the inerrancy of the Bible, and when the president himself appoints people to high office based on such faith, I think it’s fair enough for a lowly gadfly like me to poke good-natured fun at them and point out a few inconsistencies. The injunction to turn the other cheek, paired with unabashed support of military and other violence in self-defense, is just one of those inconsistencies. Don’t get me going on the whole list, or we’ll be here all night.
Re Dec. 20 Carl Strock column, “Turn the other cheek? Look again”: I have to say that although I believe Strock is an intelligent man, his childish behavior is beginning to get out of control, and is really starting to offend the majority of Gazette readers — including me. How many times does Strock have to attempt to pick apart Christianity and make all Christians out to be idiots? We get the point — he thinks Christians are stupid, ignorant and blind to the truth. Guess what? I think the same about him, so please, stop it! I have never heard Strock slander any other religion in his column, so it’s not as if he is fairly beating up anyone who believes in a higher power — he purposely picks out only Christians. Need I remind him that Christians founded this country? The original Pilgrims came here to escape religious prosecution, and now we are here dealing with it every day from people like him! From now on, I would appreciate it if Strock keeps his negative religious views to himself. JEREMY KERGEL Ballston Lake
Re Carl Strock’s Dec. 20 column, “Turn the other cheek? Look again”: It amazes me how frequently Carl Stock mounts his journalistic steed in an all-out campaign to debunk Christianity. With his lance poised for the joust, he rushes headlong with fury to knock his opponent to the ground. But those of us on sidelines watch with amusement because, when the dust settles, we find his lance thrust strategically through the heart of a straw man. Of course, this takes no intellectual muscle and gives him the illusion of victory. While he complains against Christians who take the Bible literally, he goes on himself to read “turn the other cheek” as literally (and thus as incorrectly) as those he complains about. So what are we to make of this? In addition, he cavalierly dismisses the two “detractors” who attempt to set him straight on the matter by suggesting that they got their information directly from God. Maybe, but I suspect they looked it up. And despite Stock’s protestations to the contrary, he can look this up too. I did. A little investigation will show that in ancient Near Eastern societies, a slap on the cheek with the back of the hand expressed a severe form of public dishonor. Thus, by “turning the other cheek” Jesus tells his disciples to forgo retaliation and forfeit payback in deference to showing restraint toward the accuser. Strock’s literal interpretation takes none of this into account. Hence, his complaint against Christians who see no inconsistency between “turning the other cheek,” which discourages personal vengeance and “protecting the innocent,” which encourages public justice, strikes me as pure bluster. No inconsistency exists, and to say so merely invites another joust with the straw man. JEFF KIMBLE Scotia
Is Jeremy Kergel’s Dec. 26 letter, “Time for Strock to quit bashing Christians,” a thinly-veiled call for the censoring or outright silencing of Carl Strock when he bashes Christians? Since over 80 percent of the population of this country identifies itself as some form of “Christian,” preserving and respecting the individual religious and other liberties of the rest of our citizens, (including the 30 million of us who have no religion at all) is vital. Carl Strock’s writings are a healthy reflection of a diverse, dynamic and open society, with constitutionally protected rights of free press, expression and full religious liberty. To request he cease and desist writing on any topic because it may offend someone or some group is intolerant and no less than un-American. The remedy to speech you disagree with is more speech — not less. This was the vision of our founders (who by the way, were not all Christians, but in fact mostly deists). Keep up the uncompromising rationality, Carl! TOM KELLER Clifton Park
Logged
