The Zephyr is to be commended for its objectivity and fairness in its views concerning Christianity as well as other religions. I am well aware how open minded you must be to express such a position concerning all religions with such a lack of prejudice and personal bias.

I have noted how you give all points of views space in the Zephyr, without modification or constraints, regardless of how much many of these positions are against your personal beliefs and practices. I would like to go on record and say, that not once in all 75 issues of the Zephyr that carried my column, "Bible Truths vs Bible Myths", did you or any one else on the Zephyr, make any suggestion or effort to edit, modify, or censure anything that I wrote. I am well aware there were probably many times when you may have disagreed with what I wrote. It is too bad other papers don't follow your lead.

I wish to commend you on the stellar job you did on the front page editorial of the 4th of July issue of the Zephyr, entitled, "The Founding Fathers: A distinction Between Morality and Religion". You did a good job on your research. Like myself, you made a definite effort to keep your personal views from interfering with the facts. The only hint of your personal view was your use of the term "Christian right" in the first sentence. No one can fault you for that, it is your personal right!

I also agree with your decision to encourage others to submit their positions, whatever they may be. As for the column, "Bible Truths vs Bible Myths", I will gladly go you one better. Instead of writing regularly, I will agree to relieve the Zephyr from any appearance of endorsement to the column and only write a column entry when I feel it appropriate. I will try to limit my other inputs to the critique of other writers which may present some premise or point of view which does not agree with the scriptures in the Holy Bible.

I do wish to apologize to you and all the readers, if any of my comments caused anyone to feel that I have persecuted them. That was definitely not my intent. I will not, however, apologize for any caustic words I used in my responses to those deceivers of the innocent and unlearned who were being made to believe things that were in direct contradiction to the teachings of the Bible, for the sole purpose of making them victims of scurrilous frauds.

The column, "Bible Truths vs Bible Myths", as indicated by the title was never intended to do any more than make the obvious comparisons between "What saith the Bible Scriptures", and what "False teachers of Christianity" were claiming the scriptures were saying.

The column was never about me or what I believe, concerning the scriptures. Those "False Prophets, deceivers, and spirits of the Anti-Christ" attempted to make the column about me so they could divert the readers attention to me instead of the facts presented in the column. I hope they did not succeed. I give the readers more credit than that. I am sure they could see through the attempts of these predators of the innocent, and in the future they will read the Bible for themselves and look at all positions before claiming the wrong beliefs.

"The Constitution of the United States guarantees all individuals the free exercise of religion of their choice, and to worship as they choose.

The Constitution of the United States does not allow any individual, church, group, organization, denomination, sect, or cult, to intentionally coerce, persuade, or deceive any individual to believe any false premise, in the guise of religion, for the purpose of financial gain or other benefit to any such individual, church, group, organization, denomination, sect, or cult.

To do so, constitutes an act of fraud, and is subject to the laws of every state of these United States of America. Enforcement of the punishment for the breach of such act of fraud is the duty and responsibility of the law enforcement agencies of every state of these United States."

­­Arnold Gordon

Last Modified: July 11, 1996

Back to the Zephyr home page.Send us E