the Soviets would be in a position to
control the major oil supply lines
from the Persian Gulf. Half of the
noncommunist world's supply of oil
moves through the narrow Strait of
Hormuz- the vital chokepoint for oil
moving from the Persian Gulf to the
A rabian Sea. The security and sur–
viva! of the Free World would be
threatened!
Strateglc Surrender
Russia's historie goal of a warm–
water port is now closer than ever to
realization. Her military action in
Afghanistan demonstrates clearly
that when the Soviet Union's inter–
ests are sufficiently involved, she lets
nothing stand in her way. Not "world
public opinion"-and certainly not
the United States.
Once again, Washington has
failed anotber test of national re–
solve--doing Little more than "ex–
pressing concern" over the Kremlin's
use of military force. Only days after
the Soviet -invasion, Washington had
al! but conceded Afghanistan to
Moscow. America's response, "Keep
hands off
Pakistan."
Washington's writing off of Af–
ghanistan may prove, in retrospect,
to have been one of America's major
blunders ending the 1970s. Af–
ghanistan is the pivota! center of
Central Asia.
It
is considered by
sorne geopolitical analysts as the key–
stone of the so-called Rimland re–
gion. This is the designation given by
Yale Professor Nicholas J. Spykman
in 1944 to the strategically important .
territories on the outer rim or border
of the Eurasian landmass.
"Wbo controls the Rimland," Dr.
Spykman declared, "rules Eurasia;
who rules 'Eurasia controls the des–
tinies of the world." He warned
further that no single hostile power
or coalition of powers must be
allowed to domínate the Rimland.
But Washington seems to have
ignored the message.
With Afgh11nistan in the Soviet
orbit, the Kremlin is one step closer
to achieving its age-old goal. And
America-the pride of its power irre–
trievably broken (Leviticus 26: 19)–
is one step farther down the road
toward strategic surrender as a world
power.
o
March 1980
ODeath
(Continued from page 14)
reward of the righteous is expressed
in those physical delights important
to the culture of the prophet Moham–
med's time and situation. l t is hope
for a life better and more fulfilling
than the present one.
To Mohammed, the resurrection
was the conquest of death as "at the
resurrection, the dead will have no
knowledge of the time which has
elapsed since dying; in fact, they will
think that they have just awakened
from a deep sleep." The Quran indi–
cates "that at death the individual
lapsed into a state of complete
unconsciousness, unaware of the de–
cay of his body, and that from this
state he would be suddenly awakened
by the trumpet heralding the Last
Judgment" (S.G. F. Brandon,
Thf!
Judgment of the Dead,
p. 144).
Long before the prophet Moham–
med, the religion of Persia (lran) was
Zoroastrianism. lt, too, was a mono–
theistic religion which apparently
had sorne influence on intertestamen–
tal Judaism. While this religion was
largely displaced by Islam, it still
survives in modern Iran and India.
The resurrection played an impor–
tant part even in Zoroastrian belief.
It
was at thegeneral resurrection that man
was reconciled to God. There was a
judgment followed by reconciliation of
the individual toGod and the renewal of
the entire world. It is expressed in the
following manner in a workwhich seems
to go back to the Avesta, the Zoroas–
trian holy book:
"Ail men become of one voice and
administer loud praise to Auharmazd
[God] and the archangels. Auhar–
mazd completes his work at that
time, and the creatures become so
that it is not necessary to make any
further effort about them.... and all
men become immortal for ever and
everlasting" (Bundahishn 30:23-6).
The Eastern Vlew of l.lfe
The place of the resurrection in
Christianity and Judaism is basically
well known and need not be de–
scribed. But it is also true that
certain religions , especially those of
the Far East, do not have a concept
of resurrection. The main reason for
this is their view of reality. The world
process they see as cyclical- that is,
essentially timeless- with no end or
consummation of world history.
Ther.e is no'awareness of the need for
a resurrection of the dead.
·
With due respect for the insights of
these various religions, one must still
recognize the evidence of modern
science that the world and the universe
are not timeless and eterna!. A cyclical
view of the world and life on 'it is
unsupported by pre5ent knowledge.
Rather, greatest interest and intel–
lectual excitement has surrounded the
supportable view that world history is
leading to a culmination, an ultimate
fulfillment of sorne eterna! plan or
destiny.
It
is from such a basis that
hope springs. Things don ' t have to be
what they are today. They can be
improved. The future will be better
than the present mundane life. A
cosmic plan is being worked out in
history.
To look to the future with opti–
mism is indigenous to human nature,
regardless of whether history and
present world conditions justify this
hopefulness. As contemporary think–
er Wolfhart Pannenberg wrote of
man: "AII other creatures live entire–
ly in the present. . . . All human
interest is concentrated on the future.
lt is not natural for men to live only
for today"
(What ls Man?,
p. 41).
Resurrection Philosophically
Justlfied?
Wolfhart Pannenberg is one of the
most provocative men of recent
times. His grasp of Christianity is an
intellectual one. A theological philos–
opher, he presently holds a chair at
the University of Munich in West
Germany. His statements about
man's awareness of the future have
just been quoted.
Dr. Pannenberg argues further
there is something beyond death, and
the most appropriate metaphor for the
expression of this is the resurrection of
thedead. Converse!y, Dr. Pannenberg
argues that the concept of the immor–
tality of the soul- so popular in many
religious circles- is
inappropriate,
for the following reasons:
The idea of the soul 's immortality
comes from the ancient Greeks.
It
rests on a distinction between body
and soul , a concept which has been
overturned by modern anthropology.
Furthermore, to propose an immortal
37