Wow, check this out, 1.5 million!
We’d feel it was a good turnout if 17 people turned up in the UK. 
Reminds me of the scripture from Matthew:
“For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst.”
What about one and a half million?
Previous related Posts:-
Breaking news: Yaakov Teitel arrested in Ami Ortiz case
Potential breakthrough in Ami Ortiz case
This is a cross-post from Yeze over at the Rosh Pina Project. Please ensure to have a look at the additional links at the bottom of this article, for more analysis and Internet links from Yeze.
After you’ve read Judah’s excellent post on the significance of the arrest of Yaakov Teitel, there are a few more points we may to consider.
Why did Teitel act the way he did towards believers in Yeshua?
Firstly, this is no ordinary person. Teitel committed his first murder in 1997.
Teitel was seemingly motivated by hollow religious zeal.
From The Guardian:
Teitel’s lawyer, Adi Keidar, said his client “in the best-case scenario is mentally unstable”. He described him as “a man that is motivated by false thoughts, that see himself as an emissary of the lord”.
Teitel thought he was fighting a noble cause.
Secondly, this goes beyond Teitel’s attitude towards the Ortiz family, or even Messianic Jews. Teitel was an ideologue of the most simplistic variety. He was bigoted towards all believers in Jesus, swallowing the vilest of lies about what motivates Christians.
Haaretz reports:
Tytell told the police that on April 20, 2007, he placed a bomb bear the monastery at Beit Jimal near Beit Shemesh, which injured a Palestinian tractor driver because he “heard that the monks there were enticing Jewish children with candy.”
And why attack the Ortiz family?
On March 20, 2008, Tytell allegedly put an explosive charge in Purim candy he placed near the home of the Ortiz family in Ariel. A 15-year-old boy was seriously injured in the attack. Tytell reportedly said the family were “missionaries who intended to entrap weak Jews.”
Fearing that Christians were overtaking Israel and manipulating Jews, Teitel decided to take matters into his own hands.
His actions were the product of a worldview of despair, in which rational debate is cast aside in favour of brashness and combat.
Treating Messianic Jews as deceivers and tricksters, Teitel became the ultimate deceiver.
Teitel deceived Ami Ortiz with a gift disguised as a Purim package.
Teitel deceived Israel’s authorities, living for years in freedom as past victims lay dead.
Teitel deceived his own family, and ultimately I suspect, Teitel deceived himself into thinking that he was in some way doing God’s will.
The case of Yaakov Teitel should serve as a warning as to how far people can take their prejudices. In this case, violent words have bred violent actions – a fact acknowledged by Israel’s Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu. And there are surely more Yaakov Teitels out there, plotting domestic terrorism.
May the Israeli public heed Netanyahu’s words, may Ami continue to heal from his wounds, and may such violence never rear its ugly head again.
Further links and analysis from Yeze – Rosh Pina Project:-
Tablet on Teitel – A helpful summary of articles.
Ten Unanswered Questions about Yaakov Teitel and the Ami Ortiz case
Issues faced by Messianic Jews – We are not monsters, demons or frauds! We are human beings:
If you have stumbled onto this blog please do take a few moments to read the following piece:- Echoes of GodAbsolutely first class observations from Cranmer, on the upcoming big-screen biopic of the prophet Muhammad….that…..err….won’t actually feature Mohammed?
‘Mohammed’ – The Second Greatest Story Ever Told
It is reported that there is to be a $150m Hollywood blockbuster biopic about the life of Mohammed.
About time.
Barrie Osborne, part of the Oscar-winning team behind The Matrix and the Lord of the Rings trilogy, says the new production is ‘an international epic production aimed at bridging cultures. The film will educate people about the true meaning of Islam’.
But no actor will be in line for an Oscar, because no actor will be playing the Prophet. The film is financially backed by the Qatar-based production company Alnoor Holdings, ‘who have installed the Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi (not a joke) to oversee all aspects of the shoot’. So, in accordance with Islamic law, Mohammed will not actually be depicted on screen. They will ‘shoot around’ him (so to speak).
Talk about Hamlet without the Prince.
The film purports to ‘shed light on the Prophet’s life since before his birth to his death’ and aspires to ‘highlight the humanity of Prophet Muhammad’, but it will exclude the protagonist from his own life story and thereby keep his humanity in the darkness. This will not educate people about ‘the true meaning of Islam’, for all that does not accord with Al-Qaradawi’s personal beliefs and quranic interpretation will be vetoed. He already appears to have set aside the historical Shi’a tradition that Mohammed may indeed be portrayed, and that such a portrayal does not amount to the graven image of idolatry. One wonders how he will handle Mohammed’s sexual proclivities, his betrothal to the six-year-old Aisha, his ‘war crimes‘, his exhortation to murder Christians and Jews, or his generous offer to the vanquished of conversion to Islam or death – all of which have historical quranic authority or a long heritage of hadith validity.
How on earth can a biopic exclude the bios?
At least Jesus is always portrayed as being fully human, even though he is fully God. But then Cecil B DeMille and Franco Zeffirelli had no fear of death threats and no expectation of fatal sieges.
Although there is no chalcedonian dispute going on about the divinity of Mohammed, the reverence and respect accorded to him by the western media constitutes elevation to that status: the Christian blasphemy laws may have been abolished, but there has emerged an unwritten blasphemy law to fill the spiritual void which protects Allah, Mohammed and the Qur’an. The Hadith of Al-Qaradawi will be of no assistance at all in helping people to understand either Islam or the mortal prophet revered by a billion followers. Only an Enlightenment perspective could illuminate the kuffar.
‘Mohammed Superstar’ this will not be.
Further Internet Links:-
Mohammed the Movie without Mohammed
If you have stumbled onto this blog please do take a few moments to read the following piece:- Echoes of GodThis is a lovely little article, lifted from Mere Comments and sums up the man-made global warming hysteria for me personally. Hat-tip Stand Firm.
Related post on global warming from this morning:-
If you have stumbled onto this blog please do take a few moments to read the following piece:- Echoes of GodSince the “fixes” for man-made global warming are rather costly and desperate, if there is any question about the reality of man-made global warming, it would seem wise to slow down and have more investigation and debate. But not so in Great Britain, according to Christopher Booker in the Daily Telegraph: (Thanks to David Mills for the link).
We have “less than 50 days” to save the planet, declared Gordon Brown last week, in yet another desperate bid to save the successor to the Kyoto treaty, which is due to be agreed in Copenhagen in six weeks’ time. But no one has put the reality of the situation more succinctly than Prof Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technolgy, one of the most distinguished climatologists in the world, who has done as much as anyone in the past 20 years to expose the emptiness of the IPCC’s claim that its reports represent a “consensus” of the views of “the world’s top climate scientists”.
In words quoted on the cover of my new book, Prof Lindzen wrote: “Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly exaggerated computer predictions combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.”
The article linked above goes into more details about why there are (growing) serious questions about alleged global warming.
Why is it that radical legislation is preceded with pleas and warnings that we have to act before it’s too late? For example, our American Congress’s profligate spending earlier this year to “save” our economy in the nick of time. (We’re still waiting for a sign of salvation.) The power-brokers write bills hundreds even more than a thousand pages thick, with fine print and all sorts of additions and caveats and regulatory sleights of hand, bills that legislators do not even read let alone understand before they vote on them. But without delay!–This must be done and there is no time to debate or read the bills–you must “trust us” with this mission or we die!
Well, there are times when there is no time to lose, as when firemen show up in a haze of smoke to show you the way out of a burning building “Now”. You have to trust them to get you down or lead you through the house to safety. But we have some level of confidence in them because they, after all, have a track record we know about. (Congress has a track record, too.)
God the Savior doesn’t operate in haste. He’s been very patient with the human race. God took a long time preparing a people, instilling in them a sense of what the real dangers are, slowly teaching and revealing a pattern of death and life, sin and holiness, then writ large at the right time in the Person of His Son. The legislation of sin overturned in the Cross is not hard for average Joe’s to understand–one of them signed on while Jesus was still on the Cross. He gives us time, sometimes a full lifetime of many years to figure it all out and vote, finally, Yea, on the Fix of the Cross and the Resurrection. To be sure, Today is the Day of Salvation, and it is the acceptable hour. Best to act now. But tomorrow and tomorrow, as long as you are around, the invitation stands. It has no expiration date earlier than your own.
As to the fear of global warming, we should accept it in a way, but not Al Gore’s global warming but The Global Warming: “I came to cast fire upon the earth; and would that it were already kindled!” What does that mean? Well, I trust Him on that one, and that’s the one to worry about, and Kyoto won’t be able to touch it.
Well here is a rather negative take on the emergence of the ‘virtual church’ written by Todd Matocha for Evangelicals Now
I don’t agree with most of his comments frankly (but I do accept some), and recently wrote a short piece on this blog relating to the rise of the ‘virtual church’, which I will regurgitate, as I am feeling rather lazy at the moment.
[.....] If we as Christians are to ‘go’ to where folks ‘are at’, then it would seem prudent to go online. I saw a recent study (can’t remember the source) that stated that our younger generation is more likely to go online than switch on the TV now.
Christian forums seem to me to be the fasted growing ‘virtual churches’ and the irony is that you can end up knowing the folks on the forum better than the folks in your own ‘brick n mortar’ church, largely because you spend more conversation time with the folks online. There is something to be said for the mystery of Christians being together in spirit, even though not physically together. The written word has always traditionally been a major means of communication between Christians (geographically and through time) and let’s face it, even God Himself works through the written word.
I’m not saying that Christians should ‘forsake the gathering together of themselves’, but I believe that for good or for bad, the virtual church is on the up and up. I personally spent time with lovely Christians that I met on a Christian forum and I pretty much knew them even before I met them physically.
There is of course dangers in the virtual church. Internet trolls being one and of course other ‘Christians’. In the virtual world folks can be emboldened to be nastier than they otherwise would be in the flesh, but on the flip side, the anonymity can also give rise to an opportunity for honesty and dispense with the need for the ‘holier than thou’ mask that seems so necessary at times in the physical church.
I know some Christians that run a website for Christians with mental health issues, which is something usually very misunderstood and badly handled in the physical church. As part of the website they have a forum for Christian folks to gather together with others for whom mental health impacts their lives. This has provided a welcome sanctuary for these folks to meet with and chat to others who understand. The virtual church can indeed provide a welcome relief for those who do have problems attending church, or are generally misunderstood and sidelined by the church.
Like most things in this world, new developments can be a blessing or a curse, depending on who uses them and how they are used.
Here is the article from Evangelicals Now
There is a rapidly growing movement promoting the idea of an exclusively online church. This movement is becoming more organised and influential. In March of this year a group committed to the development of online churches met in London. The Church of England and the Methodist Church have already launched versions of online church. However, the push is especially strong within the world of Christian bloggers.
A blog is a website that operates like a journal. The host of the site posts short articles and online visitors can add comments. Blogs encourage conversation and engage participants in dialogue.
In his provocatively-titled work, We know more than our pastors: Why bloggers are the vanguard of the participatory church1, Tim Bednar sees the increasing popularity of blogging as ‘an impending sea change for pastors and the church’. He continues, ‘We are a new kind of preacher, theologian, pundit, apologist and churchgoer. The phenomenon of blogging is transforming our expectations of church’.
Bednar and bloggers who share his convictions want a church shaped by the technology of our age. According to Bednar, it is a ‘new kind of church created by believers transformed by their use of the internet. Their so-called virtual life is changing them and, in turn, they will change the church.’
Behind demand for change
Bednar argues that the invention of the internet necessitates a rethinking of how we ‘do’ church. Is this really the case?
Sure, we have greater resources to spread the Christian message, but the basic forms of communication known to mankind are the same now as they were in any given age: oral, sign and written. These forms of communication were available to Moses, Paul and Calvin. What has changed is the means of communication. Moses communicated the written word on stone tablets, Paul used scrolls and Calvin promoted reform with printed books. Now we use electronic means, communicating instantaneously and globally. We communicate better, but not differently.
What is it about electronic communication that demands a change in the way we think about the church? The invention of the printing press did not lead the Reformers to rethink the church. Instead, it drove them back to the origins of the church. They were not interested in the emergence of a new church, but in repentance and reformation in an existing one. The great need of our day is a return to apostolic ecclesiology. Ignorance of the biblical doctrine of the church, not advancements in technology, it seems, is driving the demand for change.
Desiring a sub-human church
Apart from leaving out people who are not, and perhaps never could be, computer literate, one characteristic of online church is that it restricts physical communion and fellowship. By its very nature it is devoid of people getting together physically in one location and having real face-to-face contact. This is a great weakness.
God created us body and soul. According to the Dutch theologian, Herman Bavinck: ‘Man has a “spirit”, but that spirit is psychically organised and must, by virtue of its nature, inhabit a body. Hence, man’s body is first (if not temporally, then logically) formed from the dust of the earth and then the breath of life is breathed into him. He is called “Adam” after the ground from which he is formed.’2 This is basic to the Christian understanding of humanity. Many of those promoting cyberchurch tend to emphasise the spiritual aspect to the neglect of the physical.
What implications does this doctrine have on the church? Primarily, it dictates how we are to worship God. Worship involves the whole man, not just the spiritual part. Thus, true worship must be offered to God in body and soul (Mark 12.29-30).
Further, online church restricts us helping and serving one another in a real, physical way. Jesus could not have washed the disciples’ feet or served them at table over the internet (John 13.5, Luke 22.27).
Sensual in the sacraments
Christian worship involves the whole man, body and soul. It also appeals to the physical senses. The worshipper hears the word sung, prayed and preached. In addition, Christ gave the church a visible and tangible word. In the sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, the senses of touch, smell and sight are engaged. The whole man is fully participating in worship.
In The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin wrote: ‘Wherever we see the Word of God purely preached and heard, and the sacraments administered according to Christ’s institution, there, it is not to be doubted, a church of God exists’ (Book iv, ch.1. Sect.9). Does cyberchurch offer this?
It would not be surprising to hear of an online church offering virtual communion, but is that a sacrament administered according to Christ’s institution? The very purpose of the sacraments is that they are physical, tangible and concrete. They are sensual signs that confirm, support and nurture our faith.
Authority of the local church
Another common feature of the online Christian community is the emphasis on the universal church to the neglect of the local church. Cyberchurches boast of having members from all over the world. The local church is marginalised; it is all about globalisation.
Closely connected to the denial of the local church is an aversion to church authority structures. Bednar wrote: ‘The dominant theme to emerge from my research is that bloggers value this medium because they can participate without being filtered by church structures or even doctrinal impurity. We have grown tired of pastors being the gatekeepers’. He seems to think bloggers value being able to say what they want to whom they want without accountability. This may be the biggest problem facing Christian bloggers.
New Testament writers speak highly of the local church and local church elders. According to apostolic practice recorded in Acts, churches were set up in cities and towns throughout the Roman world. These local churches were in some way ‘lacking’ until elders were appointed (see Acts 14.21-23; Titus 1.5). Paul speaks of elders as gifts sent to the church by Jesus to protect the church from error and bring the church to spiritual maturity (Ephesians 4.11-16).
Also, the local church is unique in that it creates an environment for spiritual nurture designed for a specific people living in a specific cultural context. The universal church is unable to provide such an intensely personal environment for discipleship. For example, Christ addressed the seven churches in Asia Minor (Revelation 2-3) according to their unique strengths and weaknesses. He spoke to them individually, not generally. He spoke to them as unique local churches.
Things to consider
Opportunities for the church abound in the online world. We should not minimise this. However, we should not allow technological progress to lead to ecclesiological regress. We must learn how to embrace new means of communication in a God-honouring way. How can this be done?
Many of the problems we face in the online Christian community arise because we are not clear in our own minds about the biblical doctrine of the church. Pastors need to teach on the church. Individual Christians need to study the church. Read through Acts and the apostolic epistles looking for information about the church. You may be surprised how important the church was to early Christians.
If you have a blog, then make it a priority to communicate the glorious doctrine of the church. Let people who visit your site know where you stand. Also, communicate the importance of the local church and the necessity for all Christians to belong to a local church.
Lack of accountability
One of the greatest dangers facing Christian bloggers is the lack of accountability. Remember, blogging is a public forum, not a private conversation. If you blog, inform your elders and welcome their oversight. This is especially relevant for young, technologically-savvy Christians. ‘Likewise you younger people, submit yourselves to your elders’ (1 Peter 5.5).
If you are a pastor, consider starting a blog. Why? Many Christians, possibly even some from your congregation, are being spiritually nurtured by non-ordained men. Shouldn’t those who are appointed by the Holy Spirit to teach and preach be involved in Christian discipleship wherever it is taking place?
As we grapple with how to make the most of modern technology, let us learn to use modern tools of communication to the benefit and strengthening of Christ’s church.
Todd Matocha,
pastor, Bethel Presbyterian Church, Cardiff
1 Tim Bednar, We know more than our pastors: Why bloggers are the vanguard of the participatory church, April 22 2004, (accessed August 4 2009).
2 Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, Vol.2, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, Michigan, p.559.
If you have stumbled onto this blog please do take a few moments to read the following piece:- Echoes of God
