Archive for March, 2010

Don’t mess with Jerusalem world – God has his eyes set upon it!

Wednesday, March 17th, 2010

Vee over at the Living Journey blog has written an interesting piece looking at the implicit Biblical dangers lurking for nations and organisations that meddle with Jerusalem and Israel. CBN have also picked up on this theme.

There is a flood of online activity relating to the recent spat between the Obama administration and the Israeli government, especially following the recent visit to Israel by US vice president Joe Biden.

The US administrations recent overtures towards Israel has prompted the evangelical group “Christians United for Israel” (CUFI) to call for action:

CBN

The Obama administration’s unprecedented criticism of Israel these past few days over settlements has sparked bi-partisan outrage on Capitol Hill. And for good reason, as Barry Rubin points out in this penetrating, must read piece.

Now evangelical Christian groups, which are among Irael’s staunchest and most loyal supporters, are calling out the Obama administration as well over its shocking treatment of a steadfast and vital ally (whose popularity among American voters, by the way, is actually higher than President Obama’s and has never been stronger).

Christians United for Israel (CUFI) is calling on its supporters to e-mail the White House and urge the President to end the current diplomatic crisis with Israel. The effort has gathered momentum throughout the day, CUFI spokesman Ari Morgenstern tells CBN News:

Continue Reading

On top of all this, Israeli security forces are dealing with the Palestinian “Day of rage” in East Jerusalem:

Jerusalem Post

Thousands of police, border police and special forces were deployed on Jerusalem’s streets on Wednesday morning, for the case Palestinian riots in the capital might continue.

However, the official estimate is that the unrest will not reignite, and the Temple Mount compound will accordingly be open for visitors of all persuasions.

In what they called “a Day of Rage,” Palestinians rioted across east Jerusalem on Tuesday, throwing rocks, setting tires and garbage bins ablaze and even using live fire against police forces deployed by the thousands in the capital.

The violence spread from one neighborhood to another. In one incident, youths hoisted a Palestinian flag and shouted, “We shall die and Palestine shall live!”

A police officer was shot and lightly wounded in the east Jerusalem neighborhood of Ras el-Amud on Tuesday evening, after the widespread rioting saw more than a dozen security forces wounded and upward of 60 arrests.

The policeman, a member of the elite Yasam unit, sustained a gunshot wound to the hand and was evacuated to the capital’s Hadassah-University Hospital, Mount Scopus. Security forces were searching for the assailant.

The rioting erupted in the Muslim quarter of the Old City, along with the east Jerusalem neighborhoods of Wadi Joz, Ras el-Amud, Isawiya, the Shuafat refugee camp and Jebl Mukaber, among other locations.

“They are donkeys and dwarfs!” a woman screamed as riot police and plainclothes security men hauled away a handcuffed, hooded youth.

Throughout the day, more than 60 rioters were arrested for throwing rocks, among other violations, and 15 policemen were wounded. Four of those officers were evacuated for medical treatment, while the rest were treated at the scene.

Continue Reading

Israel is currently under immense stress from all directions including some quarters of the US church, namely, the The Presbyterian Church.

Jerusalem Post

NEW YORK – American Jewish leaders are slamming a report by the Presbyterian Church USA that blames Israel for the “Palestinian resistance” and denounces companies doing business with Israel.

The Jewish Council for Public Affairs, which circulated a memo to its member agencies and board of directors Monday, said the biased report reduced the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a caricature, demonizing Israel and delegitimizing its right to exist as a Jewish state.

“It’s a highly-selective use of text, history and circumstances to form an anti-Israel narrative,” said JCPA vice president Ethan Felson. “They give significant voice to anti-Zionists, condemn companies that sell to Israel and allow for the demonization of Israel. That’s several red lines.”

The 172-page report, written by the church’s Middle East Study Committee, is to be debated at the church’s General Assembly this July. But Jewish leaders say its recommendations renew old tensions over the church’s previous divestment policies toward Israel, threatening Presbyterian-Jewish relations.

The current report charges the US government with “complicity in the Israeli occupation” and suggests that the government consider withholding aid to Israel until it agrees to stop building settlements. The report singles out Caterpillar, which manufactures construction equipment, for its “continued profit-making from non-peaceful use of its products.”

It also endorses the Kairos Palestine document, a manifesto by Christian Palestinians that calls for an end to Israel as a Jewish state and uses words like “evil” and “sin” to describe Israeli actions.

Rabbi Steve Gutow, president of JCPA, said in a statement that Jewish leaders were dismayed at the attempt to “delegitimize and demonize” Israel.

“We hope that before this report is brought for a vote at the church’s General Assembly, significant revisions are made,” he said, noting that the report threatened relations with the church.

Church leaders were not immediately available for comment Tuesday.

Continue Reading

*heavy sigh*

Details of the Kairos declaration mentioned in the above article can be found here.

Beware An Overly Dogmatic Interpretation of Luke 21:24: Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Monday, March 15th, 2010

There has been uproar recently relating to the unveiling of the Israeli plans to build hundreds of new homes in East Jerusalem, which I posted about here.

This episode has so inflamed the world that it allowed – and I quote Prof. Barry Rubin – the Palestinian authority to walk out of talks with big smile’s on their faces.

Anyway, for me, all of this is an extension of the question of who Jerusalem rightly belongs to.

Many loud voices have recently called for the division of Jerusaslem to serve as the Capital of both a new Palestinian State and the Israeli nation.

Instinctively as a Christian, the division of Jerusalem feels intrinsically and deeply wrong, and I find myself siding with Netanyahu’s recent address to the “Christians United For Israel Jerusalem” Summit, in which he opened with:

Welcome to Jerusalem, the undivided, eternal capital of the Jewish state and the Jewish people.

And concluded with:-

After centuries in exile, I have come here to assure you, the people of Israel have come home and no force on earth will ever make us leave our home again.

As a consequence of these developments, I have been pondering the Scripture verse found in Luke 21:24:

And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles shall be fulfilled.

It strikes me that this Scripture is relevant to current events. As a result I asked a learned friend (Calvin Smith – Principal of King’s Evangelical Divinity School – whom I consider a mentor) his opinion, and he pointed me to one of his recent blog posts, which I reproduce in full:

Calvin Smith

Here’s a little point concerning Israel and the end times of which I would be interested to hear your thoughts and comments. It concerns the prophecy found in Luke 21:24. Naturally, liberal Protestants who reject the concept of predictive prophecy will likely dismiss interpretations of this verse by those who take the opposite view. Nonetheless, for those with a high view of Scripture, whether they are pre-, post- or a- millennialists, dispensationalists or supercessionists, this verse deserves closer attention, not least because it goes to the heart of how some pro-Israel Christians view the modern State of Israel.

Many pro-Israel Christians juxtapose Luke 21:24 with the founding of the State of Israel in 1948, but more specifically her capture of Jerusalem in 1967 during the Six Day War, as evidence that we are currently in the last days. The argument goes something like this. With the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 and the failed Bar Kochba revolt in the second century, the Jews were (with some minor exceptions) expelled and separated from their ancestral homeland for nearly two thousand years until the rise of Zionism and the founding of Israel in May 1948. With the capture of Jerusalem in 1967, it is argued that the city is no longer trampled under foot by the Gentiles and thus Luke 21:24 has, in fact, been fulfilled. Given that the whole tenor of Luke 21:5-36, which is paralleled in Matthew’s Great Eschatological Discourse (chapters 24 and 25) is clearly eschatological, it is maintained that we are thus living in the last days. Both passages are rooted in an eschatological consummation of the age (though futurists do well to note how aspects of both passages are also fulfilled or foreshadowed in Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70). Thus, the 1967 capture of Jerusalem is seen not only as the fulfilment of prophecy in Luke 21:24, but specifically the fulfilment of an end-times prophecy which marks the imminence of Christ’s return. For this reason 54% of respondents to our recent poll on Israel agreed that “Modern Israel is, without doubt, the fulfilment of end times biblical prophecy, so we must be in the last days”.

Yet such an interpretation yields several problems, perhaps demonstrated by the sizeable proportion of our poll’s respondents (25%), who agreed that Israel will be restored eschatologically but nonetheless were unable to say with certainty whether the modern State of Israel is necessarily the fulfilment of end-times prophecy. Let us consider briefly several problems with claiming Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled. First, if the 1967 capture of Jerusalem marked the end of the city’s trampling under foot by the Gentiles, as well as the fulfilment of the “time of the Gentiles” (cf Romans 11:25-6, i.e. the age of salvation for the Gentiles), why are so many Gentiles today still being saved more than forty years after Jerusalem was captured? Conversely, if the fulfilment of the time of the Gentiles (Luke 21:24) is marked by an eschatological mass salvation of Jews (again, see Romans 11:25-6), why aren’t Jews converting to Christ en masse? In short, why hasn’t “all Israel” been saved yet?

A second problem with maintaining that Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled is that arguably Jerusalem, specifically the original city of Zion – the Ophel Ridge, including the Temple Mount at the northern end of the ridge – is still being trampled underfoot by the Gentiles. After the 1967 capture of Jerusalem, the Israeli general Moshe Dayan (that iconic figure sporting the eye patch), much to the chagrin of many Israelis returned control of the Temple Mount to the Palestinian Muslim authority. This authority, known as the Waqf, has in recent years been responsible for a well-publicised display of breathtaking vandalism. Seeking to build a new mosque within the Temple Mount compound, tonnes upon tonnes of earth have been excavated and literally dumped in the Kidron Valley without any thought whatsoever for the immensely important Second Temple period artefacts which are being discovered by archaeologists sifting through the dumped mounds of earth. The Waqf, of course, has no interest in assisting in the discovery of Jewish religious history on the Temple Mount (many Muslims clerics even deny there was ever a Jewish temple there). Thus, a present-day triumphalist rendering of Luke 21:24, in the cold light of day, seems overly optimistic at this stage. Not only that, but Israel is under more pressure than ever before to cede parts of East Jerusalem to the Palestinians as the world pushes for a resolution to the bitter Israel-Palestinian crisis.

One response by the Christian believer in biblical prophecy might be to reject an overly literal interpretation of Luke 21:24 and Romans 11:25-6. Indeed, one could argue that the time of the Gentiles is being fulfilled right now, that it is coming to an end gradually, rather than all happening on one day as a strict literal interpretation would suggest. Meanwhile, statistically Jews are turning to Christ in greater numbers that at any time since the second century, and thus one could argue that in a sense all Israel is, in fact, being (continous tense) saved in the lead up to Christ’s return. Yet it is an ongoing work and salvation, rather than a pivotal historical event on a single day, as a strict literal rendering of the relevant passages suggests.

I don’t really have a problem with such a solution. After all, much of end-times prophecy takes events and projects them into the distant future, so that the fulfilment of prophecy becomes telescoped and blurred. Thus, if indeed the founding of modern Israel represents the prophetic restoration of the Jewish people to their ancestral homeland, it is important to note how it occurred over several generations and not on a single day, much like the return of the exiles and the nation (re)building under Zerubbabel stretched nearly a century into the future under Nehemiah’s eventual leadership. However, it should also be noted that with regards to end times, the Bible often focuses on the consummation of the age as the “day of the Lord”. This is certainly the thrust and main theme of Joel, arguably Paul’s discussion in the latter part of Romans 11, and the last third of Zechariah (specifically 12:10 and 13:1). So the fact remains that while Jews may be turning to Christ in ever greater numbers, arguably one cannot claim we are seeing the final consummation of these prophecies just yet.

Moreover, the fact remains that the religious and historic parts of Jerusalem, the Ophel Ridge, by and large remain trampled underfoot by an Islamic ideology which in the twentieth and twenty first centuries, much provoked by the founding of the Jewish state on Muslim land, has increasingly elevated the religious significance of the Dome of the Rock to one of its most inflexible, potent and defining symbols. It just so happens to be located just a few yards from where Jews pray at the Western Wall. So can some Christian Zionists today really claim that Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled?

What am I getting at here? Before answering that question, first let me say I’m not suggesting, as some Christians undoubtedly argue, that we need to tear down the Dome of the Rock, rid East Jerusalem of its Palestinian population, and usher in that time when the city is no longer trampled underfoot by the Gentiles. Premillennialists rightly reject how postmillennialism seeks to usher in the kingdom of God by establishing and presenting it to Christ, thus hastening the Second Coming. Such an attempt to establish the Kingdom makes the parousia (Second Coming of Christ) an anthropocentric, rather than a theocentric event. It does so by employing a hermeneutical method whereby Christians read themselves into key Bible texts. The technical term is to ‘actualise’, that is, to read oneself into a pivotal role and/or interpretation of Scripture. Yet some premillennial Christian Zionists do precisely the same thing, feeling they must (through lobbying, political activity, financing, and so on) bring about the ultimate fulfilment of passages such as Luke 21:24, which in turn will hasten the return of Christ. Such a mindset is no less anthropocentric than postmillennialism’s approach. The short of it is, God will send Christ when He so chooses and there is little we can do to hasten that event. It is one thing to express political support for and lobby on behalf of Israel, which I believe Christians should do (incidentally, I also think that as her true friends we ought to speak to her when she gets it wrong). But it is quite another to feel our political activity has any bearing at all on God’s eschatological plans. If our motive for supporting Israel is on the basis that they are God’s chosen people, well and good, but if some Christians’ motive is to hasten the consummation of the age, theirs is an anthropocentrically-driven, erroneous motive.

Having got this off my chest, let’s get back to Luke 21:24. I simply wanted to raise this issue to explain why some pro-Israel Christians (for example, 25% in our recent poll) may not necessarily be convinced current events in the Middle East represent the fulfilment of prophecy. I also wanted to respond more fully to a question raised by a reader at the end of a rather gloomy blog entry I wrote concerning how the current State of Israel might eventually break up. The reader asked an important question, namely, given how strongly Israel and the Jews played in his understanding of Christianity and how God had His hand continually on them, how might their demise as a state (which some political commentators believe might well occur within a generation or two) have a bearing on the faith of pro-Israel Christians? The point made is an important one. In short, if pro-Israel Christians maintain Luke 21:24 has already been fulfilled, how might their faith suffer if it later transpired this was not the case, for example if Jerusalem was given back to the Palestinians, or if Israel as a nation eventually even ceased to exist? I suggest those who currently maintain dogmatically that Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled might well have their faith severely shaken. At best, pro-Israel Christians might feel the need to re-examine their hermeneutics, eventually reinterpreting Luke 21:24 by spiritualising or preterising it (ie maintaining those events were fulfilled in AD 70). Either way, their hermeneutical realignment would likely lead to a radical reinterpretation of their theological understanding of Israel and the Jews as God’s chosen people. This is precisely the point made by the blog reader mentioned above.

Apart from current dogmatic assertions that Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled, or a hermeneutical realignment which preterises the text’s setting, there is a third alternative, namely, to keep our options open about whether or the current situation in the Middle East indeed marks the end times. Doing so means conceding that Luke 21:24 may not necessarily have been fulfilled. Note carefully what I am not saying here, though. Taking such a position still allows one to hold steadfastly to the view that Luke 21 and Matthew 24-25 are eschatological in nature. Neither are we ditching our great eschatological hope, or denying Israel as God’s chosen people or her central role in His consummation of the age. Israel features strongly in the Bible’s teaching of the end times, and frankly it requires hermeneutical gymnastics to allegorise or spiritualise any and every eschatological passage concerning Israel in order to claim them for a Church which supersedes her. All I am asking is this: can Bible-believing Christians say with certainty Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled and we are indeed in the last times?

For my part, I cannot help but view as miraculous not only the way the modern State of Israel was founded, but also how she has survived throughout the twentieth century against all odds. But neither do I want to be overly dogmatic and claim Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled. After all, many Christians no doubt reached similar conclusions that they were in the last days during the apocalyptic events marking the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Yet of course such was not the case. One thing is certain: Yahweh is referred to as the “God of Israel” over 200 times in the Bible. Yet the Holy One of Israel will not allow His name to be besmirched, and whenever His people have degenerated into unspeakable sin and abominable wickedness, they have experienced swift divine judgment in the form of external enemies who have overpowered them, tyrants from within, and ultimately exile (see, for example, Isaiah 1). Thus we must never fall into the trap of believing just because the Jews are God’s chosen people they can do no wrong. Today, Israeli society is bitterly divided into religious and secular camps. Meanwhile, some Israelis have totally cast aside the faith of their fathers, and like people throughout the world hate their neighbour, engage in crime, and practice witchcraft. So who knows? The modern State of Israel may experience God’s judgment in the future, which is all the more reason for not being overly dogmatic in one’s view about whether or not Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled. Moreover, many Israelis rely on American support and their own military prowess, rather than the God of Israel. Yet we see in David’s census that this is not God’s way, and who knows, maybe there will have to come a time when she has no friends to turn to that, at a moment of impending catastrophe the entire nation will finally turn to God when all seems lost.

I was born less than a year after Israel captured Jerusalem and was brought up to believe this was nothing less than the fulfilment of Scripture. This may well be the case, but equally it may not be so. We cannot say with dogmatic certainty that Luke 21:24 has been fulfilled. But neither do we need to. If this passage remains unfulfilled at this time it need not shake in any way our sincere belief that God has not finished with Israel or that she figures strongly in His consummation plan.

Let me know what you think about this comment, whatever position you take. It is good to discuss and reach clarity on such issues, which helps us to be so much more effective when we stand for Israel against those within the Church who despise her.

Originally posted on the King’s Evangelical Divinity School blog in December 2007. Details of the poll referred to can be found here.

The Baptist Union of Great Britain, the United Reformed Church and the Methodist Church have challenged the right of the British National Party to stand in the general election.

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Oh dear here we go again. I refer you to previous posts on this issue:

It is entirely sensible that ministers have ruled out a ban on teachers being members of the BNP

Why there’s Nothing British about the BNP’s (British National Party) “Christian values”

Christian Today

The Baptist Union of Great Britain, the United Reformed Church and the Methodist Church have challenged the right of the British National Party to stand in the general election.

It follows the ruling of the Central London County Court last week which deemed that the BNP’s membership policy was still racist, despite the removal of a whites-only clause last month.

Judge Paul Collins ruled that a clause asking prospective members to support the creation of an indigenous British race was illegal and should be withdrawn from the party’s admissions policy.

The BNP has been barred from recruiting new members until it changes its admission rules to be more inclusive of non-whites.

Rachel Lampard, Public Issues Policy Adviser for the Methodist Church, said Christians had a duty to challenge the “rhetoric of hatred” being championed by extremist parties like the BNP.

“Every human being is created in the image of God and every person deserves to be treated with dignity and respect, regardless of their nationality,” she said.

Graham Sparkes, Head of Faith and Unity for the Baptist Union of Great Britain, said: “If people want to make our laws, first of all they must comply with them. We would therefore question whether the BNP should be allowed to stand as a party in the general election.”

In addition to the discriminatory admissions criteria, the Churches expressed concern over the BNP’s policies seeking to abolish anti-discrimination laws, halt all new immigration, and cut all foreign aid.

Simon Loveitt, Public Issues Spokesperson for the United Reformed Church, said: “We celebrate the fact that Britain is a multicultural society and that British aid can change and improve life for people around the world, such as those affected by the earthquake in Haiti.”

The Churches have long opposed the BNP. The United Reformed Church has contacted its member churches in the run-up to the general election, which must be held by June 3, to remind them that voting for racist political parties has no place among Christians.

The Methodist Church last year passed a motion banning members from joining the BNP and preventing members of racist political parties from becoming full members of the Church.

EKKLESIA: ICM poll commissioned by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, as part of the Power 2010 shows 70 per cent of Christians believe it is wrong for bishops to have reserved places in the House of Lords.

Monday, March 15th, 2010

I’m so tired today of reading the so called “news” that a whopping 70 per cent of Christians believe it is wrong for bishops to have reserved places in the House of Lords.

This is all based on an ICM poll commissioned by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, as part of the Power 2010 initiative for reform of the second chamber in parliament.

Ekkleisa are jumping up and down over this “news” and so is Polly Toynbee (President of the British Humanist Association) over at the Guardian.

I have just noticed that the sample used for this “poll” would appear to be around the 1000 mark, which is a paltry, and statistically unsound as a representation of the entire Christian communities view on this subject. I am also under the impression that the 1000 adults polled are not all Christians anyway. I am open to correction on these assertions and will post corrections if necessary, for the sake of transparency and honesty.

If this be the case, then it reminds me of the many face cream adverts on TV, in which it is touted that 70% of users felt they looked younger, and yet when you look at the small print you notice the sample of women consulted is around 200.

Ekkelsia are also joyful that they have overwhelmed Bishops email systems with 52,000 emails, and I refer you to a previous post on this:-

eChurch: Ekklesia has today teamed up with democracy campaign Power2010 in an initiative to urge Church of England bishops to take a lead in reforming the House of Lords.

If I am correct in my analysis, then the headlines drawn from this recent poll are more a political propaganda drive than true social science in action. To draw these conclusions and headlines from such a small sample, using the closed questionnaire method, is naive at best and unscrupulous at worst.

Further, 52,000 emails sent to the Bishops proves nothing, when the entire number of Christians within the UK is considered. Also, what percentage of those sending emails did so as prompted by the British Humanist Association and other anti-Christian groups?

UPDATE: the British Humanist Association has just posted on this, please observe carefully the wording used:-

large-scale public action and poll

large majority of people are opposed to having Bishops sit in the House of Lords as of right.

Andrew Copson, BHA Chief Executive, commented, ‘It is evident that the majority of people in the UK do not support the automatic right of Bishops to sit in the legislature of our country.

But here is the rub:

The poll questioned over 1000 people

Don’t the BHA and Ekklesia sound similar! Sometimes it appears as if Ekklesia are the BHA’s trojan horse.

Please also bear in mind that I have not even commented on the validity of the sample contacted, the use of the telephone interview, the dates used to conduct the interviews, the potential interviewer bias, the funding issue and the slant of the closed questions used etc.

‘Theology After Google’ conference takes a look at religion in the InterWeb era

Monday, March 15th, 2010

The Los Angeles Times is carrying a piece on a conference called “Theology after Google” which purports to analyse the future of American Christianity in relation to the rise of the interweb.

Although the mix of Christianity and the Internet is one of my pet subjects, I simply don’t feel comfortable with this conference for personal and theological reasons.

Here are some snippets for you from the LA Times article, and you can make up your own mind:

The consensus: It’s a whole new world out there. Churches will ignore it at their peril.

So far so good.

“I think things like denomination and ordination are part of the old system of control and domination that has to go,”

Uh huh.

The premise of the conference had been laid out earlier in the evening by Philip Clayton, a professor at Claremont who talked about the role of Gutenberg’s printing press in the 15th century. By making the Bible more widely available, he said, it democratized religion and led directly to the Protestant Reformation. “Ladies and gentlemen,” Clayton said, “we are talking today about a transition equally as great.”

Really?

Theologically and culturally, the conference attendees leaned toward the liberal end of the spectrum. One theme that emerged was how smart the Christian right has been about using new media, and how progressive churches need to catch up. But more than talking about how to use new media and social-networking tools, the conference was about how those tools reflect a new cultural mind-set that is changing how people pray.

Oh dear.

Jon Irvine, a 30-year-old Web designer who works with the “emerging church” movement, said the church of the future will have to be less hierarchical and more freewheeling and ecumenical…..Every man is capable of learning and providing feedback. Church 1.0 is all about creeds and doctrines, whereas Church 2.0 is kind of like a wiki-theology.”

Really uncomfortable now.

In this new world, he said, “You can be a free agent. You could start your own church, go to a little faith community down the street, you could go to a mega-church. You could be a Methodist today, Anglican tomorrow — it’s your choice.”

That might sound like heresy to some, for whom doctrine is immutable. But it fit well with the spirit of the conference, where nothing with the exception of the corn toss tournament trophy, was etched in anything solid.

OK, I’ve had enough and I think you get the picture. You are free to read the entire article here.

UPDATE: Check out this article, oh and this one.

Irelands Justice Minister Dermot Ahern has proposed an autumn referendum to decide on whether or not to repeal the recently introduced blasphemy law.

Monday, March 15th, 2010

This is indeed good news. If you disagree then consider for one moment that “blasphemy” laws are used by Islamic states to demoralise, persecute, and control non-Muslims. Islamic blasphemy laws have been used in disputes and land grabs.

Consider also that blasphemy laws in the western world strengthens the case for the ‘Organization of the Islamic Conference’ to introduce a U.N. Resolution banning “defamation” of religion, which would usher in a global blasphemy law and only favour Islam.

Pakistan co-opted the wording of the Irish Blasphemy law in their submission to the UN, in order to bolster their own blasphemy laws. Recently Pakistani Christians have been sentenced to 25 years in jail for alleged blasphemy in relation to the Qu’ran.

In my opinion anyone should be free to “blaspheme” if they so choose and religious folks should be grown up enough and secure in their identity and beliefs to rise above it (and that goes for everyone by the way).

If religious folk wish to retain the right to comment freely and potentially negatively regarding other belief systems or lifestyles, then we must accept quid pro quo.

Cross Post from MediaWatchWatch (permission pending but expected):

Irish blasphemy law could go to referendum!

Great news from Atheist Ireland (via The Freethinker): Justice Minister Dermot Ahern has proposed an autumn referendum do decide on whether or not to repeal the recently introduced blasphemy law.

The chastened Ahern told today’s Sunday Times (no link yet),

There was an incredibly sophisticated campaign [against me], mainly on the internet. I was only doing my duty in relation to it, because clearly it is in the constitution. The attorney general said ‘there is this absolute, mandatory thing… it is an offence, punishable by law.

Atheist Ireland said,

We reiterate our position that this law is both silly and dangerous: silly because it is introducing medieval canon law offence into a modern plularist republic; and dangerous because it incentives religious outrage and because its wording has already been adopted by Islamic States as part of their campaign to make blasphemy a crime internationally.

Although the final decision on the referendum rests with the cabinet, this looks like an occasion to congratulate everyone involved in the campaign. It just goes to show that defiance and ridicule can be powerful weapons. Maybe they should be used more often?

PZ Myers has commented positively also:

P Z Myers – Grand news from Ireland!

I hope that this law will be repealed in Ireland and that there will not be “blasphemy laws through the back door”, as in the recent troubling English criminal legal case involving Harry Taylor:

eChurch – Philosophy tutor and atheist Harry Taylor in court for leaving anti-religious cartoons in John Lennon airport

At an atheist convention in Melbourne yesterday, Richard Dawkins compared the awarding of sainthood to Australian nun Mary MacKillop to a Monty Python skit.

Monday, March 15th, 2010

H/T Polycarp

Following is the word of St. Dawkins…..Thanks be to St. Dawkins.

All stand…..

Sydney Morning herald:

THE creation of saints is “pure Monty Python” and the Family First senator Steve Fielding is more stupid than an earthworm, says the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins.

“I do find it very discouraging,” Dr Dawkins told the 2010 Global Atheist Convention in Melbourne yesterday when asked about the support of the media and the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, for Mary MacKillop, who is to become Australia’s first saint in a ceremony in Rome in October.

“The whole idea of creating saints is pure Monty Python,” he said. ”Why do they have to clock up two miracles? These are people we are supposed to take seriously.”

Read All

A message to all Christian groups who wish to Boycott and divest against Israel

Monday, March 15th, 2010

To all Christian groups that desire to boycott and divest against Israel, at least do it properly:-

H/T: Naming His Grace

John Chrysostom on the Homiletical Task

Sunday, March 14th, 2010

Christian Bloggers (myself included) need to heed this message also:

H/T

Near Emmaus

For all my friends who will be proclaiming the Scriptures to the people of God around the world here is a quote from the great preacher John Chrysostom that I hope you can take with you to your pulpit:

Let, therefore, the man who undertakes the strain of teaching never give heed to the good opinion of the outside world, nor be dejected in soul on account of such persons; but laboring at his sermons so that he may please God, (For let this alone be his rule and determination, in discharging this best kind of workmanship, not acclamation, nor good opinions,) if, indeed, he be praised by men, let him not repudiate their applause, and when his hearers do not offer this, let him not seek it, let him not be grieved. For a sufficient consolation in his labors, and one greater than all, is when he is able to be conscious of arranging and ordering his teaching with a view to pleasing God. (On the Priesthood, or. 5.7)

It is God who you must please. You should neither seek nor reject the praise of your congregation. These will shift from one weekend to the next. What is important is that you can say, before God, you prepared your message for His glory.

Matt Baggott Northern Ireland’s chief constable says that God had called him to the region’s top policing job.

Sunday, March 14th, 2010

I confess that sometimes I’m not a huge fan of the police for differing reasons, but I really do like Matt Baggott.

He is the president of the Christian Police Association and last last August was unveiled as Northern Ireland’s new chief constable, which let’s face it, is not the easiest job in the world.

This guy is so refreshingly open and honest about his faith, which is a real breath of fresh air for someone in such a high profile public position.

Anyway, just noticed this from the Press Association a couple of minutes ago:-

Northern Ireland’s chief constable claims that God had called him to the region’s top policing job.

Matt Baggott, who is a born-again Christian, said he felt his entire 33-year career in the police had been mapped out for him by a higher power.

In a candid interview about his deeply held beliefs, the 51-year-old father of three explained how much his faith had influenced he and his wife’s joint decision that he should apply to take over from the outgoing Sir Hugh Orde last year.

And this from the BBC

Talking about his decision to take the PSNI job, the chief constable said he felt he had been “very strongly pulled” to Northern Ireland.

“I have a very strong Christian faith where I have never planned anything in my 33 years of policing.

“When I’m more open to what I believe is meant to happen, the circumstances have always worked around me.

“When I’ve tried to push the pace myself then sometimes the door is shut.”

He denied he saw the job as a stepping stone to a more prestigious job.

“I don’t see this as a career move. I believe that as chief constable I’m meant to be here at this moment – how that works out is a question for others to shape and work with me on.

“But yes my faith has been a determining factor in me coming here as chief constable.”

He added: “My ambition is to do the best job I can here as chief constable of the people of Northern Ireland.”

Mr Baggott said that despite the difficulties of policing in Northern Ireland, he was enjoying the job.

“It’s a massive privilege to be here. We’ve settled really well here, we’ve made lots of friends already.

“I wouldn’t describe it as a quagmire… I would describe it as a place that I’ve found to be hungry for change.”

Read All

Top man!

Switch to our mobile site