eChurch Blog

CrossWalk:

Hundreds of Bibles Burned by Iranian Authorities

IRAQ (ANS) – The Iranian security forces have burned hundreds of Bibles, according to the Farsi Christian News Network (FCNN).

A spokesperson for FCNN said, “This action [of burning the Bibles], which has been confirmed by informed sources, was aired on a site belonging to the Pasdaran paramilitary organization, is nothing less than shameful and the persons responsible must be identified and exposed to the whole world.”

On May 29, Ati News, a site belonging to Morteza Talaee, the previous head of the security forces and the current member of the Tehran’s city council, “in its usual anti-Christian propaganda” reported that their social-life reporter had disclosed that shipments of so called, “Perverted Torah and Gospels” had entered Iran through its Western borders.

Two days later, on May 31, the same report was reiterated by the official anti-crime website of the Pasdaran Army called “Gerdaub” which said that a large shipment of Jewish and Christian Scriptures had entered Iran through the Western Azerbaijan province. According to security officials of that province, the “occupier forces” that operate in the Western regions of Iraq were responsible for such activities.

FCCN stated that Gerdaub, the official website of the Pasdaran Army [also known as the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRCG] continued its report by quoting the security official who had stated: “Some of these books are distributed locally, but most of the books are smuggled and distributed all over the country. In just the last few months, hundreds of such ‘perverted Bibles’ have been seized and burned in the border town of Sardasht.”

The same unidentified security source added that his intention has been to “inform and enlighten” people.

“While the depiction of the Prophet of Islam and other historical religious leaders, whether in good or bad taste, has caused uproar and violent protests, threats of retaliation and assassinations, closure of embassies, long and mournful marches in various parts of countries of the world such as Pakistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, its quite interesting that the official website of the most powerful military wing of the Islamic Republic of Iran engages in the shameful act of reporting the burning of Bibles,” said the FCNN spokesperson.

“Of course, the security officials have not clarified the difference between these so called ‘perverted Bibles’ and those that are commonly used by people around the world – including Iran.

“These officials shamefully label the Holy Scriptures of the Christians ‘contraband’ without realizing the over two billion people around the world and at least five hundred thousand people in Iran revere and consider holy. This action is no different than what the government has wrongfully accused many Christians of insulting the sacred beliefs of Islam.

Continue Reading

Is this a positive move by the church, namely, streaming services online so you can watch them without physically being present?

Herald Scotland

Digital rev-olution: church shows its services on iPhone and iPad

A church is tapping into new technology to allow people to worship without attending services.

St Andrew’s Church in Bo’ness, West Lothian, is to screen its services in real time on iPhones and iPads. It is hoped that the scheme will be expanded to other devices such as ­BlackBerries and Nokia phones.

The Rev Albert Bogle, who spearheaded the development alongside congregation member Neil MacLennan, said he hoped to open up “a whole new world”.

“We tried the technology last weekend and I was able to sit in my car on the Royal Mile in Edinburgh and watch the morning service live,” MacLennan said.

“Essentially you could watch the service anywhere which had a 3G network.”

The congregation at St Andrew’s has been able to access services via webcast for a number of years and MacLennan is confident that other congregations will want to stream their services live.

Continue Reading

I can certainly understand the benefits in sparsely populated areas, or for the infirm who are physically unable to attend church services, but for the rest of us, does this not defeat the object of fellowshipping together? Or is it this simply an example of the modern church “reinventing itself” and adapting to modern technologies of communication?

This is seriously poor behaviour on the part of YouTube.

I featured the YouTube Vid that this cross-post from Solomonia refers to, and it’s now unplayable. Check it out here.

Solomonia:

Unbelievable dhimmitude on the part of YouTube, and not the first time: YouTube silences Latma, removes We Con the World

As Israel went offline for the Jewish sabbath, YouTube removed most versions of Latma’s hit parody song We Con the World. If you try to access the song on YouTube you receive the notification:

This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Warner/ Chappell Music, Inc. .

Copyright experts we advised with before posting the song told us in no uncertain terms that we were within our rights to use the song because we did so in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine. The Fair Use Doctrine, copied and pasted below from the US Copyright Office stipulates that it is legal and permissible to use copyrighted material under the fair use doctrine for purposes of parody.

Copyright attorneys also warned us that given our clearly lawful use of the song We are the World, if anyone wished to silence our voices, they wouldn’t target us. Instead they would target YouTube. It is YouTube’s standard practice to remove any material that they receive even the flimsiest threat for because the company wishes to avoid all litigation.

At the same time, this is not YouTube’s first move to silence Israeli voices…

Read the rest at the link. Let’s be clear. There is no copyright issue here as far as this layman who has to worry about these things can see. Parody is absolutely protected under the doctrine of fair use.

Caroline Glick writes:

…stay tuned for our next video next Thursday night.

If someone is in fact trying to silence our voices, they will soon discover that they are messing with the wrong Jews…

Support Latma here.

Further Link: CIFWatch

UPDATE: If you do want to view the vid, David over at Anglican Samizdat, has conveniently provided one for us.

Cross-post CyberBrethren:

Prayer:

Lord God, heavenly Father, at the first ecumenical Council of Nicaea, Your Church boldly confessed that it believed in one Lord Jesus Christ as being of one substance with the Father. Grant us courage to confess this saving faith with Your Church through all the ages; through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.

The Christian Church’s First Ecumenical Council was convened in Nicaea (modern Isnuk, Turkey) in the early summer of AD 325 by the Roman Emperor Constantine. The emperor presided at the opening of the council. The major intended topic was the ongoing Arian controversy.

The council ruled against the Arians, who taught that Jesus was not the eternal Son of God but was created by the Father and was called Son of God because of his righteousness. The chief opponents of the Arians were Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and his deacon, Athanasius. The council confessed the eternal divinity of Jesus and adopted the earliest version of the Nicene Creed, which in its entirety was adopted at the Council of Constantinople in 381.

Their version of what we now call the Nicene Creed was almost identical to what is now used in the Church until the third section, where the original ends, “We believe in the Holy Spirit.” It fell to the Second Ecumenical Council (First Council of Constantinople) to add what is now used. Therefore, the confession used in the churches may properly be called the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. The so-called filioque (where “and the Son” was inserted after the words about the Spirit proceeding from the Father) was only later added by the Roman Catholic Church and never accepted in the East.

The Council also saw the first major collaboration between Church and state since Christianity began and signaled a rise in imperial influence in affairs of the Church. Constantine called it, presided over the initial session, and, in many respects, set its agenda. While his personal religious beliefs may have been part of his reason, most scholars agree that his main fear was that a divided Christianity would result in a divided Empire. The historical irony is that the Roman Empire fractured before any major schisms in Christendom.

Nicene Creed

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered, and was buried. And the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father. And He will come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead, whose kingdom will have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And I believe in one holy Christian [catholic] and apostolic Church, I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins, and I look for the resurrection of the dead and the life ? of the world to come. Amen.

Two of my fav Christian bloggers have posted articles relaying Christian practice and understanding which I would view as deeply unhelpful at best.

The first from James McGrath takes a look at “Gay Exorcism”, which is a practice I have seen promoted here in the UK recently, with growing frequency:

Unreasonable Faith has a post today about “Gay Exorcism” – the attempt to treat homosexuality as a demon and command it to come out of a homosexual in Jesus’ name.

When such attempts fail to have any effect on the person, and clearly do not render the person heterosexual, should this not lead Christians to conclude that homosexuality is not caused by demon possession?

If not, what could possibly render the above as anything other than a logical conclusion? Or is this yet another example of an instance where fundamentalist Christians are willing to overlook not only evidence and logic, but the dishonor they are giving to Jesus when they make repeated failed attempts at exorcising “demons of homosexuality” in his name? If even the honor of Jesus cannot persuade such so-called Christians, what can?

Contrast the approach of the aforementioned exorcists with that of Dr. Jack Rogers, whose book Jesus, the Bible, and Homosexuality has been reviewed in Perspectives, a publication of the Reformed Church of America.

The second comes from Polycarp and looks at a “cursed Africa”:

Jason had posted on this belief found among many – white and black – that the reason that Africa is in the shape it is in is due to the curse of Ham or some variation. One of this commentators posted this:

Such an exhaustive study of The Curse of Canaan. Servant of servants means extreme poverty, or poorer than any other of the nations on Earth. Can anyone explain Black African extreme poverty and not come to the conclusion that Black people are the Canaanites? Since there is nothing wrong with Africa, it’s potential for economic growth is inexhaustible by man, and there is more right with Black people than the other peoples of the Earth, then the Gen. chapter 9 account must be literally correct. This is tangible proof that God must exist. We should explain this to the Atheists of the world. Also all other forms of religion especially the Koran can be discarded, since this truth is not found in it.

Yes, that’s right. Centuries of Western Colonialism proves that God exists.

I try to love all people, but sometimes, I find it really difficult to do so…

What do you fine blog readers think of these attitudes and practices?

Catholic Herald:

When commentators issue the remark that “football is the new religion”, they usually do so derisively. This cliché is shorthand for saying that some people now take this sport too seriously, and that our society’s obsession with the beautiful game is infantile and silly.

In the manner that the sport is held dear, football’s resemblance to religion-proper is evident. Football fans have their ersatz cathedrals: their stadiums (or “theatres of dreams”). Promising or proven manager are labelled “messiahs”. Once-idolised players who controversially sign for a rival outfit are literally branded “Judas”. Supporters’ devotion to their team is unswerving and unconditional, and can consequently sometimes inspire violence. In this, football fandom often resembles a pastiche of Christianity.

Yet are these similarities merely cosmetic? Is it correct to dismiss football fanaticism as a vacuous and its similarities to religion superficial?

I would suggest not. Of course football as a sport has no intrinsic meaning. But the fact that people ascribe significance to it, in that there are many who afford ethical and spiritual purpose to football, suggests we should take it seriously. (By comparison, less intelligent atheists are often prone to say squabbles between Catholics and Protestants or Sunni and Shia are no better than those between Swift’s Little-Enders and Big-Enders: this ignores the fact that to the protagonists, these things matter.) And football’s ethical and spiritual debt to Christianity is more substantial than the cursory observations of a pub philosopher would suggest.

The misbehaviour of professional footballers in England – their infidelities off the field, their play-acting on it, and their conspicuous avarice – is often perceived to mirror a general moral malaise in society today. Yet the public’s dislike of their conduct illustrates the opposite – that, paradoxically, many people have an automatic sense of morality that is in the continuation in the Judea-Christian tradition: one that disapproves of mammon-worship, infidelity and dishonesty. Football reviles “cheating” of all varieties.

Continue Reading

What do ya make of this one, and bear in mind that this follows hot on the heels of this little spat, towards the end of last month.

BBC:

The Caleb Foundation [do have a quick gander] said it wanted equal prominence for its religious viewpoint.

Last month, it emerged that the Culture Minister Nelson McCausland had written to museum officials arguing for greater prominence for creationism.

An SDLP MLA said such an exhibition at the Causeway would be “inappropriate”.

The chairman of the Caleb Foundation, Wallace Thompson, has met the tourism minister Arlene Foster to discuss its request.

“All we are asking for is that the views that we hold, which are based on the Word of God, are at least respected and taken on board,” he said.

“A Christian politician in a position of power can make a difference.”

Read All

I like this one.

It was back in November that the Vatican Observatory and the Pontifical Academy of Sciences concluded a week-long gathering of scientists to examine the origin of life and the possibility of extraterrestrial life.

And now the boys are probing at the theological implications of alien life.

The original post came from Diglot:

How drastic would Christian theology change if aliens arrived at our planet? And I am not talking about those people who claim to have been abducted by aliens during the night and given an anal probe. I mean, an official worldwide type arrival where there can be no question that aliens have arrived (think the opening scene of the pilot episode for the television series “V”).

How would the Church react to this?

Continue reading

And this has been picked up by Polycarp and James McGrath.

Could it be said that if a Christian believes in the existence of angels or demons that this constitutes a belief in alien life, albeit, non-carbon based and non-observable?

Full details with the ChurchMouse:

Previous post here.

Further Link: Heresy Corner

Think we’re due a bout of psychobabble.

Last month I featured an article entitled; Why atheism will replace religion, which I didn’t agree with – especially the assertion that intelligence directly correlates with atheism – but found interesting nonetheless.

Well, lucky for us, there were so many responses to the original article, that there is now a ‘part 2‘, which I bring to your attention for your consumption and enjoyment:

Thanks to the many people who responded to my previous post. Some comment writers put words into my mouth by suggesting that this would happen “soon.” Others claimed I said that religion would disappear completely. Let me clarify these and other issues.

Worldwide, disbelief in God is around a tenth of the population according to surveys conducted around 2004 for 137 countries that remains the best estimate. Even if it were true that the other nine tenths will eventually lose their faith in God, this would take a long time.

How long? The world population continues to grow and much of the growth is in religious countries where women have larger families. Religion is thus unlikely to decline appreciably for several decades, after world population begins to decline.

In writing about atheism (strictly disbelief in God) replacing religion, I meant two things. First, at some distant point in the future, the number of believers will decline as the number of non believers increases. How far can this process go? Based on what has already happened in a handful of developed countries, mostly in Europe, it is clear that disbelief in God can become a majority opinion. So disbelief in God may replace religion as the majority view which would be a remarkable transition from the 99% of believers in underdeveloped countries.

Of course, any predictions concerning the future of belief in God are predicated on our notions of economic development. I happen to believe that economic development will continue throughout the world and that increasing prosperity will bring down birth rates of poorer countries, just as happened for developed nations.

It is not hard to imagine scenarios where this does not happen from rogue asteroids to radical global warming, and the emergence of epidemic diseases like bubonic plague, any of which that could arrest economic development and secularization.

If the world economy does continue to grow and lifts currently poor nations into prosperity, how sure can one be that the improved confidence of survival and better living conditions (i.e., existential security) will translate into higher levels of disbelief in God? My statistical analysis of this problem finds that as much as three-quarters of the country differences in disbelief are explainable in terms of existential security and control variables. This means that as such matters go we can be very sure indeed (less than one chance in 10,000 of being wrong).

To summarize, if economic development is inevitable so are increasing levels of religious disbelief.

Continue Reading