muslims on tape less scary
Greg the explorer (who recently celebrated a birthday - check out the comments on that thread, by the way) pointed me to this short article:
St Paul’s in Paraparaumu says any church which tries to put on a choral work including the Muslim call to prayer is going to run into problems.
A choir due to sing the work at the Kapiti Coast Anglican community objected to the Adhan being performed inside the church.
Archdeacon Lyall Perris says in a hard-won compromise, a recording of the Adhan will be played in the foyer. He says the problem is the declaring of another faith within a church.
I have a bunch of these stories. Once a speaker at a young adults event set out his theory about why nobody should participate in martial arts because you would be required to stand in certain stances which are actually positions of worship to bad and evil gods. In short, don’t do martial arts because you might find yourself inadvertantly worshipping another God. Or the heaps of people who object to yoga or tai chi or similar exercise programs being carried out on consecrated church grounds.
Our church ministry centre also doubles as a convention centre which for some reason is really popular with wedding receptions for people of other faiths. Does that mean we are all going to hell?
May 22nd, 2006 at 6:42 pm
The old Testament is literally a continual story of god showing how the Hebrews/ Jews continue to be syncrestic with other Gods.
It is one of the reasons why Babylon is allowed to destroy Jerusalem.
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:16 am
The first commandment is “you shall have no gods ABOVE me”, not “there is only one God”. How do you explain that, Homer?
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:28 am
There is only one God.
all other are created by humans and are idolatry.
I would have thought it is completely contrary to your hypothesis.
May 23rd, 2006 at 12:34 pm
Homer, did you ignore my post?
The first commandment says, “You shall have no other gods ABOVE me”. What does that statement suggest?
May 23rd, 2006 at 12:57 pm
I am sorry Bec but it says before me or besides me
May 23rd, 2006 at 1:00 pm
Ok, so your translation has something different to mine.
“Before me” and “beside me” convey very different things. Do you have a response to THAT?
May 23rd, 2006 at 2:05 pm
Bec, you are alleging God allows the Jews and therefore us other Gods around as long he is king of the mountain.
The entire O/T shows this to be false. I must admit I have never heard this theory previously.
May 23rd, 2006 at 3:32 pm
Homer, I honestly don’t know what that post above means. Can you re-phrase your statement/question?
May 23rd, 2006 at 7:53 pm
Bec, youre unbelievable. Either you are just trying to provoke EP, or you simply know little of hte Word of God. EP is correct, and resoundingly so, “you shall have no God beside (other than) me ..” The Scripture repeatedly explains that all other gods are indeed false gods. But you know this … youre just funning with Homer; pushing his buttons
Bec, there are religious groups that are growing from strength to strength in the world whose agenda is the utter destruction and/enslavement of the entire Christian church and associated cultures. It would be naive to believe that these people entertain any good will towards Christians whatsoever. How much good will did the OT Jews experience at the hands of the worshippers of “other gods”?
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:11 pm
No James, I’m not toying with Homer at all. I am deadly serious.
The Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (it’s my understanding it’s generally called the former now) acknowledged that you see a variety of voices coming through each of the books in the HB/OT. There are other people, other perspectives, that aren’t simply exterminated despite the strict interpretation of the Law. I don’t know enough about it to give you a list of examples here, I do know enough to have read a fair bit and been persuaded by it, so you’ll just have to satisfy that you could read up on it yourself if you had the inclination.
Deut 6.5 - ear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. [a] 5 Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. The NIV has notes that say “Or The LORD our God is one LORD; or The LORD is our God, the LORD is one ; or The LORD is our God, the LORD alone”. Hmmm…those phrases all have different implications, wouldn’t you say? (I wish I had the skills to translate myself, but I don’t).
Exodus 20.2-3 2 “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 3 “You shall have no other gods before [a] me.” NB: BEFORE has a note that says BESIDE. They have different meanings. That was my point to Homer. They dont’ have slightly different meanings, but significantly different meanings.
Melchizedek and Abram were part of different cults, but they recognised each other’s gods as “the God Most High” (Melchizedek) or the “Lord Most High” (Abraham). Interesting, don’t you think?
James, re: the second point you make - I accept that there are people with issues with Christians, however I also think the situation is a darn sight more complex than you make out. I’m yet to meet a Muslim that is half as scary as some Christians I’ve met in Australia, and I really mean that. I’m not saying there aren’t scary Muslims out there - but I haven’t me them, and I’ve met a lot of Christians who’s views genuinely frighten me.
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:21 pm
Ok, I’ve read Homer’s post again, and mentally put in punctuation and it now makes sense.
I’m not suggesting that Homer, and it’s not a novel theory at all. There’s lots of voices in the Hebrew Bible, so I think that we see a pluralism and the ongoing existence of indigenous spiritualities despite the Yahwists. I do, however, think that you don’t see a clear monotheism of the kind we have today until the NT. I also don’t think things are as clear as you suggest they are.
What all this means for me is this: I believe that Christ is the way, the truth and the light. I belive that Christ is Truth. I believe that Christianity is the easiest way to follow Christ, and therefore seek the Most High God. I haven’t thought enough about this stuff to know whether I think there could be other Gods - it doesn’t sit comfortably with me, but I suspect that’s cultural rather than with any basis in the text of the Bible (but then God can work thru culture too, surely? That’s a rhetorical question btw).
I am sure that *don’t* think that those who find God elsewhere are worshipping Satan, which is basically what you and James seem to be suggesting.
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:25 pm
Bec, need a bit of time to digest your latest comments and need an early night. I realise the issues are layer upon layer. And yes, its horrendous to witness the new oppressive church. Doesnt change truth tho.
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:32 pm
It’s very easy, Bec. There are the good guys and the bad guys - just like on TV. Nothing inbetween - no shades of grey. The forces of good are lead by God and include Angels. Angels occasionally help humans. The forces of evil are led by Satan and include demons. Demons do really bad things to people, including making them speak in tongues at pentecostal churches. Now if someone is worshiping a being that is not God, then it has got to be Satan or a demon. Hardly anyone worships Angels.
May 23rd, 2006 at 9:56 pm
There you go Duck; all seems clear to you now
May 24th, 2006 at 9:43 am
Yeah…I’ve often thought that Christianity seemed something like Celestial AFL…
May 24th, 2006 at 10:43 am
Bec,
only completely and utterly ignoring Hebrews could anyone say Melchizedek and Abram were following two different cults.
Jesus is a priest in the order of who?
Abraham would have recognised Jesus according to Jesus.
you need some solid teaching on O/T. to be the most euphemistic your theory is batty and completely contrary to the story there. perhaps start with some minor prophets.
May 24th, 2006 at 11:33 am
Fine Homer, I’ll go back and check, but I’m fairly confident you’re wrong.
And I can’t be bothered engaging with you anymore, since you never converse with people, but only throw insults at them. Considering you’re probably at least 20 years my senior, that’s very sad indeed.
May 24th, 2006 at 11:48 am
Bec,
you come up with a theory which has Abram and Melchizedek as offering two different ways to God.
you offer no evidence for it and then complain when someone tells you it is silly!
Abram paid tithes to Melchizedek.why?
Melchizedek was a priest that was a greater order than Aarons!
He also has no birth nor no death.
That is just for starters.
your theory is teetering on the edge of heresy
May 24th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
No Homer, I’m not complaining about you saying it’s silly.
I’m complaining about the insulting way you dismiss people’s thoughts/musings, ie.
You have accused me of heresy before. I’d rather risk being heretical than be a stodgy old man with no interest in learning and no capacity for compassion.
May 24th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
bec, just think about what you have said.
Abram and Melchizedek were leaders of different cults.
however Abram gave 10% of the booty to Melchizedek and then says later it has gone to God.
I’m sorry if you are offended because believe or not I do like you vie cyberspace but please don’t make statements such as these without thinking them through.
Take a look at Ezekiel and See if god tolerates syncretism
May 24th, 2006 at 2:15 pm
Homer, if you like me you have a funny way of showing it. You have accused me numerous times of being heretical.
I don’t want to engage with you - I enjoy learning, and with you I don’t feel like it’s learning but rather intellectual tennis, and I have for many years refused to go down that path with anyone. It becomes a competition, and it takes all the fun and joy out of learning and studying for me.
Sorry if you find that frustrating and a cop out, but it’s just how I feel about it. I refuse to learn more on this issue purely so that I can take you on in an intellectual competition - I will learn more of this issue because it excites and intrigues me, and because in that journey I find more of God.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:21 pm
bec,
if someone is straying down the heresy path there is no easy way of saying it.
Have a real hard think of what you have stated here and then see if you think it is compatible with what is in the bible.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:24 pm
Sorry Homer, but if someone’s a stodgy old man with no interest in learning and no capacity for compassion, there is no easy way of saying it.
Have a real hard think of what you’ve said to people on this board and then see whether you think it’s compatible with what is in the bible.
May 24th, 2006 at 2:25 pm
ooooh i think I should take a break from signposts for a while…
May 25th, 2006 at 8:41 am
someone appears so stodgy in their beliefs they cannot see heresy in front of their face.
Try Hosea 1:2 for starters.
Read Hebrews again and then see if you still believe Abram and Melchizidech are two cultic leaders.
Does the first chapter of Romans lead to believe tolerates other Gods and moreover who do they represent?
May 25th, 2006 at 8:46 am
once again Homer just refuses to look at his own self and swiftly backhands the ball back into the other court narrowly averting humility, and repentence once again.
the rev
May 25th, 2006 at 9:28 am
Homer, I told you: I am going to look into it, but I’m not going to engage in this conversation because I don’t want my desire for learning to be corrupted by competition. I don’t want to ever read my Bible (or any text for that matter) purely for the sake of proving a point.
May 25th, 2006 at 9:48 am
rev,
go then prove the God approves of other Gods being around.
Show how Abram and Melchizedek were cultic leaders.
I for one would love to hear such stuff!
May 25th, 2006 at 10:05 am
Can’t prove it, don’t believe its true, bible doesn’t support it in my opinion.
Once again Homer uses a deflection tactic to turn the focus off himself and onto an arguement and the great escape artist once again gets away with his arrogance, and superiority in tact. Wow, this man is inspiring.
the rev
May 25th, 2006 at 10:13 am
So bec is wrong rev.
sounds like you are agreeing with me.