.
PAGAN SOURCES
Are full of hatred for example in the "Acts of Pilate", which must have existed in the second century (Justin, "Apol"., I, 35), and must have been used in the pagan schools to warn boys against the belief of Christians (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", I, ix; IX, v); nor need we inquire into the question whether there existed any authentic census tables of Quirinius.
TACITUS
The testimony of Tacitus (A.D. 54-119) states that the Founder of the Christian religion, a deadly superstition in the eyes of the Romans, had been put to death by the procurator Pontius Pilate under the reign of Tiberius; that His religion, though suppressed for a time, broke forth again not only throughout Judea where it had originated, but even in Rome, the conflux of all the streams of wickedness and shamelessness; furthermore, that Nero had diverted from himself the suspicion of the burning of Rome by charging the Christians with the crime; that these latter were not guilty of arson, though they deserved their fate on account of their universal misanthropy.
Tacitus, moreover, describes some of the horrible torments to which Nero subjected the Christians (Ann., XV, xliv). The Roman writer confuses the Christians with the Jews, considering them as a especially abject Jewish sect; how little he investigated the historical truth of even the Jewish records may be inferred from the credulity with which he accepted the absurd legends and calumnies about the origin of he Hebrew people (Hist., V, iii, iv) and (Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44)
SUETONIUS
Another Roman writer who shows his acquaintance with Christ and the Christians is Suetonius (A.D. 75-160). It has been noted that Suetonius considered Christ (Chrestus) as a Roman insurgent who stirred up seditions under the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54): "Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes (Claudius) Roma expulit" (Clau., xxv). In his life of Nero he regards that emperor as a public benefactor on account of his severe treatment of the Christians: "Multa sub eo et animadversa severe, et coercita, nec minus instituta . . . . afflicti Christiani, genus hominum superstitious novae et maleficae" (Nero,xvi). The Roman writer does not understand that the Jewish troubles arose from the Jewish antagonism to the Messianic character of Jesus Christ and to the rights of the Christian Church. (Clau., xxv).
PLINY the YOUNGER
Of great importance is the letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan (about A.D. 61-115), in which the Governor of Bithynia consults his imperial majesty as to how to deal with the Christians living within his jurisdiction. On the one hand, their lives were confessedly innocent; no crime could be proved against them excepting their Christian belief, which appeared to the Roman as an extravagant and perverse superstition. On the other hand, the Christians could not be shaken in their allegiance to Christ, Whom they celebrated as their God in their early morning meetings (Ep., X, 97, 98). Christianity here appears no longer as a religion of criminals, as it does in the texts of Tacitus and Suetonius; Pliny acknowledges the high moral principles of the Christians, admires their constancy in the Faith (pervicacia et inflexibilis obstinatio), which he appears to trace back to their worship of Christ (carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, dicere).
LUCIAN
In the second century Lucian sneered at Christ and the Christians, as he scoffed at the pagan gods. He alludes to Christ's death on the Cross, to His miracles, to the mutual love prevailing among the Christians ("Philopseudes", nn. 13, 16; "De Morte Pereg"). There are also alleged allusions to Christ in Numenius (Origen, "Contra Cels", IV, 51), to His parables in Galerius, to the earthquake at the Crucifixion in Phlegon ( Origen, "Contra Cels.", II, 14). Before the end of the second century, the logos alethes of Celsus, as quoted by Origen (Contra Cels., passim), testifies that at that time the facts related in the Gospels were generally accepted as historically true. However scanty the pagan sources of the life of Christ may be, they bear at least testimony to His existence, to His miracles, His parables, His claim to Divine worship, His death on the Cross, and to the more striking characteristics of His religion.
THALLUS
An ancient historian who confirmed the fact that the land went dark when Jesus was crucified.
MARA BAR-SERAPION
Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion, who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King.
JEWISH SOURCES
The later Jewish writings show traces of acquaintance with the murder of the Holy Innocents (Wagenseil, "Confut. Libr.Toldoth", 15; Eisenmenger op. cit., I, 116; Schottgen, op. cit., II, 667),
With the flight into Egypt (cf. Josephus, "Ant." XIII, xiii)
With the stay of Jesus in the Temple at the age of twelve (Schottgen, op. cit., II, 696),
With the call of the disciples ("Sanhedrin", 43a; Wagenseil, op. cit., 17; Schottgen, loc. cit., 713),
With His miracles (Origen, "Contra Cels", II, 48; Wagenseil, op. cit., 150; Gemara "Sanhedrin" fol. 17); "Schabbath", fol. 104b; Wagenseil, op.cit., 6, 7, 17),
With His claim to be God (Origen, "Contra Cels.", I, 28; cf. Eisenmenger, op. cit., I, 152; Schottgen, loc. cit., 699)
With His betrayal by Judas and His death (Origen, "Contra cels.", II, 9, 45, 68, 70; Buxtorf, op. cit., 1458; Lightfoot, "Hor. Heb.", 458, 490, 498; Eisenmenger, loc. cit., 185; Schottgen, loc. cit.,699 700; cf. "Sanhedrin", vi, vii).
Celsus (Origen, "Contra Cels.", II, 55) tries to throw doubt on the Resurrection, while Toldoth (cf. Wagenseil, 19) repeats the Jewish fiction that the body of Jesus had been stolen from the sepulchre rather than Jesus was risen from the dead.
JOSEPHUS Jewish historian (AD 37-100) wrote of Jesus:
"About this time appeared Jesus, a wise man (if indeed it is right to call Him man; for He was a worker of astonishing deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with joy), and He drew to Himself many Jews (many also of Greeks. This was the Christ.) And when Pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those who had first loved Him did not abandon Him (for He appeared to them alive again on the third day, the holy prophets having foretold this and countless other marvels about Him.) The tribe of Christians named after Him did not cease to this day." (Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 )
Some scholars believe the statements in brackets were added later by others, most likely Christians but even if that is true there has never been any dispute regarding the accuracy of his statement regarding the crucifixion of Jesus.
However many scholars believe the whole passage concerning Jesus is genuine based on the fact that all codices or manuscripts of Josephus' work contain the same text. This would mean the Christians possessed all copies of Josephus work and were all changed in the same way. It is extremely unlikely Christians owned all the copies of Josephus, they might have had one if they were lucky.
Secondly Eusebius, Sozomen, Niceph, Isidore of Pelusium, St. Jerome, Ambrose, Cassiodorus and others appealed to the testimony of Josephus and were obviously in no doubt as to its authenticity.
(Eusebius ("Hist. Eccl"., I, xi; cf. "Dem. Ev.", III, v) Sozomen (Hist. Eccl., I, i), Niceph. (Hist. Eccl., I, 39), Isidore of Pelusium (Ep. IV, 225), St. Jerome (catal.script. eccles. xiii), Ambrose, Cassiodorus, etc.,)
PHLEGON the Gentile Historian
"Phlegon mentioned the eclipse which took place during the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus. Origen and Philopon, De. opif. mund. II21
"And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place ...”
Origen Against Celsus
The historical character of Jesus Christ is also attested by the hostile Jewish literature of the subsequent centuries. His birth is ascribed to an illicit ("Acta Pilati" in Thilo, "Codex apocryph. N.T., I, 526; cf. Justin, "Apol.", I, 35), or even an adulterous, union of His parents (Origen, "Contra Cels.," I, 28, 32).
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm
There are many Jewish writings that show traces of acquaintance with the murder of the Innocents (Wagenseil, "Confut. Libr.Toldoth", 15; Eisenmenger op. cit., I, 116; Schottgen, op. cit., II, 667),
With the flight into Egypt (cf. Josephus, "Ant." XIII, xiii),
With the stay of Jesus in the Temple at the age of twelve (Schottgen, op. cit., II, 696),
With the call of the disciples ("Sanhedrin", 43a; Wagenseil, op. cit., 17; Schottgen, loc. cit., 713),
With His miracles (Origen, "Contra Cels", II, 48; Wagenseil, op. cit., 150; Gemara "Sanhedrin" fol. 17); "Schabbath", fol. 104b; Wagenseil, op.cit., 6, 7, 17),
With His claim to be God (Origen, "Contra Cels.", I, 28; cf. Eisenmenger, op. cit., I, 152; Schottgen, loc. cit., 699)
With His betrayal by Judas and His death (Origen, "Contra cels.", II, 9, 45, 68, 70; Buxtorf, op. cit., 1458; Lightfoot, "Hor. Heb.", 458, 490, 498; Eisenmenger, loc. cit., 185; Schottgen, loc. cit.,699 700; cf."Sanhedrin", vi, vii).
So significant is Jesus in man's history that the Encyclopedia Britannica has 20,000 words in describing this person, Jesus. His description took more space than was given to Aristotle, Cicero, Alexander, Julius Caesar, Buddha, Confucius, Mohammed or Napolean Bonaparte.
Here is a quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica concerning the testimony of the many independent secular accounts of Jesus of Nazareth:
“These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.”
http://www.creatingfutures.net/birth.html
http://www.sowhataboutjesus.com/existed.php
.
Saturday, 30 August 2008
ATHEISM versus CHRISTIANITY
.
Everyone has a set of beliefs and the belief there is no God is a belief. People also have morality, combine the two and you have a belief system which in the case of atheists is a morality without God called “Humanism.”
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/b-humanism-is-religion.htm
Just about everyone denies the existence of a soul and the impossibility of an afterlife. The logical conclusion is that people can do what they like for tomorrow we die.
Dawkins insists that morality is not based in absolute truth but is based on the consequences or the outcome of our actions. In this way you can justify anything and if you listen to any despot they can always justify their actions. Personally I think it is opening the door for people to do as they like providing they can show some sort of justification for their actions and personally I think people should be stopped from preaching this sort of sedition which is very dangerous imo.
The Bible talks about sedition and it compares the two philosophies and I know which I would rather have. It just seems to me that people prefer the former rather than the latter and this is why society is so sick imo and Richard Dawkins doesn’t help.
Here are the two philosophies:
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. (Galatians 5:19)
.
Everyone has a set of beliefs and the belief there is no God is a belief. People also have morality, combine the two and you have a belief system which in the case of atheists is a morality without God called “Humanism.”
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/b-humanism-is-religion.htm
Just about everyone denies the existence of a soul and the impossibility of an afterlife. The logical conclusion is that people can do what they like for tomorrow we die.
Dawkins insists that morality is not based in absolute truth but is based on the consequences or the outcome of our actions. In this way you can justify anything and if you listen to any despot they can always justify their actions. Personally I think it is opening the door for people to do as they like providing they can show some sort of justification for their actions and personally I think people should be stopped from preaching this sort of sedition which is very dangerous imo.
The Bible talks about sedition and it compares the two philosophies and I know which I would rather have. It just seems to me that people prefer the former rather than the latter and this is why society is so sick imo and Richard Dawkins doesn’t help.
Here are the two philosophies:
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. (Galatians 5:19)
.
Wednesday, 27 August 2008
FAITH
.
I put it to you that people have a reason for their faith and they are the only ones who can talk about it. I resent atheists telling me about something of which they have no knowledge. What I cannot understand about atheists is how selective they are. For example they are happy to believe in Alexander the Great but they choose not to believe in Jesus which only goes to prove that people believe what they want. It also proves how irrational atheists are.
You are using the word faith in the sense of believing in something that cannot be proved. But equally we have faith in doctors and we believe or have faith in our car that it will start in the morning. Faith can be very positive and in the Bible faith (pistis) means assurance, confidence, or proof. (Its English meaning differs from the Greek word πίστις.)
We can see its use in Acts 17:31:
“For he has fixed a day in which he will judge the whole world with justice by means of a man he has chosen. He has given proof (pistis, πίστις) of this to everyone by raising that man from the dead!"
Faith in the Bible (pistis) means confidence, assurance or proof as in things seen, and people living in New Testament times had this faith which was based on evidence, so it was a firm faith. But even so there were many who doubted and even doubting Thomas asked to touch the wounds of Jesus.
Christ himself often spoke of people as having little faith, but those who had faith had the assurance that comes with the proof of what they have seen and heard for themselves and it was that which gave them their confidence and the assurance of their faith. It is this same assurance and confidence that Christians have today. I have the same faith in Jesus as I have in Julius Caesar except that one is dead and the other rose from the dead. My faith has a solid foundation based on the historical Jesus, fulfilled prophesy, and the historicity of the Bible and is something Richard Dawkins knows nothing about.
.
I put it to you that people have a reason for their faith and they are the only ones who can talk about it. I resent atheists telling me about something of which they have no knowledge. What I cannot understand about atheists is how selective they are. For example they are happy to believe in Alexander the Great but they choose not to believe in Jesus which only goes to prove that people believe what they want. It also proves how irrational atheists are.
You are using the word faith in the sense of believing in something that cannot be proved. But equally we have faith in doctors and we believe or have faith in our car that it will start in the morning. Faith can be very positive and in the Bible faith (pistis) means assurance, confidence, or proof. (Its English meaning differs from the Greek word πίστις.)
We can see its use in Acts 17:31:
“For he has fixed a day in which he will judge the whole world with justice by means of a man he has chosen. He has given proof (pistis, πίστις) of this to everyone by raising that man from the dead!"
Faith in the Bible (pistis) means confidence, assurance or proof as in things seen, and people living in New Testament times had this faith which was based on evidence, so it was a firm faith. But even so there were many who doubted and even doubting Thomas asked to touch the wounds of Jesus.
Christ himself often spoke of people as having little faith, but those who had faith had the assurance that comes with the proof of what they have seen and heard for themselves and it was that which gave them their confidence and the assurance of their faith. It is this same assurance and confidence that Christians have today. I have the same faith in Jesus as I have in Julius Caesar except that one is dead and the other rose from the dead. My faith has a solid foundation based on the historical Jesus, fulfilled prophesy, and the historicity of the Bible and is something Richard Dawkins knows nothing about.
.
Monday, 25 August 2008
Paradox
.
A paradox cannot exist. Basically you are talking about opposites. You cannot have a hot cold front, you cannot have wooden iron, you cannot have hot ice, you cannot have something that is so heavy a child can lift it, you cannot say "I always lie' because if it is true it must be false" and neither can you have a perfect person telling lies or he wouldn't be perfect, like God.
.
A paradox cannot exist. Basically you are talking about opposites. You cannot have a hot cold front, you cannot have wooden iron, you cannot have hot ice, you cannot have something that is so heavy a child can lift it, you cannot say "I always lie' because if it is true it must be false" and neither can you have a perfect person telling lies or he wouldn't be perfect, like God.
.
Saturday, 16 August 2008
Mark Chapter 7
.
The Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus as they often did with their trick questions. Jesus in reply says "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!”
In other words he is saying they twist the Old Testament and he gives them an example which is your quote from Mark 7.
“For Moses said, Honour your father and your mother” and, “Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death”
If you notice there is the little word “and” in between. They are two seperate quotes merged into one.
The Old Testament does not say what the Pharisees said it did. The first quote is the fifth Commandment, “Honour your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord God is giving you.”
The second quote is from the next chapter Exodus chapter 21 which is the Law of Moses,
“Anyone who attacks his father or his mother must be put to death.”
Running the two separate verses into each other as the Pharisees did gives you something altogether different and Jesus was pointing out how people twist things to suit themselves. The Pharisees were wrong to twist scripture in the way they did.
The quote which reads as though Jesus is saying it is incorrect, and obviously error on error leads to further error giving us the situation we have today.
.
The Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus as they often did with their trick questions. Jesus in reply says "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!”
In other words he is saying they twist the Old Testament and he gives them an example which is your quote from Mark 7.
“For Moses said, Honour your father and your mother” and, “Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death”
If you notice there is the little word “and” in between. They are two seperate quotes merged into one.
The Old Testament does not say what the Pharisees said it did. The first quote is the fifth Commandment, “Honour your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord God is giving you.”
The second quote is from the next chapter Exodus chapter 21 which is the Law of Moses,
“Anyone who attacks his father or his mother must be put to death.”
Running the two separate verses into each other as the Pharisees did gives you something altogether different and Jesus was pointing out how people twist things to suit themselves. The Pharisees were wrong to twist scripture in the way they did.
The quote which reads as though Jesus is saying it is incorrect, and obviously error on error leads to further error giving us the situation we have today.
.
Wednesday, 13 August 2008
What is a Christian?
.
Right, people claim to be a Christian for any of six reasons. Who do you think is the real Christian.
1) You were born in England so that makes you a Christian.
2) Your parents were Christian so that makes you a Christian.
3) You were Christened as a baby so that makes you a Christian.
4) You do good deeds and you keep the Ten Commandants.
5) You go to church so that makes you a Christian.
6) You believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, you acknowledge you are a sinner before him, you repent of your sins and you ask him into your heart and life.
.
Right, people claim to be a Christian for any of six reasons. Who do you think is the real Christian.
1) You were born in England so that makes you a Christian.
2) Your parents were Christian so that makes you a Christian.
3) You were Christened as a baby so that makes you a Christian.
4) You do good deeds and you keep the Ten Commandants.
5) You go to church so that makes you a Christian.
6) You believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, you acknowledge you are a sinner before him, you repent of your sins and you ask him into your heart and life.
.
Tuesday, 12 August 2008
Psalm 82
.
v1 God is the leader of a meeting (The meeting of nations) of the powerful ones (Wicked powerful leaders). He (God) is telling the (false) gods what he has decided.
v2 (God says) "How long will you not be fair to people? (How long) will you (false gods) say that the godless are right?"
v3 (God continues) Be fair and give help to:
(a) people that are weak
(b) children with dead parents
(c) people that are poor
(d) anyone who has nothing.
v4 Make the poor people safe and give them the help that they need. Take them away from the power of the godless (people like Hitler).
v5 They (the godless) know nothing and they understand nothing (That's you jobee). They walk about in darkness. The ground beneath them moves about (People like Hitler are so full of themselves they even think the earth moves under their feet when they walk).
v6 I (God) say, "You are gods (Hitler worshipped the false gods of the occult) and you are all sons of the Most High (false gods are subject to Almighty God like a son is subject to his father).
v7 But you will die like Adam. You will fall like rulers" (Like Hitler did).
v8 (The psalmist pleads with God to: -)
"God, stand up and rule the earth because all the countries in it belong to you."
One day, the one true God will rule all the earth.
.
v1 God is the leader of a meeting (The meeting of nations) of the powerful ones (Wicked powerful leaders). He (God) is telling the (false) gods what he has decided.
v2 (God says) "How long will you not be fair to people? (How long) will you (false gods) say that the godless are right?"
v3 (God continues) Be fair and give help to:
(a) people that are weak
(b) children with dead parents
(c) people that are poor
(d) anyone who has nothing.
v4 Make the poor people safe and give them the help that they need. Take them away from the power of the godless (people like Hitler).
v5 They (the godless) know nothing and they understand nothing (That's you jobee). They walk about in darkness. The ground beneath them moves about (People like Hitler are so full of themselves they even think the earth moves under their feet when they walk).
v6 I (God) say, "You are gods (Hitler worshipped the false gods of the occult) and you are all sons of the Most High (false gods are subject to Almighty God like a son is subject to his father).
v7 But you will die like Adam. You will fall like rulers" (Like Hitler did).
v8 (The psalmist pleads with God to: -)
"God, stand up and rule the earth because all the countries in it belong to you."
One day, the one true God will rule all the earth.
.
Monday, 11 August 2008
Statement of Faith
.
I can happily agree with this dictionary definition of Christianity.
Christian
adj.
1. Following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.
n.
1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.
I believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God and the final authority in matters of faith and practice and am happy to hold to the two earliest creeds put forth by the church, generally known today as the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed:
Apostles Creed
I believe in God the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried. He descended to Hades, on the third day rose again from the dead, ascended to heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. From there He will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy universal church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting.
Nicene Creed
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of His Father, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made, both that are in heaven and in earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, was incarnate and was made man. He suffered and the third day he rose again, and ascended into heaven. And he shall come again to judge both the living and the dead. And we believe in the Holy Spirit.
Hitler could not have said any of that.
********************************************************
1. We believe the Bible is God’s Word, given by divine inspiration, the record of God’s revelation of Himself to humanity. It is trustworthy, sufficient, without error – our authority and guide for all doctrine and conduct (John 17.17; 2 Timothy 3.16, 17). It is the truth by which God brings people into a saving relationship with Himself and leads them to Christian maturity (John 20.31; 1 John 5.9-12; Matthew 4.4; 1 Peter 2.2).
2. We believe in the one living and true God, perfect in wisdom, sovereignty, holiness, justice, mercy, and love (1 Timothy 1.17; Psalm 86.15; Deuteronomy 32.3, 4). He exists eternally in three coequal persons who act together in creation, providence, and redemption (Genesis 1.26; 1 Peter 1.2; Hebrews 1.1-3).
a. The Father reigns with providential care over all life and history in the created universe; He hears and answers prayer (1Chronicles 29.11-13; Matthew 7.11). He initiated salvation by sending His Son, He is Father to those who by faith accept His Son as Lord and Saviour (1 John 4. 9, 10; John 3.16; John 1.12; Acts 16.31), and He is seeking those who will worship Him in spirit and in truth (John 4.23).
b. The Son became man, Jesus Christ, conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary (John 1.14; Matthew 1.18). Being fully God and fully man, He revealed God through His sinless life, miracles, and teaching, and gave us an example by which to live our lives (John 14.9; Hebrews 4.15, Matthew 4.23, 24; Philippians 2.5-8). He provided salvation through His atoning death in our place and by His bodily resurrection, disarming His enemies and triumphing over them by the cross (1 Corinthians 15.3, 4; 2 Corinthians 5.12; Romans 4.13-25; Colossians 2.15). He ascended into heaven where He rules over all creation (Philippians 2.5-11) and intercedes for all believers (Romans 8.34; John 14.23).
c. The Holy Spirit inspired men to write the scriptures (2 Peter 1.21). He convicts individuals of their sinfulness and of the righteousness of Christ, draws them to the Saviour, and bears witness to their new birth (James 1.18; John 16.7-11; 1 Thessalonians 1.5, 6; Romans 8.16). At regeneration and conversion the believer is baptized in the Holy Spirit, who then indwells, seals, and gives spiritual gifts to all believers for ministry in the church and society (1 Corinthians 12.13; Romans 8.9-11; Ephesians 1.13, 14; Romans 12.5-8; 1 Peter 4.10). He empowers, guides, teaches, fills, sanctifies, and produces fruit of Christ-likeness in all who yield to Him (Acts 4.31; Romans 8.14; 1 Corinthians 2.10-13; Ephesians 5.18; 2 Thessalonians 2.13; Galatians 5.16, 22, 23).
3. We believe God created an order of spiritual beings called angels to serve Him and do His will (Psalm 148.1-5; Colossians 1.16). The holy angels are obedient spirits ministering to the heirs of salvation and glorifying God (Hebrews 1.6, 7, 13, 14). Certain angels, called demons, Satan being their chief, through deliberate choice revolted and fell from their exalted position (Revelation 12.7-9). Although disarmed through the cross of Christ, they still tempt individuals to rebel against God (Colossians 2.15; 1 Timothy 4.1; 1 Peter 5.8). Their destiny in hell has been sealed by Christ’s victory over sin and death (Hebrews 2.14; Revelation 20.10).
4. We believe God created men and women in His own image to have fellowship with Himself and to be stewards over His creation (Genesis 1.26-28). As a result, each person is unique, possesses dignity, and is worthy of respect (Psalm 139.13-17). Through the temptation and deception of Satan, Adam and Eve chose to disobey God; this brought sin and death to the human race and suffering to all creation (Genesis 3; 1 Timothy 2.14; Romans 5.12-21; 8.22). Therefore, everyone is born with a sinful nature and needs to be reconciled to God (Romans 3.9-18, 23). Satan tempts people to rebel against God, even those who love Him (Ephesians 4.27; 2 Corinthians 2.11; Matthew 16.23). Nonetheless, all have been given a free will and are personally responsible to God for thoughts, actions, and beliefs, and have the right to approach Him directly through Jesus Christ, the only mediator (Romans 14.12; 1 Timothy 2.5).
5. We believe salvation is redemption by Christ of the whole person from oppression, fear, sin, and death (Luke 4.18; John 10.10; 1 John 4.18; 2 Timothy 1.9; 1 Thessalonians 5.23). It is offered as a free gift by God to all and must be received personally through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2.4; Ephesians 2.8, 9; Acts 20.21). An individual is united to Christ by the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 2.20; Colossians 1.27). As a child of God, the believer is acquitted of all guilt and brought into a new relationship of peace with God and with one another (Romans 5.1; Ephesians 2.14). Christians grow spiritually as the Holy Spirit enables them to understand and obey the Word of God (John 14.25; 2 Peter 3.18; Ephesians 4.15; 1 Thessalonians 3.12).
6. We believe the Church is the body of which Christ is the head and all who believe in Him are members (Ephesians 1.22, 23; Romans 12.4, 5). Christians are commanded to be baptized upon their profession of faith and to unite with a local church for mutual encouragement and growth in discipleship through worship, nurture, service, and the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the world (Acts 2.41, 47; Luke 24.45-48; Hebrews 10.24, 25). Each church is a self-governing body under the Lordship of Christ with all members sharing responsibility. The form of government is understood to be congregational (Matthew 18.17; Acts 6.3-6; 15.22, 23).
7. The ordinances of the church are baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28.18-20). It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s identification with the death, burial, and resurrection, of the Saviour Jesus Christ (Romans 6.3-5). The Lord’s Supper is the partaking of the bread and cup by believers together as a continuing memorial of the broken body and shed blood of Christ. It is an act of thankful dedication to Him and serves to unite His people until He returns (1 Corinthians 11.23-26).
8. We believe religious liberty, rooted in scripture, is the inalienable right of all individuals to freedom of conscience, with ultimate accountability to God (Genesis 1.27; John 8.32; 2 Corinthians 3.17; Romans 8.21; Acts 5.29). Church and state exist by the will of God. Each has distinctive concerns and responsibilities, free from control by the other. Christians should pray for civil leaders, and obey and support government in matters not contrary to scripture (1 Timothy 2.1-4; Romans 13.1-7; 1 Peter 2.13-16).
9. We believe Christians, individually and collectively, are salt and light in society (Matthew 5.13-16). In a Christ-like spirit, they oppose greed, selfishness, and vice; they promote truth, justice, and peace; they aid the needy and preserve the dignity of people of all races and conditions (Hebrews 13.5; Luke 9.23; Titus 2.12; Philippians 4.8, 9; 1 John 3.16, 17; James 2.1-4).
10. We believe the Bible teaches that marriage refers to the covenant relationship between one man and one woman, as instituted by God in the beginning, to the exclusion of all others (Genesis 1.20b-24). We affirm the family as the basic unit of society and seek to preserve its integrity and stability (Genesis 2:21-25; Ephesians 6:1-4).
11. We believe God, in His own time and in His own way, will bring all things to their appropriate end and establish the new heaven and the new earth (Ephesians 1.9, 10; Revelation 21.1). The certain hope of the Christian is that Jesus Christ will return to earth suddenly, personally, and visibly in accordance with His promise (Titus 2.13; Revelation 1.7; 3.11; John 14.1-3). The dead will be raised, and Christ will judge mankind in righteousness (John 5.28, 29). The unrighteous will be consigned to everlasting punishment prepared for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25.41, 46; Revelation 20.10). The righteous, in their resurrected and glorified bodies, will receive their reward and dwell forever with the Lord (Philippians 3.20, 21; 2 Corinthians 5.10; 1 Thessalonians 4.13-18).
(Adapted from the North American Baptist Conference “Statement of Beliefs”).
http://elimbaptistchurch.ca/statement-of-faith/
.
I can happily agree with this dictionary definition of Christianity.
Christian
adj.
1. Following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.
n.
1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.
I believe the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God and the final authority in matters of faith and practice and am happy to hold to the two earliest creeds put forth by the church, generally known today as the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed:
Apostles Creed
I believe in God the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried. He descended to Hades, on the third day rose again from the dead, ascended to heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. From there He will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy universal church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting.
Nicene Creed
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of His Father, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made, both that are in heaven and in earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, was incarnate and was made man. He suffered and the third day he rose again, and ascended into heaven. And he shall come again to judge both the living and the dead. And we believe in the Holy Spirit.
Hitler could not have said any of that.
********************************************************
1. We believe the Bible is God’s Word, given by divine inspiration, the record of God’s revelation of Himself to humanity. It is trustworthy, sufficient, without error – our authority and guide for all doctrine and conduct (John 17.17; 2 Timothy 3.16, 17). It is the truth by which God brings people into a saving relationship with Himself and leads them to Christian maturity (John 20.31; 1 John 5.9-12; Matthew 4.4; 1 Peter 2.2).
2. We believe in the one living and true God, perfect in wisdom, sovereignty, holiness, justice, mercy, and love (1 Timothy 1.17; Psalm 86.15; Deuteronomy 32.3, 4). He exists eternally in three coequal persons who act together in creation, providence, and redemption (Genesis 1.26; 1 Peter 1.2; Hebrews 1.1-3).
a. The Father reigns with providential care over all life and history in the created universe; He hears and answers prayer (1Chronicles 29.11-13; Matthew 7.11). He initiated salvation by sending His Son, He is Father to those who by faith accept His Son as Lord and Saviour (1 John 4. 9, 10; John 3.16; John 1.12; Acts 16.31), and He is seeking those who will worship Him in spirit and in truth (John 4.23).
b. The Son became man, Jesus Christ, conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary (John 1.14; Matthew 1.18). Being fully God and fully man, He revealed God through His sinless life, miracles, and teaching, and gave us an example by which to live our lives (John 14.9; Hebrews 4.15, Matthew 4.23, 24; Philippians 2.5-8). He provided salvation through His atoning death in our place and by His bodily resurrection, disarming His enemies and triumphing over them by the cross (1 Corinthians 15.3, 4; 2 Corinthians 5.12; Romans 4.13-25; Colossians 2.15). He ascended into heaven where He rules over all creation (Philippians 2.5-11) and intercedes for all believers (Romans 8.34; John 14.23).
c. The Holy Spirit inspired men to write the scriptures (2 Peter 1.21). He convicts individuals of their sinfulness and of the righteousness of Christ, draws them to the Saviour, and bears witness to their new birth (James 1.18; John 16.7-11; 1 Thessalonians 1.5, 6; Romans 8.16). At regeneration and conversion the believer is baptized in the Holy Spirit, who then indwells, seals, and gives spiritual gifts to all believers for ministry in the church and society (1 Corinthians 12.13; Romans 8.9-11; Ephesians 1.13, 14; Romans 12.5-8; 1 Peter 4.10). He empowers, guides, teaches, fills, sanctifies, and produces fruit of Christ-likeness in all who yield to Him (Acts 4.31; Romans 8.14; 1 Corinthians 2.10-13; Ephesians 5.18; 2 Thessalonians 2.13; Galatians 5.16, 22, 23).
3. We believe God created an order of spiritual beings called angels to serve Him and do His will (Psalm 148.1-5; Colossians 1.16). The holy angels are obedient spirits ministering to the heirs of salvation and glorifying God (Hebrews 1.6, 7, 13, 14). Certain angels, called demons, Satan being their chief, through deliberate choice revolted and fell from their exalted position (Revelation 12.7-9). Although disarmed through the cross of Christ, they still tempt individuals to rebel against God (Colossians 2.15; 1 Timothy 4.1; 1 Peter 5.8). Their destiny in hell has been sealed by Christ’s victory over sin and death (Hebrews 2.14; Revelation 20.10).
4. We believe God created men and women in His own image to have fellowship with Himself and to be stewards over His creation (Genesis 1.26-28). As a result, each person is unique, possesses dignity, and is worthy of respect (Psalm 139.13-17). Through the temptation and deception of Satan, Adam and Eve chose to disobey God; this brought sin and death to the human race and suffering to all creation (Genesis 3; 1 Timothy 2.14; Romans 5.12-21; 8.22). Therefore, everyone is born with a sinful nature and needs to be reconciled to God (Romans 3.9-18, 23). Satan tempts people to rebel against God, even those who love Him (Ephesians 4.27; 2 Corinthians 2.11; Matthew 16.23). Nonetheless, all have been given a free will and are personally responsible to God for thoughts, actions, and beliefs, and have the right to approach Him directly through Jesus Christ, the only mediator (Romans 14.12; 1 Timothy 2.5).
5. We believe salvation is redemption by Christ of the whole person from oppression, fear, sin, and death (Luke 4.18; John 10.10; 1 John 4.18; 2 Timothy 1.9; 1 Thessalonians 5.23). It is offered as a free gift by God to all and must be received personally through repentance and faith in Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2.4; Ephesians 2.8, 9; Acts 20.21). An individual is united to Christ by the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 2.20; Colossians 1.27). As a child of God, the believer is acquitted of all guilt and brought into a new relationship of peace with God and with one another (Romans 5.1; Ephesians 2.14). Christians grow spiritually as the Holy Spirit enables them to understand and obey the Word of God (John 14.25; 2 Peter 3.18; Ephesians 4.15; 1 Thessalonians 3.12).
6. We believe the Church is the body of which Christ is the head and all who believe in Him are members (Ephesians 1.22, 23; Romans 12.4, 5). Christians are commanded to be baptized upon their profession of faith and to unite with a local church for mutual encouragement and growth in discipleship through worship, nurture, service, and the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the world (Acts 2.41, 47; Luke 24.45-48; Hebrews 10.24, 25). Each church is a self-governing body under the Lordship of Christ with all members sharing responsibility. The form of government is understood to be congregational (Matthew 18.17; Acts 6.3-6; 15.22, 23).
7. The ordinances of the church are baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28.18-20). It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s identification with the death, burial, and resurrection, of the Saviour Jesus Christ (Romans 6.3-5). The Lord’s Supper is the partaking of the bread and cup by believers together as a continuing memorial of the broken body and shed blood of Christ. It is an act of thankful dedication to Him and serves to unite His people until He returns (1 Corinthians 11.23-26).
8. We believe religious liberty, rooted in scripture, is the inalienable right of all individuals to freedom of conscience, with ultimate accountability to God (Genesis 1.27; John 8.32; 2 Corinthians 3.17; Romans 8.21; Acts 5.29). Church and state exist by the will of God. Each has distinctive concerns and responsibilities, free from control by the other. Christians should pray for civil leaders, and obey and support government in matters not contrary to scripture (1 Timothy 2.1-4; Romans 13.1-7; 1 Peter 2.13-16).
9. We believe Christians, individually and collectively, are salt and light in society (Matthew 5.13-16). In a Christ-like spirit, they oppose greed, selfishness, and vice; they promote truth, justice, and peace; they aid the needy and preserve the dignity of people of all races and conditions (Hebrews 13.5; Luke 9.23; Titus 2.12; Philippians 4.8, 9; 1 John 3.16, 17; James 2.1-4).
10. We believe the Bible teaches that marriage refers to the covenant relationship between one man and one woman, as instituted by God in the beginning, to the exclusion of all others (Genesis 1.20b-24). We affirm the family as the basic unit of society and seek to preserve its integrity and stability (Genesis 2:21-25; Ephesians 6:1-4).
11. We believe God, in His own time and in His own way, will bring all things to their appropriate end and establish the new heaven and the new earth (Ephesians 1.9, 10; Revelation 21.1). The certain hope of the Christian is that Jesus Christ will return to earth suddenly, personally, and visibly in accordance with His promise (Titus 2.13; Revelation 1.7; 3.11; John 14.1-3). The dead will be raised, and Christ will judge mankind in righteousness (John 5.28, 29). The unrighteous will be consigned to everlasting punishment prepared for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25.41, 46; Revelation 20.10). The righteous, in their resurrected and glorified bodies, will receive their reward and dwell forever with the Lord (Philippians 3.20, 21; 2 Corinthians 5.10; 1 Thessalonians 4.13-18).
(Adapted from the North American Baptist Conference “Statement of Beliefs”).
http://elimbaptistchurch.ca/statement-of-faith/
.
Sunday, 10 August 2008
Jesus on Divorce
.
This is what Jesus said and I hope it helps. The way I read it is that if one partner is unfaithful then that partner has committed adultery, which we know. But then it says if the reason for divorce was unfaithfulness then that leaves the other partner free to remarry.
But now I (Jesus) tell you: if a man divorces his wife for any cause other than her unfaithfulness, then he is guilty of making her commit adultery if she marries again; (Matthew 5:31)
I (Jesus) tell you, then, that any man who divorces his wife for any cause other than her unfaithfulness, commits adultery if he marries some other woman." (Matthew 19:9)
The exception to the rule seems to be that it is OK to remarry if your other-half was unfaithful?
.
This is what Jesus said and I hope it helps. The way I read it is that if one partner is unfaithful then that partner has committed adultery, which we know. But then it says if the reason for divorce was unfaithfulness then that leaves the other partner free to remarry.
But now I (Jesus) tell you: if a man divorces his wife for any cause other than her unfaithfulness, then he is guilty of making her commit adultery if she marries again; (Matthew 5:31)
I (Jesus) tell you, then, that any man who divorces his wife for any cause other than her unfaithfulness, commits adultery if he marries some other woman." (Matthew 19:9)
The exception to the rule seems to be that it is OK to remarry if your other-half was unfaithful?
.
Thursday, 7 August 2008
Women at Christian Funerals
.
There have always been women at Christian funerals.
Soon afterward Jesus went to a town named Nain, accompanied by his disciples and a large crowd. Just as he arrived at the gate of the town, a funeral procession was coming out. The dead man was the only son of a woman who was a widow, and a large crowd from the town was with her. When the Lord saw her, his heart was filled with pity for her, and he said to her, "Don't cry." (Luke 7:11)
Ther followyd the corse Mr. John Roche his sone, as chief mourner, alone; and after hym ij. coples of mourners more. Then the sword-berer and my lord maire in black. Then the aldermen and sheriffs after theim, and the hole lyvory of this felowshippe, in order. Then the ladys and gentylwomen, as the aldermen's wyfes and others, which, after dirige, cam home to his house and dranke, where they had spice-brede and comfetts, wyne, ale, and beere.
After the Reformation we have "The proceedinge to the funerall of a Knight in
Fyrste, the children of the hospitall two and two.
Then two yeomen conductors, in blacke cotes, with blacke staves in their handes.
Then poor men in gownes two and two.
Then poor weomen in gownes two and two.
Then the quyer.
Then the preacher.
Then the standard borne by a gentleman in gowne and hoode.
Then gentleweomen in gownes.
Then all the aldermen of the cytie that weare blackes.
Then the executors of the defunct.
Then the preacher, yf he be a deane.
Then the penon, borne by a gentleman in gowne and hoode.
Then the healme and creaste borne by a pursuevant.
Then the coate of armes borne by a herald.
Then Clarentius, kinge of armes of the province.
The corpes, covered with a pall of blacke velvett, borne by vj. yeomen in blacke cotes, assisted by iiij. gentlemen in gownes and hoodes, as also betweene iiij. penons of armes, videliz. one of the defuncts, one of the cities, one other of the companie wherof he was free, and the iiijth of the Marchante Venturers or of the Marchants of Muscovye, or such lyke.
Then next after the corpes followeth the chief mourner.
Then other two mourners.
Then other two mourners.
Then followeth the chamberlayne and towne clerke of
Then the swordbearer.
Then the lorde maior in blacke.
Then the aldermen havinge no blackes.
Then the estates of weomen havinge blackes.
Then aldermen's wyfes havinge no blackes.
Then the companyes.
Then the masters of the hospitalls, with grene staves.
Then the neyghbours and other parishoners.
In "the Last Chronicle of Barset", Trollope writes of Mr. Harding's funeral:
"The dean and the archdeacon came first, shoulder to shoulder, and after them came their wives. I do not know that it was the proper order for mourning, "
The wives were Mr. Harding's daughters.
Trollope was simply commentating on the order of the funeral cortège.
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=45506
.
Saturday, 2 August 2008
Jesus came to Fulfill the Law
.
MATTHEWS5:17-48 Jesus and the law (cf Lk. 16:17; 12:58-59; 16:18; 6:27-36).
This long section is all on one theme, and it is important that its parts should not be interpreted in isolation from each other. The theme is Jesus' 'fulfilment' of the law, which is expressed by general statements (17-20) followed by a series of six examples contrasting Jesus' teaching with the accepted understanding of the OT law (21-47) and a concluding summary (48).
In vs 17-20 Jesus places the Law alongside the Prophets as finding fulfilment in him (for this sense of the law as 'prophesying' until Jesus came cf. 11:13; and Rom. 10:4; Gal. 3:24). To fulfil is to bring about that to which Scripture pointed, and that is what Jesus has now done. But the fulfilment of the law does not mean its abolition; it remains wholly authoritative and demands the fullest respect of the disciple (18-19). The question remains, however, how its function for the disciple is affected by its fulfilment in Jesus, and v 20 indicates that the meticulous legalism of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law is inadequate in the new context of the kingdom of heaven. Some higher approach is needed, and that is what vs 21-47 go on to spell out, by showing how Jesus' demand surpasses that of current ethical teaching based on the OT law. It does this not by being more scrupulous in literal observance but by penetrating to the true will of God enshrined in the law.
Thus in the first two examples (21-30) a mere literal avoidance of murder and adultery does not get to the heart of the problem. Underlying these outward acts are the fundamental attitudes of hatred and lust. Where the heart is not right, drastic action is needed to correct it before it results in outward sin.
Thirdly (31-32), a literal appeal to Dt. 24:1-4 had led to the sanctioning of divorce provided the due form of certification was observed, but Jesus restates God's original purpose of the permanence of marriage (see on 19:3-12 for fuller discussion).
Fourthly (33-37), Jesus sets aside the intricate discussion of the relative weight of different oaths (cf. 23:16-22) in favour of the ideal of simple truthfulness, which makes oaths and vows unnecessary. Here, as with the issue of divorce, Jesus refuses to allow the law's regulations, which were designed to control human sinfulness, to take precedence over God's original intention. Ethical standards must be built not on the law's concessions but on the positive purpose of God.
Fifthly (38-42), the natural desire for vengeance and retaliation may conveniently be justified from the OT's regulations, which were originally designed to limit the extent of legal retribution (An eye for an eye etc.}. But to extend this principle to personal ethics makes it a charter for self-interest. By a series of vivid examples (39-42), Jesus calls instead for an unselfish attitude which not only refuses to retaliate but does not resist, even when it would be legally right to do so. Such an attitude is one which subordinates one's own rights to the benefit of others.
Finally (43-47), the natural inference that the OT's command to love one's neighbour carries the corollary that one should hate one's enemy is replaced by the extraordinary command to love one's enemies. Here again Jesus goes far beyond the explicit teaching of the OT law and offers an ethic in sharp contrast to natural human values.
Thus, in all these examples a superficial observance of the letter of the law has given way to a radical search for the true will of God. This goes beyond the literal interpretation of the law and may indeed in some cases leave it on one side, as Jesus' sovereign authority [I say to you] reveals the radically alternative value-scale which discipleship must involve. It is amazingly but appropriately summed up in the concluding verse, Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Legalism has been left far behind, and the law has been 'fulfilled'.
MATTHEWS5:17-48 Jesus and the law (cf Lk. 16:17; 12:58-59; 16:18; 6:27-36).
This long section is all on one theme, and it is important that its parts should not be interpreted in isolation from each other. The theme is Jesus' 'fulfilment' of the law, which is expressed by general statements (17-20) followed by a series of six examples contrasting Jesus' teaching with the accepted understanding of the OT law (21-47) and a concluding summary (48).
In vs 17-20 Jesus places the Law alongside the Prophets as finding fulfilment in him (for this sense of the law as 'prophesying' until Jesus came cf. 11:13; and Rom. 10:4; Gal. 3:24). To fulfil is to bring about that to which Scripture pointed, and that is what Jesus has now done. But the fulfilment of the law does not mean its abolition; it remains wholly authoritative and demands the fullest respect of the disciple (18-19). The question remains, however, how its function for the disciple is affected by its fulfilment in Jesus, and v 20 indicates that the meticulous legalism of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law is inadequate in the new context of the kingdom of heaven. Some higher approach is needed, and that is what vs 21-47 go on to spell out, by showing how Jesus' demand surpasses that of current ethical teaching based on the OT law. It does this not by being more scrupulous in literal observance but by penetrating to the true will of God enshrined in the law.
Thus in the first two examples (21-30) a mere literal avoidance of murder and adultery does not get to the heart of the problem. Underlying these outward acts are the fundamental attitudes of hatred and lust. Where the heart is not right, drastic action is needed to correct it before it results in outward sin.
Thirdly (31-32), a literal appeal to Dt. 24:1-4 had led to the sanctioning of divorce provided the due form of certification was observed, but Jesus restates God's original purpose of the permanence of marriage (see on 19:3-12 for fuller discussion).
Fourthly (33-37), Jesus sets aside the intricate discussion of the relative weight of different oaths (cf. 23:16-22) in favour of the ideal of simple truthfulness, which makes oaths and vows unnecessary. Here, as with the issue of divorce, Jesus refuses to allow the law's regulations, which were designed to control human sinfulness, to take precedence over God's original intention. Ethical standards must be built not on the law's concessions but on the positive purpose of God.
Fifthly (38-42), the natural desire for vengeance and retaliation may conveniently be justified from the OT's regulations, which were originally designed to limit the extent of legal retribution (An eye for an eye etc.}. But to extend this principle to personal ethics makes it a charter for self-interest. By a series of vivid examples (39-42), Jesus calls instead for an unselfish attitude which not only refuses to retaliate but does not resist, even when it would be legally right to do so. Such an attitude is one which subordinates one's own rights to the benefit of others.
Finally (43-47), the natural inference that the OT's command to love one's neighbour carries the corollary that one should hate one's enemy is replaced by the extraordinary command to love one's enemies. Here again Jesus goes far beyond the explicit teaching of the OT law and offers an ethic in sharp contrast to natural human values.
Thus, in all these examples a superficial observance of the letter of the law has given way to a radical search for the true will of God. This goes beyond the literal interpretation of the law and may indeed in some cases leave it on one side, as Jesus' sovereign authority [I say to you] reveals the radically alternative value-scale which discipleship must involve. It is amazingly but appropriately summed up in the concluding verse, Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Legalism has been left far behind, and the law has been 'fulfilled'.
The Crusades
.
The Jewish connection to Jerusalem is an ancient and powerful one. Jerusalem appears in the Jewish Bible 669 times and Zion 154 times. All over the world Christians sing the hymn Jerusalem. However in Islam Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Qur'an a single time, it is not once mentioned in prayers, it is not the place to which they pray, it never served as capital of a sovereign Muslim state, and it never became a cultural or scholarly centre. Yet pursuing Muslim expansionism that led to the Crusades, the Muslim army of Omar conquered Jerusalem, in 638. There they built the Dome of the Rock, followed by the al-Aqsa mosque nearby. Today that expansionism continues, Muslims are taking over the birthright of the Jews, much of the ancient city Jerusalem is being destroyed by Muslim building works and the Jews feel threatened and are distraught by the devastation around them.
It was this same Muslim expansionism that led the Crusaders to the Holy Land and Jerusalem. Their first objective was to ensure the safety of pilgrims visiting the tomb of Christ in Jerusalem and to establish Christian rule in Palestine which had always been the home of Jews and Christians alike. To do this it was necessary to check the spread of Islam, to retake control of the Holy Land, to conquer pagan areas, to quell heretical Christians in Europe itself and to recapture former Christian territories. The European nations joined forces to achieve these aims against the Muslims.
Previously the mild rule of the early Saracens had for centuries allowed a Christian protectorate, first established under Charlemagne, to exist in Jerusalem, and many monarchs, including our own Alfred, sent offerings to the holy places. But this was ended in 1010 by the fanatical caliph, Hakim, who destroyed the sanctuary. The protectorate passed in 1021 to the Greek Church and in 1071 the Saracens were themselves overcome by a rougher tribe, the Seljukian Turks.
Christian pilgrimage became difficult and dangerous, and in 1095 the appeals of Pope Urban II., seconded by the preaching of Peter the Hermit, led to the undertaking of an enterprise which in various forms had already been proposed by more than one pontiff. The turbulent warriors of Europe received a new impulse. Instead of being restrained by the Church with peaceful admonitions, as in the institution of the Truce of God, their warlike ardour was encouraged, organised, and dedicated to what was proclaimed to be the highest and holiest service. The Deus vult of Clermont found its echo in the hearts of princes and commoners alike. In 1095 several undisciplined hosts including those of Walter the Penniless I and Peter the Hermit, set out for the East but perished on the way.
In 1096-97 a great army under Godfrey de Bouillon, Bohemund of Otranto, and other leaders, concentrating on Constantinople, fought its way through Asia Minor, taking Antioch in 1098, and Jerusalem in 1099. A Christian kingdom was established with Godfrey as its first head, his brother Baldwin as prince of Edessa (Upper Mesopotamia), and Bohemund ruling at Antioch. Godfrey died in 1100 and was succeeded by Baldwin; Bohemund was captured by the enemy, and a great French expedition sent for the relief of Antioch was almost entirely destroyed. During the next half-century, in spite of reinforcements, including fleets from Genoa, Norway, and Venice, the Christians in Syria were hard-pressed. To assist in the defence of Jerusalem were formed the orders of Hospitallers of St. John, (St John Ambulance) and Knights Templars, afterwards so widely renowned.
In 1144 Edessa was lost, and the second crusade, under Louis VII. of France and Conrad III. of Germany, ended disastrously, and its failure for a time discouraged European effort, while the Moslem pressure increased on all sides.
In 1184-85 the monarchy of the city of Jerusalem was offered to the kings of France and England in turn, to induce them to come to the rescue, but nothing was done in either country beyond the levying of a special yearly tax (which is said to have been the precursor of our modern system of taxation). Two years later the great Saladin, sultan of Egypt, who had long been maturing his plans, having captured Damascus in 1174 and Aleppo in 1183, now swept down through Galilee with an immense force, defeated the Christians at Tiberias and Hattin and took Jerusalem, Oct. 1187. The news was received in Europe with consternation and rage. Fresh Crusades were set on foot, of which the most important was that led by Philip of France, Frederick of Germany, and Richard I. of England.
The Germans went through Asia Minor, losing their emperor on the way by drowning; the French and English journeyed by sea to Acre, which had already been besieged nearly two years by Guy de Lusignan. Richard I distinguished himself in the capture of the city, but quarrelled with his allies, who left him to carry on the war alone. After a year of brilliant but useless exploits, he made a truce with Saladin, and returned to Europe.
Another crusade, starting from Venice in 1202, became involved in Venetian and Byzantine intrigues, and instead of reaching Jerusalem assisted the deposed Isaac Angelus to regain the Greek throne; a few months later Constantinople was stormed by the Crusaders, and a Latin empire established under Baldwin of Flanders, 1204.
In 1212 occurred the strangest and most pathetic events of the day. A ‘children's crusade,' was started by a French boy named Etienne, near Venddme, who, announcing that he had a divine mission, was joined as he went southward by 30,000 other children. They embarked at Marseilles; two of their vessels foundered near Sardinia, the rest reached Alexandria, where the children were seized and sold as slaves, few of them ever regaining their liberty.
At about The same time another boy named Nicholas, in Germany, led a similar expedition into Italy, but this did not end so miserably. Some died by the way, but many returned home, and others found service in Itallian town and villages. The fact of parents allowing their children to take part in such enterprises shows, perhaps, more plainly than anything else, the ignorant credulity and fanaticism of those days. A crusade under Andrew of Hungary and others (1217-21) against the Moslem power in Egypt was a failure, but that of Frederick II., undertaken in 1228 while he was under the ban of the pope, was successful. By diplomacy, not fighting, he regained Jerusalem and the south of Palestine, which remained in Christian hands until 1244, when it was finally lost.
The seventh crusade, led by Louis IX. of France (St. Louis), in 1248, was like that of 1217 directed against Egypt, and proved even more disastrous. Louis, with the greater part of his army, was captured, and had to pay 800,000 pieces of gold as a ransom. Even after this, in 1270, he headed another crusade, but died at Tunis. Among those who joined this expedition was Prince Edward of England (afterwards Edward I.), who a few months later led his own followers to Acre, but achieved no results. He was the last royal crusader, except Peter of Cyprus, who in 1365-67 carried on a holy war in Egypt and Syria, but was assassinated. Even when Constantinople was captured by Mohammed II in 1453 Pius II. failed in trying to raise a crusade for its recovery. The Templars were suppressed, but the Hospitallers, at Rhodes and afterwards Malta, long continued to be a bulwark against Turkish advance in the Mediterranean.
Though the Crusades failed in effecting the objects for which they were intended, they indirectly worked great and unforeseen benefits for Christendom. While princely adventurers and their turbulent followers left Europe to seek for fame and conquest in the East astute monarchs were establishing the reign of law in the West. The Church, by preaching a theocratic movement which was unsuccessful, injured its own prestige, and, what is more, by the increased knowledge and breadth of view introduced by intercourse with another and in some respects a higher civilisation, a perceptible advance was made in Europe towards that freedom of thought which led in after years to the revolt against papal authority. The Templars themselves were accused of latitudinarianism and heresy. Trade was greatly stimulated; the merchants and mariners of the Mediterranean, especially of Venice and Genoa, found the demand for the shipping increased manifold, for the transport of armies and the bringing of new and rare commodities from the East.
European craftsmen and soldiers learned valuable lessons from Saracen skill in art and in war. Sugar, cotton, and many other articles now of everyday use first became known in Europe through the Crusades. During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries rumours of a mysterious Christian potentate in Central Asia, Prester John, led to the sending of various missions, first in search of him as a possible ally and afterwards to attempt the conversion of the Mongols. Prester John was not found, nor the Mongols converted, but the missionary journeys of Carpini in 1245, and Rubruquis in 1252, and the trading journeys of Nicolo Polo and his son Marco, gave European geographers their first real knowledge of central Asia. Up to that time the wildest legends, such as those of Sir John Mandeville, had passed as truth.
The bibliography of the Crusades both as to contemporary records and modern compilations, is very extensive. See E. Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1776-88; T. Archer and C. H. Kingsford, The Crusades, 1894; S. Lane-Poole, Saladin and the Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1898; Villehardouin and De Joinville, Memoirs of the Crusades (Everyman's Library), 1908; E. Barker, The Crusades, 1923; C. Erdmann, Die Entstehung des Kreuzzuggedankens, 1935; H. Belloc, The Crusade, 1937; P. Rousset, Les Origines et les caracteres de la premiere croisade, 1946; and Sir W. Scott's novel, The Talisman, 1825.
.
The Jewish connection to Jerusalem is an ancient and powerful one. Jerusalem appears in the Jewish Bible 669 times and Zion 154 times. All over the world Christians sing the hymn Jerusalem. However in Islam Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Qur'an a single time, it is not once mentioned in prayers, it is not the place to which they pray, it never served as capital of a sovereign Muslim state, and it never became a cultural or scholarly centre. Yet pursuing Muslim expansionism that led to the Crusades, the Muslim army of Omar conquered Jerusalem, in 638. There they built the Dome of the Rock, followed by the al-Aqsa mosque nearby. Today that expansionism continues, Muslims are taking over the birthright of the Jews, much of the ancient city Jerusalem is being destroyed by Muslim building works and the Jews feel threatened and are distraught by the devastation around them.
It was this same Muslim expansionism that led the Crusaders to the Holy Land and Jerusalem. Their first objective was to ensure the safety of pilgrims visiting the tomb of Christ in Jerusalem and to establish Christian rule in Palestine which had always been the home of Jews and Christians alike. To do this it was necessary to check the spread of Islam, to retake control of the Holy Land, to conquer pagan areas, to quell heretical Christians in Europe itself and to recapture former Christian territories. The European nations joined forces to achieve these aims against the Muslims.
Previously the mild rule of the early Saracens had for centuries allowed a Christian protectorate, first established under Charlemagne, to exist in Jerusalem, and many monarchs, including our own Alfred, sent offerings to the holy places. But this was ended in 1010 by the fanatical caliph, Hakim, who destroyed the sanctuary. The protectorate passed in 1021 to the Greek Church and in 1071 the Saracens were themselves overcome by a rougher tribe, the Seljukian Turks.
Christian pilgrimage became difficult and dangerous, and in 1095 the appeals of Pope Urban II., seconded by the preaching of Peter the Hermit, led to the undertaking of an enterprise which in various forms had already been proposed by more than one pontiff. The turbulent warriors of Europe received a new impulse. Instead of being restrained by the Church with peaceful admonitions, as in the institution of the Truce of God, their warlike ardour was encouraged, organised, and dedicated to what was proclaimed to be the highest and holiest service. The Deus vult of Clermont found its echo in the hearts of princes and commoners alike. In 1095 several undisciplined hosts including those of Walter the Penniless I and Peter the Hermit, set out for the East but perished on the way.
In 1096-97 a great army under Godfrey de Bouillon, Bohemund of Otranto, and other leaders, concentrating on Constantinople, fought its way through Asia Minor, taking Antioch in 1098, and Jerusalem in 1099. A Christian kingdom was established with Godfrey as its first head, his brother Baldwin as prince of Edessa (Upper Mesopotamia), and Bohemund ruling at Antioch. Godfrey died in 1100 and was succeeded by Baldwin; Bohemund was captured by the enemy, and a great French expedition sent for the relief of Antioch was almost entirely destroyed. During the next half-century, in spite of reinforcements, including fleets from Genoa, Norway, and Venice, the Christians in Syria were hard-pressed. To assist in the defence of Jerusalem were formed the orders of Hospitallers of St. John, (St John Ambulance) and Knights Templars, afterwards so widely renowned.
In 1144 Edessa was lost, and the second crusade, under Louis VII. of France and Conrad III. of Germany, ended disastrously, and its failure for a time discouraged European effort, while the Moslem pressure increased on all sides.
In 1184-85 the monarchy of the city of Jerusalem was offered to the kings of France and England in turn, to induce them to come to the rescue, but nothing was done in either country beyond the levying of a special yearly tax (which is said to have been the precursor of our modern system of taxation). Two years later the great Saladin, sultan of Egypt, who had long been maturing his plans, having captured Damascus in 1174 and Aleppo in 1183, now swept down through Galilee with an immense force, defeated the Christians at Tiberias and Hattin and took Jerusalem, Oct. 1187. The news was received in Europe with consternation and rage. Fresh Crusades were set on foot, of which the most important was that led by Philip of France, Frederick of Germany, and Richard I. of England.
The Germans went through Asia Minor, losing their emperor on the way by drowning; the French and English journeyed by sea to Acre, which had already been besieged nearly two years by Guy de Lusignan. Richard I distinguished himself in the capture of the city, but quarrelled with his allies, who left him to carry on the war alone. After a year of brilliant but useless exploits, he made a truce with Saladin, and returned to Europe.
Another crusade, starting from Venice in 1202, became involved in Venetian and Byzantine intrigues, and instead of reaching Jerusalem assisted the deposed Isaac Angelus to regain the Greek throne; a few months later Constantinople was stormed by the Crusaders, and a Latin empire established under Baldwin of Flanders, 1204.
In 1212 occurred the strangest and most pathetic events of the day. A ‘children's crusade,' was started by a French boy named Etienne, near Venddme, who, announcing that he had a divine mission, was joined as he went southward by 30,000 other children. They embarked at Marseilles; two of their vessels foundered near Sardinia, the rest reached Alexandria, where the children were seized and sold as slaves, few of them ever regaining their liberty.
At about The same time another boy named Nicholas, in Germany, led a similar expedition into Italy, but this did not end so miserably. Some died by the way, but many returned home, and others found service in Itallian town and villages. The fact of parents allowing their children to take part in such enterprises shows, perhaps, more plainly than anything else, the ignorant credulity and fanaticism of those days. A crusade under Andrew of Hungary and others (1217-21) against the Moslem power in Egypt was a failure, but that of Frederick II., undertaken in 1228 while he was under the ban of the pope, was successful. By diplomacy, not fighting, he regained Jerusalem and the south of Palestine, which remained in Christian hands until 1244, when it was finally lost.
The seventh crusade, led by Louis IX. of France (St. Louis), in 1248, was like that of 1217 directed against Egypt, and proved even more disastrous. Louis, with the greater part of his army, was captured, and had to pay 800,000 pieces of gold as a ransom. Even after this, in 1270, he headed another crusade, but died at Tunis. Among those who joined this expedition was Prince Edward of England (afterwards Edward I.), who a few months later led his own followers to Acre, but achieved no results. He was the last royal crusader, except Peter of Cyprus, who in 1365-67 carried on a holy war in Egypt and Syria, but was assassinated. Even when Constantinople was captured by Mohammed II in 1453 Pius II. failed in trying to raise a crusade for its recovery. The Templars were suppressed, but the Hospitallers, at Rhodes and afterwards Malta, long continued to be a bulwark against Turkish advance in the Mediterranean.
Though the Crusades failed in effecting the objects for which they were intended, they indirectly worked great and unforeseen benefits for Christendom. While princely adventurers and their turbulent followers left Europe to seek for fame and conquest in the East astute monarchs were establishing the reign of law in the West. The Church, by preaching a theocratic movement which was unsuccessful, injured its own prestige, and, what is more, by the increased knowledge and breadth of view introduced by intercourse with another and in some respects a higher civilisation, a perceptible advance was made in Europe towards that freedom of thought which led in after years to the revolt against papal authority. The Templars themselves were accused of latitudinarianism and heresy. Trade was greatly stimulated; the merchants and mariners of the Mediterranean, especially of Venice and Genoa, found the demand for the shipping increased manifold, for the transport of armies and the bringing of new and rare commodities from the East.
European craftsmen and soldiers learned valuable lessons from Saracen skill in art and in war. Sugar, cotton, and many other articles now of everyday use first became known in Europe through the Crusades. During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries rumours of a mysterious Christian potentate in Central Asia, Prester John, led to the sending of various missions, first in search of him as a possible ally and afterwards to attempt the conversion of the Mongols. Prester John was not found, nor the Mongols converted, but the missionary journeys of Carpini in 1245, and Rubruquis in 1252, and the trading journeys of Nicolo Polo and his son Marco, gave European geographers their first real knowledge of central Asia. Up to that time the wildest legends, such as those of Sir John Mandeville, had passed as truth.
The bibliography of the Crusades both as to contemporary records and modern compilations, is very extensive. See E. Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1776-88; T. Archer and C. H. Kingsford, The Crusades, 1894; S. Lane-Poole, Saladin and the Fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1898; Villehardouin and De Joinville, Memoirs of the Crusades (Everyman's Library), 1908; E. Barker, The Crusades, 1923; C. Erdmann, Die Entstehung des Kreuzzuggedankens, 1935; H. Belloc, The Crusade, 1937; P. Rousset, Les Origines et les caracteres de la premiere croisade, 1946; and Sir W. Scott's novel, The Talisman, 1825.
.
Friday, 1 August 2008
Muslims are Allowed to Lie
.
Question:Are Muslims permitted to lie?
Summary Answer:Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should be truthful to each other.
There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. One of those circumstances is to gain the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.
The Qur’an:Sura (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can “compel” a Muslim to tell a lie.
Sura (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to “guard themselves.”
Sura (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must “hide his faith” among those who are not believers.
Sura (2:225) - “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts”
Sura (66:2) - “Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths”
Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be “compelled” to deceive others for a greater purpose.
From the Hadith:
Bukhari (52:269) - “The Prophet said, ‘War is deceit.’” The context of this is thought to be the murder of Usayr ibn Zarim and his thirty unarmed men by Muhammad’s men after he “guaranteed” them safe passage (see Additional Notes below).
Bukhari (49:857) - “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar.” Lying is permitted when the end justifies the means.
Bukhari (84:64-65) - Speaking from a position of power at the time, Ali confirms that lying is permissible in order to deceive an “enemy.”
Bukhari (52:271) - Recounts the murder of a poet, Ka’b bin al-Ashraf, at Muhammad’s insistence. The men who volunteered for the assassination used dishonesty to gain Ka’b’s trust, pretending that they had turned against Muhammad. This drew the victim out of his fortress, whereupon he was brutally slaughtered despite putting up a ferocious struggle for his life.
From Islamic Law:
Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746) - ”[it is] obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory… Whether the purpose is war, settling a disagreement, or gaining the sympathy of a victim legally entitled to retaliate… it is not unlawful to lie when any of these aims can only be attained through lying. But is is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression…”
Additional Notes:
Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:
Taqiyya - Saying something that isn’t true.
Kitman - Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills “it shall be as if he had killed all mankind”) while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of “corruption” and “mischief.”
Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later, and some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed. (See Sura (9:3) - (“…Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters…”)
Another example is when Muhammad tricked the leader of an opposing tribe with whom he was not at war to leave his town on the pretext of meeting with him at Medina. Usayr ibn Zarim traveled with thirty men who were unarmed because of Muhammad’s guarantee of safety. They were easily massacred by the prophet’s Muslim assassins.
The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well, in fact, that even weeks after 9/11, John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, said that their bar trips were evidence of ‘hypocrisy.’
The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is “a a bomb on board” but that everyone will “be safe” as long as “their demands are met.” Obviously none of these things were true, but these men, who were so intensely devoted to Islam that they were willing to “slay and be slain for the cause of Allah” (as the Qur’an puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing Taqiyya in order to facilitate their mission of mass murder.
The near absence of Qur’anic verse and reliable Hadith that encourage truthfulness is somewhat surprising, given that many Muslims are convinced that their religion teaches honesty. In fact, it is because of this ingrained belief that most Muslims are quite honest.
Finally, the circumstances by which Muhammad allowed a believer to lie are limited to those that either advance the cause of Islam or enable a Muslim to avoid harm to his well-being (and presumably that of other Muslims as well). Although this should be kept very much in mind when dealing with matters of global security, such as Iran’s nuclear intentions, it is not grounds for assuming that the Muslim one might personally encounter on the street or in the workplace is any less honest than anyone else.
.
Question:Are Muslims permitted to lie?
Summary Answer:Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should be truthful to each other.
There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. One of those circumstances is to gain the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.
The Qur’an:Sura (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can “compel” a Muslim to tell a lie.
Sura (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to “guard themselves.”
Sura (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must “hide his faith” among those who are not believers.
Sura (2:225) - “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts”
Sura (66:2) - “Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths”
Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be “compelled” to deceive others for a greater purpose.
From the Hadith:
Bukhari (52:269) - “The Prophet said, ‘War is deceit.’” The context of this is thought to be the murder of Usayr ibn Zarim and his thirty unarmed men by Muhammad’s men after he “guaranteed” them safe passage (see Additional Notes below).
Bukhari (49:857) - “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar.” Lying is permitted when the end justifies the means.
Bukhari (84:64-65) - Speaking from a position of power at the time, Ali confirms that lying is permissible in order to deceive an “enemy.”
Bukhari (52:271) - Recounts the murder of a poet, Ka’b bin al-Ashraf, at Muhammad’s insistence. The men who volunteered for the assassination used dishonesty to gain Ka’b’s trust, pretending that they had turned against Muhammad. This drew the victim out of his fortress, whereupon he was brutally slaughtered despite putting up a ferocious struggle for his life.
From Islamic Law:
Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746) - ”[it is] obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory… Whether the purpose is war, settling a disagreement, or gaining the sympathy of a victim legally entitled to retaliate… it is not unlawful to lie when any of these aims can only be attained through lying. But is is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression…”
Additional Notes:
Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:
Taqiyya - Saying something that isn’t true.
Kitman - Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills “it shall be as if he had killed all mankind”) while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of “corruption” and “mischief.”
Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later, and some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed. (See Sura (9:3) - (“…Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters…”)
Another example is when Muhammad tricked the leader of an opposing tribe with whom he was not at war to leave his town on the pretext of meeting with him at Medina. Usayr ibn Zarim traveled with thirty men who were unarmed because of Muhammad’s guarantee of safety. They were easily massacred by the prophet’s Muslim assassins.
The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well, in fact, that even weeks after 9/11, John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, said that their bar trips were evidence of ‘hypocrisy.’
The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is “a a bomb on board” but that everyone will “be safe” as long as “their demands are met.” Obviously none of these things were true, but these men, who were so intensely devoted to Islam that they were willing to “slay and be slain for the cause of Allah” (as the Qur’an puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing Taqiyya in order to facilitate their mission of mass murder.
The near absence of Qur’anic verse and reliable Hadith that encourage truthfulness is somewhat surprising, given that many Muslims are convinced that their religion teaches honesty. In fact, it is because of this ingrained belief that most Muslims are quite honest.
Finally, the circumstances by which Muhammad allowed a believer to lie are limited to those that either advance the cause of Islam or enable a Muslim to avoid harm to his well-being (and presumably that of other Muslims as well). Although this should be kept very much in mind when dealing with matters of global security, such as Iran’s nuclear intentions, it is not grounds for assuming that the Muslim one might personally encounter on the street or in the workplace is any less honest than anyone else.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)