Happy Christmas and a belated Hanukka everyone!
Yes, I have been pretty quite lately, for obvious reasons. I am not sure exactly when I will be back, it will all depend on how I feel after our holiday. So, with that said I wish everyone who stumbles upon my ramblings a Happy Christmas and may God bless everyone in the coming New Year.
Isa 9:6 For a Child is born; to us a Son is given; and the government is on His shoulder; and His name is called Wonderful, Counselor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name JESUS; for it is he that shall save his people from their sins.
And to our Jewish friends… I hope you had a great Hanukka!
Shepherds in the night
Just finished reading a really good post over at Herescope.
Funny how it was only last night that I was thinking about the bad shepherds in Ezekiel…
Eze 34:5-10 And they were scattered for lack of a shepherd. And they became food to all the beasts of the field when they were scattered. My sheep strayed through all the mountains and on every high hill. And My sheep were scattered on all the face of the earth, and none searched, and none sought for them. For this reason, shepherds, hear the Word of Jehovah: As I live, declares the Lord Jehovah, surely because My sheep became a prey, and My sheep became food for all the beasts of the field, from not having a shepherd, and because My shepherds did not search for My sheep, but the shepherds fed themselves and did not feed the flock, so, O shepherds, hear the Word of Jehovah: So says the Lord Jehovah: Behold, I am against the shepherds, and I will require My sheep from their hand and cause them to cease from pasturing the sheep. And the shepherds shall no longer feed themselves, for I will deliver My sheep from their mouth, and they will not be food to devour.
Then I happened upon the post by Herescope which speaks about the shepherds during the night watch…
Today, we live in a time when there are many slumbering shepherds who are not abiding in the fields faithfully, nor are they keeping watch over their flock by night. Particularly in these dark days of great growing spiritual apostasy, so many shepherds have become complacent, reticent, apathetic and drowsy.
Night time in scripture always means tribulation. This post has a good midrashic understanding of symbolism and imagery. There is a heavy use of night time imagery, fire imagery, and leaven imagery in this excellent article. A must read!
After reading this post I read Hosea chapters 4 and 7. Those chapters are of uptmost importance for the Church today. These particular chapters speak about the sin in the land of Israel; this is being recapitulated in the church. Why? Because it is not so different today as she compromises the Word of Truth as she engages with our pluralistic culture/society and pretty much beds it. She has become the adulterer, and there are temple prostitutes within her walls. Chris Elrod has the right balance when it comes to addressing today’s culture.
The Church has been called out of any given culture throughout her history…
Church - ekklēsia
ek-klay-see’-ah
From a compound of G1537 and a derivative of G2564; a calling out, that is, (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation (Jewish synagogue, or Christian community of members on earth or saints in heaven or both): - assembly, church.
In Hosea 7 the leaven is left unchecked and then inside the oven over night the cake becomes a fire that destroys, the baker did not keep watch during the nigh. There is a sense of a bad mix in the bread, a little leaven [sin] leavens the whole lump…
Hos 7:4-8 They are all adulterers, like an oven heated by the baker; he ceases from stirring, from kneading the dough until it is leavened. In the day of our king, the rulers have sickened themselves with the heat of wine. He stretches out his hand with scorners. For they have brought their heart near like an oven, while they lie in wait. Their baker sleeps all night; in the morning it burns like a flaming fire. They are all hot as an oven, and devour their judges. All their kings have fallen; not one among them calls to Me. Ephraim mixed himself among the peoples. Ephraim is a cake not turned.
For the Author
Quick post. Just blogrolled another blog called “For the Author“.
BONNIE is the blog owner and says that she is a Child of God in Christ~ Student of the Word~ Wife and Mother~ Homemaker~ Librarian~ School Bus Driver. Her blog has some interesting links, and is well set out. She addresses many of the issues that concern the Church during these last days. One certainly worth having a look at.
Neo-traditionalists turn to traditions!
Today I went on over to the ‘Emergent Village Weblog’ and found something that pointed me to the following article called ‘A Return to Tradition A new interest in old ways takes root in Catholicism and many other faiths‘ [page3] By Jay Tolson Posted December 13, 2007…
Something of a celebrity ex-pastor himself, Brian McLaren, the popular author and a founder of Cedar Ridge Community Church in Spencerville, Md., recently left the pastorate to talk and write about the emergent movement and other developments in Christianity. While at Cedar Ridge, which catered specifically to previously “unchurched” seekers, McLaren instituted a Eucharistic liturgy and contemplative prayer retreats. And he appreciates the role of tradition in the new self-organizing communities that are sprouting up around the country. “Protestantism has been in a centrifugal pattern for so long, with each group spinning away from others,” McLaren says. “But now there is some kind of pull back to the center.”
Hmmmm… a community of “Atonement – Eucharistic Praxis” perhaps?
Like McLaren, Tony Jones, author of The New Christians: Dispatches From the Emergent Frontier and national coordinator of Emergent Village, talks about the postmodern aspects of the new traditionalism. People of the postmodern mindset—particularly 20- and 30-somethings—question the hyperindividualism of modern culture. They search for new forms of community but tend to be wary of authority figures and particularly of leaders, Jones says, who take divisive liberal or conservative social-political positions—one reason why the emergent groups tend to be antipastoral. “The problem is not the issues,” says Jones, who belongs to an emergent church, Solomon’s Porch, in Minneapolis. “The problem is how we talk about issues. We are going to live in reconciliation with each other, and traditional practices are what restore us and hold us together.”
The young neotraditionalists also have an almost intuitive attraction to liturgy, ritual, and symbol as forms of knowledge that complement the dominant rational, scientific one. “There is a certain kind of postmodern sensibility that loses confidence in the rational explanation of everything,” McLaren says. For him, Jones, and others, “doing church” in traditional and innovative ways is a form of theological reflection that leaves behind the fundamendalists’ need to make all religious propositions into pseudoscientific statements, to turn Genesis, for example, into a geology textbook.
Nice.
I give you two guesses as to where these traditional practices are going to lead people. [Hint: All roads lead to Rome] Well, let’s just say I agree with Roger Oakland on this one.
So yeah, I am pretty much left behind with all the other so called ignorant fundies who’re considered to be pseudo-scientists because they hold to the historical grammatical interpretation of Genesis. Hey, check it out. I even have these fundies blogrolled, go figure!!!
A Response to an Open Letter…
Awhile a go, I wrote something about an open letter…
When reading an open letter(pdf file) from the Muslim religious leaders in Britain that was written to the Pope and the leaders of other Christian churches, there seems to be a common truth - at first glance anyway.
It is not what is said that is the problem, but rather what is not said. Things of fundamental importance to the Christian faith was not addressed at all in this letter! And it is glaringly obvious to those who know what the Koran actually says about Allah in context; that Allah and the God of the Bible are not the same God at all.
Here is a biblical response to that letter that I wanted to share with you…
Response To Open Letter and Call From Muslim Religious Leaders To Christian Leaders, 13 October 2007
Barnabus Fund
November 2007
Introduction
To mark the end of Ramadan this year “An Open Letter and Call from Muslim Religious Leaders” was published, dated 13th October 2007. The letter was addressed to Pope Benedict XVI and 26 other named heads of Christian denominations as well as to “Leaders of Christian Churches, everywhere….” It is ostensibly a presentation of Islamic teaching on love for God and love for one`s neighbour. (The text of the open letter is available at [link])
The letter was organised by the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought, a non-governmental organisation based in Amman, Jordan, supported by the Jordanian Royal House. It has been trying to forge a united scholarly Muslim leadership that could speak for the whole global Muslim community and become the international voice of mainstream Islam.
Following a year after a letter to the Pope signed by 38 Muslim signatories (October 2006), the “Open Letter and Call” seems to signal some urgency. Does it indicate a fear that the West is finally awakening to the reality of Islamic intentions and therefore needs to be lulled, even anesthetised, to the prospects of deliberate Islamic expansion into the West? Or does it indicate a growing Muslim confidence and self-awareness of Islamic power, the letter itself being part of a strategy of Islamisation of the “Christian” world? Furthermore, did the lack of response by Pope Benedict to the letter from 38 Muslims prompt the new letter with 100 more names at the end?
The signatories
A wide spread of Muslim leadership is represented amongst the 138 signatories, drawn from 43 nations and representing various Sunni, Twelver Shi`a, Zaydi, Ibadi and Sufi constituencies. There are traditionalists, Islamists and several liberal Muslims. Some of the signatories are Muslim leaders well known for their moderation and peaceful intentions. Among them are Professor Akbar Ahmed, Dr Alan Godlas, Hamza Yusuf Hanson and Seyyed Hossein Nasr.
However, the list also includes some figures known for their Islamist extremist inclinations who are Wahhabists, members of the Muslim Brotherhood, or Deobandis. There are, for example, the various Saudi Wahhabi dignitaries: Mohammed Salim Al-`Awa (Muslim Brotherhood Egypt); Salim Falahat the Director General of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan; Ikrima Said Sabri Imam of the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem; and Muhammad Taqi Usmani (Deoband). Some of these are on record as making radical and aggressive statements against Christians and Jews and in favour of global jihad.
Intended audience
While addressed to a specific group of Christian leaders, the fact that it is an open letter widely disseminated by the world media means that world public opinion is another intended audience. Furthermore, certain terminology in the letter, as well as the choice of Qur`anic quotations cited, suggest that the letter is also intended for the global Muslim audience. It is not unusual in Islamic discourse for different messages to be delivered to the different audiences. This is permitted by the Islamic doctrine of taqiyya (dissimulation) which allows Muslims to practise deception in certain circumstances. It appears that the Christian vocabulary of the letter is intended to guide Christian readers to the erroneous conclusion that Islam and Christianity are basically identical religions, focusing on love to God and to the neighbour. The hidden messages for Muslims are contained in the many polemical quotations from the Qur`an.
Another example of the apparent use of taqiyya is the fact that some of the words in the Arabic version of the letter differ in meaning from those in the English version. For example, the word used for “neighbour” in the Arabic version of the letter is jar, a term which carries only a geographical meaning. It is not equivalent to the Biblical Hebrew word for neighbour, which is re`a (denoting kinship, even as close as a brother or sister). Yet there is another word for “neighbour” in Arabic which is closer to the meaning of the Hebrew re`a and which could have been used. This is the word qarib, which is used in Arabic Bibles and which more closely translates the Biblical original. It is also worth noting that Jesus Christ is not given the name used by Arabic Christians (Yasu` al-Masih), but the Islamic version (`Isa al-Masih).
The letter looks at the world as if comprised only of Islam, Christianity and Judaism. There is no mention of other world religions like Hinduism, Buddhism etc., or indeed of secular and agnostic or atheist people in the world. This may reflect the traditional Islamic classification of non-Muslims into Jews and Christians on the one hand, and “infidels” or “pagans” on the other hand. While Jews and Christians are seen in Islam as worthy of a place in an Islamic society, albeit with a second-class status, infidels are not considered to have any place at all (indeed, according to classical Islam, they should be killed if they will not convert to Islam). This is perhaps why “infidels” have been marginalised in this letter.
Of course a basic fallacy of this letter is the view that Western states are basically Christian and that, when pursuing their national interests, religious Christian motivations are foremost in their minds. This is a very common Muslim misconception, and is an indication of how much more important their faith is to an “average” Muslim than to an average Westerner.
Reading between the lines
On the surface the letter looks like a well intentioned and urgent plea for a better understanding between Muslims and Christians, so as to avert an apocalyptic war between the two largest religious blocs in the world.
If Muslims and Christians are not at peace, the world cannot be at peace . . . the very survival of the world itself is at stake . . . So let our differences not cause hatred and strife between us.
However, the letter goes on to lay the blame for all wars in which Muslims and Christians are involved on the actions of Christians.
As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them - so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes. [emphasis added]
This implies that the war against Islamist terrorism is a global war of Christianity against Islam, and that Christianity is the aggressor against Islam (which is the radical Islamist view). There is no sense of sorrow or remorse for the wrongs inflicted by Muslims on Christians historically, or indeed currently in many Muslim lands. There is no recognition that in many places things may be the opposite, with Muslims oppressing Christians and driving them from their homes (e.g. in Iraq, Sudan, Nigeria, Indonesia and Pakistan). There is no mention of the Christian communities in Muslim lands suffering other kinds of persecution and discrimination. There is no admission that Muslim actions could have played any part in the alienation between Muslims and Christians.
The liberal Muslim leaders who signed the letter seem to have agreed with the Islamist argument which accuses all Christians of a tendency to animosity, hatred and aggressiveness towards Muslims. So an apparently moderate appeal for reconciliation actually contains a subtext of warning and threat: “Do as we say, and you can have peace on our terms.” This in fact is the normal meaning of peace in Islam - peace for those who submit to Islamic rule (and war for those who do not).
Classical Islam teaches that the world is divided into two parts: Dar al-Islam (the House of Islam) where political power is in the hands of Muslims, and Dar al-Harb (the House of War) which is the rest of the world. With this in mind, the “Open Letter and Call” is seen to be reminiscent of the traditional Islamic approach to non-Muslims outside the House of Islam. This approach consisted of a “call to Islam” (i.e. a call to convert to Islam) including the threat that if the non-Muslims do not convert they will be subject to a destructive military attack (jihad) aimed at subjugating Jews and Christians, and annihilating other non-Muslims. Hence the name “House of War” for non-Islamic territory. Only if the non-Muslims embrace Islam or submit to Islamic political power can they avert the attack. In the light of this tradition, the 2007 Muslim warning to non-Muslims about how to avoid war can be read in a very different way. Do some of the Muslim signatories see it as the traditional call and warning before an imminent attack on non-Muslims, an attack intended to win Islamic supremacy? The very word “call” in the title of the document drops a large hint in this direction, at least to Muslim readers.
Expression of Islamic mission (da`wa)
Although presented as interfaith dialogue, the letter can equally be viewed as a classical example of Islamic da`wa (mission). It is a call to accept the Muslim concept of the unity of God (tawhid) and therefore to reject the incompatible Christian views of the Trinity and the deity of Christ.
In their stress on monotheism and the unity of God, the Muslim leaders quote a number of verses from the Qur`an which express the Muslim concept of a God with no associates and no partners - verses which have always traditionally been interpreted as a direct attack on the basic Christian doctrines of the Trinity and of Christ`s deity. For instance, Q3:64, quoted numerous times in the letter, calls the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) to agree not to ascribe partners to God and not to take other lords beside him.
Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him). (Aal `Imran 3:64)
This Qur`anic verse has always been understood as a call to deny the Trinity and the deity of Christ. In the Saudi-sponsored English Qur`an of Hilali and Khan (Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qur`an in the English Language, published in Riyadh by Darussalam) this verse has a footnote which quotes the letter Muhammad sent to the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, calling upon him and his people to embrace Islam and including the threat that the rejection of this call would lead to severe consequences. It may be that a similar frame of mind lies behind the letter in which this verse is so often quoted.
Other Qur`anic quotations in the letter have a similar message about the unity of God: [emphasis added]
Yet there are men who take rivals unto God: they love them as they should love God. (Q 2:165).
Say: Lo! my worship and my sacrifice and my living and my dying are for God, Lord of the Worlds. / He hath no partner . . . (Q 6:162-164)
Hadith traditions are quoted to support the same theme:
The best that I have said-myself, and the prophets that came before me-is: `there is no god but God, He Alone, He hath no associate . . . (Sunan Al-Tirmidhi, Kitab Al-Da`awat, Bab al-Du`a fi Yawm `Arafah, Hadith no. 3934).
He who says: `There is no god but God, He Alone, He hath no associate, His is the sovereignty and His is the praise and He hath power over all things` one hundred times in a day, it is for them equal to setting ten slaves free, and one hundred good deeds are written for them and one hundred bad deeds are effaced, and it is for them a protection from the devil for that day until the evening. And none offers anything better than that, save one who does more than that. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Kitab Bad` al-Khalq, Bab Sifat Iblis wa Junudihi; Hadith no. 3329.)
Say (O Muslims): We believe in God and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered. / And if they believe in the like of that which ye believe, then are they rightly guided. But if they turn away, then are they in schism, and God will suffice thee against them. He is the Hearer, the Knower. (Al-Baqarah, 2:136-137)
According to one of the oldest and most authoritative commentaries (tafsir) on the Holy Qur`an-the Jami` Al-Bayan fi Ta`wil Al-Qur`an of Abu Ja`far Muhammad bin Jarir Al-Tabari (d. 310 A.H. / 923 C.E.)-that none of us shall take others for lords beside God, means `that none of us should obey in disobedience to what God has commanded, nor glorify them by prostrating to them in the same way as they prostrate to God`.
A hidden message for Muslims?
It is unusual to see Islamic scholars basing their presentation of Islamic doctrines only on the Qur`an. Usually the scholars seek to understand the Qur`an by reference to the hadith (traditions recording the sunna, that is the words and deeds of Muhammad and his Companions) and through tafsir (the Islamic science of interpreting the Qur`an) and other Islamic academic disciplines. There are few quotations from the hadith in the main body of the letter (though there are several more in the footnotes). However, all the Qur`anic verses quoted have interpretations in hadith and tafsir, interpretations which are well known to Muslims and which are usually much more aggressive towards Christians, Jews and other non-Muslims than represented by this letter. Therefore many Muslim readers would detect in the very act of selectively quoting from the Qur`an a hidden message that this is not a letter of appeasement, but a call to Is lam in the tradition of Muhammad and his Companions and of the early Caliphs. There the call is always to submit to Islam and to accept Islamic dominance.
For instance, the fatiha (sura 1 of the Qur`an) is quoted and presented as the greatest chapter in the Qur`an, reminding humans of their duty of praise and gratitude to God for his mercy and goodness. Included are verses 6 and 7:
Guide us upon the straight path. The path of those on whom is Thy Grace, not those who deserve anger nor those who are astray. [emphasis added]
In Muslim interpretations and commentaries on these verses, it is explained that those who deserve God`s anger are the Jews, while those who are astray are the Christians. Indeed, the Saudi-sponsored English translation of the Qur`an by Hilali and Khan explicitly incorporates this interpretation in the very text of the Qur`an:
Guide us to the Straight Way. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the Way) of those who earned your anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).
Most Westerners, reading the verse as quoted in the letter, simply do not realise what it means. But for Muslims reading the letter, the meaning is clear: a call to Christians and Jews to avoid God`s anger and judgement by accepting Islam.
Loving God
The letter suggests that Islam has much to say about loving God. For example, it quotes a hadith of Muhammad describing God with a string of Qur`anic phrases: “He Alone, He hath no associate, His is the sovereignty and His is the praise”. The letter asserts that each phrase describes “a mode of love of God, and devotion to Him”.
A similar assertion occurs at the end of the section about loving God, in a passage in which the phrase He hath no associate is repeated twice:
In the light of what we have seen to be necessarily implied and evoked by the Prophet Muhammad`s PBUH blessed saying: `The best that I have said-myself, and the prophets that came before me-is: `There is no god but God, He Alone, He hath no associate, His is the sovereignty and His is the praise and He hath power over all things` [Al-Tirmithi, Kitab Al-Da`wat, Bab al-Du`a fi Yawm `Arafah, Hadith no. 3934], we can now perhaps understand the words `The best that I have said-myself, and the prophets that came before me` as equating the blessed formula `there is no god but God, He Alone, He hath no associate, His is the sovereignty and His is the praise and He hath power over all things` precisely with the `First and Greatest Commandment` to love God, with all one`s heart and soul, as found in various places in the Bible. That is to say, in other words, that the Prophet Muhammad PBUH was perhaps, throu gh inspiration, restating and alluding to the Bible`s First Commandment. God knows best, but certainly we have seen their effective similarity in meaning. Moreover, we also do know (as can be seen in the endnotes), that both formulas have another remarkable parallel: the way they arise in a number of slightly differing versions and forms in different contexts, all of which, nevertheless, emphasize the primacy of total love and devotion to God.
In this part of the letter it is argued that Muhammad`s emphasis on the unity of God who has “no associate” is a re-statement of the Bible`s command about loving God with all your heart, soul and mind. The letter states that these two concepts are similar in meaning, although this is hard to derive from a straightforward reading of the two texts.
Perhaps the authors of the letter hoped that, by simply telling Christians that two different statements were really the same, they would be believed. Alternatively they could have had in mind the Muslim belief that Christian and Jewish Scriptures have been distorted, and that Muhammad`s statement is correcting the falsified Biblical teaching to what it was originally meant to have been.
Presenting the theme of love of God and of neighbour as central to Islam is again a misrepresentation of the truth. As stated in the Appendix, love in Islam is but one theme among many, and is not among the central themes of Islam. This is not to say that the Qur`an fails to mention God`s love at all (for it does), but that the weighting is very different from that in the Christian Bible where love is indeed the central theme.
Love your neighbour
The letter suggests that loving your neighbour is a concept common to both Islam and Christianity. But it ignores the fact that the Muslim concept of love for your neighbour can only operate within the limited scope of shari`a. Therefore in Islam there can be no absolute love for all humans, as in Christianity. Islam treats specific groups of people in specific ways: Christians and Jews are to be humiliated and brought under Islamic dominion as second rate subjects; infidels must accept Islam or be killed; apostates are to be killed if they do not return to Islam; Islamic sects considered heretical are to be fought and annihilated. Thus “neighbour” is a very limited concept in Islam, i.e. limited to fellow Muslims of the same tradition.
As we have already seen, the Arabic word chosen for “neighbour” in the letter is not one which carries the nuance of kinship as in the Bible, but another which has only a geographical meaning.
Jews are ignored
Except for the fact that the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4,5) is mentioned as a centrepiece of the Old Testament and of Jewish liturgy, the Jews are ignored. This fits with other Muslim endeavours to shift Christianity away from its Jewish roots. It also displays the traditional use of “divide and conquer” tactics - as the Jews are nowadays portrayed across the Muslim world as the worst enemies of Islam, this would signal an attempt to create an alliance with Christianity against Judaism.
Search for common ground or attempt to islamise Christianity
This letter appears to be part of an ongoing wider effort to islamise Christianity. This project presents the Qur`anic Jesus as the real historical Jesus. It presents Muhammad as similar to Jesus in character (peace and love), and it denigrates the Jewish and Old Testament roots of Christianity (Marcionism).
Thus we see that, in seeking common ground, the “Open Letter and Call” suggests that the central Muslim concept of unitarian monotheism and the central Christian concepts of love to God and love to neighbour are beliefs held by both religions. It stresses that the two commandments to love are the basis of what is common to both religions. But presenting love for God and neighbour as central to Islam is a misrepresentation of the truth.
The message is that if Christians will accept Islam`s concept of the unity of God (thus denying the basic doctrines of the Trinity and deity of Christ), Muslims will accept the Christian values of love for God and neighbour as central to Islam. Thus a radical revolutionary change in Christianity is demanded in exchange for a superficial change of emphasis in Islamic perceptions.
APPENDIX: THE CONCEPT OF LOVE IN ISLAM
Introduction: the contrast with Christianity
God`s love is the central theme of the New Testament and therefore of the Christian faith. Love is God`s main attribute and very essence. The main message of the New Testament is that God is love in His very being, and that this love was revealed in Jesus Christ and His supreme act of love, His self-giving in his sacrificial death on the cross (John 3:16; 1 John 4:7-12).
In Islam, however, the focus is on submission, so love is never more than one of many minor themes. Modern Muslim apologists in the West sometimes assert that God is a God of love. This is not a concept which traditional orthodox Islam would accept, but appears to be a modern stance of adaptation to the environment they find themselves in.
Love in Qur`an and hadith
Love is mentioned in the Qur`an over 50 times, mainly in the sense of love between persons and love of material things.
There are several verses that speak of humans` love towards God, for example:
Yet there are men who take (for worship) others besides Allah as equal (with Allah); they love them as they should love Allah. But those of faith are overflowing in their love for Allah. If only the unrighteous could see behold they would see the penalty that to Allah belongs all power and Allah will strongly enforce the penalty. (Q 2:165) [i]
A few verses speak of God`s love towards specific categories of humans (good Muslims). One of these is Q 85:14 “And He is the Oft-Forgiving, full of loving-kindness [al-wadud]“. From this verse is derived one of the 99 Beautiful Names of God, Al-Wadud (The One who Loves, The Most Loving, The Most Affectionate, The Beloved). Wadud, from the root wdd, is somewhat akin to the Old Testament Hebrew word dod or dodim (plural) used extensively in the Song of Songs for the pure love between man and woman. From it we get the name David (the beloved).
However, the word most often used in the Qur`an for love is hubb and its derivatives (mahabba, yuhibbu, etc.). This is linked to the Hebrew Old Testament word ahabah (root ahb) which is the one mostly used to denote love, both God`s love to man and man`s love to God. For example:
“I have loved you,” says the Lord. (Malachi 1:2)
Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. (Deuteronomy 6:5)
Mahabba, the most common Islamic Arabic term for love, denotes an affection inspired in humans by gratitude for God`s blessings. On God`s side mahabba is usually bestowed as a reward for a good believer who follows Muhammad and submits to God.
Say: If ye do love God, follow me: God will love you and forgive you your sins: For God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Q 3:31)
Love in the Qur`an mainly means “liking” or “preference”. It derives from God`s will, rather than from His very nature. God loves the righteous.
… verily Allah loves those who act aright. (Q 3:76)
For Allah loves those who do good; (Q 3:134)
And Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast. (Q 3:146)
For Allah loves those who turn to Him constantly and He loves those who keep themselves pure and clean. (Q 2:222)
For Allah loves those who are fair (and just). (Q 49:9)
Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array as if they were a solid cemented structure. (Q 61:4)
However, God does not love sinful people and he rejects his enemies.
… He loves not those who reject Faith (Q 30:45)
Verily He loveth not the arrogant. (Q 16:23)
Love appears also in the other main Islamic source, the hadith collections. In the hadith, there are references to love for things, love for martyrdom, love for God, and God`s love for Muhammad and for deserving Muslims.
Love in Islamic theology
According to Islamic teaching, God`s essence and nature cannot be known. Therefore a statement like “God is love” (which appears in the Bible, 1 John 4:8,16) would be theologically wrong in classical Islam.
Islam does teach that God`s attributes can be known, and these are described in the form of the “99 Beautiful Names”. Love is one of these 99, as we have seen above, but only one. The names emphasise much more God`s omnipotence and omniscience, his mercy and compassion, his sovereignty and inscrutable will.
In Islam God reveals himself mainly through his law (shari`a) which calls for submission and obedience. While in Christianity God is personal and establishes personal relationships of love with humans, in classical Islam God is seen as totally self-contained and beyond personal relationships. In Islam, although God loves certain Muslim people of whom he approves, he is not bound to love them even if they deserve his love. Ultimately God is not obliged to do anything, but acts as he wills, sometimes in an entirely capricious manner.
Orthodox classical Islam is more concerned with God`s greatness and transcendence, with shari`a law and its applications, than with God`s love. God is absolutely other, unknowable, far beyond what can be known or imagined (wara`l wara i.e. beyond the beyond). The role of humans is to submit, fear and obey God and his law. For example, following the call in March 2005 by a well-known Islamist scholar, Tariq Ramadan, for a moratorium on the brutal hudud punishments still implemented in some Muslim states (amputation, stoning, flogging etc.), several Islamic scholars opposed the suggestion. Sheikh Muhammad al-Shinqiti, director of the Islamic Center of South Plains in Lubbock, Texas, claimed that harshness was part of shari`a and any attempt at softening it was giving in to Western Christian concepts which were incompatible with Islam. Shinqiti s tated that a personalised faith, like that of Christians, leads to corruption and immorality. He preferred the detachment and severity of Islam, citing the Qur`anic verse
And let not pity for the twain withhold you from obedience to Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of believers witness their punishment. (Q 24:2, translation not specified)
In this view, harshness rather than love and mercy are at the heart of Islam. The inference is that Christianity is weak and contemptible because it has love and mercy at its very core.
Love in Sufism
It was left for Islamic mysticism (Sufism) to try to redress the balance and introduce the theme of love into Islam. Sufism offered an escape from the dry and intellectual legalism of the orthodox Islamic teachers and scholars. It focused instead on the human yearning for an authentic personal experience of God. Sufism taught that this experience could be had by a spiritual interpretation of the Qur`an aimed at finding its secret meaning, and by the disciplines of asceticism, repetition of God`s names, breath control, meditation and trance.
Rabi`a al-Adawiyya (died 801) introduced the theme of Divine Love into Sufism. She longed to love God only for himself, not for hope of any reward in paradise nor out of fear of judgement and hell. After her death the love theme became a dominant feature of Sufism, expressing the Sufi`s endless search for unity with the divine Beloved. The yearning for a love relationship with God was expressed by Sufis in the language of human love, similar to the Bible`s Song of Songs and some psalms. Sufi poetry described symbolically the relationship between God the Divine Lover and the human person searching for his love. In addition to the Qur`anic terms mahabba and wudud, Sufis coined the term `ishq for love. `Ishq denotes an unquenchable and irresistible desire for union with the Beloved (God).
While Sufism used to be found in every branch of traditional Islam, the strict Islamist reform movements which have developed in recent times have rejected much of Sufism as pagan additions and innovations which should be purged from Islam. The concept of love is downplayed by such movements and condemned as a pagan, Christian or Western notion incompatible with true Islam.
Note: Most Qur`anic quotations in this Response are taken from The Holy Qur`an: Text, Translation and Commentary by A. Yusuf Ali (Leicester: The Islamic Foundation, 1975 and many other editions) unless otherwise stated. Please note that different translations of the Qur`an have slightly different verse numbers. So in another translation it may be necessary to look at the verses just before or just after the text references given here in order to find the same text. However, where Qur`an verses quoted in the “Open Letter and Call” are re-quoted here, the translation is not known as it was no specified in the “Open Letter and Call”.
Temple Building
As you know the High Priest’s crown has been made. I wonder who will wear the crown and when this will happen?
And the blueprints for the temple are being put together…
In addition, we have begun work on architectural blueprints for the Third Temple, including cost projection, modern supplies, electricity, plumbing, computers, etc.”
And what about the Menorah…?
Menorah Moves Closer to Temple Mount
Rabbi Richman noted that in less than two weeks from now, on Rosh Chodesh Tevet, the famous Menorah (candelabrum) - suitable for use in the Holy Temple, familiar to visitors to the Cardo section of the Old City of Jerusalem - will be relocated to the landing of the wide staircase that leads down from the Jewish Quarter to the Western Wall. It will be protected inside the same type of glass structure that now houses it.
Well, take a look at this…[click on the thumbnail to get a much bigger picture]
a never before published glimpse of the golden menorah, at the very moment of its completion. Behind the three kneeling craftsmen stand three of the Temple Institute Rabbis.
The golden-plate Menorah stands overlooking the 
Western Wall, adjacent to the steps in the Old City’s Jewish Quarter. Based on years of extensive historical and Jewish legal research, the magnificent piece is the first ever to be built since the destruction of the Second Temple, thousands of years ago.
While all of this is happening, we still have the problem of certain governments not even recognising Israel’s right to exist… see Here for a photo and read the banner behind Palestinian Prime Minister of the Hamas government in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh.
Turbulent times ahead me thinks…
To download a video about the High Priest crown go Here. This is a very significant moment as the two Rabbis speak about this crown you can see the crown situated on a a table between the two of them.
- The Sanhedrin - the Lamb - and the Temple [This post has a lot about the position of where the temple may need to sit, interesting to see that it lines up with scripture!]
Just Quickly
It’s all about the sun according to some…
(CNSNews.com) - According to a new study on global warming, climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia found that the climate change models based on human influence do not match observed warming.
The new report, which challenges the claims of Gore and the IPCC, was published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society.
The report was written by David Douglass at the University of Rochester, John Christy at the University of Alabama, and Benjamin Pearson and S. Fred Singer at the University of Virginia.
“Our findings basically are that fingerprints - that is to say the pattern of warming - that’s predicted by greenhouse models does not match the fingerprints of observations, so there is a disconnect between greenhouse models and the actual reality of observations,” Singer told Cybercast News Service.
And the following advice from skeptical scientists…
Skeptical Scientists Urge World To ‘Have the Courage to Do Nothing’ At UN Conference
BALI, Indonesia - An international team of scientists skeptical of man-made climate fears promoted by the UN and former Vice President Al Gore, descended on Bali this week to urge the world to “have the courage to do nothing” in response to UN demands.
Lord Christopher Monckton, a UK climate researcher, had a blunt message for UN climate conference participants on Monday.
“Climate change is a non problem. The right answer to a non problem is to have the courage to do nothing,” Monckton told participants.
“The UN conference is a complete waste of our time and your money and we should no longer pay the slightest attention to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,)” Monckton added. (LINK)
But don’t worry too much, you can help the planet by not having more than two children. Unless of course you are willing to pay a tax levy for the sheer luxury of the third carbon child…
(CNSNews.com) - Having babies is bad for the planet, and parents of more than two children should be charged a birth levy and annual tax to offset the “greenhouse gases” their child will be responsible for over his or her lifetime.
At the same time, those who use and prescribe contraceptives and sterilization procedures should earn tax relief for such greenhouse friendly services” that help to keep the population size down.
These proposals, by an Australian academic, were published in the country’s leading medical journal on Monday. They drew a sharp response from a pro-family group.
That is all…
Dominionism - The seven mountains!
[Massive hat-tip to... Sola Dei Gloria]
I was perusing my fave’s and came across ‘Sola Dei Gloria’s post’ - see above link - and I really wanted to share it with you.
Have you heard of the 7 mountains? This is Dominionism at its absolute best. ‘Neo-Calvinism’ and ‘Sphere Sovereignty’ has entered the evangelical world and the re-think conference has a massive agenda to reclaim the 7 mountains to overtake the world and have complete dominion over it. Make no mistakes about it, it is a man made orchestrated plan, here is part of a letter written by Peter Wagner sent to Global Harvest [emphasis mine]…
I have been sharing the development of our obedience to this word with you since April.Craig Davis was the one who pointed the way toward reorganizing under “Global Apostolic Network” ( GAN ), thereby bringing together the bits and pieces we had been serving up to now. I first sent you a chart with 7 components of GAN and later another chart with 9.Then Lance Wallnau came on the scene and brought an integrating template for GAN which we call the 7-M Mandate, based on Lance’s 7 mountains which are the seven molders of culture (religion, family, education, media, arts & entertainment, government, and business).
One thing that this means is depicted in another chart, which I am sending you. You will see a large mountain representing the Kingdom of God with the 7 mountains at the bottom feeding into it. The 9 components of Global Apostolic Network are grouped under four headings: Government, Wealth, Warfare, and Teaching. The “7-M Coalition” is a new organization being birthed to implement the 7-M Mandate in a practical and effective way for transforming our society.
Isn’t this exciting? We have reorganized in obedience to the word that the Lord gave us through Chuck last December. Now please pray with us as we seek His guidance in putting the nuts and bolts together for seeing practical results along the road toward taking dominion of God’s creation. In fact Chuck Pierce has also told us that the new Jewish year of 5768 which begins in September, the year of Samekh Chet, means, among other things taking dominion. He says, “Dominion will be the key word for this year!
This was a challenging word for me because my new book coming out in January has as its title, Dominion! I’m excited about the way that this book will help change paradigms so that God’s people will be able fully to participate in the new streams that the Lord is initiating in the earth realm. Another thing that excites me is that other respected colleagues are also hearing what the Spirit is saying to the churches about social transformation. We are poised to see no fewer than seven new books on the subject of taking dominion in the next 18 months.
All nine of the components of GAN are on my heart, but especially those related to wealth and wealth transfer. I am in touch with 17 potential wealth transfer brokers, some of them expecting release momentarily. It is hard to comprehend, but some of them go to multiple millions, billions, and more. My task is to prepare a high integrity infrastructure for distributing these funds when they begin to flow. Zion Apostolic Network and The Hamilton Group are in place as agencies to carry this out. Our motto is “Sophisticated Philanthropy for Apostolic Distribution.”
One matter for your prayers is that Rod Neal of the Zion Project will be engaged during the last three weeks of August in high-level scientific experiments with the very innovative technology that he is developing for the kingdom.
What exactly is this high-level scientific experiment? It has something to do with wealth transfer, that much I know…
In a document called ‘C’ Peter Wagner writes…
Zion Apostolic Council. This is a wealth distribution infrastructure similar to The Hamilton Group. However, it is set up to handle the wealth generated by only one enterprise, namely the Zion Project founded by Rod Neal of Cincinnati, Ohio. Rod is very close to releasing some very innovative and disruptive technology which has the potential of making permanent changes in the lifestyle of the human race. He has asked me to form an apostolic council of 48 apostles who will be responsible for distributing the forthcoming wealth and also to serve them as Presiding Apostle.
Right now my head is spinning!!! Firstly what kind of technology can we look forward too that will make a permanent change in the lifestyle of the human race?
But before you watch the following youtube, I will offer you a little bit more information on how the dominionist kingdom will be built…
Our theological bedrock is what has been known as Dominion Theology. This means that our divine mandate is to do whatever is necessary, by the power of the Holy Spirit, to retake the dominion of God’s creation which Adam forfeited to Satan in the Garden of Eden.
This includes the need to govern apolitically, as well as to embrace spiritual warfare techniquesthat neutralize the control of our adversary within the functional and territorial spheres of authority to which we have been assigned. To do this, we know that we must be in communion, we must receive revelation, and we must apostolically and prophetically proclaim that revelation.
Here in America, we have done fairly well in leading the religion mountain, but not the other six. Our mistaken tendency has been to try to pull leaders from the other six mountains over into our religion mountain instead of encouraging them to use their gifts and their energy and their knowledge in the mountain to which God has assigned them. We want all of God’s people actively to do their part to fulfill the “7-M Mandate.”
Note: DayStar International Fellowship have some mp3’s available of one of the adherents of this Dominionist move, called ‘Johnny Enlow’ who is the senior pastor of Daystar International Christian Fellowship in Atlanta, Georgia Johnny has written a book on the 7 mountains that will be published in 2008. I haven’t listened to all of them as yet, but you may find them interesting. Considering his relationship to GAN I think that they would be insightful to say the least. A few of the mp3’s are called…
- The Seven Thrones of Your Soul Part 1 and 2: [1. Career 2. Bank account 3. Mind 4. Relationship 5. Worship 6. Entertainment 7. Tongue. Each throne relates to the 7 mountains so that the Church can take control over the world and become the great mountain, I am guessing they will claim that this mountain is the one spoken of in Daniel. Yet Daniel is clear that the mountain is made out of no hands and without human agency.]
- Headhunting on the 7 Mountains Part 1 and 2
- Hermon–The Angel of Unity [Living Journey notes that Hermon is an orb that appears in photo's. I speak about the orbs Here and Here as well as the heretic William Branham. The following is my email to the Baptist Union in regards to William Branham.]
- 7 Steps into the Heart of God
This is a lot to take in isn’t it! It is blatant dominionism at it’s best. Neo-Calvinism.
I will leave it there for the time being, but if anyone else has any more information to add to this, no matter how obscure, please comment!!! Or if you want to remain anonymous, go to my ‘About L~J‘ page and you can email me there with any information that is relative to this topic. I will respect your privacy if that is what you want. What I would like to do is to use the information that you have forwarded to me without your ID being disclosed in anyway!
Now watch and listen carefully to the way in which the Dominion Kingdom is advancing!
Rev 17:9 Here is the mind having wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains, where the woman sits on them.
Related Article:
What of Israel? *** Please help!!! ***
Dr. Calvin Smith of Midlands Bible College is in the middle of doing some research for a new book and he would like some help with comments and different opinions from all over the blogosphere.
So, first things first, the following is just a blurb about what it is he is actually doing and how anyone else can help if they feel they want to …!!!!
“What of Israel?” This is for two reasons. First, I want the new category to serve as a resource for those interested in Christian responses to Israel. Moreover, while I have strong views on this issue, it is important that this resource posits alternative views, questions, doubts, and concerns which need to be explored and dealt with. Only by exploring the whole range of Evangelical opinion can such a work be considered truly authoritative and scholarly.
This leads to the second reason for my desire to create a new category on this issue. Of course, I regularly interact with students and fellow colleagues on a whole range of theological issues. But my desire is that as I research this subject, distance learning students, friends of the college, and other Christians can also contribute to the debate, thus ensuring the whole effort is at least a collaborative one. So I am not simply looking for agreement with my views (though it is nice to know when arguments crafted are both persuasive and effective). In fact, I am interested in hearing from both sympathisers AND opponents, as ultimately this will enable me to consider and deal with the full range of issues. All we ask is that contributions are thoughtful, genuinely concerned with establishing truth (a concept out of fashion in today’s postmodern milieu), and which are not unnecessarily aggresive (though we encourage passionate expression of views).
Thus, my request from our readers is simple. First, please circulate details of this blog and particularly the “What of Israel?” category as widely as possible, to fellow Christians, your church, and elsewhere, both as a resource and to encourage Christian to debate the subject of Israel. Second, please contribute your thoughts, questions, and ideas to this section of the blog as much as possible. Some of these will help me, as well as also challenge readers, so making all of us more effective in our views. (The phrase “iron sharpens iron” comes to mind). Third, just as you contribute to this particular discussion (or in New Labour parlance, a “Grand Conversation”), be prepared to engage with the issues raised and the views of others fairly, openly, and above all from a biblical perspective. My aim is for a collaborative effort that produces a debate which seeks biblically-sound, theologically-viable, politically-sophisticated and non-rhetorically-driven conclusions on the very many facets of this issue.
I make no apologies for taking a pro-Israel stance, which is where I currently stand at the present stage in my research (though my position is far from slavish or subjective… I have grappled with these issues for years). It has led to the college being singled out by at least one Christian organisation as one of only three or four UK mainstream Bible colleges that take a position in support of Israel on the issue, though it should be noted that our faculty have a free view on the issue. Neither does the college include a statement along these lines in its core beliefs and values. Moreover, yet once again for the record I reject an “Israel right or wrong” stance. After all, if biblical Israel sinned and angered God, it is folly to say, as some extreme Christian Zionists suggest, that Israel today is totally guiltless of sin and can do no wrong. All such views do is make support for modern Israel all the more difficult to justify. So honesty rooted in good biblical theology, devoid of the philosophical agenda of the current political Zeitgeist, is what I am after.
Therefore, please help me in this project as I seek genuine discussion which is biblically-based and prayerfully-driven. I want to hear all views, regardless of how far advanced in your studies you are, or how much (or little) time you have devoted to this issue. Even the simplest of questions demonstrate what the current Evangelical thought on the the issue might be and how Christians should respond. Thank you.
© Calvin L. Smith 2007.
You can find more at the ‘Midlands Bible College Blog’ under the category called ‘What of Israel?‘.
So go on over and have a read of some of his posts and add your comments, keep it respectful and remember he wants to hear it all, the good with the bad!
What do you smell like?
2Co 2:14-17 But thanks be to God! He always leads us triumphantly in Christ and through us spreads everywhere the fragrance of knowing him. To God we are the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are being lost. To some people we are a deadly fragrance, while to others we are a living fragrance. Who is qualified for this? At least we are not commercializing (corrupt) God’s word like so many others. Instead, in Christ we speak with sincerity, like people who are sent from God and are accountable to God.
Corrupt the word of God - Margin, “deal deceitfully with.” The word used here (καπηλεύοντες kapēleuontes) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and does not occur in the Septuagint. The word is derived from κάπηλος kapēlos, which signifies properly a huckster, or a retailer of wine, a petty chapman; a man who buys up articles for the purpose of selling them again. It also means sometimes a vintner, or an innkeeper. The proper idea is that of a small dealer and especially in wine. Such persons were notorious, as they are now, for diluting their wines with water (compare the Septuagint in Isa_1:22); and for compounding wines of other substances than the juice of the grape for purposes of gain. Wine, of all substances in trade, perhaps, affords the greatest facilities for such dishonest tricks; and, accordingly, the dealers in that article have generally been most distinguished for fraudulent practices and corrupt and diluted mixtures. Hence, the word comes to denote to adulterate; to corrupt, etc. It is here applied to those who adulterated or corrupted the pure word of God in any way, and for any purpose. It probably has particular reference to those who did it either by Judaizing opinions, or by the mixtures of a false and deceitful philosophy. The latter mode would be likely to prevail among the subtle and philosophizing Greeks. It is in such ways that the gospel has been usually corrupted:
(1) It is done by attempting to attach a philosophical explanation to the facts of revelation, and making the theory as important as the fact.
(2) by attempting to explain away the offensive points of revelation by the aid of philosophy.
(3) by attempting to make the facts of Scripture accord with the prevalent notions of philosophy, and by applying a mode of interpretation to the Bible which would fritter away its meaning, and make it mean anything or nothing at pleasure. In these, and in various other ways, people have corrupted the Word of God; and of all the evils which Christianity has ever sustained in this world, the worst have been those which it has received from philosophy, and from those teachers who have corrupted the Word of God. (Barnes)
… Corrupt the word of God; by “the word of God”, may be meant the Scriptures in general, which are from God, contain his will, and which he uses for the good of men, and his own glory, and may be corrupted by false glosses, and human mixtures, and by adding to them, or taking from them; or the Gospel in particular, which is the word of truth, of faith, righteousness, reconciliation, and salvation, and which was corrupted by these false teachers, by making merchandise of it; they huckstered the word of God, made gain of it, sought merely their own worldly interest and advantage in it, and so mixed it with their own vain philosophy, to please the carnal ears and hearts of men; they blended law and Gospel, grace and works, in the business of salvation; they did, as peddling merchants do, mix good and bad commodities together, and then vend them for sound ware; or as vintners, who mix their wine with water, and sell it for neat wine. (John Gill)
I just thought the above was an interesting read, so I thought I would share it!
