;)
tagged: Contextualization, Dove World outreach center, Ground Zero Mosque, Islam, Rastis, Rev Terry JonesHow to Burn Books and Influence People: A Parable
Posted by Rastis in Church & Missions, News & Culture
He could feel the heat from his torch as the fire light licked away at the darkness around him.
His heart raced in anticipation as his plot was about to unfold. He chose this night because it was the feast of the passover. This had always been an important festival, but since the Jews were once again in bondage those radicals enjoyed the though of breaking free from their western occupiers all the more. While they remembered and celebrated their bloody victories after their Egyptian exile he had stolen away with the scrolls from the synagogue. It was only a lingering memory ago that he was one of them, trained in their schools of intolerance. There he learned to follow their texts. They wanted nothing less than to enforce their laws on everyone. Standing in their way was a new dedicated minority who followed Jesus, some obscure teacher who was executed for political reasons. At first he hated these Christians, even to the point of being complicit in their persecution. But then something changed; He met their God. He realized that the notion that God had no son was a lie. Not only was Jesus the Messiah, he was God! These Jews terrorized his new way of life and his new freedoms. The religious leaders had tried to silence their group before–even under the threat of bodily harm. While he was ethnically Jewish he enjoyed the status of a full citizen of Rome. He was not about to let another Jewish uprising threaten him. As the Jews prayed to their false God that night he could feel the anger rising. They were like a monolithic army of brainwashed Jewish-Fascism. Barnabas had counseled him not to take action against the Jews. Apparently Barnabas was just using that “gift of encouragement” as an excused to be spineless and pander to those radicals who would not be happy till every Roman was dead. Barnabas went as far as allowing Believers to continue in the synagogue and temple worship. No, Barnabas would not be any help tonight. If only Rome would quit pandering to these radicals; they should get rid of the grandfather clause permitting them to worship. As he lowered his torch to the scrolls he longed for the days when someone still had the backbone to sacrifice a pig on the altar–that would teach those Jews….
For those who will be wont to point out in the comments, this is not intended to be anything but a parable in response the Pastor in FL who is going to be burning the Qurans. Lucky for us–not to mention many 1st cent. Jews, Paul did not approach them in this way. Rather he became all things to all people, albeit without their sin, so that he might make more disciples. It seems that in dealing with Islam we have simply failed to learn from centuries of failure. You probably all know someone who is Muslim. Maybe you don’t recognize the connection. Maybe you have simply been afraid. This would be a good time to show the love of Christ.
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;){kind=logo}
;)
I just heard that the pastor agreed to cease and desist.
It would have been easier if Rev. Terry negotiated with Obama to take back his statement that America is NOT a Christian nation than trying to move a $100 million mosque from ground zero with a few copies of the Quran.
I agree totally with the love of Christ you have encouraged us to use. Christ also made bold statements through His love to those who were strongly opposed to His kingdom teaching. Eventually, it comes to that in some cases and that is love, too, if done appropriately. When it comes to that we are told, “and having done all, to stand” Eph. 6:13. Standing in love takes on a whole new meaning when we have to do it.
“A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly. When they calculated the value of the scrolls, the total came to fifty thousand drachmas.” Acts 19:19
If a bunch of former Muslims took their old Koran’s and burned them, would that be appropriate?
Bruce,
Thanks for the comment. I would not take “contending” off the table at all. We just have to contend over the real issues.
Andrew,
That is an interesting question. I would still say no. We have to remember that evangelism and missions needs to be receptor oriented. If they are not clearly receiving our message then the fault is ours not theirs. The issue would be how the broader Muslim community would view such an act. Open and public defamation of their book or prophet will instantly close the door. They are an honor/shame society. They must take a stand against such actions (or face the consequences) even if they don’t agree. It is kind of like baking someone into a corner–the persuasive person always leaves them one way out. When honor demands a reply statement, then there is no way out, all other options are off the table.
Andrew, why didn’t you include the rest of the chapter about the ensuing riot? The Bible not only tells what the believers did, it also includes the reaction and consequences as well.
Here’s one scenario that would have played out: Terry burns the Koran. Muslims issue a fatwa. The press focuses on California fires and life goes on.
Another scenario: The Koran burns. Engraged Muslims go on a rioting rampage and issue threats and step up terrorist action. America justifies itself by saying in THIS country men are free to speak their mind and the burning of the Koran, like the burning of the American flag or effigies of the president or even the Bible are all protected as free speech. We all say that we may not agree with what he says, but we will defend to the death his right to say it. Muslims become more enraged at our wanton freedoms, do more violence, and world opinion turns against them even more harshly than before. Soon the world wakes up to the threat that fatwas against Danish cartoonists and Baptist preachers are contrary to constitutional government and Islam is exposed for the tyrannical, hateful, repressive religion that we all know it to be.
All in all, I think it was a tempest in a teapot. Yes, it represented a potential threat to American troops in Afghanistan, but then so does caving to Muslim sensibilities. bin Laden has just achieved a great victory in the eyes of his compatriots because the US (as represented by Terry) just caved in to Muslim pressure. We all worry about the consequences of burning it, but who really considered the consequences of not burning it?
Rick,
It felt so good reading your comment. Thanks
Rastis: On the whole on first reading I am proud of you for this effort. I congratulate.
Still a couple points of inflection.
First I do hope you will become acquainted with the witness of Martin Accad and Sayyid Syeed on these matters.
And I think you will want to google up Charles Marsh’s Berlin Lecture March of this year on Bonhoeffer.
Here is a strong and timely essay this morning that goes further and more explicitly to all the nuances of this for the Southern Baptist Convention in particular and all of us in general:
http://www.ethicsdaily.com/news.php?viewStory=16658
It’s about General Petraeus, Jerry Vines and Dog Whistles; a very strong point.
While at that site check the essay by Jim Somerville of FBC Richmond Va and ask yourself where employees of the SBC IMB stand with him on this issue.
Jim has shown the Parham documentary endorsed by Denzel Washington at his church.
Rick,
The “ensuing” riot was not linked to the burning of the scrolls. It took place sometime later (see v.20-23 for context), and it was due to a lack of business for the craftsmen and the realization that fewer people would pay homage to the goddess Diana. The two events are only related by the fact that 1) people were coming to Christ, and 2) they were breaking their ties to false religion. The riot had nothing to do with the burning of scrolls.
However, the idea of burning another religion’s holy book should cause some reflection. I can’t imagine actually purchasing a book just to burn it. But what if you were leaving another religion and you had the book? Do you give it to the religion’s adherents? Give it to Goodwill? Dispose of it quietly? I admit that burning it publicly is not likely to earn goodwill with adherents of the religion, but is it necessarily wrong?
Jesus, Paul, Stephen, and others had some harsh words about those who followed other religions. Would it be polite to say that someone worships God in ignorance, or that he is stiff-necked? Not really. But are we always called to be polite? I don’t think so. Even if we are as polite as we can be, if we accurately present the gospel, the concept that “I am a sinner and God is my judge” is not going to be received well by everyone. If we present the gospel in a non-offensive way every time, I’d have to think that we weren’t really presenting it at all. We can’t just decide whether an action or statement was “good” or not based on how people responded to it.
Now I value politeness, and my hypothetical situation is just that–hypothetical. I asked it to make me (and others) think. Normally I would prefer to be polite when dealing with people of other religions. But if I have to be straighforward and candid about what I think of Islam (or any other religion for that matter), I certainly can’t say that it is of God. It is of man. And I believe that there is a supernatural element to Islam that has a strong hold over so many people. So is Mr. Jones’ sign correct in saying that “Islam is of the devil?” We can’t really wage spiritual warfare if we fail to recognize the spiritual element playing a role in false religions. It isn’t just philosophies or worldviews that keeps people from coming to Christ.
(Please note that I don’t support this guy at all, and his motivations, as he’s expressed them, do not conform with what I’ve mentioned here about politeness and candor. Has anyone ever noticed that the weirdos and cult leaders are all named Jones?)
Some of you who have been following this story more closely than I have may have to fill me in on some of the details. Maybe there’s something I’m missing. But, what I am wondering is, Is there some reason why the media sees such a need to give so much publicity to every crackpot out there who cooks up some stunt like this? Is there something to this story, beyond mere sensationalism, and stirring the pot, that warrants the coverage this has gotten? If not, then who is mostly to blame? Rev. Jones, no doubt, has his share. But, is not the media who gives him his platform just as guilty of the possible repercussions of all this, though? Is this not a time for cries for more responsible journalism?
Recently Pastor Jeffress at FBC Dallas has had a word tussle with Steve Blow, an opinion columnist with the Dallas Morning News. The columnist took umbrage with Dr. Jefferess statements calling as “broad-brush” “uninformed” and “un-American” the following factoids:
1) Islam is a false religion
2) The Q’ran is a false book
3) Mohammad is a false prophet
In particular Mr. Blow takes umbrage with the claim by Dr. Jeffress that Mohammad taking a nine year old girl as his “wife” when he was 54 has lead some in the Islamic world to take young girls old as eight and nine as wives. Is this claim “true” or not?
Mr.Blow’s article can be found here:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/localnews/columnists/sblow/stories/090510dnmetblow.19e1646.html
Pastor Jeffress response can be found here:
http://www.firstdallas.org/article/our-pastor-responds-to-dallas-morning-news-columnist/
Is this type of engagement with the world (in particular Muslims) necessary? Are these statements “true”? And do they need to be said?
As to the burning if someone wanted to burn stuff that was their property that had a spiritual bind on them, (and as such as Scriptural precedent) how can we disagree? Are we disagreeing with the authority of precedent found in the Scripture itself? On what authority can we do that?
Rob
Is not this a prime example of standing up culturally for truth in order to point to the Truth?
One of the radio personalities didn’t comment his opinion either way on the Koran burning but pointed out that in 2009 when some American troops received Bibles to distribute to the Afgans the Afgan leaders were greatly offended and the US Commander took the Bibles and burned them.
For whatever its worth I want to go on record as being very Proud of the President of the United States, the man I voted for, with whom I had every intention of walking across the Selma Bridge with the first Sunday in March of 2007; I want to go on the record here and I Hope my sentiment comes to the attention of Richard Land. Al Mohler,Russ Moore and Jerry Vines; I thought he was most eloquent in his closing remark in the News Conference that just ended in response to the reporter from Fox News, on the Wisdom of the NYC Mosque
Rick,
Is your last paragraph serious?
David,
I think the media is a big part of the problem. However, youtube and the internet help tons of people with no real connection to fray spout their nonsense. But on a more benign note [at great risk of starting the wrong fight, albeit probably not with you] just google how many churches have some kind of “we pray for the troops” vs “we pray for Muslims.” With the connections they draw about us regarding the military and the church, at the perception level it appears that we have yet to move beyond the crusades.
Rob,
There are many shots we can take at Islam and Islamic culture. In all fairness there are many they could take at us. At the end of the day, these shots will do little to convince either side–we shore up, regroup and try again the next day. I remember when our own Jerry Vines made similar comments (with the Caners in tow). Telling the other man he is fat and ugly might be true, but it is pointless and useless in changing his worldview.
The question was serious. I’m not sure a lot of thought has been given to what the consequences are of the decision not to burn the Koran. In reading Al Jazeera, they don’t seem to be as exercised over this as we do: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2010/09/2010910123534220284.html
Rastis,
This is an epistemological question – not a question of likes/dislikes, opinions, conjecture, or interpretation. When we confront in love anybody with the truth claims of the gospel, then anything else is by definition false (“The Law of the Excluded Middle” – Aristotle, bright guy). We are not talking about fat men, skinny men, or guys with mustaches and weather the preferences for the opposite are right, wrong, or middle of the road. Jesus claims He is the only way to God. Mohamed claims he is the one true prophet. Jesus claims He is God incarnate, part of triune God. Mohamed claims that Allah is the one and only God, and all the rest including the claims of Christ followers that Jesus is God (including Jesus’ claim) are false. Neither we nor they can have it both ways: One is true; one is false.
We as believers must be when called upon claim the truth both in the affirmative as well as the dis-affirmative. Jesus Is Lord and the only way to God; Mohamed is a false prophet and Islam is a false religion and the Q’ran is a false book. The proclamation of the first truth infers the second; the affirmation of the second truth leads to the proclamation of the first. They are connected and circular – you cannot disconnect them without yourself being false and in error.
No matter what method that is employed to get to the truth albeit via relationships or personal discussions will eventually get to this fork of decision: which one is true? which one is false? To not get their at all belies a false gospel – one without sacrifice or distinction between truth and error, right or wrong, good or bad. I get it that guys like you don’t want to create waves but merely want to employ the gospel as Andrew said in a nice polite way. But if you are true to the Truth, you will have to eventually broker these things with your friends. I pray you will have the strength to do so both in love and the courage of Him found in you.
Rob
“But on a more benign note [at great risk of starting the wrong fight, albeit probably not with you] just google how many churches have some kind of “we pray for the troops” vs “we pray for Muslims.” With the connections they draw about us regarding the military and the church, at the perception level it appears that we have yet to move beyond the crusades.”
I am not going to start a fight or start a debate. But for the record (just so we are clear) that statement is just a bunch of beef baloney – in case you were wondering
.
Rob
I am not a Michele Malkin fan, and the only way I know about this article is though an email I received. Minus the sarcasm, it is a fairly good read, putting a comprehensive light on current events. I include it to “vitiate the atmosphere.”
http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2010/09/10/the_eternal_flame_of_muslim_outrage/page/1
Rob
“But for the record (just so we are clear) that statement is just a bunch of beef baloney – in case you were wondering”
That is exactly what they would say about our perceptions. Hence the reason we need to be more circumspect.
I wasn’t trying to establish a cause and effect relationship between churches praying for or supporting troops as the direct cause of bad perceptions. My guess is probably no one over here is looking at our church websites. It does serve as an example of how we can do something with right intention and even actions {the vague “troops” are made of of many individuals within our own congregations–we should be praying for them} but can be misread and misinterpreted. Most Arabs cannot conceive of a secular culture. As far as many of them are concerned the state is at the bequest of the church and vice versa. Thus, at least to them, military action is nearly synonymous with church action. Although this is in error, with all of the God and Country talk, it is easy to see how they arrive at their conclusions. These connections come through in our speeches, sermons, tv, movies, art, books, and magazines. Needless to say, this particular perception has a very negative effect on gospel proclamation and receptivity.
But Rastis…
As the article in #17 illustrates, about any proclamation or innocuous statement by anybody (specifically Christians) is considered a great slight. If we do as you suggest we would be forever walking around on eggshells, always extremely fearful of saying anything that would vitiate the “perception”. The outcome would be that we would say nothing, including the presentation of the gospel which in of itself is highly offensive for it forces a choice between right/wrong, good/bad, and true/false. The school teacher did not believe she said anything wrong when she suggested the name for the teddy bear = but they wanted her killed for it! I do not envy you = you are walking around in a minefield and you think you have the map to keep you safe, but that stray mine laid without anyone knowing about it will kill you. Yet we know that God is sovereign and can and will continue to keep you in the palm of His hand. I will have to say though: So much for the religion of “peace” …
I will not and refuse to curtail my activities of what I know is truth and right in fear of the darkness in the hopes of mollifying any person’s sensibilities or perceptions. I will however ask for discernment and use sound judgment in determining the difference between my opinion and absolute truth. The only answer here is prayer for those in darkness – specifically Muslims – that the Lord Jesus would open their eyes and that He bind the Prince of Darkness from further fermenting hatred, destruction, and misery from their hand in the name of Islam.
Rob
I think there is a difference in clearly proclaiming the truth, and doing it without tact. For instance, plenty of people have written good books exposing the errors of Islam, but that doesn’t make the news. What makes the news is when people do untactful, in-your-face types of things.
David,
What is tact? Can you give a good example of what you are referring to here (this is not a question in jest – just an earnest desire to understand to see an example of a truth statement given in “tact” that does not offend). And for the record as far as I understand it, I agree with you in being tactful with all people – one better really really hear God to give a prophecy like Jonah’s message of destruction to Nineveh in this climate.
Also…I disagreed with the burning of the Q’ran – just a publicity stunt – but you will have to concede that it “worked.”
Rob
I never suggested we say nothing that would offend. My point was that burning the Quran was a no-win situation. The gospel is offensive by nature; our communication of it should not be. If they are going to be offend, they need to be offended with Jesus not with us. If we are going to have an argument–if that is to be our approach–then we should get mired down in the details of Jesus not Muhammad (they are well aware of his life, actions, and relations–Jerry Vine’s line was not news breaking to any of them). There are those who take a polemic approach who do a good job. They do not characterize, insult, or defame. The issue is not so much specifically what we say, it is how we say it. Having pig races next to the mosque to flaunt our freedom–as that man in west-Houston does–has nothing to do with any kind of truth. It is simply an emotive response.
Our calling is not to be safe, but to be wise.
Hard for me to improve on or add anything of substance to Rastis’s answer.
It was interesting for me to be confronted by Sam (a local believer here on my team) on the issue of this man burning the Koran. Sam was not sure how a man could do something like that and be a real follower of Jesus. I had to spend some time explaining to him how fed up Westerners are with some Islamic folks pushing us around in our current situation of immigration etc. He was shocked to discover that not every believer from the West was not in fact, like me. That apparently many believers made decisions that were not based on what forwarded the Kingdom of God best.
As to Rick’s question of not burning the Koran all I have to say is that he is right. In backing down and not burning it many Muslims will see that Americans are weak and can be intimidated. All I can make of that is that should never influence what we do. If Jesus asks us to turn the other cheek and love our enemies then we must do that. If we are to speak the truth in love then we must do that. The results will likely be that many will think we are weak and push us around. We will be handed over and crucified in the end. Of course, if that is not the destination you wanted to go then you are following the wrong guy.
Too many Christians think that being offensive is being faithful, and that as long as people are offended, they are on the right track.
I often bring current issues up at Men’s Bible study, and it can be frustrating. I have one attender who regularly tells the gathering that he has no use for any moslem (his term). They favor having the state step in and halt the misnamed ground zero mosque, even if it means abrogating their legal rights. They grudgingly agree that quran burning won’t really serve any purpose but I think they’d like to see it happen anyway. Anything to tick off muslims.
Then you have yahoos, too many of whom have access to the internet, who proclaim all Muslims are terrorists. Most Christians don’t even read their bibles, but suddenly they’re all experts on the quran.
To counter Rob Ayers MMalkin Townhall link I offer the following thoughts. It seems to be similar to what Progressive in the SBC were facing in the mid 70′s with the onslaught of SBC Fundamentalism.
Progressive Muslims now face similar conundrum in their own traditions: Quoting:
Many of our religious leaders have forgotten that our theologies, teachings and practices were means to serve a transcendent Creator, not idolatrous ends. Many of the most prominent Muslim religious and moral authorities the world over—clergy, intellectuals, scholars, politicians—have, through silence and inaction, invited a plague of craven violence on a number of Muslim societies. In a manner of speaking, in many places, the asylum is in charge of the mosque. Religious leaders are more interested in cowing to public adulation through demagoguery than in showing courage and exhorting people to piety and sanity.
From:
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/3302/god_bless_islam_with_courageous_leadership/
Stephen,
Islam is a false religion; Mohammad is a false prophet; the Q’ran is a false book.
While we can hope that “moderates” bring sanity (in terms of bloodshed) into reality, there will never be true “sanity” or peace until the “Prince of Peace” is found supreme and Muslims become believers in the true faith.
Rob
Randall Balmer in his book Thy Kingdom Come–and the Title does have Significance–in his second chapter devoted to George Truett in contradistinction to Judge Roy Moore calls Richard Land a “counterfeit Baptist”.
Jesus Christ is my Saviour. I made my profession of faith in 1959 at the Truett Memorial Baptist Church in Hayesville NC where the Historic Marker outside on HWY 64 said Truett left and went to Texas where for 40 years he was pastor of FBC Dallas.
So in my Dunked, Baptized guts I know a little bit about what it is to be a Baptist Christian.
But how much more is WA Criswell, the Criswell of 56 in Columbia SC a false prophet of the Baptist Tradition as Osama Bin Laden is of the best of the Muslim tradition. Strong argument to be made it is a matter of degree.
You and I could spend a lot of time and energy the next few days on the matter. I think Charles Kimball in When Religion Becomes Evil, an ordained Baptist minister and great friend of Jeff Rogers whose sermon on the Mission of the Church yesterday at FBC Greenville was grand. Easily googled at Pulpit Bytes.
Both Kimball and Rogers are grand plumblines for this discussion.
I hope you will have the curiousity and good sense to give Kimball a Fair Reading.
Again, Looking forward for strong discussion between Richard Land and Charles Marsh on these matters in wake of Marsh publication of his book on DB fall of 2011
For Rob Ayers in particular and all others as well.
Fabulous article in current Ny Rev of Books, one of the best to date of the hundreds that have been published on this matter.
I hope Rob in particular will consider it in his heart, as well as the Yorty Sermon in the Your Land My Land Thread.
Side note, had a fascinating conversation with a Syrian Christian tonight who had been in America for Ten Years. Said I was the most enlightenned person with whom he had a conversation on these matters the whole time he’d been here. I think he will be googling material on the Common Word documentary this weekend.
However this sterling article is the Wisdom of the Hour. I hope someone brings it to Richard Land and Al Mohler’s attention as well as David Miller whose SBC Voices Blog is in dire need of some Light these days:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/sep/30/catholics-muslims-and-mosque/?pagination=false&printpage=true