Is burning the Koran a hate crime?

This was the question asked recently in national media outlets in response to a Gainsville, Florida pastor's plan to burn the Koran on 9/11.

Simple - we live in America and if you can burn the US flag in protest you can certainly burn a book. It is exactly the same! Some hold the US flag to be sacred - some hate what it is only a symbol of. Some hold the koran to be sacred - some hate what it is a symbol of. So NO it is not a crime in any sense of the word.

Burning a Koran may not be a crime, but it may be stupid. The backlash could be worse than even the media or military predicts. Certainly "peaceful" Muslims around the world will protest and people will most likely die. They will burn US flags and chant "Death to Satan America"! But, that is not what worries me most.

Certainly this book burning cannot be compared in scope to the Night of Broken Glass, but the incremental loss of freedom our does hearken back to 1930s Germany. Gainsville police plan to step up a road block and check the ID of everyone who attends the Koran burning. Is no one outraged that the city of Gainsville plans to "set up a road block" and "check the license" of people who go to the event? Who is going to keep the list and what are they planning to do with it? What is happening to our freedom?

You may laugh now, but do not be surprised if one day you have a visit from the "Religious" division of the FBI, or an entirely new federal agency established to "promote tolerance" and fight against the "defamation of religion".

PREDICTION -- The US Congress will debate a bill on the Defamation of Religion that will seek to make it a "hate crime" to "defame" anyone's religion, religious symbols, sacred sites or founders.

I wish the pastor would just cancel the burning, but the firestorm has already started. He did not start the fire, it has always been burning.

Lastly, speaking of politics since when did our political leaders become so well versed in religion? Since when do our political leaders have the right to tell us what to believe and how to practice our faith?

Hillary Clinton has apparently become well versed in Islam and stands in the place of prophet as she make proclamation after proclamation. She condemned Jones' plan at a dinner Tuesday in observance of Iftar, the breaking of the daily fast during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. "I am heartened by the clear, unequivocal condemnation of this disrespectful, disgraceful act that has come from American religious leaders of all faiths," she said. She has proclaimed that Islam is a religion of peace and that "terrorism has no religion".

Repeatedly we are told that we are "not in a religious war". This is a war against "terrorism". You know the thing that has "no religion". Am I stupid or something? As the Islamic terrorists blow themselves up they chant religious slogans, mobs chant "Death to Infidels", spontaneous parties broke out in the Islamic world to celebrate the Islamic victory on 9/11 and I could go on and on. But, it isn't religion?

The fact is that all leaders of all faiths have not condemned the Koran burning, and from the comments posted on many websites it seems that many (if not a majority of) Americans agree that Pastor Jones has every right to burn whatever book he wants to burn. Furthermore many Americans still believe that you can believe whatever you want to believe, and say whatever you want to say about religion. It is based on something we call the US Constitution.

What ever happened to the separation of Church and State?

www.righttobelieve.org

Method vs Proclamation

I was reading a book today about a modern method of "reaching Muslims for Jesus." The method is based on using the Koran, Islamic tradition and custom, but somehow sneaking Jesus into the mix. The tactic is to Islamify the "gospel" and take away the offense. Change the name of Jesus or Yeshua to "Isa". Change God to Allah. Exchange the title "Jesus, Son of God" for "Isa, Spirit of God". The hopeful end result is "Isa Muslim" (someone who looks, speaks and acts like a Muslim; but has been "saved" by Isa). If you have read much of this blog I am sure you know how I feel about this so I will not belabor the point.

The interesting thing is the story for how this particular method was started. Years ago a young Muslim boy was evicted from his school and family for asking, "How do we know the Koran is true?" He was literally labeled as a "sinner". Some time later the boy was befriended by a foreign missionary who gave the young sinner a Bible. The boy read the Bible, repented and received faith in Jesus. He was baptized and began sharing the Bible with others. Eventually hundreds were saved by hearing the Gospel as revealed in Scripture. After some time one of the leaders in the movement was killed for his faith. Then a method was developed in an effort to "bridge the gap", and hopefully "remove the offense".

I found it ironic that the gift of a Bible was the catalyst for this move of God, however the method now is to use the Koran. The impetus for the young sinner to receive the gift was his expulsion from Islamic society. The young boy exited Islamic culture and found Jesus. The product of using the Bible was a true convert to Christ who was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Why try to develop a scheme for evangelism when God has given us His Word?

Words - are they important?

I am totally understanding the need to be careful in our language
with prospects, and even the general public. I do not agree with lying
about our intentions to evangelize, or deception to gain access to "closed areas".
However, I can see the wisdom of prudent language when living or
ministering in a hostile land.

Recently I was asked to teach a seminar to converted Muslims. I was instructed to not call Jesus the "Son of God" or to mention "Trinity". Furthermore I was told to call God "Allah" and use "Al Masheia" rather than "Jesus".

When we are dealing with converted Muslims I think it would be irresponsible
not to teach the whole counsel of Scripture and introduce our new brothers
to good theology. I know that Muslims have a problem with calling Jesus
the Son of God because they know it means that He is literally God's Son
and therefore divine. But, that is the point.

Some years ago I had a bad experience with the IMB's "expert" on Muslim
evangelization. He said that Muslim, Jews and Christians all worship the
same god. I asked, "But, doesn't Jesus say, 'I am the Way, the Truth and
the Life... no man comes to the Father except by me.'"? The teacher
rebuked me and said that I was only interested in arguing semantics. I
responded that I was not speaking of semantics at all, but the very words
of God. He had said that Jews and Muslims worship the God I worship, but they do not
know Jesus. SO, in what way can they come to the Father? How can they
worship a God that can only be approached through Christ Jesus? It was an argument over words, primarily the Word of God.

Recently I had a conversation with a Jehovah's Witness. In the past they
would have never said, "Jesus is LORD." However, they have recently
started saying, "Jesus is lord." Notice the difference? "LORD" =
God, Jehovah, the Word incarnate. "lord" = master, landowner, knight. When I
say "LORD" I proclaim that Jesus is God. When a JW says "lord" he is
saying "mister." Very subtle, and very dangerous. So it isn't just words I am
concerned about it is their meaning.

Allah is an Arabic word for the god of Mohammed. After thinking about it I might could use the term "allah" to refer to God, but not Allah. I think I would be compelled to clarify each time I said allah "notice the small 'a'." Or maybe "allah - I mean the triune God of the Universe". It would be difficult, but I think I could find some way to accommodate on this point.

Many languages have a word for god and another for God. I have heard Muslims in America use "God" when speaking of Allah.

Really this whole issue for me is resolved in the Trinity. The Nicene and
Apostle's creeds predate Islam by several hundred years, and I would think
that a converted Muslim would readily agree with these historically
orthodox statements. In fact, for several hundred years you would not be
considered Christian, nor be baptized if you did not profess a Trinitarian
creed. Christ's divinity is almost impossible to discuss without a
discussion of the Trinity.

If former Muslims had sound teaching in this area I think it
would give them a foundation that would be unshakable. Someone recently implied that the Trinity is too advanced for new believers, but I
would argue that a child could understand - indeed we must have the faith
of a child to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Maybe they would not be
able to explain, but I am confident that the Spirit (if indeed they have
the Spirit of Christ) would bear witness and they would shout "glory to
God" as the beauty of God's triune nature is proclaimed to them.

Often we make the mistake of not communicating deeper truth with new
converts. Somehow we think that a lack of formal education might mean
that they are too ignorant to grasp complex concepts. We think that
evangelism is too important to waste time on theology. However, we see
many examples in Scripture of men preparing for years (some for decades)
learning about God before serving Him.

Stephen Kennedy, Mission Coordinator for IOI, had a beautiful experience with a new evangelist. He came from the countryside and was very poorly educated. When he was joining IOI he had to sign a form that states that he agrees with the Apostle's
Creed. He did not know what it was, so Stephen read it to him. When he
heard what the creed contained he began to say, "Yes! Yes! Praise God!"
It was wonderful to see that the truth of this creed was readily accepted
by this dear brother. He was encouraged to find that this creed predated
his personal experience by over 1,700 years.

To contrast I heard a song tonight on Christian radio. The lyrics said
something like, "It isn't important that I understand some creed, or even
what I believe... I want to feel like I am falling in love." So, are we
saying that it does not really matter what we believe about God as long as
it feels right? Call Him Allah, or Baal, or Bob - Trinity, not trinity -
Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha - don't all roads lead to the same destination? -
words don't matter as long as it feels right, promotes peace and we keep
the numbers coming.

I cannot state emphatically enough how central the Trinity is to everything I might teach. I mean my name is PATRICK (as in Saint Patrick the Trinitarian theologian that won Ireland for Christ - and to this day symbols for the Trinity are plastered
everywhere in Ireland including on beer bottles) for goodness sakes!

Lying to tell the Truth - Evangelistic Deception

For years I have protested the modern evangelical Christian practice of Evangelistic Deception (lying about our intentions in doing mission work). How can we share the Truth by lying?

Today it is painfully evident that we have only deceived ourselves - the Taliban knows exactly what the IAM (International Assistance Mission) workers were doing - promoting Christianity. It seems that the only people who are unaware that this is what the team was doing are the US Secretary of State, news outlets and the director of IAM.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton condemned the attack and disputed the Taliban's assertion that the medical team was promoting Christianity.

"We also condemn the Taliban's transparent attempt to justify the unjustifiable by making false accusations about their activities in Afghanistan," Clinton said.

On the IAM website a statement was posted that reads, "Our faith motivates and inspires us - but we do not proselytize. We abide by the laws of Afghanistan. We are signatures of the Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs Disaster Response Programmes, in other words, that, 'aid will not be used to further a particular political or religious standpoint.' But more than that, our record speaks for itself." (Dirk R Frans)

What record is that? One of doing good in the name of Jesus the Christ and proclamation of the Gospel I would hope. For a true Christian your entire life is about the following of Christ which certainly does include "proselytizing."

It is a shame that this mass martydom is not being portrayed as exactly what it is. These people were killed because they were Christians ministering in the name of Jesus and hopeful that their witness might cause some to convert to Christ and proclaim Jesus as LORD. Instead the State department and even the ministry that sent the team is tying to convince the world that these people were "aid workers" and not "ministers."

It is time to stop fooling ourselves. If you go to another country in the name of Jesus you are a missionary! If you extend yourself on behalf of the poor for Jesus sake, and the Gospel - YOU ARE A MISSIONARY! You do not have to "preach," but I certainly am hopeful that many heard the Gospel through this team of missionaries. Certainly I do not propose that we wear little name plates that say "Missionary Bob," but we should never be ashamed of the fact that these people (at least one that I knew) were promoting Jesus!

Should I get a tattoo?

I would like to begin by saying that I do not intend to offend, pass judgement or condemn anyone. My purpose is simply to look at the issue of Christians trying to decide on the issue of getting tattoos, and to help young believers think through the issues.

I have read a lot of opinion on the issue and the debates about Levitical law. Both sides seem to make many good arguments, but there is apparently no consensus on the Old Testament Biblical prohibition. Generally most people end up saying something like, "Christians are not 'under' the law..." and the response is generally, "well then is murder still wrong?" These type of arguments don't really get to the heart of the matter.

Indeed it is the heart where Christ's work is done and God's concern for the individual seems to be focused. The New Testament teaching on circumcision is clearly about God's concern for our heart. The Apostles agreed that Gentile believers be prohibited from eating blood and sexual immorality (both of which are Levitical laws, btw), and that Gentiles not be burdened with the extent of ceremonial law. The heart is God's concern, and a transformed heart will change behavior.

But, does the New Testament have anything to say about tattoos? The Apostle Paul goes to great lengths to command Gentile (and Jewish) believers that they should do everything within their power not to live "as the pagans do". Any behavior or meal that is associated with pagan behavior should be avoided. Christians should be know by the "Banner of Love". We should be "marked" with love. In other words, Pagans display their gods in carvings of stone, wood and skins -- Christians display our God through deeds of love and concern for our brothers. We should be known for our love.

This led me to investigate WHY many young Christians want tattoos. Obviously there are many reasons. One of the main reasons I hear is, "To witness Christ to others" or "so everyone will know I am a Christian". Kind of the Evangelical trump card - EVANGELISM.

One blogger said of his reasons for getting a tattoo, "To me it was the sense of taking control and doing what I want regardless of what anybody said or thought... Really what I think is it all boils down to is either you have the nerve to have ink carved into your body for life... That is why all of us with tattoos have a sense of brotherhood. Because each one of us knows the pain we went through for something we love (tattooing)."

So there we have it. "Taking control and doing what I want to do regardless of what anybody said or thought." As Christians we are to be intensely concerned with what others think, especially in regards to the perception of sinful behavior (real or imagined). Also, we are to be controlled by the Holy Spirit, not our fleshly desires.

While the Old Testament prohibition against tattoos might be up for debate I think it is clear that our society still views tattoos as "rebellious" and "to Hell with your opinion of me". A new term has evolved called "tattoo lifestyle" with magazines focusing on this evolving people group. (BTW, many Internet filters will block 'Tattoo Lifestyle' sights as "R rated"). I wonder how long it will be until people begin saying, concerning their desire to be tattooed, "I was born this way."

In conclusion I think the real issue concerns your heart. Why do you want a tattoo? Are you at all concerned about offending people for the sake of your freedom? Do you seriously want to do what pleases God, or what pleases you?

If you are truly concerned about lost souls or being identified with Christ then I would suggest a little soul searching. Is a tattoo glorifying to God? Will it offend others around you? Will it cause others to stumble?

The Apostle Paul put it this way, "So whatever you eat, drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God -- even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good, but the good of many, so that they may be saved." (I Corinthians 10:31-33)