Showing posts with label tolerance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tolerance. Show all posts

16 April 2024

As unto the Lord... a sermon on conscience given in Sydney in April 2024

 As unto the Lord—don’t judge the servant of another!

 

A sermon on conscience from Romans 14

By Bob Mendelsohn

Given at Sans Souci Anglican Church

14 April 2024

 

Shalom! You have been studying the book of Romans, one of my favourite books in the Bible, and I like to say the big theme of that letter is “Getting Right with God.” Sometimes we title that in terms of justice or righteousness. Paul, the author of this letter says that the entry, the admission ticket to obtain this being right with God is through faith, particularly faith in the death and resurrection of the Son of God, Yeshua the Jewish messiah. Judgment is given to him and he will judge all, and he will welcome all who come to him. That reality of this judgment is going to be the basis of Paul’s comments today as we look at judgmentalism and mutual affirmation from chapters 14 and 15.

Can I ask that those watching this sermon later than live on YouTube, please pause your playback and read this section of the Bible. It will only take a few minutes, then press play and re-join us as we explain the text. Thanks.    

Let me give you the outline of today’s talk. 

1.     The strong and the weak contrasted --Don’t condemn! (.1-12)

2.     Faith is the key (.13-23)

3.     Acceptance, not tolerance, is how the Body works (15.1-7)

Now let’s unpack this section and see what it has to say to us who are reading this letter written nearly 2000 years ago. The title of the message is “As unto the Lord—don’t judge the servant of another!”

First then, The Strong and the weak contrasted (.1-6)

It’s likely that some Jewish people, who were kicked out of the city of Rome from AD 49 to AD 53 or so, were now back in town. In the gathered community, the church there in Rome, there would have been some Jewish believers who saw some practices which were alarming. Some believers were eating foods that were out-of-bounds, like seeing pork ribs at the Saturday potluck lunch. And other practices were a bit different, as some in the church were not observing new moons or even the Sabbath with propriety. These Jewish believers would have been scandalized by the changes they saw in the faith since Jesus had been around and might have wanted things to be ‘like the old days.’ They might have had some racial pride and some racial prejudices in action. 

But as some of you will attest, even here in Sydney, and certainly in other global cities, you will meet Gentiles who strongly believe in Yeshua and who want to maintain some Jewish laws. They want to honour God by keeping kosher (Leviticus 11) and by observing the festivals of the Lord (Leviticus 23). Over many chapters, Paul has showcased the inadequacies of these to make ourselves right with God. (Romans 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7). 

With those two categories of peoples in mind, I find it fascinating that Paul doesn’t label the weak here in our text as either Jewish or Gentiles. In other words, he doesn’t want to aggravate any natural branch vs. wild olive branch hostility. He’s already highlighted that Gentile believers ought not to boast over the Jewish believers (Romans 11.17-24). By using ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ in this section, he’s not making this point into a racial consideration, but rather a matter of faith in action.  He uses the phrases ‘Unto the Lord” or “For the Lord” over and over. 

Let me give you an Older Testament single word that may help us in this matter of understanding what informs the apostle.

In Torah, over 250 times, the word “La’adonai” is used. Sometimes it’s about direction. He spoke “to the Lord.” Other times, it has to do with offerings being given “to the Lord.” Leviticus 25.2 says, ‘When you come into the land which I shall give you, then the land shall have a Sabbath to the LORD.” 

Sabbath then is either unto the Lord or not! Widening this truth, in fact, everything that I do can be unto him or not. 

So many people get this wrong. They think that some believers are weak or strong in faith, by what they wear, how loudly they sing, how they seem to have a perpetual smile on their face. Paul says their weakness is defined here in terms of legal observance of not eating all foods and by celebrating certain days. Wow, that would smack against the beliefs of many Jewish believers and legal observers in our days. But Paul’s statement is that no matter what they believe or what they practice, let them do or not do, AS UNTO THE LORD.

When people tell me they keep kosher ‘unto the Lord’ I’m good with that. When they say “God wants me to keep kosher so I can please him more” I wonder if they are short-sighted and missing the point. But even to them, the weak in the faith, as Paul says, I must have kindness and openness and NO contempt.

Verse 3: Not showing contempt for the other. I hear this language, this sentiment regularly in politics and in Facebook, in conversations like we have with those not yet no board with the Gospel. I remember a couple of years ago being on the corso in Bondi Junction. I offered a hand sanitiser bottle to a middle-aged man who looked intensely at the product on my tray and said, “No, that’s a contradiction. I won’t take that.” But it wasn’t so much his words as it was his attitude which spewed out hostility. Contempt. Not a simple dismissal or like some say, ‘No thank you.” No it was derision and disdain for me, for my product, for my kind offer… contempt. 

Paul says not to show that contempt for ‘the other.’ Why not? Because GOD has judged him already and has accepted him. Because of that person’s relationship with God, the ‘la’adonai’ that’s going on in the heart of the believer who is weak or who is strong… who eats or who doesn’t eat.. because of the acceptance by the Almighty, we ought to accept him as well. Paul says that here in verse 1: “accept the one” and in verse 18 “acceptable to God and approved by men” and in chapter 15 verse 7, “Therefore accept one another just as Messiah also accepted us to the glory of God.” 

Verse 4, “Who are you to judge the servant of another?” Again the point Paul makes, based on his understanding of the Judgment of God in Yeshua, that all who are known by him, that all who are by faith welcomed into the community, then I’m not to judge that one in terms of eternity. There are plenty of Bible verses about judgment beginning with the house of God (1 Peter 4.17) and that we are to judge those living in error (1 Cor. 5.11-13) inside the church. But in this case, here in Romans, that judgment is on matters of style rather than matters of life and death. This can be confusing, and I appreciate the difficulties some have. 

NT Wright makes the point in his book on this (Paul for Everyone) using two extreme examples. One a person who ‘believes’ that stealing is acceptable and you shouldn’t judge me for doing so. The other, a person who reads in Torah that you shouldn’t wear garments at the same time of two different materials. How we put this section of ‘not judging the servant of another’ into practice depends on the situation. I’m reminded of the old axiom, “In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.” Paul is highlighting the non-essentials of food laws and holy day observance. How we treat each other in Messiah, at the fellowship table over morning tea, on the golf course, at the chemist… those are what evidence the godly life. Amen?

I know a lovely woman who is homosexual. She attends a church dedicated to gay people here in Sydney. She claims to be a Christian. To me, that’s similar to the first extreme example, of stealing. Sexual sins are clearly listed in the Bible, in both Older and Newer Testaments. Even in Romans chapter 1. What then is my response as a man of God? Dunn says, “The point is that the Christian is not a law unto himself or herself. But neither is any Christian a law unto someone else.” She cannot be living a gay life ‘unto the Lord’ since the Lord has made this very clear. 

Same with Sabbath observance. Verses 5 and following. Some observe with technical precision the Jewish Sabbath. Some of us grew up with a deep commitment to going to Friday night meals with candles and challah and wine, with Saturday synagogue and prayers, to the hearing of the Torah and Haftorah being read and sometimes explained. Then the lunch and the study session, the 3rd meal and the final prayers before returning home for Havdalah. In fact this weekend I was in Hobart, with a long-time mate who is Jewish and his wife, and on Friday night we welcomed Shabbat with candles and wine and bread, and yesterday he and I both led portions of the prayers at the oldest continuing running synagogue in the Southern Hemisphere on Argyle Street. We are both religiously ritualistically Sabbath-keepers, but maybe not enough for some Orthodox Jews. Sabbath has a certain rhythm all its own. But some of you here at Sans Souci might regard ‘every day alike.’ Let each man… What, Paul are you saying? Allow each man to make up his own rules? You’ve got to be kidding! People in modern times would dismiss any regulations because hey, it’s inconvenient or I don’t have time or the kids have football games or.. But that’s exactly NOT what Paul is saying. Either do it or don’t do it ---UNTO THE LORD. Let God, not convenience, be your guide. Let God, not the kids, be your guide. Let God be the one to whom you submit and whom you seek to honor BECAUSE he has accepted you. Whatever is not of faith is sin, he says. (verse 23)

Dunn says this, “With repeated emphasis Paul presses home the point: “God has welcomed him . . . he is God’s servant . . . he will stand because it is precisely and solely God’s prerogative and power to make him stand” (vv 3–4). This is a crucial step in Paul’s pastoral tactic: to get the traditionalists actually to accept that someone who differs from them, and differs from them in something they regard as fundamental, is nevertheless acceptable to God and accepted by God.”

Paul quotes Isaiah (45.23) which indicates that God will judge all people, even the weak in this passage, not only for their biblical compliance but also with their haughty self-projection and attitude of superiority over their brothers and sisters who belong to God. Be careful!

Faith is the key (.13-23)

Whereas the first section of the chapter seems to be focusing on the weak, this section clearly has the strong in view. Even so, verse 13 opens with ‘don’t judge!’ and both groups could have heard that being said to them. The use of the phrase ‘stumbling block’ brings my mind to Leviticus 19.  There in verse 14 we are told not to put a stumbling block in front of blind people, nor are we to curse deaf people. This is a serious charge to keep peace in the whole community. Blind people wouldn’t see the block, and deaf people wouldn’t hear the malediction, but God sees what you do secretly. That seems to be in Paul’s mind as he writes this, ‘do not judge’  Verse 15, “do not destroy with your food.’ Verse 16, “Do not let what is for you a good thing…” Verse 20, “Do not tear down the work of God” All of these negative words are designed to remind the readers in Rome of what he says in verse 15, “you are no longer walking according to love.” Where did Paul get that? Back to Leviticus 19. Verse 18, after the stumbling block and deaf curse line, he says, 

‘You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor nor defer to the great, but you are to judge your neighbour fairly. You shall not go about as a slanderer among your people, and you are not to act against the life of your neighbour; I am the LORD. You shall not hate your fellow countryman in your heart; you may surely reprove your neighbour but shall not incur sin because of him. You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself; I am the LORD.” (15-18)

Listen to those charges, ‘no injustice in judgment’, ‘judge fairly’, not a slanderer, not hate your countryman, no vengeance… all summed up in LOVE your neighbour as yourself.

Paul hears the words of Moses and takes them on board. By the way, ‘stumbling block’ in Greek is the word ‘scandalon’ from which we get the word for offense, or ‘scandal.’ Don’t let your freedom scandalize another, and don’t be scandalized by their behaviour if they are seeking to honour the Lord in their life, by faith. 

Do you have some passages that stick out as highlights in your reading of the Scriptures? I have many favorites and 14.17 is one of those. I love the ‘order of things’ and here Paul says the Kingdom of God is not eating and drinking. He obviously was not an Australian where after every event, any sporting contest, any election, almost any agreement at work, “I’ll drink to that” comes into play. What time is it? It’s ‘beer o’clock’ they say. Paul says the kingdom is not found there, and therefore not to be lost because of food or drink. It’s three things: righteousness, peace and joy in the Ruach Hakodesh. If you have right relationship with God (what he calls ‘righteousness’) then that gives you peace with God (Romans 5.1) and thus joy in the Spirit realm. 

Faith, our entry key, our admission ticket into that right standing with God is what makes the difference. Not only in Paul’s life, but in my life, and in your life. Faith in the death and resurrected Messiah of Israel…that will bring us into righteousness. And anything short of that, like judging others, like condemning others, like having contempt for others… that’s falling short of faith and thus is titled ‘sin.’

Acceptance, not tolerance, is how the Body works (Chap15.1-7)

Our third and final section today is the beginning of chapter 15. Paul says, “accept one another, just as Messiah also accepted us to the glory of God.” Clearly the struggles between the strong and the weak, between the libertarians and the legalists are resolved in faith in Messiah and in accepting of one another. But, do you see, 15.7 starts with a therefore? There are 24 ‘therefore’s’ in the letter to the Romans. So much sequential and logical thinking.  What is this therefore there for? See 15.1-6.

Lest we miss it, Paul continues his teaching with the ordinance that the strong ‘ought to bear the weaknesses of the weak’ since we are in the same Body. He says in verse 2 we are to ‘please his neighbour for his good, to his edification.’ On what does Paul base this? Verse 3: “even Messiah did not please himself” and he had reproach fall on him.” (Psalm 69.9) What is reproach? It’s the shame and blame for all wrong things. Obviously Yeshua took our sins, our punishment, and even our reproach on himself. Paul here says if you want to follow Messiah, you should bear reproach as well as the annoyances of strong vs weak regarding health, Sabbath and other Jewish law matters. 

Verse 4: Whatever was written in the past, meaning the Tenach, was written for our instruction. And for our having hope. It was not written to knock us back or knock us down. It’s not a stumbling block to offend or scandalize us. The record of Scripture is written for us so that “through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures, we might have hope.” He uses the word ‘encouragement’ a translation of the Greek word ‘paraklesis’ or comforter, the one called alongside to help. And what will that lead to? 

Verse 5-6: One mind, one accord, one voice. It’s not only for one individual. It’s about unity in the midst of diversity. Not a tolerance of misbehaviour, but rather an acceptance of one another. Tolerance usually in modern days is a word of allowance. Sort of, ‘agree to disagree.’ But acceptance goes well beyond that. Tolerating is what you do with a toddler who is screaming in the restaurant while you are eating. Tolerating is what you do with the neighbour who is playing loud music long after midnight and you hear its sounds as you try to sleep. Acceptance is much deeper. 

Eric Mason writes in his book titled, Woke Church: An Urgent Call for Christians in America to Confront Racism and Injustice. “This is one of the strongest expositions on God’s justice.” Mason argues that “righteousness is an active, not static attribute of God. He forcefully argues that for us to understand the righteousness of God, we have to understand that God’s righteousness works itself out in the world. This is what justice is, and just as we do not sit back and say that God’s love will one day win out, but that has no bearing on our today, so too we must see an active call for today in God’s righteousness.” (comment by John Beeson, Goodreads, review of Mason’s book)

Our accepting one another is based on God accepting this person. The purpose: to get to the glory of God, where he is glorified and manifest. In my life. In your life. In our lives. Together. That’s how the Body works. Maybe that’s why we enjoy studying the Bible together. Or why we pray together. Or fellowship in the Spirit together. We represent Yeshua that much better as a result.

Dear friends, if you are not yet a believer in Yeshua, I urge you today, call on him while he is near. If you know your Torah, and you know yourself, you know you need help, you’ve been stumbling, you need salvation, you need a Saviour. Joel the prophet said, “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be rescued, will be saved” That is, you will be made to be in right relationship with God. It’s worth all the rejection of others who don’t want to know about God’s love in Messiah Yeshua. 

If you want, you can pray a prayer with me just now to solidify your choice. Something like this, “Father in Yeshua’s name, thank you for loving me. Thank you for sending Yeshua to save me from myself, from my selfishness, from my despair and the harm I cause so many. Thank you for making me right with God by your sacrifice. I receive Yeshua (Jesus) as my saviour and the lover of my soul. He frees me to love others. I repent of my sins and ask for God’s forgiveness to be my portion. I receive the free gift of God, eternal life in Messiah Jesus our Lord. Amen.”

If you just prayed that, would you please contact Ps Stephen here at church or speak with me back at the book stall with morning tea. For those here in the sanctuary who want to donate to Jews for Jesus, please use this QR code on the screen or we will have an offertory at the stall also. I’m happy to share more on this as we are all able. 

Ps Stephen, thanks so much for your love and support and for your care for me and my people. I’m so pleased God has given us this partnership. Let us live, as unto the Lord, in 2024 and throughout our days, amen?

 

06 February 2019

Harlot in our midst

The Great Harlot Called Tolerance
 Written by Guest Author:  Danielle Kohen

Do not be misled.  Grace is not the same as tolerance.  In no way does God have the ability to tolerate sin. By his great mercy and grace, he has made a way for us to be reconciled to him through his son, Jesus. There is no other way. 
Yes, the Harlot of Revelation has a name, and her name is Tolerance.  She has already begun to charm and seduce the masses.  So many adoring fans watch on the sidelines and cheer, the media splashes headlines around world news, and the world leaders are both intrigued and fantasising about what they can do with her. Regaled in splendour and false beauty, all marvel at her.

She is here now, on the world stage for all to see. She is a one-world religion of “tolerance”.  She speaks grand words and claims to know how to unite the world through shared love and tolerance of religion.

Yet she is guilty of more crimes against humanity in history than anyone. How many martyrs murdered? How many children robbed of their innocence? How many poor have been robbed by her? She is indeed drunk on the blood of the saints and will continue to persecute those loyal to the one true God. The saints serve only God. They do not serve her so she hates them.

She is wicked and guilty of so many terrible things.

Tolerance whispers to the weak and she says:
“You don’t need a saviour,
Everyone goes to heaven,
You don’t need to repent,
You don’t need to change,
Sin is ok,
There are no rules,
Everything is grey,
Everyone is welcome,
Homosexuality is a celebration; not an abomination,
God’s design is not perfect; swap your gender and chase after beauty,
You can do what you want,
You can pray to whoever you call God,
You can idolise yourself,
I can give you everything you want,
I am your Queen,
Bow down to me now,
Because I will tolerate everything you do.”


Her words are sweet like honey, but she will take you down to the abyss. Be wise and do not let her tempt you. Do not listen to her. Drink only the water from your own cistern and listen only to the one true God and read his Word.  Just as the adulterous woman of Proverbs 5, the Great Harlot, Tolerance displays the exact the same characteristics and will leave you with exactly the same fate.

“For the lips of the adulterous woman drip honey, and her speech is smoother than oil; but in the end she is bitter as gall, sharp as a double-edged sword. Her feet go down to death; her steps lead straight to the grave.  She gives no thought to the way of life; her paths wander aimlessly, but she does not know it.” Proverbs 5:3-6

Tolerance will make you bear her burdens and suffer. She persecutes those that stand up and speak against her.  When you do not bow to her demands or conform to her ideology, she screams at you and calls you “bigot”, “intolerant”, “discriminatory” or “prejudiced”.  She sentences you with hate crimes just for standing in agreement with the Word of God.  And just like Jezebel, Tolerance is a power hungry murderess who will stop at nothing to get what she wants.  

She masquerades under the banners of “human fraternity” and “world peace”.  But she will turn on the faithful remnant in an instant, like a viper.  There is no peace found in her, only strife and death. She will prostitute herself to all the false gods and all the world leaders.

Above all, remember that as God’s faithful, we are called to love each other and to love our enemies. This is a far higher calling than what Tolerance is calling you to.

“But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.” Luke 6:27-31

As the faithful remnant of the Most High God, let us keep the faith, fight the good fight, run the race with perseverance, and keep our eyes on the prize.  Let us finish the race and not be turned to the right or to the left by the Harlot, Tolerance.

                                       -- Written by Danielle Kohen 

05 November 2014

Sodom, Rabbi Ingram and tolerance

Rabbi Chaim Ingram wrote this week on the portion in the Bible concerning Abraham and the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. He alludes to tolerance and intolerance and same-sex marriage. It's a very good read. Tell me what you think, won't you?

"Why is the famous passage of Abraham’s plea for the inhabitants of Sodom and Gemorra such a seminal statement of Jewish ideological outlook?

Abraham’s series of entreaties to G-D to spare the populations of five wicked cities including Sodom and Gemorrah if even 50 then 45, 40, 30, 20 or even 10 righteous inhabitants are to be found there(Gen. 23-32)  is often cited by thinkers of a leftist-libertarian persuasion as a seminal example of, as they put it, “the Jewish value of tolerance”.

Actually nothing could be further from the truth.  What Abraham does not do – and what he would do were he “tolerant” in the leftist-libertarian sense – is to ask G-D  “Please tell me – what is the nature of their sin?  And anyway, ‘sin’ is such a judgmental word is it not? Why do You wish to destroy them? Is it because they are pursuing alternative lifestyles to mine? Perhaps G-D, You ought to embrace their diversity. Isn’t multiculturalism a wonderful thing?  After all, surely it is arrogant to suppose there is only one absolute truth in the world! Can You not see their actions as equally valid truths? After all, I am pursuing my mission and they are pursuing theirs as they see it.  Please can I go and investigate their culture and then I will call a meeting and propose a detailed resolution on what I believe is the best way to proceed.”

That would have been a “tolerant” response.  It would also have meant the end of Abraham’s unique moral influence and mission as av hamon goyim the father of a multitude of nations and the end of his special relationship with G-D.

Abraham’s greatest virtue is not tolerance.  It is unconditional compassion..  He is not the least bit interested in learning about the “alternative lifestyle” of the citizens of  Sodom and Gemorrah. If G-D says that their actions (which included the shedding of innocent blood, corruption, perversion of the course of justice, sodomy, same-gender marriage, robbery with violence and forced eviction) are sins then sins they are.  But that does not mean that Abraham is about to give up on the perpetrators of these sins. Maybe they had no parental example. Maybe they can be helped to change their ways. Even if  there were just ten people there who could help to change the culture, surely, pleaded Abraham to G-D, you must give the cities another chance!

It is fascinating that those people who are the most passionate advocates of  ‘tolerance’ as we have illustrated it above are the most vitriolically intolerant of those who dares to challenge their particular set of values.  Anyone who disagrees with their approach must be a ‘fundamentalist’ or a ‘reactionary’ or ‘obscurantist’ (to cite just a few of the tolerant brigade’s intolerant epithets).  Abraham on the other hand, because he chooses compassion over tolerance ends up being neither uncompassionate nor intolerant of any soul.

Judaism’s ideological approach vis-a-vis the world is a unique and remarkable one. It is absolutist when it comes to belief in G-D but pluralistic with regard to how G-D should be worshipped by the world’s family of believers. It is absolutist in its belief that Torah is G-D given and therefore the repository of absolute truth to the exclusion of all other ideologies;  but pluralistic with regard to how Torah is to be embraced by the world’s family of nations - by Jews via the 613 mitsvot, by Gentiles via the seven universal laws of humanity which would mean that even pre-Messiah a nation could live by broad Torah ideals and be deemed righteous. Judaism is not tolerant of those societies who breach these broad Torah ideals; but it is compassionate of all those within these societies who find themselves without anchor, caught up in a maelstrom not exactly of their making and seeking safe haven in a tempestuous world. Anyone demonstrating such compassion is a true disciple of our father Abraham."                                                    -Rabbi Chaim Ingram

 Others' thoughts:

Barbara Lardinais lives in Toledo, Ohio, (I think) also writes about Abraham's prayer of negotiation here:
Prayer

Also from Bible "Got Questions" website: 
Sodom and Abraham

And from my teaching series on the book of Genesis, you might like to read the whole sermon on Genesis 18:
Guess who's coming to dinner

04 November 2014

Mosques, Christian warriors and tolerance: What is OWRT?



My friend Owen sent me this link:  "Interstate Christian activists on board of Canberra group fighting mosque in Gungahlin"
And Owen asked me a question which is a good one. Could I "please elaborate on the concept of #OneWayReligiousTolerance as you use it."

 In other words, knowing that I'm very keen to notice the misuse of religion in the gamery of public action, isn't this just another one of those actions and thus intolerance in a multi-cultural society?
You see, in the article, some Christians are trying to prevent some Muslims from opening a mosque in Canberra.  And in fact, some of those listed as preventers are running for parliament in the next election.
One of the opponents is Mr Adrian Van Der Byl - who said he opposed "the advancing Islamisation of Australia" - and he also confirmed he planned to run as the CDP candidate in the seat of Goulburn, which borders the north of the ACT, at the coming NSW state election.
Realistically I have no problem with people using their inalienable and incontrovertible rights to access public opinion or try to persuade government to accomplish their moral convictions.  In a democracy, we have political means to our own ends and those are right to use. They may be wrong; they may be bigoted; they may be misinformed, but this is not the same as other examples of #OneWayReligiousTolerance. 

Maybe I should define that hashtag.

#OneWayReligiousTolerance describes the attempt by those who follow Islam to demand non-Muslims to allow (aspects of) sharia law in a free society, but not to allow other religions and cultures to influence them. It is related to the idea of intolerance, but is more specific. If you will, the door only opens in one direction. This is both my definition and my hashtag creation.


Read more here Canberra

In another story out of the UK, tolerance, the new religion of the 21st Century, has reared its uncompromising and ignorant head in a case involving both Jewish and Christian private schools. Seems that A successful Christian school has been warned it is to be downgraded by inspectors and could even face closure after failing to invite a leader from another religion, such as an imam, to lead assemblies. Even attending a mosque is not enough to warrant such downgrading.

A Jewish school was warned it had to have conversation about sexuality, especially lesbianism, and learning about babies and biology to maintain its ranking.

So Owen's question remains. Is all intolerance #OWRT?  Not at all. Whatever tolerance really is, it's currently leaning toward madness, especially in the UK. Another recent article from there highlights this madness. Anyone who criticizes gay marriage is legally equated with hate-mongers and true terrorists like ISIS. Does that smack of idiocy? Or something as 'tolerant' as 'via media' being the only way.


So when a Christian few try to stop a mosque in Canberra from finishing construction or a legal expert tries to shut down gay marriage critics, it's not #OneWayReligiousTolerance; it's simply tolerance or intolerance gone awry. The Christians in Canberra are not saying Muslims should not exist. They are not threatening deportation. They are not burning other previously built mosques. On the other hand, if a country like Saudi Arabia will allow people to own Christian Bibles, or Iraq will stop destroying churches, then I will stop citing them with #OneWayReligiousTolerance. Until then, they are the classic examples of such.

26 October 2014

Shapiro on terrorism

In the newspaper (The Australian) yesterday we read this report by Ahron Shapiro about Islamic terrorists.

Moral clarity about Islamic State needs zero tolerance of terrorism 

"In Ottawa on Wednesday, a lone gunman rampaged in and around Canada’s parliament, killing a Canadian soldier before being killed. Authorities said he was a convert to Islam, radicalised to commit his act of terrorism.

That day in Jerusalem, a newborn girl was run down and killed in her pram when a vehicle intentionally rammed a crowded tram stop. The Palestinian driver, killed while fleeing, had an extensive ­arrest record for nationalistic violence and familial connections to Hamas. He was glorified on Hamas-affiliated websites as a martyr and a Hamas spokesman said his attack was only “natural”.

In Australia, we looked in horror at a photo of an Australian child in Syria holding a severed head aloft like a hunting trophy, basking in his father’s pride.

This week, a baby-faced jihadist joined Islamic State, the militia responsible in Syria and Iraq for mass executions and beheadings of aid workers and journalists, filmed to shock the civilised world. The AK-47-toting teen taunted Tony Abbott in a video that might have been grimly funny if people weren’t losing their lives daily to such bloodthirsty zealots.

All these disparate incidents are linked by Islamist terror, but when the violence is perpetrated against Israel, there is a widespread tendency in the media to rationalise it, suggesting Israeli policies invited or caused the attacks. This rationalisation is unfair and harmful to Israelis in general and Jews in particular, but lessons learned by Islamist terrorists from this immoral exemption extend far beyond Israel.

Mainstream Islamic groups have rightly distanced themselves from those who they say have misappropriated an Islamic identity while distorting the tenets of the religion, and it is true that extremism, even violent extremism, is not unique to Islam. However, the actions of Hamas and Islamic State are products of the same broad totalitarian ideological movement — Islamism — which draws on elements of Islam and recruits from Muslims around the world. Popular support for militant Islamists often translates into substantive recruitment for Islamist terror groups, targeting civilians to sensationalise their cause.

Recent polls show that Islamic State is more popular overall — not just among Muslims — in some Western states than in most Middle Eastern ones. A poll by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy found just 3 per cent of Egyptians expressed a positive opinion about it, as did 5 per cent of Saudis. In Lebanon, it was less than 1 per cent. Yet in a poll in Aug­ust by ICM Research, 7 per cent of British respondents had a favourable view of the group, as did 16 per cent of French polled — rising to 27 per cent in the 18-24 demographic.

These numbers suggest large percentages of Western Muslims — and some non-Muslims as well — are attracted to the group’s ­violent totalitarian message despite, or because of, all its barbarism, beheadings, terrorism, mass executions, ethnic cleansing and selling women into slavery.

This almost certainly also ­applies to some degree in Australia, as evidenced by the numerous Australians who have travelled to Syria and Iraq to join up, and the positive view of this behaviour ­expressed by some of their peers.
The allure of groups such as Islamic State should be understood as similar to that which drew people to past murderous totalitarian movements and their atrocities — Nazism, fascism, communism, Maoism. All claimed their violence and genocide were a justified self-defence against race, class or external enemies.

It begins with rationalisations that extreme violence is justifiable under the right circumstances, that terrorists are humans and their behaviour is understandable and motivated by injustice.

Once that red line has been crossed, the distance from justification to embracing the violence, and then glorifying it, is short.
There is a way back. We can begin by unblurring the lines, by defining terrorism consistently and ending the corrosive tendency to justifications for it and excuses. Only through a zero-tolerance approach can Western society restore to this growing quagmire the moral clarity it desperately needs."

Ahron Shapiro is a policy analyst at the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council.

“Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil.”
              ―Thomas Mann,  The Magic Mountain

Anglicans, Synod and the Jews

Yesterday, the news from the Anglicans of Sydney was very good. The timing was impeccable. Yom Kippur  5787. And this is what I read. And wh...