This morning I read in our newspaper that Prince Charles is hopping across to visit President Bush to persuade him of the strengths (supposedly positive good points) of Islam since he feels that America is being intolerant of this religion. Prince Charles is reported as believing that the Islamic suicide bombers have done a disservice to the reputation of Islam and the millions of peace-loving Muslims around the world. It seems that the Prince wants to modify the perception of Islam that President Bush may have, and persuade him not to be so harsh in dealing with the adherents of this world religion.

What?! Has the Prince finally lost all of his marbles? He was reported last week as saying that he feared he was seen as being irrelevant in today’s world, but is this going to help him become any more relevant? I certainly don’t think so.

It is expected that one day, since everyone including royalty must die eventually, that Prince Charles will accede to the British throne. According to The Preface to the 39 Articles of the Church of England, the British monarch is ‘being by God’s Ordinance, according to Our just Title, Defender of the Faith and … Supreme Governor of the Church of England’.

I am already despairing of the so-called leadership of the Church of England which is selling out fast to the liberals who believe that stripping Christianity of it’s orthodox Biblical truth claims thereby makes it more relevant in these post-modern times… and now we have the Heir Apparent actively pushing Islam! So whatever happened to “Defender of the Faith”? Which faith? What faith? Islam?

Prince Charles of Arabia ~ our future King is said to have already converted to Islam.

Prince Charles spoke with some senior members of Islam back in November 2001 after the devastating attacks on America two months earlier. If I am to believe Reuters, it is said of him that he has done more than anyone else in the Royal family to understand the history of Islam. Now, I wonder if he spoke with anyone as knowledgeable and as honest as Dr Mark Gabriel whose credentials I have mentioned before but will cite here again…

Raised in Egypt to be a devout Muslim and able to recite the entire Qur’an at an early age.
Bachelor’s, master’s, and doctorate degrees in Islamic History and Culture from the prestigious Islamic Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt, graduating second in his class of six thousand students for his bachelor’s degree. He was one of the youngest lecturers ever hired at Al-Azhar University. He started lecturing after he finished his master’s degree and was working to finish his doctorate. The university sent him as a travelling lecturer to countries around the Middle East to lecture in Islamic history.
He also served as the imam at a mosque in the Cairo suburbs.
When Gabriel began questioning the Qur’an he was kidnapped, imprisoned and tortured by the Egyptian Secret Police, denounced by his own family who attempted to kill him, and was forced to flee to South Africa.
Later Gabriel (who abandoned his Arabic name for his personal safety) became a Christian and pursued a Christian education which included: Discipleship Training School with Youth With A Mission in Cape Town, South Africa; Master’s degree in World Religion from Florida Christian University in Orlando, Florida (2001); Doctorate degree in Christian Education from Florida Christian University in Orland, Florida (2002); Induction as a fellow in the Oxford Society of Scholars, September 2003.

Dr Gabriel would be able to tell Prince Charles about the practice of “taqiya” (”al-taqiya” or “taqaiyya”).

This is the principle of “holy hypocrisy” (taqiyya) whereby lying is condoned to hide malevalent intent. By this practise a Muslim may conceal his true intentions in the interests of progressing the cause of Islam. Islamic universities and imans in their mosques teach that the ultimate goal expressed in the Qur’an is world domination with Islam as the sole religion. Such a goal will be strenuously denied by imans to hide the true nature of Islam, but it is written in the Qur’an and it is taught as true doctrine. Perhaps Dr Gabriel might have been able to stop Prince Charles from falling for this strategy and pursuing this treacherous venture which fosters Islam at the expense of Christianity which he, as future defender of the faith, is supposed to be upholding.

Where Muslims are in the minority they are to practice taqiya in order to get on with their neighbours. It happens that many Muslims actually prefer to live peaceably and lead ordinary lives, uncommitted to jihad (holy war) and the violent Medina surahs (verses in the Qur’an), choosing to follow the Islam of the more peaceful Mecca period. They ignore the principle of nasikh whereby the peaceful surahs are abrogated by the later violent ones, and are often labelled apostates by their more devout brothers. By doing so, these Muslims show the face of Islam to be the peaceful religion that they sincerely but wrongfully claim it to be, and so help to give confusing messages regarding the real voice of Islam. But as the number and strength of devout Muslims build, and their leaders find greater opportunities to influence, there will be increasing pressure applied to all Muslims to practice their faith fully and become organized to take up the call to physical jihad. The sword of Islam is to be felt eventually by all nonbelievers, and for Muslims, to die in jihad is to be received immediately into Paradise with it’s promised eternal carnal rewards.

Islam is a very real threat. Iran's President Mahmud Ahmadinejad has just cited comments by Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the Islamic revolution, when he declared to an audience of 3,000 students, “As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map” and that there was “no doubt the new wave [of attacks] in Palestine will soon wipe off this disgraceful blot from the face of the Islamic world.” The U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack has said in Washington: “I think you are starting to see, through some of these remarks, some of the true views and intentions of this [Iranian] regime, and I think that it only serves to underscore our concern, as well as the international communities concern, about Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.”

So just how relevant is Prince Charles trying to be?
He leaves me shaking my head in dismay. And as for any role in leadership of the Church of England…
Matthew 8:25

Essential further reading on this subject:

Prince Charles: The Constantine of Islam?
by Ali Sina of the FaithFreedom website.

Added 22 November:

Prince Charles, Islam`s New Ambassador

Prince Charles of Wales and his new bride, Camilla Parker Bowles, the Duchess of Cornwall, were just in the United States, hobnobbing at the White House and imparting royal pearls of wisdom. According to statements made prior to this visit, Prince Charles thinks the U.S. is “intolerant” toward Islam. In Charles's view, it's all gone downhill since 9/11 because of the Bush administration's “confrontational” approach to Muslim countries. In fact, he made these comments during a meeting with Muslim leaders soon after 9/11.

Of course, Great Britain's tolerance for Islam is hardly the model to follow. After allowing Islamic extremism to fester openly in Muslim mosques and neighborhoods (to the point where the nickname “Londonistan” became commonplace), the UK was attacked by homegrown terrorists on July 7, 2005. The London bombings were the culmination of years of turning a blind eye to the cancer within.

Initially, there was much talk about retaining a sense of “British identity” in lieu of the self-destructive multiculturalism that had engulfed English society, but that has since faded into obscurity. The “stoic” British spirit in the face of terrorism and the country's historical legacy of wartime endurance were also popular topics. But instead of defiance, the British reacted more with resignation. “We can take it,” was the mantra uttered by many an Englishman in the wake of the bombings, as if bearing terrorism rather than fighting it was their unavoidable fate.

But even after these brutal attacks, the British descent into dhimmitude continued. Radical groups such as Al Mahajiroun are still calling publicly for jihad against the West and the creation of an Islamic Caliphate to rule Britain. Members of the British government, such as Respect Party MP George Galloway, openly side with Islamists against their own country, going so far as to aid in the propaganda battle with regular appearances on al-Jazeera and other Arab media outlets.

Muslim voters and politicians are having an ever greater influence on the British political landscape. When Queen Elizabeth knighted the secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, Iqbal Sacranie (now Sir Iqbal Sacranie), it was the epitome of this trend. Although he paid lip service to condemning violence against civilians (a word with multiple connotations among Muslims), Sacranie also said of the July 7 terrorists: “Nothing is clear about what motivated them.”

In a country where knighthood is conferred upon such luminaries as Sir Mick Jagger and Sir Elton John, the honor bestowed on Sacranie is hardly shocking. But something tells me rock stars will have less of an impact on British politics in the years to come than Islamists.

To cap all this off, British banks are now phasing out piggy banks because they “offend Muslims.” It's apparently not enough that Muslims abstain from eating pork, as do devout Jews. The mere sight of a pig-like figurine is an affront to their purity. At this rate, it's just a matter of time before the sight of women's uncovered heads will also be deemed offensive to Muslims and such freedoms will go the way of piggy banks. The Islamic Caliphate is encroaching and England appears to be going down without a fight.

Prince Charles certainly seems to be on board for the changeover. His visit to Georgetown University's Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding was simply the icing on the cake. It turns out his fascination with Islam, along with various New Age pursuits, has a long history.

In 2000, the prince made a point of visiting former singer Cat Stevens (turned Muslim convert Yusuf Islam) at his Islamia School in Britain, where he congratulated Cat, a.k.a. Yusuf, for his efforts at spreading “peace and harmony through education.” The fact that Stevens is a sympathizer of groups linked to terror and was deported back to Britain after appearing on a no-fly list in the U.S. would seem to belie such claims. The prince has also become a patron of the UK's Center for Islamic Studies, along with the late King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, who once donated 33 million dollars to the school.

When Prince Charles became Supreme Governor of the Church of England in 1994 he opted to call himself not the traditional “defender of the faith” but rather “defender of faiths” so as not to offend non-Christians. A year earlier, he gave a speech in which he urged the West to overcome its “unthinkable prejudices” about Islam. Of Islam's unthinkable prejudices toward every other religion in the world, he had little to say. Prince Charles tends instead to employ the logic of moral relativism by equating Christian “extremism” with Islamic extremism, as if the two are comparable.

With all of this mind, one has to wonder whether Prince Charles' own conversion to Islam is eminent or if the royal family has simply made the change from symbolic rulers to proselytizers for Islam?

Against this backdrop, anti-Semitism in the UK is at an all-time high. Whether it be leftists in academia calling for boycotts and divestment from Israel or the Muslim Council of Britain (of Sir Ian Sacranie fame) insisting that commemorating Holocaust Day is somehow offensive to Muslims, things aren't looking too good for Jews in England these days. This may explain why British Jews are streaming out of the country, in some cases moving to Israel. British society has always had an anti-Semitic streak along with a propensity for Arabism, and both are now reaching their logical conclusion.

Meanwhile, over in France, Muslim mobs have been rioting for the past three weeks. It began when two Muslim men (or “youths” as the media likes to call them) hiding from police in a power substation accidentally electrocuted themselves. Riots ensued and quickly spread, resulting in roaming gangs attacking police, setting hundreds of vehicles on fire, firing guns into the street, hurling Molotov cocktails and stones at firehouses, and burning down stores.

The violence ratcheted up a notch when rioters doused a disabled woman in gasoline and tossed a Molotov cocktail at the bus she was in, almost burning her to death. Another man fared even worse, dying after being in a coma for a week thanks to the group of thugs that attacked him.

After dithering ineffectually for the first two weeks, French “leaders” instituted measures to try to control the chaos. But the nightly rioting in Muslim neighborhoods, while diminishing somewhat, continued on. Perhaps this will be the new norm for France.

France's high unemployment rate and segregated ghettos have long been fertile ground for crime and extremism, but what we're witnessing now is nothing less than societal collapse. Much as it has in England, multiculturalism in France has created an unassimilated population in which radicalism is allowed to flourish. Whether the latest generation of Muslims actually wishes to integrate into French society is another matter.

This last question is also integral to the Muslim riots that recently occurred in Denmark. They were spurred by anger at the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten for running a series of cartoons deemed insulting to Islam. It appears the newspaper miscalculated in thinking the Muslim community would welcome such freedom of speech. As Imam Raed Hlayehel put it, “This type of democracy is worthless for Muslims.” With both Denmark and France under attack from within, a civil war certainly seems to be brewing in Europe.

All of this is a far cry from what one finds in the U.S., with its relatively integrated and prosperous Muslim population. A drive through the largely Arab-American enclave of Dearborn, Michigan, demonstrates not ghettoes or alienation but well-maintained streets and a thriving business community. According to the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau, individuals of Arab descent in the U.S. are actually “better educated and wealthier than average Americans.”

Despite Prince Charles's claims of American intolerance, incidents of anti-Islamic hate crimes in the U.S. numbered only 154 in 2004. This is far below that of racially motivated hate crimes, not to mention those involving other religions. Anti-Jewish hate crimes for instance, were the highest of the bunch, numbering 954. Yet for some mysterious reason, Prince Charles hasn't commented on the “intolerance” of anti-Semitism in America.

If helping Muslims rid themselves of their despotic leaders is considered too “confrontational,” so be it. Perhaps Prince Charles needs reminding that his own prime minister has been along for the ride since day one.

While the U.S. has its own extremist elements to contend with, the long-term prospects are fairly hopeful. Commitment to religious freedom is still high among Americans and this may prove to be the ultimate savior.

In contrast, Great Britain and Europe as a whole are forgoing their Christian heritage in favor of an Islamic future. Whether the masses go willingly or not, the sheer demographics will eventually engulf them. Islamists are nothing if not patient, assigning centuries to these ongoing civilizational battles. When it comes to Europe, they are definitely winning. Just ask Prince Charles.

(written by Cinnamon Stillwell)

It is a matter of perspective. While I am focussed inwards and trapped by my own preoccupations, I am limited by the volume of my cranium. Worries bounce like echoes off the inside walls of my skull - oh, does that imply an emptiness in there? I am certainly caught within a closed system.

There was a worrier who spent all day and most the night at his computer, researching worrisome things and quizzing others for their responses on a Christian forum. Several good souls tried to calm his fears with rational responses seasoned with some sound advice, but to little avail. It had become something of a lifestyle and while he was so absorbed in his own spiritual anxieties, there was little room for anything else to squeeze its way in as well.

It is interesting how we often need to do the opposite of what we are doing now. One who holds on needs to let go. One who looks inward needs to look outward. One who is self absorbed needs to care for others. One who is sedentary needs to get mobile. One who worries needs to trust that God is greater than all those worries and is able to handle them if asked, and bring about a good outcome for all who love Him and are prepared to do as He bids them.

While it is a matter of perspective, as unpopular as these next words might be, it is also (dare I say it?) a matter of obedience.

Out in the Fields

The little cares which fretted me,
I lost them yesterday
Among the fields, above the sea,
Among the winds at play;
Among the lowing of the herds,
The rustling of the trees,
Among the singing of the birds,
The humming of the bees.

The foolish fears of what may come,
I cast them all away
Among the clover scented grass,
Among the new mown hay;
Among the hushing of the corn,
Where drowsing poppies nod,
Ill thoughts can die, and good be born,
Out in the fields of God.

(Elizabeth Barrett Browning, 1806-1861)

Matthew 6:28-30 “Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall He not much more clothe you?”

I am being followed by a parallel. It sneaks up on me, walks with me, waits for me, whispers to me, haunts me. Each day it grows larger in reality and imposes its presence upon me. There is no ignoring it. It will not go away.

Being a parent is one of the hardest jobs in the world. Beginning with hopes and dreams, a heart brimming with the best intentions, and a will for self-sacrifice, parents launch into this lengthy project with the idea of a good outcome and wholesome rewards. But what if all does not go according to plan? What if the youngster, in spite of all you do and say, decides to follow a different path that includes bad choices from a rejection of apparent good sense and reasoning? Some youngsters seem able to learn only from their own mistakes. The good parent will undoubtedly seek to protect their child from harm and moderate the impact of those mistakes. A carelessly broken window may be paid for by the temporary confiscation of the ball, or some contribution deducted from the pocket money, rather than the full cost of a replacement window. However, there comes a time when the youngster, now approaching adulthood, in stubborn defiance of parental wisdom, will simply learn no other way than to experience the full impact of harm in order to revise his choices. And some bad choices can be extremely harmful indeed.

This world operates on a fundamental principle of cause and effect. Newton’s third law of motion states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. When it comes to human behaviour, we know that actions bring about consequences.

A parent no longer with authority nor the means by which to stop the action must suffer the anxiety of anticipating the consequence, often incurring the breakage of earlier hopes and dreams, and the grief of their eventual loss. In Singapore at this very moment a 25 year old is shortly to face the gallows, his heart broken mother back in Australia pleading the government of Singapore for clemency. Singapore has said there will be no clemency. This mother had been unable to stop her son from his one incidence of drug trafficking, most likely having no prior knowledge of it, and not only must he pay the price but so must his poor mother through her grief also. All her hopes and dreams for her tiny newborn son have now come to this.

So what is the parallel that will not leave me alone?

As I watch my almost adult son make choices less than wise, albeit nothing like the one above, and from experience know their outcome will not serve him well, I have to let him learn the hard way and reap what it is he sows… just as our Heavenly Father must watch all of us do just the same, including me as well. What kind of children are we to Him? Do we listen to His wisdom and do as He bids us? At every turn in dealing with my son, I hear our Father whispering to me too. If I can suffer from what my son is doing, how much grief am I giving Him over what I do that is not His will for me? I am a caring parent, and I am our loving Father’s child. I look to Him on both accounts and see the reflection of my pain mirrored there in Him… for it is His as well. From both perspectives, this parallel exists in every little detail and I can not escape from it.

Hello visitors from Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Japan, NZ, UK and USA.
It is amazing where you all come from, and it is very nice to have you call in to visit. You are very welcome to register and leave a comment too.

It is Springtime here in New Zealand, and these Iceplant flowers are currently in bloom in my garden. This is a photo of a small portion of a large earthenware container with flowers cascading everywhere. Also in flower at the moment are Freesias, Irises, Sweat Peas, Lavender, Jasmine, Roses and many more, plus the native hebes too. There is nothing like a garden, and getting one’s hands into the soil, to touch base with nature and recharge the batteries when times are tough and life gets rough.

A Prayer in Spring
by Robert Frost

Oh, give us pleasure in the flowers to-day;
And give us not to think so far away
As the uncertain harvest; keep us here
All simply in the springing of the year.

Oh, give us pleasure in the orchard white,
Like nothing else by day, like ghosts by night;
And make us happy in the happy bees,
The swarm dilating round the perfect trees.

And make us happy in the darting bird
That suddenly above the bees is heard,
The meteor that thrusts in with needle bill,
And off a blossom in mid air stands still.

For this is love and nothing else is love,
The which it is reserved for God above
To sanctify to what far ends He will,
But which it only needs that we fulfil.

An investigative legal affairs journalist probes the evidence for the divinity of Jesus.

Paperback: 304 pages
Publisher: Zondervan (September 1, 1998)
Language: English
ISBN: 0310209307
Product Dimensions: 8.6 x 5.6 x 0.8 inches

Lee Strobel, former legal editor at the Chicago Tribune and a former non-Christian skeptic, sets out in his book to “determine if there’s credible evidence that Jesus of Nazareth really is the Son of God.” He interviews 13 devout Christian Biblical scholars and puts to each of them basic questions concerning credible evidence that supports the divinity of Jesus. He continues to probe their answers to produce a compact and interesting summary of the apologia that exists to support the case for Christ.

One major criticism of his work is that no critics of Christianity are interviewed, and so no counter-arguments are explored except very briefly in the form of questions to develop the answer of his interviewee. The result therefore is hardly balanced reporting although he does produce a good case for one side of the debate, a case that cannot be dismissed without serious consideration.

All the same, as the publisher comments on the back page: “This remarkable book reads like a captivating, fast-paced novel. But it’s not fiction. It’s a riveting quest for the truth about history’s most compelling figure. What will your verdict be in The Case for Christ?”

The questions asked (and the scholars who respond) are as follows:
1. Can the biographies of Jesus be trusted? (Dr Craig Blomberg)
2. Do the biographies of Jesus stand up to scrutiny? (Dr Craig Blomberg)
3. Were Jesus’ biographies reliably preserved for us? (Dr Bruce Metzger)
4. Is there credible evidence for Jesus outside His biographies? (Dr Edwin Yamauchi)
5. Does archaeology confirm or contradict Jesus’ biographies? (Dr John McRay)
6. Is the Jesus of history the same as the Jesus of faith? (Dr Gregory Boyd)
7. Was Jesus really convinced that He was the Son of God? (Dr Ben Witherington III)
8. Was Jesus crazy when He claimed to be the Son of God? (Dr Gary Collins)
9. Did Jesus fulfill the attributes of God? (Dr D. A. Carson)
10. Did Jesus - and Jesus alone - match the identity of the Messiah? (Louis Lapides, M.Div., Th.M.)
11. Was Jesus’ death a sham and His resurrection a hoax? (Dr Alexander Metherell)
12. Was Jesus’ body really absent from His tomb? (Dr William Craig Lane)
13. Was Jesus seen alive after His death on the cross? (Dr Gary Habermas)
14. Are there any supporting facts that point to the resurrection? ((Dr J. P. Moreland)

There is a summary conclusion that addreses the question: What does the evidence establish, and what does it mean today?
Strobel’s bibliographical recommendations at the end of each chapter seem to be generally excellent.

This is a worthwhile book for those seeking intelligent rational answers in support of Christian beliefs about Jesus.

A Journalist Investigates Cuttent Attacks on the Identity of Christ

Paperback: 311 pages
Publisher: Zondervan (2007)
Language: English
ISBN: 978-0-310-24061-7
Product Dimensions: 8.0 x 5.25 x 0.75 inches

Lee Strobel, with a journalism degree from the University of Missouri and a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School, was the award-winning legal editor of the Chicago Tribune and a spiritual skeptic until 1981. His wife became a Christian and Lee was antagonistic to her beliefs.

But deciding to be fair and objective, as much as he could from his bias towards atheism, he decided to sift through and weigh up the evidence for the Christian claims about Jesus. After all, a fair trial of the available evidence was a sound legal move and one by which he, as a legal journalist, should surely grant the claims made concerning the one called Christ. Setting out to interview the most highly regarded scholars of Christianity, he was staggered by what he discovered.

As a result, given the veracity of the evidence, he too became a Christian. Lee has since published the results of those interviews so that others may also consider the evidence, and in their role as jurors of one, decide the outcome of the “Case” he presents.

This latest “Case” book considers further the truth about Jesus. From the back cover of this book comes the following summary:

Today, the traditional picture of Jesus is under intellectual onslaught from critical scholare, popular historians, TV documentaries, Hollywood movies, bestselling authors, Internet bloggers, Muslim debaters, and aetheist think tanks. They’re capturing the public’s imagination with a radical new portrait of Jesus that bears scant resemblance to the picture historically embraced by the church.

How persuasive is this new image of jesus? Is it based on well-supported facts and arguments - or does it fade away when exposed to the hot light of scrutiny?

In this dramatic investigation, award-winning writer and former legal editor Lee Strobel explores such controversial questions as:

* Did Christianity suppress “alternative gospels” that portray Jesus more accurately than the New Testament?
* Did the church distort the truth about Jesus by tampering with the early Biblical texts?
* Have fresh insights and explanations finally disproved the resurrection?
* Were the essential beliefs about Jesus stolen from earlier mythology?
* Have new objections disqualified Jesus from being the Messiah?

Evaluate the evidence for yourself as leading experts grapple with the latest objections from today’s foremost critics. Then reach your own verdict in The Case for the Real Jesus.

This book is very timely. Even in Christian circles there is a movement away from the traditional understandings of God, how Scripture should be regarded, and the nature of Jesus. This movement is fuelled by philosophies since the Enlightenment, the liberal theologies derived from them, and heat-set by elements of today’s post-modernism. Liberalism in the mainstream Christian churches is tearing into the Christian faith, modernizing doctrine towards more fashionable cultural trends in the effort to attract more adherents but actually achieving the opposite instead. Unbelief is what this is about. Doubts are raised, and the truth is watered down to make it more acceptable to the modern thinker - except doing so also makes it no longer truth at all.

So… just who exactly is Jesus? Could He really be “God Incarnate”, or is that just a myth disproven by today’s more sophisticated knowledge and sensibilities? If you are to be fair and objective, then give Him a fair trial by examining the evidence for yourself. Lee Strobel brings it to you in all his “Case” books (several of which you will find reviewed right here) and you, the lone juror, must decide one way or the other for yourself.

The arrival of a large item of computer-related hardware into my Happy Room the other day caused something of a crisis. There was already scarcely any room in there for myself, let alone for anything else. Something had to give. Then a friend told me that her church was having a fund raising fair and she would happily relieve me of anything I would like to move on. Well, being the middle of Spring down this end of the planet just now, I guess it was the appropriate season for a spot of clearing out and cleaning up. Time to scutter the clutter I mutter and stutter.

A ruthless approach, two huge cardboard cartons and many bags later, it actually feels good… even a little exhilarating, refreshing, and much lighter on the soul. Too many possessions becomes oppressive. It is a Happier Room for being an emptier room. All those big and little things that attach like barnacles to the hull of a vessel start weighing oneself down as a burden more than a blessing. Stuff in stuffed cupboards, stuff in stuffed drawers. Paralytically stuffed by stuff, far more than enough. Well, these cartons and bags of barnacles are now ready to go. May my divested burden become a revested blessing, but elsewhere instead.

I think of Mother Teresa… one change of clothes and a bucket. I don’t think we are all called to have that little, but a lot less than what we have in this materialistic age of consumerism might work much better for many of us. Less having, more giving. That is certainly so for me.

I took a walk along the shore, the wind whipping my hair about my face, the sea spray stinging my lips with the taste of salt. Seagulls soared and circled overhead, diving to land among their squawking peers squabbling at the rubbish bins for scraps of yesterday’s lunches left behind by brave picnickers undaunted by inclement weather. Tom, Dick and Harry Gull were fighting for possession of a fried potato, but where was Jonathon? Of course, he had far better things to do… as did I as well.

I am weary and wary of fried potatoes. I certainly have no wish to fight over them. Wherever Jonathon was, I was too… walking along the shore in the biting breeze, savouring the touch of nature through my skin and speaking to my soul. As the days get cooler and the white-caps appear to roughen up the harbour, it is good to get outside, to have the mental cobwebs blown away. Peeling off shoes and socks I stand up to the ankles in the edges of the bubbling surf, the tide pulling back against my heels, the sand tunnelling under my feet. I am invigorated.

It seems I cannot avoid the stress of modern life. Attempting to reduce as much of it from around me, it beats down the door in news reports and incessant demands for my response. I am not immune to it as I was. I cannot shake it off as I once did. It resonates with an accumulation of life’s experiences until the tremors become jarring jolts of pain and I need to get away, to walk the beach, to touch home base within my soul and seek solace in the embrace of Mother Nature.

My family laughed at me, but kindly so. We had driven through downtown Detroit, Michigan, and come to a safe tree-lined place well away from there and stopped. I leapt out of the car and flung my arms around a tree. There is too much that is horrid made by man; too much plastic and waste and ugliness. It is through our skin that we learn to love and be loved, the most basic sense of them all, to touch and be touched. I held my father’s hand as he died, and then my mother’s when she died too. When all else is going, sight and sound, breath and life, to feel through one’s skin becomes primary; the point where personal boundaries meet and become defined, where contact is made and life is real. To touch the wind, the salt, a tree… Mother Nature please touch me.

This text - The Songs of Bilitis - is in the public domain in the United States because it was not renewed at the US Copyright Office in a timely fashion as required by law at the time. It may not be in the public domain in other countries. These files may be used for any non-commercial purpose, provided this notice of attribution is left intact.

I wonder if there is such a thing as a Christian Agnostic?

Why I wonder is that, on my travels through cyberspace and reading some of what there is to read out there, I come across so much that I simply find too hard to believe. It may be true, or it may not be true. For instance, someone was talking about seeing angels on a frequent basis, and representations of various saints, each with a message of some kind. She said she wasn’t given to hallucinations, and so she took a photo… but what does a photo prove? It has been said that the camera doesn’t lie, but I know for a fact that the software sure does! And others are talking about prophetic cosmic politics that leave me behind somewhere in the Stone Age when it comes to following their line of thinking. I’m not one for attempting to match today’s or tomorrow’s world events with anything in the Book of Revelations, and even just understanding that Book itself, except for general themes, is quite beyond me. I guess I am a simple type.

I have read quite a few things on numerous Christian forums. There have been a lot of heated discussions, a lot of labelling, a lot of dissension with judgement and condemnation, a lot of upset. Sometimes I step back and wonder how much this kind of talk helps any of us, and even if those who join in are merely dabbling in something that is nothing short of avoidance of the real thing they are supposed to be doing. It may be interesting, but to me it is mostly all peripheral and there will always be many kinds of ideas about what it all means.

If the search is for truth, then to me it is really very simple. The historical Jesus who lived on this planet around two thousand years ago, and whose words and activities are reported in the Bible, made some claims that cannot be ignored. Those who say He was just a good teacher of morals and some kind of prophet but nothing more are left with a problem. Good teachers of morals don’t tell lies and deceive people, and they are also reality based, not living in some weird fantasy and suffering delusions of grandeur as they speak. The Jesus who walked around back then actually claimed to be God.

John 10:30 “I and the Father are one.”

So you don’t get allowed the “good teacher only” option - it isn’t an option. For each one of us, we get to decide if He was either grossly deluded or telling serious fibs - in other words wrong - or if He was actually telling the truth. Such a decision is a biggy. It cannot be taken lightly because whichever way you decide will affect your thinking, and your future, from here on ever after. Avoiding a decision is a decision regardless, the one that disregards His claim.

That same Jesus also said that He is the way, and the truth, and the life. That was a rather profound thing to say, and at it’s simplest, you can take it to mean that Jesus gave us a good example of how to behave towards each other. But at it’s most profound, it means much much more. He said that no one comes to the Father except through Him. I know this is offensive to some people, but to all Christians who happen to know Jesus, it is nothing short of an absolute truth.

Jesus gave us two summary commandments:

Matthew 22: 37 Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

So what happens after that? It is so simple, albeit hard to do, but by getting on with it you also come to discern the truth.

John 14:15 “If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.

John 16:13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15 All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you.

I keep coming back to what is central - the truth claims about Jesus, what we have decided about those, and what we are supposed to be doing following on from there. The follow on is simply: “If you love me, you will obey what I command”. The New Testament in particular is a good manual for how to love both God and our neighbour. There are some big clues in there, and plenty to get going with while sorting out the peripheral matters.

But back to my earlier ponderings… is there such a thing as a Christian Agnostic? I guess the answer is Yes because I certainly see myself as one. Some of the things I read do challenge my ability to believe and, naturally cautious, I am disinclined to accept anything on “blind faith” alone. The faith I have is pistis, a Greek word that was used as a technical rhetorical term for forensic proof. It is not a belief in just anything, but belief based on real evidence. I need to have evidence so that I know that my beliefs are substantial, can be substantiated, are rational and valid. How can I know if an angel appeared to you in a candle flame and told you something or not, and that it really was what you claimed it to be? I don’t know that I can, and so I will pass… I will remain agnostic on that. I can weigh things up against Scripture and determine if it is consistent with the truth therein or not, but where I cannot be certain, I shall again pass… I will remain agnostic.

On a forum recently I was told I am confused although all I did was point to Scripture as the arbitrator in a discussion. I wasn’t at all confused, but the other was a New Ager who became frustrated when confronted that way and chose to make condemnatory judgements against me, and against my website. I stepped aside for a time, but then drew his attention back to Scripture again… the central message devoid of peripheral matters. He took umbrage and left. But where I see people getting upset and angry, becoming abrasive and rude, throwing around insults, being judgemental and condemnatory towards each other on such things, the following is the message I would like to leave with them to consider:

Luke 6:36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful. 37 “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. 38 Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”

James 4:11 Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?

Galations 5: 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

I was raised in the Church of England and it saddens me considerably to see that it is poised to split apart, liberals who have dispensed with content and no longer believe the Nicene Creed on the one side, and conservatives upholding traditional Biblical truths on the other. It looks as though the liberals may have the upper hand with their pressure for the ordination both of women as Bishops, and of unrepentant practising homosexuals as clergy. They ignore Scripture to do so despite all their excuses to convince everyone otherwise.

Women’s traditional ministry may not be valued by those in power and authority, but I believe that it is highly valued by God and by those who actually benefit directly from it. What rewards are we seeking? Our God-given roles are different - men and women - and I am sorry that some women must seek the rewards they think are more valuable than perhaps the ones God would have for them for serving in a different way. What reward did Mother Teresa seek? I don’t think she sought any as her whole life was dedicated to simply loving and serving those who most needed her. I believe her reward in heaven will be huge, and rewards that God bequeaths are always worth far more than anything that the world might give. I heard that when Mother Teresa was asked what she thought about women’s ordination, she said waspishly, “women have other things to do”!

When I think of gender roles in the church, and the value of all kinds of ministry, I see that the difference between what is prominent and visible, and what is significant, needs to be considered. There is a tendency to look at things with worldly eyes and miss the difference.

Many think that if something is given a lot of visibility, it's the most important… but that simply is not true. Often it is the work behind the scenes that is actually the most important. For instance, how significant do you think it might be to help someone to find a seat for a church service?

In the early 20th century two teenage boys tried to come into a revival service, only it was packed out. So they turned around and decided to leave but one usher said, “Come on, guys. I'll find you a seat.” And that usher personally escorted them down to the center and set them in the middle and found them two seats. That night both of those boys accepted Christ and became Christians. One of them was Billy Graham who has led tens of millions of people to Christ.

We often have no idea how significant small acts of seemingly unimportant service really are. The significance of women’s roles is being missed when viewed with worldly eyes by those who prefer the prominence of men’s roles instead.

What does it mean to be tolerant?

In this multi-cultural and pluralistic present age, some would have me believe that all views have equal merit and none should be considered better than another, and that I am intolerant to believe otherwise. In these days of rigorous political correctness I am considered to be especially intolerant if I express a firm belief and conviction that my views are right and those who don’t agree with me are therefore wrong. But what if I should argue most strenuously, albeit respectfully, in defence of my views and even manage to show some truth in them?

As it happens, I actually do believe I am right to hold a view counter to that one. I also happen to believe that, despite my point of view, I am quite a tolerant person. It is the post-modern way the word is now defined that comes into question here.

To say I'm intolerant because you disagree with my ideas is actually confused. Tolerance requires that every person is treated courteously, no matter what his or her view, not that all views have equal worth, merit, or truth.
Tolerance applies to how we treat people we disagree with, and not how we treat the ideas we think false.

Just out of interest, let’s look for a moment at the view that “all views have equal merit and none should be considered better than another”.

Would you agree with it?

Well, if so then you are probably a relativist, someone who accepts the validity of all views for the person/s or sub/culture that holds to them. That’s not saying all relativists would agree with that statement. Why? Well, some may have seen through it, seen the little inherent illogical trap that exists in there, and so not answered.

If you say that all views have equal merit and none should be considered better than another, what would you say when I told you: “All views are not equal at all as some are better or more accurate than others, or indeed simply right while the rest are all wrong” ?

By the first part of your statement, you are saying that my view has equal merit with yours.
By the second part of your statement, you are saying that your view is not better than mine.
Therefore, in your view that allows mine to have validity equal to yours, there is a nonsense created by the contradictory possibility that your own view is wrong should mine be correct. If we are not to go around in everlasting circles, then you will need to say that either your view is right (to discredit mine, and your own along with it) - or it is wrong (to discredit yours but not mine).
Suddenly you are no longer a relativist… or if you are elsewhere, then you have a self-contradictory problem to resolve. And common sense has it stand to reason that when contradictory and mutually exclusive views are held, if one is absolutely right then the other is usually wrong.

But back to tolerance again. Real tolerance is not incompatible with either firm convictions nor even the desire to persuade others. It does not require that one must hold views in favour of the general consensus opinion based on a politically correct agenda. Real tolerance involves respect for others and the expression of civility towards them. It separates the person from the idea held, just as Christians are told to separate the sinner from the sin… to love the sinner while not the sin, and with tolerance, to respect the person regardless of the idea. Real tolerance rejects force and intimidation toward those who think differently. It allows us to have differences with impunity. Mind you, what we do with our ideas might well be something else for which each will always be held accountable.