Rss

  • youtube

How much is your child worth?

You’ve probably heard or read about Harambe of the Cincinnati Zoo. He was the 420 pound silverback gorilla that was shot and killed on May 28th by zoo officials to protect the life of a 3-year old child that managed to slip into Harambe’s domain. Such is the outrage at the killing by many in our humanistic society that the story has spun across several 24-hour news cycles as well as exploded in the internet and print media.

The preschooler managed to wiggle into zoo’s Gorilla World enclosure, walk through some bushes, and then fell down the 15 wall into a moat that separated the gorilla from onlookers. The gorilla went to the child and was reported to have been “violently dragging and throwing the child.” Within ten minutes zoo officials had been notified and responded. Zoo officials determined that it was too dangerous to attempt to use a tranquillizer gun because it might enrage the gorilla during the time it takes for the tranquilizing drug to take effect. Instead they made the decision to shoot and kill the gorilla.[1] Jack Hanna, the respected and renowned American zookeeper, fully agreed with the decision. Hanna said he saw video of the gorilla jerking the boy through the water and knew what would happen if the animal wasn’t killed. “I’ll bet my life on this, that child would not be here today.”[2]

It takes 5 to 10 minutes for a gorilla to lay down and go to sleep, so what’s that male going to do if all the sudden, “pow” he feels this thing hit him? He’s going to go back there, what is this thing? pull it out, and he’s got a child in his hand … We’re going to have a disaster. Within one split second. You wouldn’t even want to witness it.[3]

Rather than rejoice with saving the life of a 3-year old child, it seems that there are thousands if not millions in America culture that have made the killing of Harambe the center of the story. Jane Goodall, the world-renowned British primatologist and conservationist, sent an email to Cincinnati Zoo executive Thane Maynard. She expressed her sorrow for Maynard for “having to try to defend something which you may well disapprove of.”[4]

I tried to see exactly what was happening – it looked as though the gorilla was putting an arm round the child – like the female who rescued and returned the child from the Chicago exhibit…Anyway, whatever, it is a devastating loss to the zoo, and to the gorillas. How did the others react? Are they allowed to see, and express grief, which seems to be so important? Feeling for you.[5]

By “others,” Goodall appears to mean that the other gorillas at the zoo should be allowed to see and express grief at what had happened to Harambe.

One Cincinnati animal rights activist helped organize a vigil just outside the zoo gates “to honor Harambe who turned 17 the day before he was shot.[6] Another expression of this collective moral outrage was the initiation of a petition to hold the parents accountable for negligence and lack of supervision.

A sad incident at the Cincinnati Zoo has prompted this petition. On May 28, 2016 an unattended four-year-old boy [as originally reported] was able to crawl through a series of barriers at the Gorilla World enclosure. The child fell an estimated 10 to 12 feet into the moat surrounding the habitat. The 17 year-old male Western Lowland Gorilla named Harambe then got a hold of the boy. The gorilla was perceived as dragging and throwing the boy. The zoo made the last-resort decision to shoot Harambe because of the increased risk of aggression if a tranquilizer was used in such close proximity to a human. This heartbreaking decision was made in the best interests of keeping the child and the public safe. This beautiful gorilla lost his life because the boy’s parents did not keep a closer watch on the child. We the undersigned believe that the child would not have been able to enter the enclosure under proper parental supervision. Witnesses claim that they heard the child state that he wished to go into the enclosure and was actively trying to breach the barriers. This should have prompted the parents to immediately remove the child from the vicinity. It is believed that the situation was caused by parental negligence and the zoo is not responsible for the child’s injuries and possible trauma. We the undersigned want the parents to be held accountable for the lack of supervision and negligence that caused Harambe to lose his life. We the undersigned feel the child’s safety is paramount in this situation. We believe that this negligence may be reflective of the child’s home situation. We the undersigned actively encourage an investigation of the child’s home environment in the interests of protecting the child and his siblings from further incidents of parental negligence that may result in serious bodily harm or even death.[7] [emphasis added]

As of June 7th the petition had received over one-half million signers.[8] The petitioners have already judged the parents guilty of neglect and lack of supervision. Why? Because something bad happened to a child. No one can deny that there are occasions of neglect or lack of supervision by parents or caregivers. But in the normal course of life bad things will happen to even the children of the most caring, attentive, and protective parents. But humanists must not bother with such distinctions in their rush to judgement and condemnation when bad things happen. One is guilty until they have proven their innocence.

This is one of the hallmarks of the modern humanistic society. Something bad happens. Therefore, someone was victimized and someone must be held accountable. For these cultural vigilantes, one is either a victim or a victimizer. There is no middle ground, and it is up to the powers of NGO activists (non-governmental organizations) and socialistically-minded governments to assess the situation, parcel out the requisite penalties, and dump another load of meaningless rules and regulations on Americans in a futile attempt to assure that nothing bad will ever happen again. No element of life is so small or insignificant into which they will not stick their long bureaucratic noses, be it sugary soft drinks, genderless bathroom facilities, or other such examples of demagoguery.

It is difficult to imagine that the signers of the change.org petition who had raised children of their own would never have had moments of inattention or distraction which may have resulted in a bad outcome for their child such as failing to prevent their child from falling from a bicycle, preventing a child from slipping out of a yard whose gate was left unlocked, becoming separated at a park or zoo, or allowing a child to jerk his hand from his parent’s hand and dash into traffic.

The social engineers of the humanistic world which they have created will argue that education is the key. Education leads to appropriate behavior modification in both children and parents which will minimize such unfavorable outcomes in life. However, there is a disconnection between humanism’s belief in the perfectibility of man and their means of achieving that perfection. For most of a century American children and their parents have been immersed in John Dewey’s democratized education model in which the teacher is merely the facilitator and must not impose fixed values or notions of right or wrong. Children are presumed to be inherently good and must be allowed to explore and develop their own relativistic versions of truth. But in the real world, bad actions and bad behavior have consequences that demand rigorous adherence to fixed standards of behavior. In other words children are taught to think one way but must act another way when they become adults. This is just one of the basic fallacies of the humanistic understanding of the world. It ignores the innate fallen nature of mankind but demands perfection without the fixed values and timeless objective truths of the God who created the universe and mankind. Such disconnection is one of the principal causes of the rapidly deteriorating social fabric at all levels of America life—government, marriage, family, economy, education, arts, and culture in general.
______

The massive moral outrage and hand-wringing at the unfortunate death of a single silverback gorilla is astonishing. Where is the moral outrage when approximately 3000 unborn babies are aborted each day of the year in America? Where is the moral outrage when in slightly less than two months the number of babies aborted in America equals the entire population of 175,000 silverback gorillas remaining in the world? What is the value of a child compared to a silverback gorilla? In the humanistic view of the world, it appears to be very little.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Alex Abad Santos, “Harambe, the zoo killing that’s set the internet on fire, explained,” Vox culture, June 1, 2016. http://www.vox.com/2016/5/31/11813640/harambe-gorilla-cincinnati-zoo-killed (accessed June 7, 2016).
[2] Dan Sewell, “Correction: Zoo gorilla-child hurt story,” Associated Press, May 30, 2016. https://www.yahoo.com/news/vigil-planned-cincinnati-zoo-tribute-143125063.html?ref=gs (accessed June 7, 2016).
[3] Santos, “Harambe, the zoo killing that’s set the internet on fire, explained,” Vox culture.
[4] Patrick Brennan, “Jane Goodall to Cincy zoo director: I’m so sorry’,” cincinnati.com, June 2, 2016. http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/06/02/jane-goodall-cincy-zoo-director-feel-so-sorry/85285432/ (accessed June 7, 2016).
[5] Ibid.
[6] Sewell, “Correction: Zoo gorilla-child hurt story,” Associated Press.
[7] Sheila Hunt, “Justice for Harambe,” change.org. https://www.change.org/p/cincinnati-zoo-justice-for-harambe (accessed June 7, 2016).
[8] Ibid.

Growing Apostasy in the Last Days – Part IV

As described in Part I, the Yale Covenant was a response to an open letter signed by 130 Muslim scholars from throughout the Muslim world to leaders of Christian churches everywhere. The Muslim scholars pointed to common ground between Muslims and Christians with regards to the commands to love God and to love one’s neighbors. The Yale Covenant was a response to the Muslim letter signed by over three hundred prominent Christian ministers, professors, and leaders from various organizations including Christian churches, ministries, seminaries, Christian publishers, and various quasi-Christian organizations. Most of the signers could be classified as coming from the liberal segment of those entities. However, there were several high-profile and highly influential representatives from major evangelical churches and organizations that signed the Yale Covenant but who are not typically thought of as being associated with liberal doctrines and causes. Those included:

Leith Anderson, President, National Association of Evangelicals

David Yonggi Cho, Founder and Senior Pastor of Yoido Full Gospel Church (Assemblies of God), Seoul, South Korea

Bill Hybels, Founder and Senior Pastor, Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, Illinois, and Founder of Willow Creek Association

Dr. Robert Schuller, Founder of Crystal Cathedral and Hour of Power television ministry

Rick Warren, Founder and Senior Pastor, Saddleback Church, Lake Forest, California, and author of The Purpose Driven Church and The Purpose Driven Life.[1]

When these men affixed their names to the Yale Covenant, they effectively associated themselves with a false religion in direct violation of the Apostle Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians.

Do not be mismatched with unbelievers. For what partnership have righteousness and iniquity? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God…[2 Corinthians 6:14-16a. RSV] [emphasis added]

Matthew Henry’s 300 year old commentary gives additional insight into the Apostle Paul’s words of cautioned to the Corinthians.

It is wrong for good people to join in affinity [kinship or relationship] with the wicked and profane. There is more danger that the bad will damage the good than hope that the good will benefit the bad. We should not yoke ourselves in friendship with wicked men and unbelievers. We should never choose them for our bosom-friends. Much less should we join in religious communion with them. It is a very great absurdity. Believers are made light in the Lord, but unbelievers are in darkness; and what comfortable communion can these have together?[2]

These men and others in evangelicalism that embrace and promote anti-biblical efforts such as the Yale Covenant bring great reproach and damage to the cause of Christ through their efforts. They cannot separate their pronouncements, actions, and example from those of others in the church (evangelical or liberal) such as the Reverend Canon Gina Campbell, pastor of the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. Pastor Campbell permitted the Episcopal Church to host a Muslim prayer service at the Cathedral on November 14, 2014. The Muslim’s Friday call to prayer (a “Jummah”) was conducted at the Cathedral by Ebrahim Rasool, a Muslim and the South African ambassador to the U.S., in cooperation with various Muslim societies and organizations and The Nation’s Mosque. Widespread criticism of the event by many Christian leaders including Dr. Franklin Graham prompted Reverend Campbell to vigorously defend her decision. She stated that the National Cathedral was a

…place of prayer for all people. Let us stretch our hearts and let us seek to deepen mercy for we worship the same God…We here at the cathedral have embraced a steep challenge to grow in our identity as a house for people. This prayer marks a historic moment. This prayer symbolizes a grand hope for our community. As we get to know each other, more bridges are built and there is less room for hate and prejudice to come between us.[3] [emphasis added]

Campbell is profoundly wrong in three ways. First, Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God as has been unequivocally demonstrated in Parts I through III of this series. Second, the National Cathedral is not a house of prayer for all people but a building in which His people “…who are called by my name…” worship the God of the Bible [2 Chronicles 7:14. RSV] Third, as Matthew Henry wrote, religious communion between the light and darkness is a great absurdity, not bridge building as Reverend Campbell would have us believe.

In his outreach efforts to the Muslim faith, Rick Warren did much more than just sign his name to the Yale Covenant in 2007. In 2006 Warren and his wife received an invitation to visit and share an Ifar meal from the leader of the Mission Viejo mosque near Saddleback Church. Iftar is the evening meal Muslims eat after fasting all day during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Following several such visits, Warren began accepting invitations to address Muslim conferences in Long Beach, Washington, D.C., and elsewhere.[4]

On July 4, 2009, he spoke to a crowd of 8000 Muslims at the nation’s capitol during the annual convention of the Islamic Society of North America.

I will tell you that I am not interested in interfaith dialogue. I am interested in interfaith projects. There is a big difference. Talk is very cheap. You can talk and talk and talk and never get anything done. Love is something you do. It is something we do together…You know what I discovered is when you walk down the middle of the road you get hit coming and going…Actually, it is easier to be an extremist of any kind because then you only have one group of people mad at you. But if you actually try to build relationships, like invite an evangelical pastor to your gathering, you’ll get criticized for it, so will I. But that is not what matters.[5]

Although Warren strongly asserts that he has maintained his religious differences with Islam, he says that Muslims and Christians can work together for “the common good.” He encouraged the Muslim audience to not compromise their convictions.[6]

In 2011 Warren invited Muslims to share Christmas dinner with the members of his church. At the dinner Warren and the leader of a Los Angeles mosque introduced King’s Way as “a path to end the 1,400 years of misunderstanding between Muslims and Christians.” The document co-authored by Warren and the Muslim leader outlined points of agreement between Christianity and Islam that centered on friendship, peace, and shared social projects. The document stated that Muslims and Christians believed in “one God” and that the religions shared two fundamental commandments: “love of God” and “love of neighbor” and quoted side-by-side verses from the Bible and the Koran to support their claims. The “King’s Way” document committed both faiths to: “Making friends with one another, building peace and working on shared social service projects.” Echoing Warren’a statements, the mosque’s leader stated that, “We agreed we wouldn’t try to evangelize each other. We’d witness to each other but it would be out of ‘Love Thy Neighbor,’ not focused on conversion.”[7]

The Orange County Register reporting on the event stated that, according to polls by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, “evangelicals are 30 percent more likely than other Christians to hold a negative view of Islam…[and] that evangelicals overwhelmingly favor converting Muslims to Christianity and are more likely to believe that Islam encourages violence.” The newspaper also stated that Warren “has repeatedly encouraged evangelicals to set aside such views, arguing that Christians are obliged to treat everyone with love and respect, regardless of faith.”[8] Christians should treat individual Muslims with love and respect, but one must ask where in the Bible does it give Warren the authority to tell Muslims to not compromise their convictions and to suspend efforts at conversion for “the common good”?

How does Warren’s words and actions align with the Apostle Paul’s admonishment to the Corinthians: “…what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?” Henry’s commentary on this verse is abundantly clear when he states that “It is wrong for good people to join in affinity with the wicked and profane.” Although Warren claims that he is working for “the common good,” Henry states that “There is more danger that the bad will damage the good than hope that the good will benefit the bad…We should never choose them for our bosom-friends. Much less should we join in religious communion with them.”

The words and actions of Campbell and Warren are clearly contrary both to the letter and the spirit of Paul’s instructions to Christians. This is theological apostasy described in Part I in which deceitful leaders will depart from and reject part or all of the New Testament teachings of Christ and the apostles. They and others in the evangelical church who follow their examples bring great harm and disunity to the Christian church, weaken the authority of the Bible, and give legitimacy to a false and violent religion.
______

In Matthew 24, after Jesus and His disciples left the temple, they went to the Mount of Olives where the disciples asked questions with regard to the sign of His coming and the end of the world. In verses 4 through 14, Jesus gave them general signs of events leading up to rapture which occurs just before the end the last days which culminate with the seven-year tribulation period. The signs that Jesus gave in these verses characterize the events preceding the rapture, and these events will intensify as that time approaches. One of those signs was the increase of false prophets and religious compromisers within the visible church. They will deceive many as religious deception becomes rampant throughout the planet (v.4-5, 11). Other events of our present day mirror those spoken of by Christ and unmistakably signal the nearness of the rapture: the increasing prevalence of war and threats of war, famine, pestilences, and natural disasters (vv. 6-7); the increase and severity of hatred for and persecution of God’s people (v. 9) resulting in large numbers that will forsake their loyalty to Christ (v.10); and the rapid increase in immorality, violence, and crime while natural love and family affection decrease (v. 12).[9]

In Matthew 24:11 Christ states, “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” Given that we are primarily addressing theological apostasy, the extensive Commentary and Study Notes of Donald Stamps written for the Full Life Study Bible and published over twenty-five years ago give great clarity as it paints a prescient picture of the condition of today’s contemporary American evangelical church.

As the last days [before the rapture] begin to close, false teachers and preachers will be exceedingly prevalent. Much of Christendom will be in an apostate condition. Loyalty and total commitment to the truth of God’s Word and Biblical righteousness will be in the minority. [emphasis added]

(1) Professing believers will accept “new revelation” even though it conflicts with the revealed Word of God. This will lead to opposition to Biblical truth within the churches. Those who preach a distorted gospel may even gain strategic leadership positions in denominations and theological schools of Christendom, enabling them to deceive and mislead many within the church.

(2) Throughout the world millions will be in the occult, astrology, witchcraft, Spiritism, and Satanism. The influence of demons and evil spirits will multiply greatly.

(3) Protection against being deceived is found in an enduring faith and love for Christ, in a commitment to the absolute authority of His Word and a thorough knowledge of that Word.[10] [emphasis added]

______

The Yale Covenant is just one example of apostasy in the church. One might argue that the number of evangelicals among its three hundred signers was relatively insignificant and does not reflect the true condition of the evangelical church. But the magnitude and extent of the influence of these men and others of like minds are extremely significant in the evangelical world, and their words and actions in this and other matters have contributed greatly to the rapid increase and spread of a general apostasy in these last days.

Leith Anderson is President of the National Association of Evangelicals, an organization that represents more than 45,000 local churches from nearly 40 different denominations and serves a constituency of millions.[11]

David Yonggi Cho was the Founder and Senior Pastor [now Emeritus pastor] of Yoido Full Gospel Church (Assemblies of God), Seoul, South Korea, the world’s biggest congregation[12] estimated by several sources as being in excess of eight hundred thousand.

Bill Hybels founded Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, Illinois, and has been the senior pastor of the multi-campus mega church for over forty years. Since 1992, Hybels also had indoctrinated twelve thousand churches and their leaders with his message, methods, and practices through their membership in the Willow Creek Association, also founded by and led by Hybels.[13]

Dr. Robert Schuller founded what eventually became the Crystal Cathedral, a California mega church that for many years had a world-wide television audience through Schuller’s Hour of Power television ministry. Schuller died in 2015.

Rick Warren, Founder and Senior Pastor, Saddleback Church, Lake Forest, California, is often called America’s pastor. The mega church pastor’s reach extends far beyond his own congregation through his Purpose Driven empire which includes his multi-million bestselling books (The Purpose Driven Church and The Purpose Driven Life). The Purpose Driven Church is listed in “100 Christian Books That Changed the 20th Century.” Warren’s Purpose Driven Network of churches is a global coalition of congregations in 162 countries that have trained more than 400,000 ministers and priests worldwide. Additionally, almost 157,000 church leaders subscribe to the Ministry’s ToolBox, Warren’s weekly newsletter.[14]

These five men have had an incredibly powerful influence on evangelicalism not only in America but around the world. Yet, these men have through their words and actions boldly aligned themselves with doctrines of darkness in direct contradiction to the Bible’s commands. For Schuller, Hybels, and Warren, their departures from sound doctrine and practice of New Testament Christianity are not new and not limited to the Yale Covenant. In spite of the power, influence, popularity, and strategic leadership positions of these men, Bible-believing Christians must adhere to Christ’s warning to His disciples found in Matthew 24:4, “Take heed that no man deceive you.”

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] “‘A Common Word’ Christian Response,” Yale Center for Faith and Culture,
http://faith.yale.edu/common-word/common-word-christian-response (accessed April 27, 2016).
[2] Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary, Dr. Wilbur M. Smith, Ed., (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961), p. 1832.
[3] John Blosser, “Franklin Graham slams Muslim service at National Cathedral,” Newsmax, November 17, 2014. http://www.newsmax.com/US/Franklin-Graham-Billy-Graham-Muslims-Washington-National-Cathedral/2014/11/17/id/607906/ (accessed December 25, 2014).
[4] Jim Hinch, “Rick Warren builds bridge to Muslims,” Orange County Register, August 21, 2013. http://www.ocregister.com/articles/muslims-341669-warren-saddleback.html (accessed December 5, 2014).
[5] Michelle A. Vu, “Rick Warren to Muslims: Talk is Cheap, Let’s Work Together,” The Christian Post, July 5, 2009. http://www.christianpost.com/news/rick-warren-to-muslims-talk-is-cheap-let-s-work-together-39543/ (accessed December 5, 2014).
[6] Ibid.
[7] Jim Hinch, “Rick Warren builds bridge to Muslims,” Orange County Register.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Donald C. Stamps, Study Notes and Articles, The Full Life Study Bible – New Testament, King James Version, gen. ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), pp. 53-54.
[10] Ibid., p. 54.
[11] “About NAE,” National Association of Evangelicals, http://nae.net/about-nae/ (accessed May 2, 2016).
[12] “World’s Biggest Congregation,” PBS – Religion and Ethics Newsweekly, August 10, 2012.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/2012/08/10/august-10-2012-worlds-biggest-congregation/10162/ (accessed May 2, 2016).
[13] Greg L. Hawkins and Cally Parkinson, Reveal – Where Are You? (Barrington, Illinois: Willow Creek Association, 2007), pp. 3-4, 111.
[14] “About Rick Warren,” Pastor Rick’s Daily Hope, http://rickwarren.org/about/rick-warren (accessed May 2, 2016).

Growing Apostasy in the Last Days – Part III

The second area that must be examined to determine if there is hope for finding common ground between Islam and Christianity is love. If there are fundamental differences in the concepts and practices of love between Islam and Christianity, then love cannot provide a common ground.

Are the Islamic and Christian understandings of love the same?

As they did in addressing questions presented in Part II, the Yale Covenant authors point to the difficulties in identifying the similarities between the Islamic and Christian understandings of love. These difficulties include several issues. A major difference noted was whether God’s love was conditional or non-conditional. The Bible says that God’s love is unconditional whereas in the Quran it appears that Allah’s love is conditional. Another concern raised by the covenant authors was the difficulty of translating the meaning of words between Arabic and other languages which leads to difficulty in comparing the conceptions of love in the two religions. Other areas identified for further study and discussion were the meanings of the names for God with respect to love and whether God’s love is self-giving. The authors provide no answers to these questions but once again stress the need “for conversations and interactions on these crucial matters of love of God and of neighbor.[1]

Here again the covenant authors get caught up in details (important though they may be) but step away from the fundamental question as to the natures of the two Gods revealed by the Bible and the Quran. However, answers will not come from mere discussions about God’s titles, translations, interpretations, and definitions of love. Answers can be found only in an examination of the fundamental natures of the God of the Bible and the God of the Quran in relation to love and its application between God and man and man to man. Put another way, are the understandings and practices of love expressed by the nature of God described in the Bible and the Quran essentially the same or radically different?

The Christian’s God is love, not just a loving God (John 4:8). God’s love is unconditional which is revealed throughout the great meta-narrative of the creation, the Fall, and redemption. For the Christian, we must again return to the Trinity. In the Christian worldview, God did not create man out of need. Rather, it was a will to love, an expression of the very character of God, to share the inner life of the Trinity. It was a sacrificial love because rebellious man did not deserve it. But man’s rebellion was not a surprise to God for He knew the cost of His supreme love before he created man (see Revelation 13:8). No man was worthy or deserving of God’s love or capable of doing anything to gain His love. Therefore, God sent His incarnate Son to die on a Roman cross that made possible the redemption of mankind. God willingly gave his begotten Son’s life so that all of mankind through their individual freewill would have the opportunity to accept the gift of forgiveness and redemption.

God’s nature is love, and He commanded His followers to unconditionally reflect His love to others in this world. “But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the selfish. Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.” [Luke 6:35-36, RSV]

Contrast the love of the Christian’s God with Allah’s love as described in the Quran. The Quran states that God is Al-Wadud meaning that he is full of loving kindness. This loving kindness is well-demonstrated by many Muslims in the loving way they treat their children and in the great hospitality and kindness bestowed on those that visit their homes. But Allah’s loving kindness is limited to only a part of mankind. Islam does not love its enemies nor does it love the unlovable, and the Quran is very specific in its directives as to the harsh and violent treatment of infidels, the disobedient, and evil-doers. The Quran[2] specifically states in numerous verses that Allah’s love is restricted to those that deserve it, a concept that mirrors the very human reaction to love only those who love us.[3] Listed below are just three examples.

Allah will deprive usury of all blessing, but will give increase for deeds of charity: for He loveth not creatures ungrateful and wicked. [Sura 2:276. Quran]

Say: “obey Allah and His Apostle”: but if they turn back, Allah loveth not those who reject Faith. [Sura 3:32. Quran]

As to those who believe and work righteousness, Allah will pay them (in full) their reward; but Allah loveth not those who do wrong. [Sura 3:57. Quran]

A personal or an impersonal God?

As important is our understanding the different natures of God and Allah with regard to love, we must take one step beyond to determine the reasons for the differences and why those reasons matter to mankind.

In Islam, it is not possible to separate or differentiate Allah’s mind, will, and actions. He is described as absolute oneness in his nature and personhood. The distinguishing characteristic of Islam is the unity of Allah.[4] One of the most revered chapters in the Quran is Sura 112 which commands, “Say: He is Allah, the One, the Only; The Eternal, the Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.”

When Mohammad was asked to describe Allah, Sura 112 was supposedly given to him by Allah. Islamic tradition states that Mohammad considered Sura 112 as worth one-third of the entire Quran. The verses weld together two fundamental doctrines of Islam: (1) Allah is an absolute, undifferentiated unity and (2) “in his unity, is utterly independent of anything. He is self-subsisting and self-sufficient.” But this conception of Allah’s greatness makes it impossible for man to relate to him and impossible for the human heart and mind to understand anything about him apart from the superficial. Allah is personal in that he is described as a conscious being with a will, but his personality is hidden and cannot be known to any meaningful degree by mankind. Therefore, it is not possible for his followers to have a personal, loving relationship with him.[5]

Because of this description of Allah as a self-subsisting and self-sufficient entity absolutely independent of anything, it is impossible for Allah to express or give love because his nature will not allow such. Therefore, Allah is unipersonal and his ultra-unified, self-contained, self-subsisting, self-sufficient, and self-centered being removes any hope of love flowing from his nature in spite of Mohammad’s claims in the Quran. Given Allah’s self-described nature in the Quran as an absolute oneness and independence from anything, to say that Allah loves or does not love is an oxymoron at best or a false claim shrouded in an incomprehensible, unexplainable enigma that demands blind faith from his followers.

In Christianity, the central theme of the entire Bible focuses on relationship and confirms the importance of His Trinitarian nature. Perichoresis is a word used to describe the triune relationship between the members of the Godhead. It explains the close inter-relatedness of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, each of which is clearly distinct but at the same time “…one in their own eternal and intense love for each other.”[6] Expressed another way, it is one heart beating within three persons.

Perichoresis shares its etymological roots with the word “choreography.”[7] With this in mind, Timothy Keller, in his book The Reason for God, wonderfully adds to our understanding of this relationship which he calls the Dance of God. The dance is about love and relationship which implies constant movement or flowing in which a “…self-giving love is the dynamic currency of the Trinitarian life of God. Three persons within God exalt, commune with, and defer to one another…a dynamic pulsating activity, a life, a kind of drama…a kind of dance…”[8]

And God has allowed man to share in this Trinitarian relationship. How can we know this? John’s gospel gives us the answer in Christ’s own words: “The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them, and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one.” [John 17: 22-23a. RSV] Historian George Marsden summarized Jonathan Edwards’s explanation of this passage. “The ultimate reason that God creates, said Edwards, is not to remedy some lack in God, but to extend that perfect internal communication of the triune God’s goodness and love…” Keller refines Edward’s statement when he said, “God did not create us to get the cosmic, infinite joy of mutual love and glorification, but to share it. [9] [emphasis added]

Is there common ground between Islam and Christianity with regard to love and relationship between man and God and man to man? When we examine the natures of Allah of the Quran and the God of the Bible, the answer is an indisputably no. In the areas of love and relationships, the differences between the unipersonal Allah of the Quran and the loving, personal God of the Bible are enormous and provide no basis for common ground between Islam and Christianity.

In the first three parts of this series we have discussed the end time apostasy that is engulfing many in the evangelical church, the Yale Covenant, and two areas identified as supposedly providing a basis for finding common ground between Islam and Christianity. In Part IV we shall examine how this modern apostasy of attempting to find common ground between Islam and Christianity has been embraced and promoted by some leaders in the evangelical church.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] “A ‘Common Word’ at Yale: Frequently Asked Questions,” Yale Center for Faith and Culture, http://faith.yale.edu/common-word/common-word-yale-frequently-asked-questions (accessed April 27, 2016).
[2] All quotations from the Quran are from the textless edition of the English translation of the Holy Qur-an: A. Yusuf Ali, The Meaning of the Illustrious Qur-an, Published by: Dar AHYA Us-Sunnah, Al Nabawiya.
[3] Abdu H. Murray, Grand Central Question – Answering the Critical Concerns of Mayor Worldviews, (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Books, 2014), pp. 231-232.
[4] Ibid., p. 159.
[5] Ibid., pp. 159-161.
[6] Glenn T. Stanton and Leon C. Wirth, The Family Project, (Coral Stream, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2014), pp. 82-83.
[7] Ibid., p. 82.
[8] Timothy Keller, The Reason for God, (New York: Dutton, 2008), pp. 214-215.
[9] Ibid., pp. 218-219.

Growing Apostasy in the Last Days – Part II

The Muslim scholars in their 2007 open letter to the Christian world (“A Common Word between Us and You”) and the response (the Yale Covenant) signed by three hundred Christian leaders identified two areas that were supposed to be common ground between Muslims and Christians: the commands to love God and to love one’s neighbor.[1] However, the truth or falsity of this claimed common ground can only be determined after a thoughtful examination of the nature of the Islam’s Allah and the Christian God of the Bible and their respective teachings and commandments with regard to love.

In other words, the evidence of any common ground between the two religions must ultimately be found in the natures of the respective Gods. If there are essential similarities in the most important aspects of the natures of Allah of the Quran and the God of the Bible, it would appear that there may be areas of common ground in the religions of Islam and Christianity. Likewise, if their natures are radically different, no common ground can exist.

Muslims claim that what can be known of Allah is found in the Quran written by Mohammad in the seventh century. Christians claim that God revealed himself through the divinely inspired writings of a number of men in both the Old and New Testaments recorded over a 1600-year period. Christians also claim that God can be known through His creation and the operation of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of men and women. However, the written record of the Quran and the Bible will serve as our basis for determining the existence of common ground.

In examining the nature of God and the meaning and application of love as expressed by these natures, two questions must be answered in the affirmative if we are to determine there is common ground between Islam and Christianity. First, do Muslims and Christians worship the same God? Second, are the Islamic and Christian understandings of love the same? The second question will be addressed in Part III.

Do Muslims and Christians worship the same God?

Many claim that Islam’s Allah and the Christian God are really the same God. As one well-known television talk show hostess infamously claimed, all roads lead to the same God. In addressing this question, the Yale Center for Faith and Culture responded to a number of questions and criticisms following the publication of the Yale Covenant. Their response to the question as to whether Allah and the Christian God are the same was presented in two parts.

First, the authors of the Yale Covenant assert that the God of the Bible may also be called “Allah” because it is merely the Arabic word for God. The second part of the response addressed the question of whether Muslims and Christians worship the same God. The signers of the Yale Covenant identify what they believe to be many similarities in the two religions’ views about God. Each claims to worship the one true God, that he is the creator of the heavens and the universe, is merciful and compassionate, rules the universe, and guides the affairs of mankind. They both believe that their God will judge all people at the end of history, that God sent prophets into the world to guide God’s people, and that both the Quran and the Bible were written by men who were divinely inspired. But the Yale Covenanters also acknowledge the two Gods are unlike with regard to the Trinity and the “Person of Jesus Christ whom Christians see as God’s ultimate self-revelation.”[2]

Ultimately, the Yale Covenant’s responders do not answer the question as to whether Christians and Muslims worship the same God. However, they claim that in spite of important differences, those differences are “similar to the differences between Judaism and Christianity, and few Christians today would assert that Jews are worshipping a different god or an idol.”[3] But to compare the differences between Islam and Christianity as being similar to the differences between Judaism and Christianity is ludicrous. Christians almost universally do not view the Old Testament as hostile to the teachings of the New Testament which is a record of the completion of story of God’s plan for mankind following the creation and the Fall found in the Old Testament. The Bible and the Quran could never be bound together as one book because they describe two completely different Gods and two different blueprints for mankind on this earth and in eternity.

The God of the Quran and the God of the Bible are superficially similar in certain ways but vastly different in the most fundamental and important aspects of their natures. Perhaps the most important differences are determined by an understanding of the very essence of who they say they are. The Bible reveals God in His Trinitarian form in the first chapter of Genesis, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…” [Genesis 1:26. KJV] [emphasis added] Where verse 26 establishes the plurality of the Deity, verse 27 reinforces the unity of His divine essence. God is three persons (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit) but one divine being having a single divine nature. The Trinitarian nature of God will be discussed in greater detail in Part III.

Islam denies that God (Allah) is Triune but an “absolute unity, utterly without differentiation within himself” as such differentiation would diminish his greatness. In Islam, to suggest there is differentiation is to commit the greatest possible blasphemy.[4] “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.”[5] [Sura 5:76, Quran]

Islam also denies that God became incarnate because Allah would never stoop to the level of his creation by becoming human.[6] Islam teaches that those who claim that God became incarnate are blasphemers. “They do blaspheme who say: ‘Allah is Christ the son of Mary.’ But said Christ: ‘O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’ Whoever joins other gods with Allah,—Allah will forbid him the Garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.” [Sura 5:75] But the gospel of John states that, “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” [John 14:6. KJV] In Islam, Jesus is not God but a prophet.

These verses from the Quran and the Bible have unquestionably presented a starkly different image of the true natures of the two Gods. If they have such vastly different natures, there can be no common ground of any significance between Islam and Christianity. One must be the ultimate Supreme Being that transcends all of creation and the other a false God, and the religion of the false God leads to pain and despair in this life and eternal damnation thereafter.

Yet, the Yale Covenanters state that, “We believe that Muslims and Christians share enough in their perspectives about God to serve as the foundation for a meaningful and constructive dialogue between them.” Apparently, the responders are not concerned with objective and eternal truth but merely “perspectives” that will lead to dialogue because “…we share enough common understanding of the true God to sit down at the table and discuss both our areas of agreement and disagreement in regard to God.”[7]

But we must look to the pithy writings of A. W. Tozer for wisdom and clarity regarding the motives and mindset of the defenders of the Yale Covenant. “When men believe God they speak boldly. When they doubt they confer. Much religious talk is but uncertainty rationalizing itself; and this they call “engaging in contemporary dialogue.”[8] [emphasis added]

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] “A ‘Common Word’ at Yale: Frequently Asked Questions,” Yale Center for Faith and Culture, http://faith.yale.edu/common-word/common-word-yale-frequently-asked-questions (accessed April 27, 2016).
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Abdu H. Murray, Grand Central Question – Answering the Critical Concerns of Mayor Worldviews, (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Books, 2014), p. 166.
[5] All quotations from the Quran are from the textless edition of the English translation of the Holy Qur-an: A. Yusuf Ali, The Meaning of the Illustrious Qur-an, Published by: Dar AHYA Us-Sunnah, Al Nabawiya.
[6] Murray, Grand Central Question – Answering the Critical Concerns of Mayor Worldviews, pp. 166-167.
[7] “A ‘Common Word’ at Yale: Frequently Asked Questions,” Yale Center for Faith and Culture.
[8] A. W. Tozer, Man – The Dwelling Place of God, (Camp Hill, Pennsylvania: WingSpread Publishers, 1966, 1997), p. 126.

Growing Apostasy in the Last Days – Part I

The Apostle Paul’s second letter to Timothy speaks of the last days.

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. [2 Timothy 3:1-5. KJV]

Before we discuss the growing apostasy of the church, we must place it in context with the end times. The last days spoken of by Paul include the entire Christian era that began with Christ’s crucifixion, resurrection, and the establishment of the Church. But at the end of the those last days (the church age) things will become ever-increasingly worse in the world including a rapid disintegration of moral standards and a great increase in false believers and churches within God’s kingdom.[1]

In the last days great numbers of the professing church will depart from biblical truth in both word and deed. This departure is called apostasy and means to “fall away” or abandonment and rebellion. Within the church, the apostasy will take two forms. The first is theological apostasy in which false leaders will depart from and reject part or all of the New Testament teachings of Christ and the apostles. Under these false leaders and teachers, a false salvation and cheap grace will replace salvation through Christ’s atoning sacrifice at Calvary, repentance, turning from sin, and adherence to God’s standards of living. The false leaders and teachers will offer a gospel centered on the self and its needs and desires. The second type is moral apostasy in which one severs his relationship with Christ and embraces sin and immorality. Although proclaiming right doctrine and New Testament Christianity’s teachings, they will abandon the moral standards as taught by the New Testament in exchange for money, success, honor, and a large following.[2]

When this general apostasy (often called the Great Apostasy) will occur is described by Paul in his second letter to the Thessalonians.

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition…[2 Thessalonians 2:1-3. KJV]

In his first letter, Paul had assured the Thessalonians that the true follower of Christ would be caught up to meet the Lord in the air and be delivered from the coming wrath of God that was to fall upon the earth. Christians call this the rapture which also signals the beginning of the seven years of tribulation in which God’s wrath will be poured out upon the world. Paul’s continued assurances in the second letter were necessary because certain false teachers claimed that God had already begun to pour out His final wrath on the earth. Paul explained that before God’s final wrath would be loosed, two things must occur: there must be a specific falling away and the “man of sin” will be revealed. These two events signal that day when God’s wrath will be loosed. But we must remember that there is a sequence of events leading up to this time. During the entire church age, iniquity has been at work, but as the last days of the age draw to a close, evil becomes progressively worse. As the flood tide of evil swells as the end of the age nears, apostasy within the church will grow to startling proportions. Following the rapture of the true church, the Holy Spirit will no longer restrain the man of lawlessness (the Antichrist) who will then be revealed. Following the rapture of the true church, the remaining apostate church enters into a total rebellion against God and His Word.[3]

Evidence of a generalized apostasy within the church

Between 1870 and 1930 there was a great surge of apostasy within the church. Most of it was centered on the liberal church that eventually dominated the American church. Fundamentalists of the era who stayed true to New Testament Christianity were demeaned and marginalized. They had largely abandoned the culture until the mid to late 1940s when some fundamentalists emerged. Those fundamentalists became known as neo-evangelicals who once again engaged the culture while remaining true to the teachings of Christ and the apostles. But as America progressed through the remainder of the century and into the twenty-first century, a large portion of the evangelical church had succumbed to spirit of the age and slid into apostasy.

The apostasy that was embraced by the liberal church in the early part of the twentieth century has now entered much of the evangelical church in the last half of the twentieth century and first two decades of the twenty-first century. The extent to which this escalating apostasy has grown is evident in many quarters of the evangelical church and is symbolized by a recent occurrence of significant importance.

The Yale Covenant

On October 7, 2007, 138 Muslim scholars from throughout the Muslim world, representing every major school of the Islamic faith, sent an open letter “to leaders of Christian churches, everywhere.” The Muslim scholars pointed to the common ground between Muslims and Christians with regards to the commands to love God and to love one’s neighbors. With reconciliation as their goal, the Muslim scholars proposed that these common grounds would serve as the basis for a dialogue between the two religious faiths. This invitation was titled “A Common Word between Us and You.” In response to the Muslim “Common Word,” the Reconciliation Program at Yale University and several members of the Yale Divinity School community responded on November 13, 2007 with a full-page advertisement in the New York Times. Titled “Loving God and Neighbor Together: A Christian Response to ‘A Common Word Between Us and You’,” the Yale response was signed by 130 Christian leaders and scholars and subsequently by an additional 180 prominent signatories.[4] This response has become known as the Yale Covenant.

The Yale response to the Muslim’s “A Common Word” contained a preamble, statements about world peace and religious peace, common ground, love of God, love of neighbor, and “The Task Before Us.” The document begins by asking Muslims to forgive Christians for their guilt in sinning against “our Muslim neighbors” in the past (the Crusades) and in the present (e.g., excesses of the “war on terror”).[5]

There are two essential questions that must be answered to determine the legitimacy of the Christian response to “A Common Word.” First, is Allah the same God that Christians worship? Second, is the Christian concept of love the same as that of Islam? If the answers to one or both of these questions is no, then it is apparent that no common ground exists and that those Christians who promote such commonality have departed from biblical truth and have become apostate.

In Parts II and III we shall examine the so-called common ground between Islam and Christianity as identified by the Muslim scholars and signers of the Yale Covenant.

Larry G. Johnson

Sources:

[1] Donald C. Stamps, Study Notes and Articles, The Full Life Study Bible – New Testament, King James Version, gen. ed. Donald C. Stamps, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1990), p. 500.
[2] Ibid., p. 478.
[3] Ibid., pp. 474-475.
[4] “A ‘Common Word’ at Yale: Frequently Asked Questions,” Yale Center for Faith and Culture, http://faith.yale.edu/common-word/common-word-yale-frequently-asked-questions (accessed April 27, 2016).
[5] “‘A Common Word’ Christian Response,” Yale Center for Faith and Culture, http://faith.yale.edu/common-word/common-word-christian-response (accessed April 27, 2016).