Christians United for Israel – discount offer.

 If you are quick you can register to show your support

for a poor oppressed group who do not have a voice in government. 

And you can save almost $80. 

 

An unbeatable offer – exclusive to Signposters,

2011 CUFI Summit
Dear Wazza,

We’re going back to Washington DC for our 7th annual Washington, DC Summit on July 16-18
 
When it comes to influencing our leaders in Washington, numbers speak louder than words.  And memories are short. 
 
With the threats to Israel increasing — and America’s support for Israel being debated in real time — we need to go to Washington with more people than ever before. 
 
We hope you will join us.  We pray that for Zion’s sake you will not be silent at this critical time.  If not now, when? 

 

Discounted Rates


Click here to register today before prices increase tomorrow at midnight.

Pastor John Hagee
Chairman
CUFI
David Brog
Executive Director
CUFI
 


Forward This Message  |  Update Email Preferences  |  Contact Us  |  Unsubscribe
Find us on Facebook
(210) 477-4714 | PO BOX 1307 San Antonio, TX 78295-1307 | info@cufi.org
Copyright © 2011 Christians United for Israel. All Rights Reserved.

 


264 thoughts on “Christians United for Israel – discount offer.

  1. “not a peep out of them”????

    You need to read more Greg.

    It’s very difficult to compare genocides and i think doing so is distasteful. The Armenians suffered incredibly and it’s outrageous that Turkey doesn’t admit to the genocide.

    But there are differences of course. There was not as far as I know a systematic organized genocide across Europe. I don’t think they compare.

    But it’s interesting you brought up the Armenians because Hitler used that same argument that nobody talks about the Armenian genocide to do his own.

    Maybe you haven’t heard any peeps from the Armenians, but that isn’t because they weren’t and aren’t even now peeping.

    I support the Armenians and the nation of Israel.

    If you all want to stand with the Palestinians, maybe you could ponder the question about why it is that the Muslim countries haven’t taken the Palestinians in. I’m sure there’s enough room in Saudi Arabia for them.

    Hint for those who aren’t aware of it. Muslims all over the world love to kill, injure, maim, bomb because of the injustice done to their Palestinian “brothers”, but they won’t take them in and give them land anywhere.

    If you don’t know why, then you don’t know much about Arabs.

  2. Before the attacks start, I’ll say first that I’d be happy to bring the whole nation of Israel to somewhere in Australia, and let the Palestinians take what is now Israel if that would stop the fighting.

    But that wouldn’t stop the fighting in the Middle East. And it wouldn’t stop people attacking Jews.

    Yes, I’m pro-Israel and pro-Jewish.

  3. Israel is surrounded by 22 hostile Arab/Islamic dictatorships with 640 times the land area, and 60 times the number of people.
    It’s land area is about 1/6 of a percent of Arab land. It’s a democracy among Arab totalitarian regimes many of which continual argue for Israel’s destruction.

    And you guys think Israel is the problem? You know what happened in 1947, 1967 and 1973? And the threats of annihilation that go on continually? And the way kids in Palestine are educated?

  4. I have a good friend who’s a Pali minister and he has told me of how the Israelis took his house and other deprivations he has endured. There’s a significant Palestinian Christian community over there caught between a rock and a hard place. That being Fundamentalist Islam and Jewish Zionism.

    The policy of settlements which are financed by righz wing Christians deprive Palis including our Christian brotherd and sisters.

  5. Which country has nukes and the power to wi
    pe out all the other countries?

    That reminds me of mordachai vanunu. Became a christian and was living in sydney going to an anglican church when he decided to spill the beens on israels nukes. Then the mossad got him anf he’s lucky to be seen again.

  6. I’ve removed two standard anti-semitic comments by “snozza”. Happy for people to criticise Israel, as I do, but if it gets to be shock-hate speech I will shut the discussion down.

  7. jews are the most dangerous nuke owning bunch of crazies on the planet
    At least Adolf wasn’t hiding nukes like the jews are.

  8. If you take over a country and dispossess and disenfrancise its inhabitants by force with the help of powerful friends like the UK and the US – then you shouldnt be surprised to find that you are surrounded by countries hostile to you. It would be like Australia taking over Thailand and then saying “They all want to destroy us!”

    That said, the Arab states use opposition to Israel as an excuse for a lot of things – so it is complex.

    What I find slightly disgusting is people rally christians to support the Jewish lobby, which is already quite powerful in Washington – and charging them for the privilege! Thats gutless and self-serving. Support the weak and stand up for the people without a voice.

  9. So, Bones, you think that a country which has nukes but has never used them is more dangerous than one which daily hurls rockets into a neighbour’s sovereign territory? have you even asked yourself why Israel has to put a shield over its sovereign state when it is such a small and otherwise insignificant state?

    No. The prize for Islam is Jerusalem. It will always be the battleground, until Jesus comes.

    Having the hardware is one thing, but using it is quite another. I think after 64 years, if Israel was really going to wipe out the neighbourhood it would have done so by now.

    If Iran ever gets to make nukes do you think they’ll sit on them? Or if the Gaza Strippers ever get their hands on a smart bomb, what do you think will be their first thought?

    I sympathise with Palestinian Christians who have been largely the meat in the sandwich, but tarring Israel is not productive. It is the only democracy in the region.

    The Gazan hardliners are as heavy handed with their own people as Israel has ever been with them. The propaganda of starvation and lack of goods and services is wrong. The Israelis protect their borders from suicide bombers and insurgents, but allow hundreds of trucks to go into Gaza.

    The Gazans have created a warlike people for at least another generation, as they psychologically warp the perspective of their won children, so this will not go away.

    The Israelis will continue to insist on their 18 year old males and females to do national service in defence of their homeland, granted by the UN in 1948, and on a constant state of alert ever since.

    When Hamas and Fatah decide that Israel has a right to exist there may be a way forward, but the longer they launch missiles into Israel the more chance there is of assertive action.

    Personally I look on it as evidence of Biblical accuracy, but in human terms everyone suffers, Gazan, Jew, Christian and Arab.

    Singling out Israelis for scorn is not helpful.

  10. Oi wazza, are you a jew with a mindless brain that refuses to realize about why the world hates israel.
    Removing the truth as you do is the same as the kiddie fiddlers from the catholic cult who reckon by removing a rapist everything will be ok.
    All you religious cults are extremeists.
    If Israel didn’t get invented we’d be much safer.
    Political correctness aint in my vernacular and I say what others only dare to think.
    I hate all godgobbers.
    Especially jews catholics and muzzies,.,YOU 3 bunch of wackos will be the idiots who start world war three.
    You prayer mongering goons will all be singing your stupid rubbish about which mythological non existent super man in the sky is the most powerful as nuke and destroy most of the planet.
    delete that you bloody ignorant fool !!!!!

    Go pray your useless gods muck gibberish to the invisible spirit man you talk to

  11. wazza, which people do not have a voice? Hamas? Fatah? I think they’ve had a rather large voice, don’t you.

    I remember recently Paul Howes of the Union movement standing on the steps of some Sydney mosque and shouting hate speech at the Israelis in support of Hamas with crowds waving Palestinian flags.

    I was amazed. I wrote to his boss, but realised the entire Union movement is behind Hamas, almost as if they are honorary members, so I got no joy with him.

    Hamas and Fatah have been paid millions by the US to come tot he table. Arafat pocketed a fortune meting with Clinton. He was paid to shake Sharon’s hand. Did it do any good? No. They still denied Israel the right to exist. They still allowed the rockets to be fired into Israel.

    The actual Arabs and Palestinians outside of Gaza who live in Israel elect their own councils, mayors. Vote. Build their own cities and towns. I was amazed to see how at liberty they are to build their homes and work things out within democratic Israel. I thought they were downtrodden.

    I met with Arab merchants in Jerusalem, which, on one side, is completely Arab and Muslim. They have control of the Al Aqsa Mosque, overlooking the Wailing Wall, on the Temple Mount, which is sacred to Jews.

    So much propaganda has gone out about what is happening in Israel. Of course there are tensions. Israelis were targeted for years by suicide bombers, especially the youth.

    You say it was because of UK and US friends, but you don’t know history. Eisenhower left the Israelis to be decimated in 1948. That’s right. He gave no assistance to their rag-tag army as they were attacked from all sides by surrounding nations. He fully expected they would be wiped out before they had even started.

    The British had withdrawn, and had nothing to do with Israel in that first war. Only the French gave any assistance with weapons provision when they realised the plight of the Israelis.

    To everyone’s surprise the Israelis not only survived but won that war. Only then did any other nations other than France give any assistance.

    Sadly, history has been warped by false evidence and propaganda. That Israel exists and has survived has nothing to do with the UK and US in the beginning. That they have the right to exist and defend themselves by whatever democratic means they can is undisputed.

    If wealthy US Jews have the wherewithal and ability to lobby their government or raise funds to guard their homeland then that is their prerogative.

    What you are really saying is that if it weren’t for the Christians, and Jews in the US and UK Israel could be easily wiped off the map and your little world might be safer.

    I actually hope that last paragraph is wrong.

    Whatever. Israel won’t be liberated until Jesus comes.

  12. Hey, snozza, how can a mindless brain realise anything? Or be ignorant?

    Anyhow. You won’t find any ‘jews, catholics or muzzies’ here, unless you count Bones and Greg as catholics, so you can’t be hating anyone on this site.

    Be on guard during your journey in life without God. You’ll need it!

  13. Whatever Steve, this site http://www.wrmea.com/special-topics/5696.html estimates US aid to Israel since 1948 at $134 billion or over $20.000 per Israeli.

    I know a few Americans who could use $20,000 for a decent health- care system.

    That they have the right to exist is disputed regularly. I dispute it myself. No country has the right to exist. They are all political creations maintained by force – some more than others.

    The prolamation of the state of Israel was immediately recognised by Truman and Stalin. It was populated before 1948 by Jewish illegal immigrants brought there by people smugglers.

  14. Yes we know that Christians are helping finance settlements ie the forcible eviction of Palestinian homes and land (whether Muslim or Christian). This is in no small measure to their nutbag theology of the Jews returning to Israel.

    Of course the US has to do what Blair did to Northern Ireland. He gave the Protestants a choice between peace or pulling out British support.

    It seems we’ve forgotten the terrorism Zionists applied to the Brits when they were in Palestine.

    “The Bible Belt in America is Israel ‘s only safety belt right now.” Falwell and the movement he helped create have played a major role in supporting the construction and maintenance of the settlements. They helped bring tens of thousands of Eastern European Jews to Israel to increase the population of the settlements. They have made it politically risky for any American president to promote a peace plan.

    Because of their passion to see Israel permanently expand its borders, Christian Zionists have added fuel to the flames of anti-semitism worldwide. Their work has also served to isolate Israel, particularly in the United Nations. And then Falwell has the chutzpah to say, “The Bible Belt in America is Israel ‘s only safety belt right now.”

    http://www.theocracywatch.org/christian_zionism.htm

  15. Bones,
    nutbag theology of the Jews returning to Israel

    Again your language is extreme. Almost anti-Semitic.

    But please explain what you mean.

  16. Of course Canon Garth Hewitt of the Jerusalem Cathedral would know less than Steve.

    Reverend Garth Hewitt, Director of the Amos Trust, talked of the Wikileakes revelations confirming Israel intentions in its medieval siege of Gaza, he said “callously warehousing 1.5 million people is a way of saying they are of no value.. is a form of racism..”.

    He talked of Israel’s war on children: “half of Gaza’s population are children, in the Cast Lead offensive schools were the most targeted buildings, and schools are not being allowed to be rebuilt.. this is an attack on children’s rights, its a deliberate attack on their future”.

    The Reverend Garth Hewitt also talked of the scandal of the UK buying Israeli drones from ELBIT even though “this company [ELBIT] is making money of occupation and commits human rights abuses against Palestinians..”.

    Reverend Garth Hewitt read out a new year message he received from Father Manuel Musallam, the priest in charge of Holy Family Church in Gaza: “We don’t want to die to liberate our country, we want to live to build it. But if death is imposed upon us, we will all die brave and loyal..”

    Reverend Garth Hewitt also read out the message of Archbishop of Wales Dr Barry Morgan who had joined the Amost Trusts initiative “Just Peace for Palestine” : “A Just Peace for Palestine reminds us that we are all involved – what happens to one person or nation affects us all because we belong to one undivided humanity. And that’s why we cant remain silent or inactive in the face of this injustice. When one country deliberately keeps another on the brink of collapse and thereby destroys its future, we can’t be silent – we must end the siege of Gaza.

  17. Theocracy Watch?

    What is it about this ‘watch’ thing? Must be running out of time!

    You really must be more careful with your sources, Bones!

    I’m thinking of starting new blog called Dipstick Watch! Plenty of material just watching the watchers! LOL! 😀

  18. I’ve been to some of these right wing supporters rallies for Israel. These Christians are solely intent on the the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. That when all of Israel is restored Christ will return.

    Of course any criticism of Israel is howled down with cries of anti-semitism.

    “The trust enjoys 501(c)(3) status and receives funds from private individuals, estates and large evangelical-fundamentalist organizations. The Trust in turn gives this money to Israel, expressly for Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Mrs Hormas told me the Trust planned to raise a hundred million dollars to purchase land for Jewish settlements in the West Bank, the present target area being in the Palestinian town of Hebron… This I was told would help fulfill biblical prophesy. (p,170-171)

    John Hagee, pastor of the Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, announced in February 1997 that his church was donating over $1 million to Israel. Hagee claimed the funds would be used to help resettle Jews from the Soviet Union in the West Bank and Jerusalem. “We feel like the coming of Soviet Jews to Israel is a fulfillment of Biblical prophecy,” Hagee stated.

    From 1991 through the Fall of 2004, Ebenezer has brought more than 100,000 olim back to Israel.

    If their numbers are accurate, and if most of their “olim” end up in the settlements, they could have brought into the West Bank and Gaza Strip as much as 41% of the settlers. (Author’s note – Gratefully Grafted Ministries’ website changes from time to time, so the quotes on this page my no longer exist in their site.)

    Why does Operation Aliyah exist?

    In the fulfillment of Biblical Prophecy. The Jewish people were scattered throughout the nations according to God’s word, because of their disobedience. God beckons to the gentiles to assist in the return of the Jewish people to Israel. Jeremiah prophesied that the return will be of greater magnitude than the exodus from Egypt and will involve all the tribes of Israel. This time they will remain in their land. I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy God. Amos 9:15

    Postmillennialism and Premillennialism

    Postmillennialists are not Christian Zionists. They are adherents of Christian Reconstructionism or Dominion Theology. They represent the most extreme constituency of the Religious Right. They are the activists who claim the United States is a “Christian nation,” calling for the United States to return to Old Testament Biblical law.

    They don’t believe in the rapture theory, or that we are living in the End Times before Christ returns. Leading Reconstructionist author, the late David Chilton, explains that the last days ended with the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D:

    the expression “the last days” and similar terms, are used in the Bible to refer, not to the end of the physical world, but to the last days of the nation of Israel, the “last days” which ended with the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. (Paradise, p12)

    Gary North, a prolific Christian Reconstruction writer points out in The Unannounced Reason Behind American Fundamentalism’s Support for the State of Israel:

    In order for most of today’s Christians to escape physical death, two-thirds of the Jews in Israel must perish, soon. This is the grim prophetic trade-off that fundamentalists rarely discuss publicly, but which is the central motivation in the movement’s support for Israel. It should be clear why they believe that Israel must be defended at all costs by the West.

    Postmillennialists believe that Christians must take domionion, or control over most of the secular institutions in the world in order for Christ to return. Therefore, they encourage Christians who share their biblical worldview to become politically active.

    http://www.theocracywatch.org/christian_zionism.htm

  19. He talked of Israel’s war on children: “half of Gaza’s population are children, in the Cast Lead offensive schools were the most targeted buildings, and schools are not being allowed to be rebuilt.. this is an attack on children’s rights, its a deliberate attack on their future”.

    That would be hilarious if it wasn’t so serious!

    It was Hamas who gathered around schools and hospitals to launch missiles! Cowards!

    And the indoctrination of children is notorious! Shall I bother you with some of their propaganda pollution of children’s minds from youtube? I’m sure you must have seen them.

    Come on, man.

    The rot that is being poured out as fact is unbelievable.
    Even the Egyptians have to put a wall between themselves and Hamas.

    The supply lines are not cut, only the borders protected from fully endorsed suicide killers. The wall isn;t there to keep Palestinians out, but to stop the murders of innocent Israelis.

    I hate the wall too, but please don’t further the propaganda here with rubbish information.

  20. You’re an idiot, Steve.

    There are similarities with Northern Ireland.

    Treat a large group of people like shit and some will fight back.

    With your mentality expect nothing good to come out of the Middle East but more of the same and worse.

    I gather you endorse settlements then.

  21. First, I am not interested in trying to fulfill biblical prophecy.

    Second, if the Arab/Muslim world is so upset and concerned about the plight of 1.5 million Palestinians, why not take them in? Make them a beautiful homeland 10 times the size of where they are now.

    Where are all the millions of wealthy Muslims? Are they setting aside land? We KNOW FOR A FACT, that Hamas etc have repeatedly publicly stated that Israel has no right to exist. The Arab world doesn’t want Israel to exist there at all -that’s the elephant in the room.

    All the talk in the world about Israel doing this and who funds who is beside the point. They don’t want Israel to exist at all.

    Israel isn’t invading all the other countries. If Israel is so nasty and illegitimate for having the nukes, why haven’t they just taken over Saudi Arabia, Egypt years ago. If they are so powerful and so evil and just wanting land, why didn’t the kick all the Arabs out years ago.

    This is just a complete scam. Nobody cares about the Palestinians. Nobody wants them. Go look at some maps people. The Arab nations could make a whole new country with schools and parks and roads and everything where the poor Palestinian people would be safe and could prosper.

    Why don’t they?

    For all the huge land and population and oil money that the surrounding Muslim nations have, and with all the Muslims all over the world, they could solve the problem tomorrow.

    Israel is a prosperous democracy surrounded by countries that want to deny it’s whole right to exist – and have ganged up on them on more than one occasion.

    Steve, excellent posts.
    But like I said, I’m not interested in doing anything to fulfill what I think is biblical prophecy.

    All of you who are against Israel, what is your solution? Every time Israel has given up more land, has anyone been satisfied?

    If you think Israel invaded and shouldn’t exist – what is your solution?
    You think Israel should cease to exist?

    Fine, bring them to the middle of Australia, or the US. I guarantee where they live with bloom in the desert and become a model of democracy and economic efficiency.

    But if you want to talk about religion……. Muslims have 3 holy sites as far as I know, and jerusalem is the least important, and yet they are there.

    Let the devout Palestinians Muslims live close to Mecca.

    LIke I said, the Arab world isn’t interested in helping the Palestinians. They have the money to do so, but don’t. They’re happy for them to stay in poverty so they can bash Israel.

    Go live in Israel for a few months and visit the schools and then go see the way Muslims raise their kids.

  22. Why should the Palestinians leave their land and to where should they go?

    Lol @ taking over Saudi Arabia.

    Who’s keeping the Saudi monarchy in power under extremist Islamic law.

    Let me guess – USA.

    After Egypt good luck seeing democracy being promoted in the Middle East.

    Oh the hypocrisy of it all.

    Hamas no longer says Israel has no right to exist. They proclaim the right to be an independent state.

    Nobody cares about the Palestinians. Nobody wants them.

    That includes the Palestinian Christians and your speaking for yourself of course.

    Jesus cares about the Palestinians.

    As do those who believe in justice, peace and humanity.

  23. From the video source

    Would you want this person as your neighbor ? LOL
    Interesting conversation with an israeli settler (august 17th). I went to a protest against Governor Mike Huckabee, who is here in Jerusalem to support the Israeli settler cause in occupied Palestine and particularly in Sheikh Jarrah. On the way down from the protest, we came across a young woman who asked us where the protest was in Hebrew. We told her we did not speak Hebrew, and she asked us again in English, after which we gave her the directions. She asked us where we were coming from, and we said that we were coming from the Peace Now protest, which is against settlements. Immediately her face changed. She asked us if we were Jewish. When we said no, she asked us why we were in her country. She said that we had no right to be here, and that this country was only for the Jews, who were given this land by God. My friend asked her if she thought God would distinguish amongst people of different religions. She said yes, because she was part of the “Chosen People”. In this video, one of my other friends ask her if this justifies the murder of tens of thousands of Arabs (referring to the massacre that took place with the creation of the State of Israel). You can hear her assert that yes, it does. Not only that, she says that she loves that Arabs are killed. Then she tells us to get off her land, and threatens to break our camera. Her words weren’t empty. Unfortunately, the footage ends when she jumped on me ( I was holding the camera ). She hit us all and would not let us leave. We did not want to react, because we were afraid of being accused by her of attack instead of self-defense (settlers are often favoured by the police in Israel). So, we waited (I was a bit scared, not gonna lie) until police showed up and saw that she was the one attacking us. They told us to leave right away, and told the settler to go away. What is interesting is that if a Palestinian would have attacked us in the same way and the police would have seen, the Palestinian without a doubt would have been arrested and imprisoned. It is a bit windy, so it might be hard to understand her clearly. Listen closely and you should be able to make out what she is saying.

  24. Mordechai Vanunu on his Christian conversion and treatment by the Israeli Government. I have followed Mordechai’s story for some 20 odd years as a very good friend of mine witnessed to him at St John’s Anglican Church.

    “Israel is not a democracy unless you are a Jew” – Mordechai Vanunu

    In the 1980’s Vanunu, a secular Jew held a low tech position in the underground Dimona WMD Plant in the Negev. When Vanunu had a crisis of conscience about being a cog in the making of WMD’s he obtained the keys to restricted areas that were left in the shower room and then shot two rolls of film before resigning from Dimona. He left the country but did not develop the film until eight months later while in Sydney, Australia.

    “After I left Israel I spent two days in a Moscow hotel wondering if I should tell my story to the Red Army, I decided to leave instead. The reason I had arrived there was that before I left the Dimona I had checked out the Palestinian Communist Party to see how the communists worked. I was curious and wondered about once I left Israel, that maybe they would help me. But when I witnessed the poverty and nothing but military cars everywhere I decided to get out of there.”

    While in Sydney, Vanunu worked as a cab driver and began attending the social justice St. John Cross Anglican Church where he was baptized a Christian. Shortly thereafter, he met Peter Hounam, a journalist for London’s Sunday Times. After Vanunu shared his story and photos, Peter flew Vanunu to London for ‘safe keeping’ while he began to vet the story. This took more days than Vanunu had patience to bear in solitude. Out of boredom Vanunu ventured onto the streets of London and met an American named Cindy. He had no clue she worked for the Mossad.

    Article 1 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights upholds that: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in the spirit of brotherhood.

    Vanunu responded, “When I decided to expose Israel’s nuclear weapons I acted out of conscience and to warn the world to prevent a nuclear holocaust…The Israeli media demonized me…they published many lies about me…and Israel kept me totally isolated in prison for most of the 18 years…I am also regarded as a traitor because I was baptized a Christian.”

    Article 18 of the UDHR affirms that: Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to change one’s religion.

    Vanunu informed me, “My Christian conversion was also considered as treason and led to me receiving more time in jail than any murderer has ever served. The Israelis have this very beautiful article about freedom and liberty but they want to destroy anyone who criticizes them for revealing the truth to the world. The world must look and see what kind of democracy Israel is when one speaks out the truth.”

    Article 13 of the UDHR upholds that: Everyone has the right to freedom of movement. Vanunu and millions of Palestinians have been denied this right under the British Emergency Mandate Regulations and the concrete wall/electrified fence has been repeatedly deemed illegal by the International Court of Justice.

    Vanunu continued, “It’s very sad that Hilary Clinton went to the Jewish Wailing Wall and forgot the real crying wall is the Palestinian wall…the apartheid wall… the wall is not for defense, but to keep this conflict permanent…the people who need the help are the Palestinian Christians. We need all Christians to come and see the true facts on the ground…The Dimona is 46 years old; reactors last 25 to 30 years. The Dimona has never been inspected and Israel has never signed the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty but all the Arab states have…Twenty years ago when I worked there they only produced when the air was blowing towards Jordan ten miles away. No one knows what is happening now…The Israelis have 200 atomic weapons and they accuse the Palestinians and Muslims of terrorism. The world needs to wake up and see the real terrorism is the occupation and the Palestinians have lived under that terror regime for 40 years…Israel propaganda portrays all Palestinians as Muslim extremists and Hamas terrorists and neglect that Palestinian Christians are following the true message of Jesus Christ with nonviolent resistance. We need all Christians to come and see the truth for themselves.

    According to Fuad Farah, Board member of Sabeel and the Chairman of the Orthodox National Council in Israel told this reporter that, “Ninety percent of all Christians who visit Israel Palestine never meet a Palestinian Christian.”

    Vanunu rejects the title prophet, but the similarities are striking. The ancient prophets warned of danger and were mostly ignored, ridiculed or jailed. The prophets also always offered hope.

    Vanunu concluded the interview, “My hope is that the pullouts will continue in the West Bank and then they will bring down the wall.”

    There can be no peace without justice. Justice requires that every human being does indeed have what we call in America: inalienable rights, meaning no government, no state can revoke them.
    Although Israeli denies Vanunu many of these inalienable rights, he continues to defy their restrictions in the spirit of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13963.htm

  25. Yes and pre-1948 the Arabs and Brits were subjected to terrorist attacks by various Zionist militia in the express purpose to drive them out of Palestine.

    Some of these such as attacks on buses sound familiar.

    SOME EARLY EXAMPLES OF JEWISH-ZIONIST TERROR.

    August 20, 1937 – June 29, 1939. During this period, the Zionists carried out a series of attacks against Arab buses, resulting in the death of 24 persons and wounding 25 others.

    November 25, 1940. S.S.Patria was blown up by Jewish terrorists in Haifa harbour, killing 268 illegal Jewish immigrants (see below).

    November 6, 1944. Zionist terrorists of the Stern Gang assassinated the British Minister Resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne, in Cairo.

    July 22, 1946. Zionist terrorists blew up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, which housed the central offices of the civilian administration of the government of Palestine, killing or injuring more than 200 persons. The Irgun officially claimed responsibility for the incident, but subsequent evidence indicated that both the Haganah and the Jewish Agency were involved.

    October 1, 1946. The British Embassy in Rome was badly damaged by bomb explosions, for which Irgun claimed responsibility.

    June 1947. Letters sent to British Cabinet Ministers were found to contain bombs.

    September 3, 1947. A postal bomb addressed to the British War Office exploded in the post office sorting room in London, injuring 2 persons. It was attributed to Irgun or Stern Gangs. (The Sunday Times, Sept. 24, 1972, p.8)

    December 11, 1947. Six Arabs were killed and 30 wounded when bombs were thrown from Jewish trucks at Arab buses in Haifa; 12 Arabs were killed and others injured in an attack by armed Zionists on an Arab coastal village near Haifa.

    December 13,1947. Zionist terrorists, believed to be members of Irgun Zvai Leumi, killed 18 Arabs and wounded nearly 60 in Jerusalem, Jaffa and Lydda areas. In Jerusalem, bombs were thrown in an Arab market-place near the Damascus Gate; in Jaffa, bombs were thrown into an Arab cafe; in the Arab village of Al Abbasya, near Lydda, 12 Arabs were killed in an attack with mortars and automatic weapons.

    December 19, 1947. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blowing up two houses, in the ruins of which were found the bodies of 10 Arabs, including 5 children. Haganah admitted responsibility for the attack.

    December 29, 1947. Two British constables and 11 Arabs were killed and 32 Arabs injured, at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem when Irgun members threw a bomb from a taxi.

    December 30,1947. A mixed force of the Zionist Palmach and the “Carmel Brigade” attacked the village of Balad al Sheikh, killing more than 60 Arabs.

    1947 — 1948. Over 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were uprooted from their homes and land, and forced to live in refugee camps on Israel’s borders. They have been denied the right to return to their homes. They have been refused compensation for their homes, orchards, farms and other property stolen from them by the Israeli government. After their expulsion, the “Israeli Forces” totally obliterated (usually by bulldozing) 385 Arab villages and towns, out of a total of 475. Commonly, Israeli villages were built on the remaining rubble.

    January 1, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked a village on the slopes of Mount Carmel; 17 Arabs were killed and 33 wounded.

    January 4, 1948. Haganah terrorists wearing British Army uniforms penetrated into the center of Jaffa and blew up the Serai (the old Turkish Government House) which was used as a headquarters of the Arab National Committee, killing more than 40 persons and wounding 98 others.

    January 5, 1948. The Arab-owned Semiramis Hotel in Jerusalem was blown up, killing 20 persons, among them Viscount de Tapia, the Spanish Consul. Haganah admitted responsibility for this crime.

    January 7, 1948. Seventeen Arabs were killed by a bomb at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem, 3 of them while trying to escape. Further casualties, including the murder of a British officer near Hebron, were reported from different parts of the country.

    January 16, 1948. Zionists blew up three Arab buildings. In the first, 8 children between the ages of 18 months and 12 years, died.

    December 13, 1947 — February 10, 1948. Seven incidents of bomb-tossing at innocent Arab civilians in cafes and markets, killing 138 and wounding 271 others, During this period, there were 9 attacks on Arab buses. Zionists mined passenger trains on at least 4 occasions, killing 93 persons and wounding 161 others.

    February 15, 1948. Haganah terrorists attacked an Arab village near Safad, blew up several houses, killing 11 Arabs, including 4 children..

    March 3, 1948. Heavy damage was done to the Arab-owned Salam building in Haifa (a 7 story block of apartments and shops) by Zionists who drove an army lorry ( truck) up to the building and escaped before the detonation of 400 Ib. of explosives; casualties numbered 11 Arabs and 3 Armenians killed and 23 injured. The Stern Gang claimed responsibility for the incident.

    March 22, 1948. A housing block in Iraq Street in Haifa was blown up killing 17 and injuring 100 others. Four members of the Stern Gang drove two truck-loads of explosives into the street and abandoned the vehicles before the explosion.

    March 31, 1948. The Cairo-Haifa Express was mined, for the second time in a month, by an electronically-detonated land mine near Benyamina, killing 40 persons and wounding 60 others.

    April 9, 1948. A combined force of Irgun Zvai Leumi and the Stern Gang, supported by the Palmach forces, captured the Arab village of Deir Yassin and killed more than 200 unarmed civilians, including countless women and children. Older men and young women were captured and paraded in chains in the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem; 20 of the hostages were then shot in the quarry of Gevaat Shaul.

    April 16, 1948. Zionists attacked the former British army camp at Tel Litvinsky, killing 90 Arabs there.

    April 19, 1948. Fourteen Arabs were killed in a house in Tiberias, which was blown up by Zionist terrorists.

    May 3, 1948. A book bomb addressed to a British Army officer, who had been stationed in Palestine exploded, killing his brother, Rex Farran.

    May11, 1948. A letter bomb addressed to Sir Evelyn Barker, former Commanding Officer in Palestine, was detected in the nick of time by his wife.

    April 25, 1948 — May 13, 1948. Wholesale looting of Jaffa was carried out following armed attacks by Irgun and Haganah terrorists. They stripped and carried away everything they could, destroying what they could not take with them.

    http://guardian.150m.com/palestine/jewish-terrorism.htm

  26. How bizarre is this.

    Such was the extremist Zionist Stern Gang (or Lehi)’s hatred of the Brits, they sought an alliance with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy.

    During World War II, Lehi initially sought alliance with Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, offering to fight alongside them against the British.[13] On the belief that Nazi Germany was a lesser enemy of the Jews than Britain, Lehi twice attempted to form an alliance with the Nazis.[14] During World War II it initially supported fascism, declaring that it would establish a Jewish state based upon “nationalist and totalitarian principles”.[15]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)

  27. Q says Fine, bring them to the middle of Australia, or the US. I guarantee where they live with bloom in the desert and become a model of democracy and economic efficiency.

    Actually that was seriously put forward as an option before Palestine was selected as the homeland for the zionists. Both the Kimberley region and the northern half of NT were considered. But Curtin said no.

    If they had come here and treated us anything like they did the Arabs, I guarantee we would be less worried about their ‘right’ to exist, and more worried about our own existence.

    What is it with the ‘right to exist’ thing? Why does Israel have some ‘right’ of existence but Palestine does not? It is stated like its an obvious fact that should never be denied, but its a nonsense. Nations dont have rights, people do. Just because someone proclaims nationhood in some land and wins a war does not guarantee that nation a right to exist in perpetuity.

  28. The rot that is being poured out as fact is unbelievable.

    Steve obviously knows more than ministers who live in and pastor their congregations in Palestine.

    They just have to suck it.

    They’re probably not even REAL Christians.

  29. If wealthy US Jews have the wherewithal and ability to lobby their government or raise funds to guard their homeland then that is their prerogative.

    While the US is influenced by Jewish lobby groups and Christian nutbags in Wazzas original article, you can expect no peace in the Middle East.

    But they probably don’t want peace anyway.

    That would be the work of the Anti-Christ.

  30. The innocents in Texas, the USA and the World, are extremely lucky that George Bush left office before being fully groomed by his best mate
    Lubya Dubya was being groomed by this bloated pig John Hagee, to start fundamentalist religious terrorism on Atheists and muslims around the nation and then overseas. Starting from his ever expanding Cornerstone Compound in San AntonioTexas.
    Unfortunately this mad piece of bloated religious offal is still dead set on him and his jew mates taking over the world.
    Behemoth Hagee is easily the most dangerous fundie nutter in the USA.

    Funny old Westboro git Freddy Phelps aint got nuffin on fat guts Hagee when it’s down to reeking religious mayhem.

    Hagee wants to nuke it out with any one who gets in his way.
    Because of his old age Hagee knows that he can’t keep on trumpeting the stupid notion of being around to personally help his hero plant his feet on terra firma when he floats down courtesy of Rapture Airlines.
    It’s gunna pass the old bastard by innit, unless it happens tomorrow.
    Blubber Guts is just as frantic to get the wars started as is the other old creepy prayer mongering terrorist near Rome.The crazy bug eyed little Geman creep, the holy roman empire resurrecting pope ratzi the Nazi the umpteenth.
    And of course don’t forget what Hagee covets most.
    Being sock puppet close to the ever lying jew PM, Benjamin Netanyahu.
    Having the massive Earth destroying arsenal of the zionists resting on Hagee’s humungous wobbling guts is a worse scenario than anything a noooked up North Korea has ever worried the world about.

    I hope some one assassinates these decrepit old monsters before they can start their world dominating carnage.

  31. Hamas is a terrorist organization.
    Israel is a democracy.
    Seeing a youtube video of liberal Christians getting in the faces of people in Israel and getting abused doesn’t make me think that Israel has no right to exist and that the Jews are the bad guys. Was that the point of the video? You think because foreign liberal Christians go to Israel and put cameras in people’s faces who say bad things about Jesus and swear will make people think the Jews are REALLY BAD PEOPLE, and the poor Palestinians are being persecuted?

    Didn’t work guys.

    Neither am I interested in Al Jazeera’s view of Middle Eastern history.

    You still haven’t answered my question. You all seem to think that Israel shouldn’t exist – they are the evil invader’s with all the nukes. So, what’s your solution?
    You want them to leave, and let the Palestinians take over?
    You honestly think – really, do you honestly think that if Hamas etc get all of their demands that they will then decide to cease all hostilities and let Israel be?
    Really?

    And yes, Wazza, regardless of all the nasty videos you can produce of women threatening to break someone’s camera, I would much rather have Israel in the middle of Australia than the same number of Arabs. You bet!

    I’d like to see those same liberal Christians go to Hamas and do a story and tell them how wrong they are.

    Read up on the history of Hamas. These guys still talk about the the protocols!

    And I never said anything about Palestinians taking over Saudi Arabia. I’m asking why with all the land (go look t it!!!) that Arabs own, why they can’t let the Palestinians have some land with them. Go look at all the land in the Middle East. Have you ever done that? Look at the tiny space Israel has.

    Oh and if Israel is so bad to Christians, think about whether you really think a church would have more freedom in Muslim countries as opposed to Israel.

    Most people assume Israel has nukes. But even Arab countries don’t want other Arab countries to have nukes. Why?

    Some of you seem to love youtube videos about nasty Jewish settlers. Go look at some others of rocket attacks from Hamas, human shields, Arab involvement in the holocaust, wonderful statements by Hamas and Muslim leaders re Israel, and while you’re at it, Muslim attacks against churches in, no…it would take too long to mention all the countries.

    But – do any of you think Israel has the right to exist?
    Yes or no?

  32. Bones quote De Jure!! – “I’ll stand with my Palestinian brothers and sisters.”

    Question: How many pelagian/socinian/marcionite hybrid, scripture undermining/denying/twisting, neo-liberal deconstructionist emergent heretics are there in Palestine Bones?

    I think its more accurate to say that you will stand with your Palestinian “brother” & “sister” (singular) – I am being generous in assuming there must be at least 2 other like minded bible twisters over there….

  33. “I hope some one assassinates these decrepit old monsters”

    Haggee, the PM of Israel and the Pope?

    Is the moderator asleep? Your fellow Israel hater is at it again. The evil that comes out of the mouths of those who hate Israel really appalls me.

    Come on guys, can you reign in your friend there?
    And maybe you should stop stirring him up with youtube videos.

  34. Bones quote De Jure “I’ll stand with my Palestinian brothers and sisters.” (lol)

    Question: How many pelagian/socinian/marcionite hybrid, scripture undermining/denying/twisting, neo-liberal deconstructionist emergent heretics are there in Palestine Bones?

    I think its more accurate to say that you will stand with your Palestinian “brother” & “sister” (singular) – I am being generous in assuming there must be at least 2 other like minded bible twisters over there….

  35. Im not asleep. Let that one through, but am keeping a close eye on snozzas comments. Have blocked 3.

  36. Hamas is a terrorist organization.

    Which started out as a social welfare organisation.

    Israel is a democracy.

    Only if you are Jewish.

    Didn’t work guys.

    Neither am I interested in Al Jazeera’s view of Middle Eastern history.

    Didn’t think it would. You aren’t interested in truth.

    You honestly think – really, do you honestly think that if Hamas etc get all of their demands that they will then decide to cease all hostilities and let Israel be?
    Really?

    If the yanks threaten to pull out their support from both sides it would be interesting.

    Hamas has removed their demand that Israel cease to exist. They have however asked for an independent state.

    Actually I would advocate foreign peacekeepers.

    But Israel hates the idea that someone might get in their way.

    Israel of course could start by banning and removing settlements.

    However these are actually growing and the Zionists have immense sway re balance of power in Israeli politics which is an absolute basket case.

    Oh and if Israel is so bad to Christians, think about whether you really think a church would have more freedom in Muslim countries as opposed to Israel.

    Yes you’re right. They’re better than Stalin but not apartheid South Africa.

    And the Christian response to the persecution of the Palestinian Christians.

    Move, you stupid bastards.

  37. And with every post Bones proves himself to be a hater – a hater of Christians, a hater of conservatives, a hater of Israel, and a hater of God’s word. No Christian fruit whatsoever. I know what you are Bones, and it ain’t saved.

  38. I am being generous in assuming there must be at least 2 other like minded bible twisters over there….

    Also known as my contribution to this debate is to show how big a dickhead I am.

    Mission achieved, Pelagian/Socinian/Marcionite hybrid Christian aka I couldn’t give a shit about anyone else or myjesusor penisisbetterthanyours.

  39. And with every post Bones proves himself to be a hater – a hater of Christians,

    You friggin disgusting liar. There are Christians in Palestine that I personally know. You couldn’t give a shit about them.

    Moron.

  40. The Christian haters here have been exposed.

    I love Israel. They can treat Christians however they want.

    Hypocrites.

  41. Of course when Brown Nose finishes defending Kong Hee, he can research the Rev Garth Hewitt and condemn him for not living his best/abundant life now.

  42. Yep, love Garth’s music.

    Except he doesn’t make a fortune writing trendy “I love you” songs. His songs deal with the reality of the Gospel, suffering and injustice.

    Which would be why Brown Turd would hate him.

  43. Greg, I actually have said on more than one occasion that Bones isn’t a God-despiser. I’ve defended him several times on that point.
    And because I did, I was accused of not taking sides, sitting on the fence and being a coward.

    So, I’ll say for a third, or probably fourth time. Bones is not a God-despiser. I don’t think you are either Greg. I’m surprised you don’T remember me saying so.

    On the other hand, Bones just said, “that I’m not interested in truth”.

    All I can say is that that statement is not true. It may seem that way because on this issue I have a totally opposite view. If it’s because I said I’m not interested in the Aljazeera point of view, it’s because I’ve read it. There was a time when I looked at Aljazeera everyday and still do from time to time.

    But I’ll go on re God despiser. The reason why I said (more than once mind you) that Bones is no God-despiser, is because that goes at the attitude of the heart. And I can’t judge a persons heart or intent – but if I did, I’d say based on the evidence that neither Bones or you Greg despise God, or hate God, or are closed to the truth at all. I’d say you both surpass me in devotion. So, while I totally disagree with you re gays, and this issue, I think what you are doing at Zac’s place shows your heart for God and for people.

    And i’ve said so before.

    But, if you didn’t notice me disagreeing with the God-despiser thing, it’s probably my fault for writing too many posts come to think of it.

    ps. I don’t really mind if people call me a God-despiser, or not interested in the truth or idiot. This blog has desensitized me! 🙂

    btw guys, maybe this is evidence that I’m the real God-despiser…..but, I probably won’t comment much tonight on this or any other religious/spiritual matters.. And it’s not because of a prayer meeting. I’m an unashamed Blues-despiser!

    pps, I AM reading your posts – so I’m more open to truth than you think.

    Peace

  44. Btw Brown Nose calling me a God Despiser just proves to me he has nfi. Like being called an infidel by a Muslim or a pelagian/socinian/marcionite hybrid, scripture undermining/denying/twisting, neo-liberal deconstructionist emergent heretic by someone who could be a JW for all I know.

  45. Bones,
    Hamas no longer says Israel has no right to exist.

    I hadn’t heard that. Could you show me where they signed up to that? As far as I know that s still e sticking point. Netanyahu has said he’ll stop he settlements and even yield lands to the Palestinians if they’ll at least recognise Israel’s right to existence.

    If that’s true it’s a very recent development.

    Evidence please…

  46. You are sometimes such a nasty piece of work, Bones, I’m sad to say.

    Nowhere have I said any of the things you attribute to me on his issue.

    I am saying that you are over-political in your attitude to Israel. I am not condoning the wrong things they have done.

    I am not against Palestinians. I am against Hamas, and the former Fatah, who were oh terrorist organisation bent on the destruction of Israel, and, to a large extent still are.

    I am saying that Fatah and Hamas have held their own people to ransom for too long and it would be better for al if they were dismantled, but since Hamas has largely eliminated dissidents there are not a whole lot of alternatives in Gaza.

    I am saying, and have stated on this thread, that Palestinian Christians are the meat in the sandwich, which is a tragedy. They are treated just as badly by Hamas as they are by extreme Israelis.

    They are the most targeted of groups in Israel, but how many still exist in Gaza?

    I am saying this is a terrible situation, but blaming Israel for everything is simply ignorant.

    And the real deal is your hatred of the US, and especially US Christians, which why I poured such scorn on your use of Theocracy Watch as a source. They’re not biased are they?!

    Finally, this will not be resolved until Jesus comes, and does have clear Biblical implications, but you have made it apparent that you spit on Biblical prophecy and the way some Christians view it.

    Your activism is completely political. It has no compassion, only hatred. It has no Christian backing, only the dismissal of those you detest.

  47. I’m not a God-despiser but I do despise the god of Roundhouse. A devisive hateful fearful god which is a projection of his own sub-concious. If Roundhouse is saved then I dont want to be. I’d rather spend an eternity in a lake of fire being fed molten lead by demons with pitch-forks than end up in the same place as Roundhouse.

  48. Hamas has accepted Israel’s right to exist and would be prepared to nullify its charter, which calls for the destruction of Israel, Aziz Dwaik, Hamas’s most senior representative in the West Bank, said on Wednesday. Dwaik’s remarks are seen in the context of Hamas’s attempts to win recognition from the international community.

    Dwaik is the elected speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council. He was released a few months ago after spending nearly three years in an Israeli prison.

    Dwaik was among dozens of Hamas officials and members who were rounded up by Israel following the abduction of IDF soldier St.-Sgt. Gilad Schalit near the Gaza Strip in June 2006.

    His latest remarks were made during a meeting he held in Hebron with British millionaire David Martin Abrahams, who maintains close ties with senior Israeli and British government officials.

    Abrahams is scheduled to brief British Foreign Secretary David Milliband this weekend on the outcome of his meeting with Dwaik and other top Hamas officials in the West Bank.

    Abrahams, a major donor to Britain’s Labor Party, told The Jerusalem Post he would urge Milliband to “consider the implications of Hamas’s positive overtures.”

    During the meeting in Hebron, Dwaik stressed that other Hamas leaders, including Damascus-based leader Khaled Mashaal and Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, have voiced support for the idea of establishing an independent Palestinian state within the pre-1967 boundaries.

    “The [Hamas] charter was drafted more than 20 years ago,” Dwaik noted, adding that his movement would even be prepared to “nullify” the document.

    “No one wants to throw anyone into the sea,” he said.

    Dwaik also expressed Hamas’s desire to engage in dialogue with the international community, first and foremost the European Union. He confirmed that Hamas was receiving financial aid from Iran, but said that this was the direct result of the boycott and sanctions against the movement.

    Abrahams said that he would be happy to facilitate a dialogue between Hamas on the one hand, and Israel and the international community on the other. He said he was “very excited” to hear from the most prominent leader of Hamas in the West Bank that the movement would be prepared to nullify its charter and accept Israel.

    “The fact that there is a possibility for recognition of Israel is a symbolic gesture,” Abrahams added. “We can all look for good in people and we can all look for bad in people. I always look for the good.”

    Asked whether he might be condemned as naïve for believing Hamas, Abrahams said, “People might say that I’m naïve, so let them. But I’m prepared to give them [Hamas] a chance because I’ve got faith and confidence in Dwaik and Haniyeh. We can’t allow 1.5 million to be festering in the Gaza Strip while the majority of them are good and well-educated.”

    Abrahams said that his decision to engage Hamas was aimed at “preventing bloodshed on both sides.” He said he was encouraged by the massive support he found among the Jewish community in Britain for the idea of talking to Hamas.

    “I recently published an article in the Jewish Chronicle to test the temperature of the water within the Jewish community about Hamas,” he said. “I found a lot of support among Jews for dealing with Hamas and I was pleasantly surprised.”

    Denying that he had delivered any message from the British government or the EU leadership to Hamas, Abrahams said he was convinced more than ever that the movement posed no threat to the US. “Hamas is different from al-Qaida,” he said. “Hamas is no threat to Western interests.”

    Some consider Dwaik, as speaker of the PLC, to be the acting president of the Palestinian Authority, since Mahmoud Abbas’s term officially expired on January 9. Dwaik himself has said that he is content to let Abbas continue in office until the election that is now scheduled for June 28, 2010

    http://matzav.com/hamas-accepts-israels-right-to-exist

  49. Greg, Ps Hewitt is probably a wonderful man with a big activist heart, but that doesn’t make his activism either accurate or right. There are activists on both sides who live in Jerusalem or thereabouts. That means nothing if their politics and basic beliefs are one-sided.

    I think he is great to expose some of the issues, but the mere fact that he is able to oppose Israel and live there at the same time should tell you something about their democracy.

    If he did the same in Gaza against Hamas, what would you think would be the outcome? Would he last more than five minutes? I doubt it. That should send a clear message to you about Israel, right there. There are many dissident voices in Israel, Israelis included. But are they silenced? No. They even get into the Parliament.

    Try that in Gaza!

    And what the hang has Phil Pringle or Brian Houston to do with anything?

    I find your constant attempt at some rank equivalence with Pentecostalism, C3 or Hillsong extremely offensive and unnecessary, frankly.

    Grow up!

  50. wazza2 says:

    July 4, 2012 at 3:33 pm

    Im not asleep. Let that one through, but am keeping a close eye on snozzas comments. Have blocked 3.

    Hey wazza,., religious maniacs are raping kids and getting away with it because the rapists activities are deleted by people who have the power to print the contents of these crimes.
    Are you intelligent enough to decipher the meaning of that or do you run and hit the delete button.
    I admire being called an anti semite because it’s my right to hate jews who murder babies in the arms of their mothers in gaza and continually commit war crimes that go unpunished.
    I care about people deleting the truth about todays jewish crimes against humanity while todays jews try to gain sympathy for the crimes done against jews last century.

    they lost my sympathy long ago

    I prefer to tell all truth all the time

  51. Your report is encouraging, Bones, but it is the view of one, admittedly very influential, Hamas member. It is two years old. Has anything changed in reality?

    I asked for the treaty which was signed to declare this. What are the developments from this statement?

    One of the commenters on the blog you quoted said something poignant which sums a few things up:

    What’s really going on here?
    Also the fact that the world at large “is pleased” that Israel “has the right to exist” makes me ill. Do countries typically need to apply for a right-to-exist permit? if it’s denied do you need to stop existing !?

  52. And the real deal is your hatred of the US, and especially US Christians, which why I poured such scorn on your use of Theocracy Watch as a source.

    I’ve no problem with the US except for the nuttier elements of the Christian right who are the ones seeking to influence government policy based on their theology.

    Settlements and mass immigration of Jews have been financed by Christians. That’s a fact. Are you disputing that?

    I am not against Israel. I am against settlements and the denial of basic human rights to Christians and Muslims.

    btw Catholics and Palestinians would say you’re a nasty piece of work. Just like you do with Zorro and me.

    It’s all pretty subjective really.

  53. Boo Hoo Bones. You go all “poor me you don’t know me”, and then continue to vomit the most foul stuff at me and at everyone who doesn’t fit into your warped world-view. You’re some piece of work. So you know some Lebanese Christians. So what. So do I. I also know some Jews who’s parents and grandparents were murdered just because they were Jewish. I see your Lebanese and raise you three Jews.

    It’s just so funny how you and Greg and wazza all cry “foul” when I point out your hypocrisy, yet your language on this site is far more foul and degrading than I have ever used here. Get off your pharisaic high-horses and have a look. There is documentary evidence all through this site how much Bones despises God’s chosen people, His children, and His word. Are you all blind????? And grow up Greg. You’re just as bad. You are not a church leader’s bootlace. You are a foul-mouthed bully running roughshod over anyone who disagrees with you. Sadly, because you have admin rights, you can easily delete any comments that I make, and will probably delete this one, which is I guess your right, but it doesn’t change the fact that you are a disgrace.

  54. Do countries typically need to apply for a right-to-exist permit? if it’s denied do you need to stop existing

    I wish, then maybe Palestine could have applied for one.

  55. Bones,
    It’s all pretty subjective really.

    No, no. You miss the point, again. What is singling you out as a nasty piece of work at times is the way you knowingly falsified things both Q and I said and believe to suit your argument, and then shot us down for holding those alleged and supposed views.

    That is downright wicked and not at all in any way decent, Christian behaviour.

  56. The Palestinians were accorded the right to a homeland in 1948 along with Israel.

    It was not the fault of Israel that their neighbours subsequently decided to obliterate them from the map several times, with the consequence that israel extended its borders and held off the wolves.

    Gaza is run by Gazans, and the West bank by Palestinians. The Al Aqsa Mosque is exclusively palestinian. Half of Jerusalem is Palestinian. Most of the merchants in Jerusalem are Palestinian and sell their goods to tourists, many of whom are Christian.

    The churches are open in Jerusalem. You can even visit all the Catholic shrines in Palestinian run nazareth and Bethlehem. You can visit and float in the Dead Sea.

    You can bath and bask in the sun in Tel Aviv.

    What you can’t do is transport suicide bombers from Gaza to Israel.

    If you’re Israeli it’s no a smart thing to live close to the border with Gaza within range of their rockets.

  57. That is downright wicked and not at all in any way decent, Christian behaviour.

    Oh like I’d rather take my kids to gay bar than a Pentie church.

    Gotcha chief.

  58. Well, put it like this, Bones, the way you argue deflates your own argument. I’ll listen to what you have to say if you at least treat me as human, but if your character is in my face all the time with slander, jibes and pokes I’ll miss what you’re trying to say.

  59. Brown Nose, Jesus and the prophets spoke specifically about you. The ones who hate justice and tolerate injustice and the victimisation of the weak.

    Nothing to see here folks. Just Zionists throwing Christians out of their homes and land. Nothing to worry about at all.

    You are a Christ hater and I shall say it again – a nutbag.

  60. That’s why I think Roundhouse has already lost his argument by calling you a God-despiser. Whatever he might say that is right won’t be heard because of what is wrong about his methodology and lack of respect.

  61. And of course the original thread is whether or not Christians should financially support Israel, not Hamas, who are Islamic nutbags.

    As I have argued supporting Israel only leads to more persecution for Palestinian Christians.

    I’m still waiting for a counterargument.

    Name calling is not an argument.

  62. Oh and the Origins of the Palestine-Israel Conflict
    by Jews For Justice in the Middle East

    As the periodic bloodshed continues in the Middle East, the search for an equitable solution must come to grips with the root cause of the conflict. The conventional wisdom is that, even if both sides are at fault, the Palestinians are irrational “terrorists” who have no point of view worth listening to. Our position, however, is that the Palestinians have a real grievance: their homeland for over a thousand years was taken, without their consent and mostly by force, during the creation of the state of Israel. And all subsequent crimes — on both sides — inevitably follow from this original injustice.

    This paper outlines the history of Palestine to show how this process occurred and what a moral solution to the region’s problems should consist of. If you care about the people of the Middle East, Jewish and Arab, you owe it to yourself to read this account of the other side of the historical record.

    Introduction

    The standard Zionist position is that they showed up in Palestine in the late 19th century to reclaim their ancestral homeland. Jews bought land and started building up the Jewish community there. They were met with increasingly violent opposition from the Palestinian Arabs, presumably stemming from the Arabs’ inherent anti-Semitism. The Zionists were then forced to defend themselves and, in one form or another, this same situation continues up to today.

    The problem with this explanation is that it is simply not true, as the documentary evidence in this booklet will show. What really happened was that the Zionist movement, from the beginning, looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the indigenous Arab population so that Israel could be a wholly Jewish state, or as much as was possible. Land bought by the Jewish National Fund was held in the name of the Jewish people and could never be sold or even leased back to Arabs (a situation which continues to the present).

    The Arab community, as it became increasingly aware of the Zionists’ intentions, strenuously opposed further Jewish immigration and land buying because it posed a real and imminent danger to the very existence of Arab society in Palestine. Because of this opposition, the entire Zionist project never could have been realized without the military backing of the British. The vast majority of the population of Palestine, by the way, had been Arabic since the seventh century A.D. (Over 1200 years)

    In short, Zionism was based on a faulty, colonialist world view that the rights of the indigenous inhabitants didn’t matter. The Arabs’ opposition to Zionism wasn’t based on anti-Semitism but rather on a totally reasonable fear of the dispossession of their people.

    One further point: being Jewish ourselves, the position we present here is critical of Zionism but is in no way anti-Semitic. We do not believe that the Jews acted worse than any other group might have acted in their situation. The Zionists (who were a distinct minority of the Jewish people until after WWII) had an understandable desire to establish a place where Jews could be masters of their own fate, given the bleak history of Jewish oppression. Especially as the danger to European Jewry crystalized in the late 1930’s and after, the actions of the Zionists were propelled by real desperation.

    But so were the actions of the Arabs. The mythic “land without people for a people without land” was already home to 700,000 Palestinians in 1919. This is the root of the problem, as we shall see.

    Was Arab opposition to the arrival of Zionists based on inherent anti-Semitism or a real sense of danger to their community?

    “The aim of the [Jewish National] Fund was ‘to redeem the land of Palestine as the inalienable possession of the Jewish people.’…As early as 1891, Zionist leader Ahad Ha’am wrote that the Arabs “understood very well what we were doing and what we were aiming at’…[Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, stated] ‘We shall try to spirit the penniless [Arab] population across the border by procuring employment for it in transit countries, while denying it employment in our own country… Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly’…At various locations in northern Palestine Arab farmers refused to move from land the Fund purchased from absentee owners, and the Turkish authorities, at the Fund’s request, evicted them…The indigenous Jews of Palestine also reacted negatively to Zionism. They did not see the need for a Jewish state in Palestine and did not want to exacerbate relations with the Arabs.” John Quigley, “Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice.”

    Inherent anti-Semitism? — continued

    “Before the 20th century, most Jews in Palestine belonged to old Yishuv, or community, that had settled more for religious than for political reasons. There was little if any conflict between them and the Arab population. Tensions began after the first Zionist settlers arrived in the 1880’s…when [they] purchased land from absentee Arab owners, leading to dispossession of the peasants who had cultivated it.” Don Peretz, “The Arab-Israeli Dispute.”

    Inherent anti-Semitism? — continued

    “[During the Middle Ages,] North Africa and the Arab Middle East became places of refuge and a haven for the persecuted Jews of Spain and elsewhere…In the Holy Land…they lived together in [relative] harmony, a harmony only disrupted when the Zionists began to claim that Palestine was the ‘rightful’ possession of the ‘Jewish people’ to the exclusion of its Moslem and Christian inhabitants.” Sami Hadawi, “Bitter Harvest.”

    Jews attitude towards Arabs when reaching Palestine.

    “Serfs they (the Jews) were in the lands of the Diaspora, and suddenly they find themselves in freedom [in Palestine]; and this change has awakened in them an inclination to despotism. They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause, and even boast of these deeds; and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination.” Zionist writer Ahad Ha’am, quoted in Sami Hadawi, “Bitter Harvest.”

    Proposals for Arab-Jewish Cooperation

    “An article by Yitzhak Epstein, published in Hashiloah in 1907…called for a new Zionist policy towards the Arabs after 30 years of settlement activity…Like Ahad-Ha’am in 1891, Epstein claims that no good land is vacant, so Jewish settlement meant Arab dispossession…Epstein’s solution to the problem, so that a new “Jewish question” may be avoided, is the creation of a bi-national, non-exclusive program of settlement and development. Purchasing land should not involve the dispossession of poor sharecroppers. It should mean creating a joint farming community, where the Arabs will enjoy modern technology. Schools, hospitals and libraries should be non-exclusivist and education bilingual…The vision of non-exclusivist, peaceful cooperation to replace the practice of dispossession found few takers. Epstein was maligned and scorned for his faintheartedness.” Israeli author, Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, “Original Sins.”

    Was Palestine the only, or even preferred, destination of Jews facing persecution when the Zionist movement started?

    “The pogroms forced many Jews to leave Russia. Societies known as ‘Lovers of Zion,’ which were forerunners of the Zionist organization, convinced some of the frightened emigrants to go to Palestine. There, they argued, Jews would rebuild the ancient Jewish ‘Kingdom of David and Solomon,’ Most Russian Jews ignored their appeal and fled to Europe and the United States. By 1900, almost a million Jews had settled in the United States alone.” “Our Roots Are Still Alive” by The People Press Palestine Book Project.

    he British Mandate Period
    1920-1948

    The Balfour Declaration promises a Jewish Homeland in Palestine.

    “The Balfour Declaration, made in November 1917 by the British Government…was made a) by a European power, b) about a non-European territory, c) in flat disregard of both the presence and wishes of the native majority resident in that territory…[As Balfour himself wrote in 1919], ‘The contradiction between the letter of the Covenant (the Anglo French Declaration of 1918 promising the Arabs of the former Ottoman colonies that as a reward for supporting the Allies they could have their independence) is even more flagrant in the case of the independent nation of Palestine than in that of the independent nation of Syria. For in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country…The four powers are committed to Zionism and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desire and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land,’” Edward Said, “The Question of Palestine.”

    Wasn’t Palestine a wasteland before the Jews started immigrating there?

    “Britain’s high commissioner for Palestine, John Chancellor, recommended total suspension of Jewish immigration and land purchase to protect Arab agriculture. He said ‘all cultivable land was occupied; that no cultivable land now in possession of the indigenous population could be sold to Jews without creating a class of landless Arab cultivators’…The Colonial Office rejected the recommendation.” John Quigley, “Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice.”

    Were the early Zionists planning on living side by side with Arabs?

    In 1919, the American King-Crane Commission spent six weeks in Syria and Palestine, interviewing delegations and reading petitions. Their report stated, “The commissioners began their study of Zionism with minds predisposed in its favor…The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission’s conferences with Jewish representatives that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine, by various forms of purchase…

    “If [the] principle [of self-determination] is to rule, and so the wishes of Palestine’s population are to be decisive as to what is to be done with Palestine, then it is to be remembered that the non-Jewish population of Palestine — nearly nine-tenths of the whole — are emphatically against the entire Zionist program.. To subject a people so minded to unlimited Jewish immigration, and to steady financial and social pressure to surrender the land, would be a gross violation of the principle just quoted…No British officers, consulted by the Commissioners, believed that the Zionist program could be carried out except by force of arms.The officers generally thought that a force of not less than fifty thousand soldiers would be required even to initiate the program. That of itself is evidence of a strong sense of the injustice of the Zionist program…The initial claim, often submitted by Zionist representatives, that they have a ‘right’ to Palestine based on occupation of two thousand years ago, can barely be seriously considered.” Quoted in “The Israel-Arab Reader” ed. Laquer and Rubin.

    Side by side — continued

    “Zionist land policy was incorporated in the Constitution of the Jewish Agency for Palestine…’land is to be acquired as Jewish property and..the title to the lands acquired is to be taken in the name of the Jewish National Fund, to the end that the same shall be held as the inalienable property of the Jewish people.’ The provision goes to stipulate that ‘the Agency shall promote agricultural colonization based on Jewish labor’…The effect of this Zionist colonization policy on the Arabs was that land acquired by Jews became extra-territorialized. It ceased to be land from which the Arabs could ever hope to gain any advantage…

    “The Zionists made no secret of their intentions, for as early as 1921, Dr. Eder, a member of the Zionist Commission, boldly told the Court of Inquiry, ‘there can be only one National Home in Palestine, and that a Jewish one, and no equality in the partnership between Jews and Arabs, but a Jewish preponderance as soon as the numbers of the race are sufficiently increased.’ He then asked that only Jews should be allowed to bear arms.” Sami Hadawi, “Bitter Harvest.”

    Given Arab opposition to them, did the Zionists support steps towards majority rule in Palestine?

    “Clearly, the last thing the Zionists really wanted was that all the inhabitants of Palestine should have an equal say in running the country… [Chaim] Weizmann had impressed on Churchill that representative government would have spelled the end of the [Jewish] National Home in Palestine… [Churchill declared,] ‘The present form of government will continue for many years. Step by step we shall develop representative institutions leading to full self-government, but our children’s children will have passed away before that is accomplished.’” David Hirst, “The Gun and the Olive Branch.”

    Denial of the Arabs’ right to self-determination

    “Even if nobody lost their land, the [Zionist] program was unjust in principle because it denied majority political rights… Zionism, in principle, could not allow the natives to exercise their political rights because it would mean the end of the Zionist enterprise.” Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, “Original Sins.”

    Arab resistance to Pre-Israeli Zionism

    “In 1936-9, the Palestinian Arabs attempted a nationalist revolt… David Ben-Gurion, eminently a realist, recognized its nature. In internal discussion, he noted that ‘in our political argument abroad, we minimize Arab opposition to us,’ but he urged, ‘let us not ignore the truth among ourselves.’ The truth was that ‘politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country, while we are still outside’… The revolt was crushed by the British, with considerable brutality.” Noam Chomsky, “The Fateful Triangle.”

    Gandhi on the Palestine conflict — 1938

    “Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French…What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct…If they [the Jews] must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs… As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regard as an unacceptable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.” Mahatma Gandhi, quoted in “A Land of Two Peoples” ed. Mendes-Flohr.

    Didn’t the Zionists legally buy much of the land before Israel was established?

    “In 1948, at the moment that Israel declared itself a state, it legally owned a little more than 6 percent of the land of Palestine…After 1940, when the mandatory authority restricted Jewish land ownership to specific zones inside Palestine, there continued to be illegal buying (and selling) within the 65 percent of the total area restricted to Arabs.

    Thus when the partition plan was announced in 1947 it included land held illegally by Jews, which was incorporated as a fait accompli inside the borders of the Jewish state. And after Israel announced its statehood, an impressive series of laws legally assimilated huge tracts of Arab land (whose proprietors had become refugees, and were pronounced ‘absentee landlords’ in order to expropriate their lands and prevent their return under any circumstances).” Edward Said, “The Question of Palestine.”

    The UN Partition of Palestine

    Why did the UN recommend the plan partitioning Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state?

    “By this time [November 1947] the United States had emerged as the most aggressive proponent of partition…The United States got the General Assembly to delay a vote ‘to gain time to bring certain Latin American republics into line with its own views.’…Some delegates charged U.S. officials with ‘diplomatic intimidation.’ Without ‘terrific pressure’ from the United States on ‘governments which cannot afford to risk American reprisals,’ said an anonymous editorial writer, the resolution ‘would never have passed.’” John Quigley, “Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice.”

    Why was this Truman’s position?

    “I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.” President Harry Truman, quoted in “Anti Zionism”, ed. by Teikener, Abed-Rabbo & Mezvinsky.

    Was the partition plan fair to both Arabs and Jews?

    “Arab rejection was…based on the fact that, while the population of the Jewish state was to be [only half] Jewish with the Jews owning less than 10% of the Jewish state land area, the Jews were to be established as the ruling body — a settlement which no self-respecting people would accept without protest, to say the least…The action of the United Nations conflicted with the basic principles for which the world organization was established, namely, to uphold the right of all peoples to self-determination. By denying the Palestine Arabs, who formed the two-thirds majority of the country, the right to decide for themselves, the United Nations had violated its own charter.” Sami Hadawi, “Bitter Harvest.”

    Were the Zionists prepared to settle for the territory granted in the 1947 partition?

    “While the Yishuv’s leadership formally accepted the 1947 Partition Resolution, large sections of Israel’s society — including…Ben-Gurion — were opposed to or extremely unhappy with partition and from early on viewed the war as an ideal opportunity to expand the new state’s borders beyond the UN earmarked partition boundaries and at the expense of the Palestinians.” Israeli historian, Benny Morris, in “Tikkun”, March/April 1998.

    Public vs private pronouncements on this question.

    “In internal discussion in 1938 [David Ben-Gurion] stated that ‘after we become a strong force, as a result of the creation of a state, we shall abolish partition and expand into the whole of Palestine’…In 1948, Menachem Begin declared that: ‘The partition of the Homeland is illegal. It will never be recognized. The signature of institutions and individuals of the partition agreement is invalid. It will not bind the Jewish people. Jerusalem was and will forever be our capital. Eretz Israel (the land of Israel) will be restored to the people of Israel, All of it. And forever.” Noam Chomsky, “The Fateful Triangle.”

    The war begins

    “In December 1947, the British announced that they would withdraw from Palestine by May 15, 1948. Palestinians in Jerusalem and Jaffa called a general strike against the partition. Fighting broke out in Jerusalem’s streets almost immediately…Violent incidents mushroomed into all-out war…During that fateful April of 1948, eight out of thirteen major Zionist military attacks on Palestinians occurred in the territory granted to the Arab state.” “Our Roots Are Still Alive” by the People Press Palestine Book Project.

    Zionists’ disrespect of partition boundaries

    “Before the end of the mandate and, therefore before any possible intervention by Arab states, the Jews, taking advantage of their superior military preparation and organization, had occupied…most of the Arab cities in Palestine before May 15, 1948. Tiberias was occupied on April 19, 1948, Haifa on April 22, Jaffa on April 28, the Arab quarters in the New City of Jerusalem on April 30, Beisan on May 8, Safad on May 10 and Acre on May 14, 1948…In contrast, the Palestine Arabs did not seize any of the territories reserved for the Jewish state under the partition resolution.” British author, Henry Cattan, “Palestine, The Arabs and Israel.”

    Culpability for escalation of the fighting

    “Menahem Begin, the Leader of the Irgun, tells how ‘in Jerusalem, as elsewhere, we were the first to pass from the defensive to the offensive…Arabs began to flee in terror…Hagana was carrying out successful attacks on other fronts, while all the Jewish forces proceeded to advance through Haifa like a knife through butter’…The Israelis now allege that the Palestine war began with the entry of the Arab armies into Palestine after 15 May 1948. But that was the second phase of the war; they overlook the massacres, expulsions and dispossessions which took place prior to that date and which necessitated Arab states’ intervention.” Sami Hadawi, “Bitter Harvest.”

    The Deir Yassin Massacre of Palestinians by Jewish soldiers

    “For the entire day of April 9, 1948, Irgun and LEHI soldiers carried out the slaughter in a cold and premeditated fashion…The attackers ‘lined men, women and children up against the walls and shot them,’…The ruthlessness of the attack on Deir Yassin shocked Jewish and world opinion alike, drove fear and panic into the Arab population, and led to the flight of unarmed civilians from their homes all over the country.” Israeli author, Simha Flapan, “The Birth of Israel.”

    Was Deir Yassin the only act of its kind?

    “By 1948, the Jew was not only able to ‘defend himself’ but to commit massive atrocities as well. Indeed, according to the former director of the Israeli army archives, ‘in almost every village occupied by us during the War of Independence, acts were committed which are defined as war crimes, such as murders, massacres, and rapes’…Uri Milstein, the authoritative Israeli military historian of the 1948 war, goes one step further, maintaining that ‘every skirmish ended in a massacre of Arabs.’” Norman Finkelstein, “Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict.”

    tatehood and Expulsion
    1948

    What was the Arab reaction to the announcement of the creation of the state of Israel?

    “The armies of the Arab states entered the war immediately after the State of Israel was founded in May. Fighting continued, almost all of it within the territory assigned to the Palestinian state…About 700,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled in the 1948 conflict.” Noam Chomsky, “The Fateful Triangle.”

    Was the part of Palestine assigned to a Jewish state in mortal danger from the Arab armies?

    “The Arab League hastily called for its member countries to send regular army troops into Palestine. They were ordered to secure only the sections of Palestine given to the Arabs under the partition plan. But these regular armies were ill equipped and lacked any central command to coordinate their efforts…[Jordan’s King Abdullah] promised [the Israelis and the British] that his troops, the Arab Legion, the only real fighting force among the Arab armies, would avoid fighting with Jewish settlements…Yet Western historians record this as the moment when the young state of Israel fought off “the overwhelming hordes’ of five Arab countries. In reality, the Israeli offensive against the Palestinians intensified.” “Our Roots Are Still Alive,” by the Peoples Press Palestine Book Project.

    Ethnic cleansing of the Arab population of Palestine

    “Joseph Weitz was the director of the Jewish National Land Fund…On December 19, 1940, he wrote: ‘It must be clear that there is no room for both peoples in this country…The Zionist enterprise so far…has been fine and good in its own time, and could do with ‘land buying’ — but this will not bring about the State of Israel; that must come all at once, in the manner of a Salvation (this is the secret of the Messianic idea); and there is no way besides transferring the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, to transfer them all; except maybe for Bethlehem, Nazareth and Old Jerusalem, we must not leave a single village, not a single tribe’…There were literally hundreds of such statements made by Zionists.” Edward Said, “The Question of Palestine.”

    Ethnic cleansing — continued

    “Following the outbreak of 1936, no mainstream (Zionist) leader was able to conceive of future coexistence without a clear physical separation between the two peoples — achievable only by transfer and expulsion. Publicly they all continued to speak of coexistence and to attribute the violence to a small minority of zealots and agitators. But this was merely a public pose..Ben Gurion summed up: ‘With compulsory transfer we (would) have a vast area (for settlement)…I support compulsory transfer. I don’t see anything immoral in it,’” Israel historian, Benny Morris, “Righteous Victims.”

    Ethnic cleansing — continued

    “Ben-Gurion clearly wanted as few Arabs as possible to remain in the Jewish state. He hoped to see them flee. He said as much to his colleagues and aides in meetings in August, September and October [1948]. But no [general] expulsion policy was ever enunciated and Ben-Gurion always refrained from issuing clear or written expulsion orders; he preferred that his generals ‘understand’ what he wanted done. He wished to avoid going down in history as the ‘great expeller’ and he did not want the Israeli government to be implicated in a morally questionable policy…But while there was no ‘expulsion policy’, the July and October [1948] offensives were characterized by far more expulsions and, indeed, brutality towards Arab civilians than the first half of the war.” Benny Morris, “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949”

    Didn’t the Palestinians leave their homes voluntarily during the 1948 war?

    “Israeli propaganda has largely relinquished the claim that the Palestinian exodus of 1948 was ‘self-inspired’. Official circles implicitly concede that the Arab population fled as a result of Israeli action — whether directly, as in the case of Lydda and Ramleh, or indirectly, due to the panic that and similar actions (the Deir Yassin massacre) inspired in Arab population centers throughout Palestine. However, even though the historical record has been grudgingly set straight, the Israeli establishment still refused to accept moral or political responsibility for the refugee problem it — or its predecessors — actively created.” Peretz Kidron, quoted in “Blaming the Victims,” ed. Said and Hitchens.

    Arab orders to evacuate non-existent

    “The BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) monitored all Middle Eastern broadcasts throughout 1948. The records, and companion ones by a United States monitoring unit, can be seen at the British Museum. There was not a single order or appeal, or suggestion about evacuation from Palestine, from any Arab radio station, inside or outside Palestine, in 1948. There is a repeated monitored record of Arab appeals, even flat orders, to the civilians of Palestine to stay put.” Erskine Childers, British researcher, quoted in Sami Hadawi, “Bitter Harvest.”

    Ethnic cleansing — continued

    “That Ben-Gurion’s ultimate aim was to evacuate as much of the Arab population as possible from the Jewish state can hardly be doubted, if only from the variety of means he employed to achieve his purpose…most decisively, the destruction of whole villages and the eviction of their inhabitants…even [if] they had not participated in the war and had stayed in Israel hoping to live in peace and equality, as promised in the Declaration of Independence.” Israeli author, Simha Flapan, “The Birth of Israel.”

    The deliberate destruction of Arab villages to prevent return of Palestinians

    “During May [1948] ideas about how to consolidate and give permanence to the Palestinian exile began to crystallize, and the destruction of villages was immediately perceived as a primary means of achieving this aim…[Even earlier,] On 10 April, Haganah units took Abu Shusha… The village was destroyed that night… Khulda was leveled by Jewish bulldozers on 20 April… Abu Zureiq was completely demolished… Al Mansi and An Naghnaghiya, to the southeast, were also leveled. . .By mid-1949, the majority of [the 350 depopulated Arab villages] were either completely or partly in ruins and uninhabitable.” Benny Morris, “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, 1947-1949.

    After the fighting was over, why didn’t the Palestinians return to their homes?

    “The first UN General Assembly resolution—Number 194— affirming the right of Palestinians to return to their homes and property, was passed on December 11, 1948. It has been repassed no less than twenty-eight times since that first date. Whereas the moral and political right of a person to return to his place of uninterrupted residence is acknowledged everywhere, Israel has negated the possibility of return… [and] systematically and juridically made it impossible, on any grounds whatever, for the Arab Palestinian to return, be compensated for his property, or live in Israel as a citizen equal before the law with a Jewish Israeli.” Edward Said, “The Question of Palestine.”

    Is there any justification for this expropriation of land?

    “The fact that the Arabs fled in terror, because of real fear of a repetition of the 1948 Zionist massacres, is no reason for denying them their homes, fields and livelihoods. Civilians caught in an area of military activity generally panic. But they have always been able to return to their homes when the danger subsides. Military conquest does not abolish private rights to property; nor does it entitle the victor to confiscate the homes, property and personal belongings of the noncombatant civilian population. The seizure of Arab property by the Israelis was an outrage.” Sami Hadawi, “Bitter Harvest.”

    How about the negotiations after the 1948-1949 wars?

    “[At Lausanne,] Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinians were trying to save by negotiations what they had lost in the war—a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Israel, however… [preferred] tenuous armistice agreements to a definite peace that would involve territorial concessions and the repatriation of even a token number of refugees. The refusal to recognize the Palestinians’ right to self-determination and statehood proved over the years to be the main source of the turbulence, violence, and bloodshed that came to pass.” Israeli author, Simha Flapan, “The Birth Of Israel.”

    Israel admitted to UN but then reneged on the conditions under which it was admitted

    “The [Lausanne] conference officially opened on 27 April 1949. On 12 May the [UN’s] Palestine Conciliation ,Committee reaped its only success when it induced the parties to sign a joint protocol on the framework for a comprehensive peace. . Israel for the first time accepted the principle of repatriation [of the Arab refugees] and the internationalization of Jerusalem. . .[but] they did so as a mere exercise in public relations aimed at strengthening Israel’s international image…Walter Eytan, the head of the Israeli delegation, [stated]..’My main purpose was to begin to undermine the protocol of 12 May, which we had signed only under duress of our struggle for admission to the U.N. Refusal to sign would…have immediately been reported to the Secretary-General and the various governments.’” Israeli historian, Ilan Pappe, “The Making of the Arab-Israel Conflict, 1947-1951.”

    Israeli admission to the U.N.— continued

    “The Preamble of this resolution of admission included a safeguarding clause as follows: ‘Recalling its resolution of 29 November 1947 (on partition) and 11 December 1948 (on reparation and compensation), and taking note of the declarations and explanations made by the representative of the Government of Israel before the ad hoc Political Committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions, the General Assembly…decides to admit Israel into membership in the United Nations.’

    “Here, it must be observed, is a condition and an undertaking to implement the resolutions mentioned. There was no question of such implementation being conditioned on the conclusion of peace on Israeli terms as the Israelis later claimed to justify their non-compliance.” Sami Hadawi, “Bitter Harvest.”

    What was the fate of the Palestinians who had now become refugees?

    “The winter of 1949, the first winter of exile for more than seven hundred fifty thousand Palestinians, was cold and hard…Families huddled in caves, abandoned huts, or makeshift tents…Many of the starving were only miles away from their own vegetable gardens and orchards in occupied Palestine — the new state of Israel…At the end of 1949 the United Nations finally acted. It set up the United Nations Relief and Works Administration (UNRWA) to take over sixty refugee camps from voluntary agencies. It managed to keep people alive, but only barely.” “Our Roots Are Still Alive” by The Peoples Press Palestine Book Project.

    http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/origin.html

  63. @ Margot

    About as dangerous as a Palestinian three month old.

    From your article

    But there has been continued tension between Palestinian villagers and hardline settlers, with regular skirmishes over the destruction of olive trees. Settlers have pledged to resist the evacuation of unauthorised outposts, which Netanyahu said last week would be completed by the end of this year.

    Itamar, home to around 100 families, is an intensely nationalist-religious isolated settlement deep inside the West Bank. Nationalist-religious Jews believe they have a divine right to the land irrespective of legal ownership.

    In Awata, Khalil Shurrab said that “many, many soldiers” had come in the early hours, going house to house to round up people suspected of involvement in the killings. Residents showed visitors spent tear gas canisters and rooms in houses that they said had been trashed by soldiers.

    Hilary Minch, a volunteer with a Christian monitoring group based near Nablus, said the army had used live ammunition and stun grenades. “The next 24 hours will be very tense,” she said. “The villagers fear retribution by the settlers.”

  64. Wazza, you are indeed a despiser of God – despite your protests to the contrary. You have demonstrated on this blog how you hate the God who is revealed in scripture.

    I dont know why you are so concerned about what people are going to be in heaven when you get there (rather presumptuous on your behalf) – the God, who you hate will be there. He will also be right there if you got to hell – except as your judge.

  65. Wazza, did you know that if you don’t blindly support Israel, you hate God?

    That should also mean if you aren’t a conservative right wing fundamentalist.

    If you aren’t one of those you don’t love God.

    If you support Obamacare, you don’t love God.

    So really we’re saved by works after all. All this nonsense about faith and scripture alone. When in reality we are saved by works and blindly following the goats.

    Maaaaa

  66. Just so you all know, False Conversion isn’t me. Thankfully someone else has finally seen what no one else has seen (or refuses to see) on this blog.

    @Steve, I am a little disappointed that even though I have explained several times why I am calling Bones God-despiser, you still seem to be sticking up for him and holding me accountable, which I find strange considering how often you have been at the sharp end of Bone’s abuse, name calling, scripture twisting and vitriol.

  67. @Roundhouse the answer to your question regarding Steve is simple – he is semi-pelagian (being generous) and rather dumb like a golden retriever (he likes anyone who throws him a bone).

  68. @False Conversion

    “Steve is simple”

    I disagree entirely. Steve has posted some of the most succinct and intelligent stuff on this entire blog. He knows his stuff, and can express it in ways that I cannot. He is not simple. I just think he is reluctant to give the others ammunition to fire back at him, although I have on occasion felt that he was really going to give them a serve, only to then pull back. I probably should take a leaf out of his book and do the same, but unfortunately my astonishment and gobsmackery (is there such a word? Well there should be) at most of the stuff written here causes me to write what I am feeling.

  69. Can someone give me an example of where I have twisted scripture?

    I find it strange that I am the God despiser given that throughout this thread I have pointed out how Jewish settlers and Orthodox Jews have persecuted Christians.

    And great contribution to the debate Round Head too. When you have something to offer beyond personal attacks let me know.

    But I won’t hold my breath.

  70. @Bones

    “Can someone give me an example of where I have twisted scripture”

    Perhaps the term I should have used was “despised” scripture.

    “When you have something to offer beyond personal attacks let me know.”

    Straight back at you big guy.

  71. Yeah right.

    You mean I haven’t twisted scripture the way you’re used to or like.

    Of course I haven’t contributed anything to this thread.

    And your response to Christians being kicked out of their homes so that Israelis can live as the Chosen People is…..

    lol @ False Conversion

    Seems Steve don’t love God either.

    Maybe no one on this thread loves God.

    Except False Conversion.

    Maybe he’s Jewish.

  72. “Steve has posted some of the most succinct and intelligent stuff on this entire blog.”

    Actually, Steve wishes that he could write even a tenth as succinctly and intelligently as do I, Roundhouse. He idolises Phil Pringle, and he consequently got very upset when I pointed out that I can run rings around Phil without so much as raising a sweat. Of course, what really raises Steve’s ire is the fact that he knows that it’s quite true, and as I have pointed out his anger is mingled with utter confusion that someone who is not a C3 pastor should be able to reason and write as I do. (It’s entirely contrary to the firmly-held C3 precept that only C3 “leaders” and their faithful lap dogs are God’s truly anointed; the rest of us are simply envious losers and disaffected wannabes).

    “He knows his stuff […]”

    He goes to C3 and he vigorously defends it. He knows nothing at all.

    “[…] and can express it in ways that I cannot.”

    Don’t feel too bad about that; facility with the language is not generally a hallmark of pentecostal adherents.

    “He is not simple.”

    No, he’s not. He’s wilfully blind, which is actually much worse.

  73. Bones, I’ll get back to you to tomorrow if that’s okay. Too “happy” about the game result if you know what I mean.

    Off the top of my head…..I think Israel is entitled to all the land they won when the surrounding countries attacked them.

    But, I want peace in Israel and Palestine, and don’t think that the settlements are helping. If I were a politician of influence I would oppose the settlements.

    But your comment about funny people on this thread i totally concur with.

    I don’t think Greg’s comment about Phil Pringle or Houston adds anything to the discussion.

    But for me the ultimate funny line is this.

    “Actually, Steve wishes that he could write even a tenth as succinctly and intelligently as do I”

    in the old days in Aussieland my grandad would say “don’t stand in the wind mate!”.

    something about tickets.

    See you guys tomorrow.

    I’ll leave you guys with this. You can beat each other up about who is right in this conflict – but basically, nobody has been able to come up with a solution. Nobody. Not the best political brains over the last 60 years. Obviously more. So I don’t think there’s much point in really attacking each other over this.

    To me it’s the biggest problem in the world, and successive heads of state haven’t been able to solve it.

    Bless you all

  74. See ya Q, you God hater you.

    (PS I know you don’t hate God, but I’m sure someone on here probably thinks you do and it’d be a shame for you to miss out)

  75. Roundhouse, thanks or your kind words.

    As to your protest, I’m not saying you don’t have a point in your consideration of Bones’ attitude towards God and scripture in particular. I am merely saying that you don’t add to your arguments, which are often sound, by ad hominem attacks, even if you fervently hold to them.

    I was saying the same to Bones, by the way, not just you, because his personal attacks and misrepresentation of what others say are frustrating at best, but I don’t think Bones is listening.

    Zorro, however, is just a mangy mongrel dog with fleas and ticks. That’s why he scratches about in his greasy fur so much and licks his privates with such self-appreciation.

    He didn’t even notice everyone else leave the room.

  76. Zorro,
    Actually, Steve wishes that he could write even a tenth as succinctly and intelligently as do I, Roundhouse.

    I don’t do wishing. If I did you’d become in reality what you are in essence – a vapour.

    Succinct: briefly and clearly expressed.

    The only things brief about your writing is the depth of substance and level of importance. Otherwise it’s all Roget’s and bluster.

    He idolises Phil Pringle, and he consequently got very upset when I pointed out that I can run rings around Phil without so much as raising a sweat.

    Idolises? A mere man saved by grace? Nope. I’m a God worshipper.

    Upset? The only thing upset is my stomach when I read some of your wordy, baseless piffle, especially over at Jake’s where your wolf-pack really are building a great case for defamation, especially your Kiwi mate MacDougall.

    Run rings? Why would you want to go round a man in circles? The only reason you don’t raise a sweat is that you can’t manage more than two circuits. You have fewer rings than 1950s door bell.

    And run rings around him at what? Preaching? Let’s hear a message. Painting? Let’s see an example. Pastoring? Show us where. Leading a church? Evidence. Leading anyone? Only astray. Overseeing a movement? Prove it today. Publishing Christ? I have yet to see it.

    Tiddy-winks? That I can believe. Bragging? Definitely. Boasting? Undoubtedly. I bet you’re really good at Hide-and-Seek, Snap and Pin-theTail-on-the Donkey, especially Hide-and-Seek, because that’s what you do on blogs.Hide behind anonymity and take pot-shots at believers.

    Of course, what really raises Steve’s ire is the fact that he knows that it’s quite true, and as I have pointed out his anger is mingled with utter confusion that someone who is not a C3 pastor should be able to reason and write as I do.

    Ire? Raised? I thought I’d actually demonstrated a firm and contemtuous dismissal of your sloppy attempts at provocation.

    Knows what is true? That you can run rings around someone at being an bigoted, self-appraising bore? No contest. You win.

    Utter confusion. Well, that is almost accurate. You are very confusing, but not for the reasons you’re outlining.

    I would be very dismayed if any C3 pastor wrote as you do. Indeed. I’m dismayed that you write as you do.
    ___________________________________

    Hey this is fun. What you do is take the words of another person and pull them apart in the most insulting way you can, and claim to be both intelligent and succinct.

    I mean, who’d dare to oppose your view if you were about to take whatever they write to pieces with ad hominem, evidence-lacking, poison letter attacks on their character no matter what they say? You’d have to be mad to attempt to respond to a hyper-smart, crushing ball dude like Zorro.

  77. @Zorro

    “I can run rings around Phil without so much as raising a sweat. ”

    So what international church movement do you run Zorro? How many thousands of people are in your church? How many thousands of people have you led to Jesus? How many invitations do you get to speak in churches around the world?

  78. The numbers game – “face palm”! 😦

    Seriously, this Pentecostal circuit is a goldmine for travelling speakers. And they never go outside of that circuit – check the itineraries of these guys (just for fun), it’s eye-opening…

  79. Off topic, but since we are taking about “celebrity preachers”, numbers and invitations, but I submit this comment by Carl Trueman, especially as the “routine” church describes ours exactly, and we are blessed to be there…..

    “ON CELEBRITY BUILT MEGACHURCHES; “Finally, I worry that a movement built on megachurches, megaconferences, and megaleaders does the church a disservice in one very important way that is often missed amid all the pizzazz and excitement: it creates the idea that church life is always going to be big, loud, and exhilarating, and thus gives church members and ministerial candidates unrealistic expectations of the normal Christian life. In the real world, many, perhaps most, of us worship and work in churches of a hundred people or fewer; life is not loud and exciting; big things do not happen every Sunday; budgets are incredibly tight and barely provide enough for a pastor’s modest salary; each Lord’s Day we go through the same routines of worship services, of hearing the gospel proclaimed, of taking the Lord’s Supper, of teaching Sunday School; perhaps several times a year we do leaflet drops in the neighborhood with very few results; at Christmastime we carol sing in the high street and hand out invitations to church, and maybe two or three people actually come along as a result; but no matter—we keep going, giving, and praying as we can; we try to be faithful in the little entrusted to us. It’s boring, it’s routine, and it’s the same, year in, year out. Therefore, in a world where excitement, celebrity, and cultural power are the ideal, it is tempting amid the circumstances of ordinary church life to forget that this, the routine of the ordinary, the boring, the plodding, is actually the norm for church life and has been so throughout most places for most of the history of the church; that mega-whatevers are the exception, not the rule; and that the church has survived throughout the ages not just—or even primarily—because of the high-profile fireworks displays of the great and the good, but because of the day-to-day faithfulness of the mundane, anonymous, nondescript people who constitute most of the church, and who do the grunt work and the tedious jobs that need to be done. History does not generally record their names, but the likelihood is that you worship in a church that owes everything, humanly speaking, to such people.” Carl Trueman

  80. @Steve

    “I am merely saying that you don’t add to your arguments, which are often sound, by ad hominem attacks, even if you fervently hold to them.”

    Yes, you’re right. The problem is that I usually check in here on my iPad at work, so I often don’t have the time to go into a full on argument or defence of a point, so a quick jab is often all I can contribute. But point taken.

  81. @Greg

    “Is that all you do Roundup? Wait for Steve to say something and then repeat it?”

    Actually I wrote it last night. I thought I’d hit send but didn’t and closed my laptop before I realised it wasn’t posted. Woke up this morning, realised it was still in the comments pane and so I hit send again. The fact that it matches Steve’s means we’re on the same page.

  82. So what international church movement do you run Zorro? How many thousands of people are in your church? How many thousands of people have you led to Jesus? How many invitations do you get to speak in churches around the world?

    Can we use that logic for Catholics too please?

    Except omit thousands and insert millions/billions.

  83. @Margot

    Thanks for that article. Sounds like that pastor has a touch of sour grapes and, dare I say it, jealousy towards the larger churches. Let me ask you, have you ever considered that God may have called some leaders to small churches where their influence will only ever extend to the hundred or so in their congregation, and yet others for international ministries where their message and influence can change nations? Not every minister is destined to be a Bill Johnson or a Joel Osteen. But because they aren’t does that make them more “holy” and those in the limelight less so? There are plenty of pastors wanting their church to be another Hillsong, when in reality God has a unique plan for their own church which doesn’t involve them producing hit albums and holding huge meetings at stadiums. But why is one good (i.e small churches), and the other not (i.e Hillsong etc)?

  84. @Bones

    “Can we use that logic for Catholics too please?

    Except omit thousands and insert millions/billions.”

    Sure. But what does that have to do with Zorro’s gigantic ego?

  85. Not every minister is destined to be a Bill Johnson or a Joel Osteen.

    Thank God for that.

    This is from C3′s Facebook or something.

    Presence 2011: Positioning For Power

    Bill Johnson preached on the Person of the Holy Spirit.

    Bill Johnson drew the congregation in further with his message to the Church “to broker or release the presence of the Holy Spirit on the earth.” He reminded the audience that the Holy Spirit was a Person and the Christian life was in essence to illustrate the manifestation of our relationship with the Holy Spirit just as Jesus did during His ministry on earth.

    Johnson stressed Jesus’ humanity—He performed those miracles as a mere mortal and not as God, as most would have thought. It is a compelling revelation that Jesus had set aside His divinity and put on the same restrictions that we as humans have. It was for the purpose of illustrating what man could do when he or she was in a right relationship with God through the Holy Spirit.

    http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150176338383806

    Must have been something about that Conference with Kong Hee and all.

  86. @ Roundhouse – major “face palm” !!

    http://www.wts.edu/faculty/profiles/trueman.html

    Seriously wish you would consider listening to some sound teaching or at least compare what your favourite “preachers” are saying, in the name of God, about the Word of God – truly compare what they say, to the word of God.

    I pray that guys like Osteen and Bill Johnson actually repent of THEIR false gospels and begin to use THEIR so-called “influence” to win THEIR false conversions to the true gospel of Christ and Him crucified.

    Not the sinless/powerless seeker friendly fairy-floss of Osteen – not the glory clouds, gold dust and feathers of Bill Johnson. And you would reject someone as considered as Carl Trueman (and other godly men who respect and treasure God’s Word) for the likes of these?

    With respect, I would hate to have someone accuse you of having “itching ears”, Roundhouse?

    By the way, do you think we would have left C3 if they were truly preaching the gospel? We had no other reason to leave……

  87. @Margot

    “sound teaching….false gospels….truly preaching the gospel”

    And what Gospel would that be? The T.U.L.I.P heresy?

  88. Being a Calvinist or an Arminian are non-salvific issues, Roundhouse.

    A false gospel cannot save. Preaching no gospel at all? Well, you know the answer to that….

  89. You would do well to research and learn the relationship between George Whitfield and John Wesley before you start throwing the “heresy” word around.

  90. Wesley (Arminian) of Whitfield (Calvinist)….

    Our hands, and hearts, and counsels let us join
    In mutual league, t’advance the work Divine,
    Our one contention now, our single aim,
    To pluck poor souls as brands out of the flame;
    To spread the victory of that bloody cross,
    And gasp our latest breath in the Redeemer’s cause.

    Osteen and Johnson? Just may be fuel for the fire, sadly….

  91. Seriously off topic again but thinking about Roundhouse’s approach to the presentation of God’s Word.

    Listening to a Steven Furtick sermon today and was reminded of a comment another guy made about Furtick’s preaching (on the offering of Isaac by Abraham in Genesis 22)

    “How in the world did Steven Furtick take that passage meant to teach us about GOD’S sacrifice for US, and turn it into what WE need to sacrifice for GOD (law)? How can these people ever have ANY peace in their life? How can their consciences ever give them any rest under this type of preaching?!? Why would they sit there week after week and have this enormous amount of guilt heaped upon them when they should be having their consciences cleansed by the reminder of the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ?!? And what a dishonoring thing to do with the precious Word of our gracious God.”

    That pretty much sums up what we heard for 22 years at C3, it’s what we hear when the likes of Brian houston, Joel osteen, Bill Johnson etc etc stand in pulpits, demonstrating that the Law always demands and is never satisfied, we can never check it off as accomplished or completed.

    They (Osteen, Johnson etc) ARE in rebellion for refusing to preach Christ from the biblical text, they preach themselves, at the same time making gospel passages into law passages!!

    The people listening either become very self-righteous believing they can somehow fulfill those (to quote Furtick) “audacious” requirements in how they view themselves and view others.

    Or they are left in despair, it just doesn’t work.

    They are “innoculated” against Christianity because they haven’t really heard the gospel and if they stay, they end up just “going throught the motions”.

    “Jesus wept” as my mum loved to say…..

  92. Ooohhhh!

    It looks like I’ve annoyed Steve this time.

    I’m glad that you C3 drones are so spirit-filled and that you’re not easily provoked; I’d hate to see how spitefully you might post if you *really* lost it.

    Have you managed yet to figure out how to admit that your fearless leader (a.k.a. “The Garbo”, a.k.a. “The Postman”) *doesn’t* have a PhD?

    Speaking of Phil, has he gone over to help Kong Hee? Maybe he’ll need to get himself a degree in forensic accounting as his next little project; I do hope he doesn’t get any honey stuck to his own fingers (it’s quite the professional hazard for self-professed pentecostal “pastors”, isn’t it, Steve?)

  93. “So what international church movement do you run Zorro? How many thousands of people are in your church? How many thousands of people have you led to Jesus? How many invitations do you get to speak in churches around the world?”

    Dear, oh, dear, Roundhouse.

    Shouldn’t you be out helping King David to number his fighting men?

    (Note for Steve: just in case you find it difficult to spot, that is an example of succinctness).

  94. No, Bones, I’ll give this discussion a miss. Too hard for me.
    But I wouldn’t go to the Middles East to fight on behalf of either side, and wouldn’t want my son going there either.

    But if a group of Christians can’t discuss theology with insults and personal attacks, I don’t have any hopes for Middle East peace happening any day soon.

    So, I’ll bow out.

  95. Z,
    that is an example of succinctness

    I would have said it was an example of try hard.

    The man who has to boast on his own achievements has none.

  96. try hard

    It’s a bit like telling a joke nobody gets and nobody laughs at and trying to explain why it’s funny.

    Better to give it up while you can.

  97. @Zorro

    “Shouldn’t you be out helping King David to number his fighting men?”

    Shouldn’t you be addressing the question instead of throwing distractions? So, how many is it that you’ve led to Jesus? Hundreds? Thousands? None?

    Tell you what – when you have done the hard yards, started a church from scratch, sacrificed your career, and dedicated your life to preaching the gospel and saving the lost, then I will place some credence on what you write. In the mean time, I will just view you as another chronic criticiser with a titanic, self-inflated opinion of himself.

  98. @Margot

    I am trying to ascertain what gospel you are talking about. Is the gospel you refer to the one where they are told they are wicked sinners destined for eternal damnation in the fires of Hell unless they accept Jesus, but they have no choice in it anyway because God has already “predestined” them, but sadly not their neighbours and friends who are destined for eternal damnation in the fires of hell because God didn’t want them? And this gospel, is it the one where once they do accept Jesus they are still wicked sinners incapable of doing anything right but are saved by the skin of their teeth and can expect to suffer in this life with sickness and poverty because that’s true holiness? Is that the gospel you wish they preached, or is it something else?

  99. There can never be any middle east peace.

    Merely a ten year truce before fighting starts up again.

    It was thought the same about Northern Ireland. It’s up to the elephant in the room (the USA). Although Truman’s words show the stark reality of the US’s position.

    “I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.” President Harry Truman, quoted in “Anti Zionism”, ed. by Teikener, Abed-Rabbo & Mezvinsky.

    What it surely is, is a vindication of Jesus’s words “They who live by the sword shall perish by the sword” as well as the old adage “violence begets violence begets violence…”.

  100. Also that guy Pastor John Hagee (the Chairman of CUFI) believes Jews don’t need Jesus nor the Cross. They’re saved by their lineage back to Abraham.

    How’re we with that?

  101. “[…] when you have done the hard yards, started a church from scratch, sacrificed your career, and dedicated your life to preaching the gospel and saving the lost […]”

    Do you think that’s what Phil Pringle’s done? Really?

    Go and do some research: he didn’t start a church from scratch, he split one that already existed. And what he has now is not a church; it doesn’t qualify as such by a long shot.

    He sacrificed his career…as a garbage collector. Yes, he could have made a mint, couldn’t he? He was a mover and shaker at the big end of town, a real force to be reckoned with in the corporate world.

    He’s dedicated his life to twisting the Gospel, not preaching it. He’s all about law and works, not faith and grace. He hasn’t a clue.

    Saving the lost? He’s convinced gullible people to throw in their lot with him, and to give him their money. Are they saved? Some are – but that would be in spite of Phil, not because of him.

    You are blind to all that, though, because you judge as the world judges – by outward appearances, and by worldly standards. Unfortunately for Phil, God cannot be fooled by any means; there is nothing that is hidden from His sight. The truth will come out, sooner or later – sooner if Phil repents, later if he waits for God to judge his works.

  102. “Shouldn’t you be addressing the question instead of throwing distractions?”

    Your ignorance is showing when you call my question “a distraction”. You are a typical product of pentecostalism – all zeal and no knowledge.

    Why don’t you go away and find out what I’m talking about, then you can explain to me why my question is not apropos.

  103. “I would have said it was an example of try hard.”

    My words have stung you very, very deeply, haven’t they Steve?

    And still you haven’t so much as a single answer for any question I have put to you.

    When Phil Pringle says that those who fail to tithe are cursed, do you believe that he is correct? Or do you believe the Bible, which states: ‘Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us–for it is written,“Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”’.

    Come on, Steve, you are a knowledgeable man – which is it? Do we have to tithe to avoid a curse, or do we put our trust in Christ to be free of it? Is it by works of the law, or is it by faith according to God’s grace?

    Who is the liar – is it the Apostle Paul, or is it Phil Pringle?

    They are very simple questions, Steve. Do you love the truth, or do you love C3?

  104. @Zorro

    “Do you think that’s what Phil Pringle’s done”

    Obsessed with Phil are you? Have a bit of a man crush? I am not talking specifically about him, but about most Pentecostal pastors whom you take pleasure in disparaging. Phil is just one amongst many thousands who have done immeasurably more for the kingdom of God than you will ever do Zorro. You are all bluff and bluster and no substance.

  105. @Zorro

    “My words have stung you very, very deeply, haven’t they Steve?”

    I accidentally spat out my coffee when I read this! My, you have such an ENORMOUS opinion of yourself, don’t you? How old are you, by the way?

  106. “Phil is just one amongst many thousands who have done immeasurably more for the kingdom of God than you will ever do Zorro.”

    So if that’s the case, answer the question I put to Steve: who is the liar – is it the Apostle Paul, or is it Phil Pringle?

  107. “I accidentally spat out my coffee when I read this! My, you have such an ENORMOUS opinion of yourself, don’t you? How old are you, by the way?”

    Still no answer to the question, I see. A bit tricky, is it?

  108. @Zorro

    “till no answer to the question, I see. A bit tricky, is it?”

    What, the stupid “question” (deflection more like) about David counting his fighting men? Why should I answer when you haven’t answered mine? Where are the thousands of lives changed through your ministry? After all, you are SOOOOO much better than Phil Pringle, aren’t you? Something about “running rings around him? Prove it. I dare you.

  109. @Zorro

    “who is the liar – is it the Apostle Paul, or is it Phil Pringle?”

    Phil is wrong in his interpretation of Malachi, but I don’t believe it’s a deliberate lie intended to deceive.

  110. You are clueless, Roundhouse.

    First, go back and read what’s written – slowly, so you can follow the conversational flow.

    Then go and find out about David numbering his fighting men (it’ll be a real eye-opener for you).

    After you’ve done that, see if you can tell me who the liar is – is it the Apostle Paul, or is it Phil Pringle?

  111. “Phil is wrong in his interpretation of Malachi, […]”

    So he is preaching law rather than grace.

    Do you know what that’s called? It’s called heresy, Roundhouse.

    Now tell me again about how wonderful Phil’s “ministry” is.

  112. @Zorro

    I will say it again, slowly, so you can follow the conversational flow – I am not going to dignify your deflection with an answer. You cannot justify claiming to be better than Phil and other ministers and then run away from it with straw mans. Prove to me how many thousands of lives you have changed in your ministry. Put up or shut up big man

  113. “Prove to me how many thousands of lives you have changed in your ministry.”

    Phil has changed people’s lives by putting the yoke of the law on their shoulders – you have admitted yourself that he preaches law rather than grace. Do you know what God says about people who do that?

    I preach grace, not law – which confirms me as loyal to God, true to his word, and giving honour and glory to Him.

    Thus my ministry is approved in the sight of God, whereas Phil’s is not, and cannot ever be until he repents.

    QED, Roundhouse.

    “Put up or shut up big man”

    Throwing a temper tantrum can’t change the facts, Roundhouse. Your pentecostal heritage doesn’t give you much to fall back on, does it?

    Now go and find out about David taking a census of the fighting men. It’s about time you stopped hiding behind your pentecostal super-heroes and became acquainted with the truth as God tells it.

  114. @Zorro

    “I preach grace”

    Where? How many people do you preach to each week? How many people have you led to Jesus through your preaching? How many lives have you personally spoken into?

  115. So Steve,

    Roundhouse has stated the following:

    “Phil is wrong in his interpretation of Malachi, but I don’t believe it’s a deliberate lie intended to deceive.”

    So Phil Pringle is a heretic who preaches law, but not a liar (what a relief that it is, eh?). Anyway, Roundhouse can at least bring himself to admit the truth – which is more than you can do, apparently.

    Your “leader” has feet of clay Steve, and you know it. But you just can’t bear to say it, can you?

  116. Zzzzz,
    My words have stung you very, very deeply, haven’t they?

    OK, I’ll play.

    You seem to delight in popping up your head like a coconut in a shy.

    I hate to hurt your feelings, but the truth is that your words mean absolutely zero to me. They neither hurt nor impress. They are nothings from a nobody. Of no consequence. The mere prattling of a spiteful anonymous nonentity.

    Actually, if I were really truthful, I don’t really care if I hurt your feelings at all, partly because I don’t think you actually have any, and of you do, they are so meagre they still amount to a massive hardness of heart.

    Here’s the deal with someone like you.

    If I say something which confirms your belief about someone you are targeting you will crow like a rooster in an Alpine Pass.

    If I contradict your claims, even with a rational argument and evidence to back it, you will still holler and howl like a wolf on a full moon, or change the subject to some other aversion, or strike out with ad hominem accusations.

    You hear nothing, yield nothing and accept nothing but your own opinion, judgment and value system.

    There would be no point whatsoever in engaging with you on C3 issues because it would get us nowhere.

    We already know your opinion. It’s not going to change. What’s the point in proceeding?

    You do not what to listen. You only want to press your hate into someone’s face. My face isn’t designed to take your bulbous excreta. It is designed to shine the countenance of God. I’d rather turn my face from your falsehoods and reflect Christ any day.

    I engaged you this time because I wanted to see how you would approach it. How would you react to someone doing the same thing you do to just about everyone else?

    You were so predictable I could have written your next comments for you. Your telegraphed haymakers are like windmills in a breeze.

    If you played chess you’d be shouting and celebrating your hollow victory right up to the point your opponent declared ‘check mate’. You miss all the nuances of decent conversation and debate by attempting to intimidate everyone you think is on another side.

    I don’t really know how someone with such an apparently impressive vocabulary can actually be so thick when it comes to dealing with other people.

    I’ve watched the way you’ve treated anyone with a contrary view over at Jake’s witch-tower. Some really nice people, upset by Jake’s constant barrage of hate and derision in the guise of his false and sickeningly sentimental ‘love’ values, have commented there and with good heart, but you have been like a sledgehammer in a snowstorm flailing at anyone and everyone.

    The abominable snowman of the anti-christ freak’s circus.

    So your pitiless approach I condemn, and reserve the right to deny it any leverage.

    Say what you want. Bask in triumphalism. Piss into the wind for all I care. Just make sure no-one really decent is standing near you.

  117. @Steve

    You’re right. I have read Zorro’s stuff on C3churchb**ch and I am now regretting engaging in debate here with him. He’s like a dog returning to it’s own vomit. The same old rants every post. Not only that, but he’s convinced himself that he’s God’s gift to the world, so I think I might just leave him to it.

  118. So Zorro, you haven’t responded to my questions yet:

    Run rings? Why would you want to go round a man in circles? The only reason you don’t raise a sweat is that you can’t manage more than two circuits. You have fewer rings than 1950s door bell.

    And run rings around him at what? Preaching? Let’s hear a message. Painting? Let’s see an example. Pastoring? Show us where. Leading a church? Evidence. Leading anyone? Only astray. Overseeing a movement? Prove it today. Publishing Christ? I have yet to see it.

    1. Can you show us one message with demonstrates that you run rings around anyone at preaching?

    2. Can you show us one illustration or painting which identifies you as a more accomplished artist?

    3. Can you give us evidence of the people you pastor or have pastored better?

    I’m not interested in numbers particularly because I understand there are amazing pastors of small flocks as well as large. So, can we have evidence of your pastoral abilities over a sustained period – say ten years, which would still be a third of Phil’s time?

    4. Leading a church? Can you show us the proof you have of how you have better led a church. Again the size is not important, but it should have some evidence of growth over a certain period of time.

    5. Overseeing a movement? I know this is a hard one for you, since it is not a simple matter to actually grow other churches out of the church you have planted, or have established churches express the desire to to join up with you as affiliates.

    But can you please give bona fide proof of your ability to excel as an Overseer of several associated churches, and, to compare to Phil, they would need to have a presence on at least five Continents?

    Now my interpretation of running rings would be that you would be able to easily do far better at something someone else does in at least the same time span and to the same degree.

    I only commented on this because you have brought it up on more than one occasion, so the first time I accepted it as mere bravado, but the second time I considered that you must actually believe your own press.

    So I’m ready now to hear your evidence on all of these things.

  119. “Phil is wrong in his interpretation of Malachi, but I don’t believe it’s a deliberate lie intended to deceive.”

    I call bs. Deception is the hallmark of all the prosperity cults. What is the motivation for this ‘error’ other than to scare people into giving. And of course the nonsense about Kong Hee just confirms it.

    Given your rabid attacks on Catholics for so-called extra-biblical beliefs, you can’t even spot simple Christological heresies like that espoused by Bill Johnson on C3’s own facebook page. In fact you can’t even spot simple Biblical truths. This is from the same person who says Catholicism is a wackier cult than Mormonism and JWs. We’ll condemn all the Catholics and Church Fathers (who have contributed far more to Christianity and society than Dr Phil who) but don’t say anything about their own apostate Pentecostal leaders. They are beyond reproach.

    But of course when you abandon the history of Christianity and treat it as irrelevant then the same problems creep in.

    I don’t expect any defense. Because it’s indefensible, reprehensible and hypocritical.

  120. @Bones

    You lot take such a simplistic view towards things. You’re like children. “He teaches this, it’s wrong, therefore he’s DELIBERATELY and MALICIOUSLY causing millions to go to Hell”. Understanding and critical thinking are not your strong suits, are they? Well, let me explain it for you. The teaching of tithing is not one that the modern Pentes made up to fleece the flock. It was an early church practice, made compulsory under the pain of excommunication by your beloved Catholic church in 585AD at the Synod of Macon. Bet you didn’t know that, did you? You revere the early church fathers, yet most of them were less than perfect -Origen believed scripture to be mostly allegorical. He also taught that after infant baptism the child would be eternally saved, in fact he taught that everyone would eventually be saved and in heaven – even Satan! Tertullian taught that we can pray for dead souls and they will be saved. Many of the early church fathers were heavily influenced by paganism, and many pagan practices came into the church and are still practiced today, such as prayer beads and Mary worship (coming from the worship of Astarte, or Eostre, the Queen of Heaven, which, incidentally is where many of the traditions we celebrate at Easter come from – Eostre is actually pronounced “easter”). Even Martin Luther was a flawed individual. He was extremely anti-semetic, and his writings on the subject inspired Hitler to institute his “final solution”. Luther also disagreed with the laity preaching, even to the point of encouraging them to be killed if they did so. To view the early church fathers as being paragons of virtue is simply ignorant.

    So, why does the modern church teach tithing? Well, to put it simply, they are following the traditions and teachings handed down over 4000 years. They honestly believe that tithing was a principle before the law, so therefore it should be today, even though we NT believers aren’t bound by the law. Even the teaching from Malachi, which we know to be contradictory to the teachings of Paul, can be justified by them as being consistent with other teachings in the bible, both the Old and New Testaments. Of course, when we study the subject from an objective point of view we can see that under the New Covenant tithing isn’t compulsory. But we must remember that these teachers honestly believe it is a biblical principle. And you know what? More power to them. It’s their prerogative to teach what they believe to be the truth. If the people in their churches are happy to tithe, let them. They have bibles. They can discover for themselves what the bible says about the subject. If you are in their church and discover that tithing is not required, stop tithing, or leave. Let God sort it out. It’s not your job to try and change them. Only God can change them. But I can guarantee you that none of these teachers are teaching tithing from a manipulative point of view. They honestly believe it to be biblical truth. The teaching of tithing isn’t the “game-changer” that you all think it is. It is simply one small part of a larger picture in the church, yet you go all apoplectic, as if it is the single most important issue facing the church today. well, sorry to burst your bubbles, but it ain’t!

  121. I wonder if Margot will answer my question about what she believes the gospel that Phil Pringle and friends are not teaching should be.

  122. Obviously no idea.

    It was the position of the great early Church Father Irenaeus that tithing was a legal obligation in the Law of Moses and therefore is no longer binding. He explains this in chapter XIII of book IV in “Irenaeus Against Heresies”…

    Irenaeus (A.D. 120-202)

    And for this reason did the Lord, instead of that [commandment], “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” forbid even concupiscence; and instead of that which runs thus, “Thou shalt not kill,” He prohibite danger; and instead of the law enjoining the giving of tithes, [He told us] to share all our possessions with the poor;

    And again in chapter XVIII of book IV he again states…

    And for this reason they (the Jews) had indeed the tithes of their goods consecrated to Him, but those who have received the liberty set aside all their possessions for the Lord’s purposes, bestowing joyfully and freely not the less valuable portions of their property, since they have the hope of better things [hereafter]; as that poor widow acted who cast all her living into the treasury of God.

    Tertullian –c. 150-220 (apology, XXXIX, 1-18)…

    Our presidents are elders of proved worth, men who have attained this honor not for a price, but by character. Every man brings some modest coin once a month or whenever he wishes, and only if he is willing and able; it is a freewill offering. You might call them the trust-funds of piety; they are spent… on the support and burial of the poor.

    Tertullian (c. 197, W 3.46) Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs (p.9)…

    Though we have our treasure chest, it is not made up of purchase money, as of a religion that has its price. Rather, on the monthly day, if he likes, each puts in a small donation – but only if it is his pleasure and only if he is able. For there is no compulsion; all is voluntary.

    Hasting’s Dictionary of the Apostolic Church…

    It is admitted universally that the payment of tithes or the tenths of possessions, for sacred purposes did not find a place within the Christian Church during the age covered by the apostles and their immediate successors.

    The New Catholic Encyclopedia…

    The early Church had no tithing system… it was not that no need of supporting the Church existed or was recognized, but rather that other means appeared to suffice.

    A search of the patristic writings will uncover these and more quotes regarding the issue of tithing. The New Catholic Encyclopedia summarizes this by saying, “The payment of tithes was adopted from the Old Law, and early writers speak of it as a divine ordinance and an obligation of conscience. The earliest positive legislation on the subject seems to be contained in the letter of the bishops assembled at Tours in 567 and the canons of the Council of Macon in 585.”

    Richard Schebera, Associate Professor of Religion at St. Louis University, summarizes this whole tangled story for the World Book Encyclopedia by saying, “The early Christian church did not require tithing. By the 500’s, church law required payment of a tax on income and lands. In the late 700’s, Charlemagne made this civil law. Tithing was more common in the West than in the East.”

  123. @Bones

    Thanks for supporting my post – “The payment of tithes was adopted from the Old Law, and early writers speak of it as a divine ordinance and an obligation of conscience. The earliest positive legislation on the subject seems to be contained in the letter of the bishops assembled at Tours in 567 and the canons of the Council of Macon in 585.”

  124. Not that I have a problem with tithing. More this:

    But I can guarantee you that none of these teachers are teaching tithing from a manipulative point of view. They honestly believe it to be biblical truth.

    Bahahhah.

    Seen Rodney Howard Browne at all? What about Benny Hinn?

    The teaching that you can buy God’s blessings and miracles is no different to the Catholic teaching of indulgences or that you are cursed if you don’t tithe.

    eg
    “When we fail to obey God with regard to the tithe, we invite a curse into our lives…” – Phil Pringle, Keys To Financial Excellence, pg 67.

    You may be poor right now but follow the principle of God’s Word and you’ll get thirty fold, [applause starts] sixty fold, a hundred fold. The law of harvest WORKS!!! Oh come on! Give God a big hand!” – Kong Hee, 9 reason y Jesus is rich,

    Must be time for some Kong Hee

    Kong Hee praises those who sell their homes for smaller dwellings, giving their money to the church. So he can live in bigger, wealthier dwellings.

    “Nick and Connie sold their five room flat and down-graded to three room apartment just so they could give $20,000 to the building fund. I mean- where do you hear people like that? People willing to sell their house and downgrade to build God a great house. Friends, it’s a sacrifice.” – Kong Hee, Kong Hee – Downgrade your home to upgrade the Lord’s City Harvest Under Investigation Pt 2,

    From $127k HDB flat to $9.3m Sentosa Cove penthouse

    SINGAPORE – How did the Kongs get from a $127,000 HDB flat to a $9.3 million Sentosa Cove penthouse?

    Pastor Kong Hee and his family started with a five-room HDB flat in Tampines, which they bought for $127,000.

    They later sold it for $420,000, The New Paper reported in 2010.

    From there, the Kongs bought a Horizon Towers unit in River Valley. It had a private lift, two living rooms, four bedrooms and a compact kitchen.

    The flooring was marble, with a carpeted family area and a walk-in wardrobe which showed off the fashionista side of Ms Ho.

    It was done up in a mix of American classic and contemporary styles.

    In 2010, they sold this apartment and moved into The Suites at Central on Devonshire. It was reportedly sold to them for $2.6 million.

    There was also a $28,000-a-month Hollywood Hills estate which Ms Ho rented while pursuing her career as a singer in the United States.

    She stayed there with her son, an assistant, a nanny and some relatives while going about her music career. She shuttled between the US and Singapore.

    Today, the Kongs live in a luxury Sentosa Cove penthouse which cost $9.3 million, according to The New Paper.

    The 487 sq m apartment is more than four times bigger than their Tampines flat and has an ocean view.

    http://business.asiaone.com/Business/My%2BMoney/Property/Story/A1Story20120627-355755.html

  125. But no Christian would manipulate people into giving.

    ROFL

    Let’s bring in the master of manipulation

    ‘God bless your credit card’

    Johannesburg – God’s blessing would last only two minutes and it would create 500 churchgoing millionaires or even billionaires – all they had to do was use their credit cards to pay $1 000 in offerings to televangelist Benny Hinn.

    Pastor Tommie Ferreira of the AGS Church in Johannesburg was so upset about the “blessing” that, after a week, he wanted to know who of the donors actually had become millionaires.

    Ferreira told Rapport he did not mean to bring about Hinn’s downfall.

    He merely wanted to know if any of the hundreds of churchgoers who donated amounts of up to $1 000 (about R7 500) to Hinn’s Miracle Crusade last week Saturday had now become millionaires.

    About 18 000 people streamed to the Coca-Cola Dome in Randburg to hear Hinn’s message of healing and miracles.

    Ferreira, who is a keen choir singer, voluntarily sang in the Miracle Crusade’s choir.

    He said one of Hinn’s American guest speakers, Pastor Todd Koontz, spoke about financial burdens and said 500 audience members would receive “an exceptional blessing”.

    “He said the service would yield millionaires and billionaires within 24 hours.

    “Everyone had to donate $1 000 because an exceptional blessing rested on $1 000.”

    Koontz apparently really had the congregation scrambling when he said, “This blessing will be poured out for only two minutes.”

    Ferreira said: “People stormed to the front – poor people, rich people, people from all sections of our society.”

    Hinn’s co-pastors apparently had credit-card machines ready with which they could take donations.

    “He (Koontz) said God would bless the people’s credit cards and they would be able to rule over South Africa with their money.

    “Eventually there were no fewer than 1 000 people who made such donations.”

    According to Ferreira’s calculations, Hinn must have collected millions of rands with these donations – perhaps more than R7m if each of the 1 000 church-goers donated $1 000 in the hope of becoming millionaires.

    Furthermore, after Koontz’s collection of the $1 000 donations, Hinn collected general donations.
    […]

    Dr Sarel Smit of the AGS church Lofstad in Hursthill, Johannesburg, who supported Ferreira as he spoke to Rapport, was equally worried about the method by which Hinn collected donations.

    “Especially at a time like this when there is dire need, people run the risk of losing their faith in the Lord in this way. God will provide for your needs, but not your greed.”

    Rapport spoke to an employee in Hinn’s South African office in Durban who said on Friday morning that they were still busy collecting money.
    […]

    He said that before the collection of the $1 000 donations, Koontz had delivered a message about “you reap what you sow”.

    http://www.religionnewsblog.com/21802/benny-hinn-todd-koontz-and-the-two-minutes-blessing-scam

    Must be time to post some more articles attacking Catholics hey.

  126. @Bones

    The law of sowing and reaping is a biblical principle.

    And thanks for those two articles. It’s interesting how your perceptions colour the things you read, isn’t it?

  127. Yeah I know. Those caught up in the cult can’t or won’t see it. No matter how much truth is brought before their eyes they’ll still believe the Anointed One.

    It’s the same blindness that you would allow the cult leader to abuse your children because he is the man of God (hi, David Koresh).

  128. I don’t get all the hate on Phil Pringle. I don’t know him personally but knowing what I do about people in similar churches, it’s easy for me to believe that he believes that tithing is a requirement but also an avenue for blessing, that if we give financially we will receive back and that not tithing brings a curse. Many people believe that who are lay people and not recipients of tithes or offerings.

    It’s one thing to disagree with a man, it’s another to be judge his reasons for believing and teaching so.

    Bones and Roundhouse have talked about church fathers. Put them together and I think it’s pretty conclusive that tithing was not a requirement or expected or preached the way Pringle does (at least in the first couple of centuries) but by the 5th and 6th centuries things changed. So Catholics taught tithing in the 6th century, and so have many churches for centuries. Some European churches collected it through the taxation system until recently.

    Pringle is wrong in my opinion but how can I judge his heart?

  129. It’s pretty obvious, Q.

    Early Christians didn’t preach a prosperity Gospel because

    (a) Jesus didn’t
    (b) Christians were more concerned about survival than living an ‘abundant/prosperous’ life
    (c) they weren’t inculcated with the western yearning for money and things.

    I’ve been thinking about the Early Church and the signs of holiness in the Perpetual Virgin Mary thread. To those Christians it was chastity, sacrifice and martyrdom.

    To today’s Christians it is about accumulation of money, size of congregation and personal advancement.

  130. @Bones

    “Jesus didn’t”

    Yes He did. Luke 6:38 “Give, and it will be given to you. They will pour into your lap a good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over. For by your standard of measure it will be measured to you in return.” The biblical principle of sowing and reaping right there. Paul also taught extensively on the subject many times, and the Old Testament also teaches prosperity. So, you’re wrong. But regardless of whether the early church lived it or not, it is still a biblical principle. As for the early church, it was available for them, but their “pious” religious nature dictated that it is more holy to be broke, sick and oppressed than to be blessed, healed and wealthy, and that religiousness still exists today in people like you.

  131. Hit send before I checked what I wrote.

    “But regardless of whether the early church lived it or not, it is still a biblical principle.” should read “But regardless of whether the New Testament believers church lived it or not, it is still a biblical principle.”

  132. Doh! Still hit send too early! It should read “But regardless of whether the New Testament believers lived it or not, it is still a biblical principle.” Whew!

  133. Roundhouse, Paul didn’t say that the poor believers in Jerusalem were in any way remiss in their faith when he took up offerings for them.

    And many of the believers in the persecuted church in Rome were too busy getting killed to have time to realize what was “available” to them.

    NB in my first sentence I’m referring obviously to the church of Paul’s day, and in the second to later times.

    I think it’s reasonable when talking about the early church to make distinctions between the primitive church and later centuries.

    I don’t see Paul or James ever implying that people without money weren’t claiming or appropriating the prosperity available to them.

    But I accept that tithing was expected by the 6th century
    ( but I don’t feel bound to emulate the faith of Christians in the 6th century,)

  134. Bones,
    I’ve been thinking about the Early Church and the signs of holiness in the Perpetual Virgin Mary thread. To those Christians it was chastity, sacrifice and martyrdom.

    Actually it’s by grace and righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ.

  135. @Q

    “I don’t see Paul or James ever implying that people without money weren’t claiming or appropriating the prosperity available to them.”

    No, of course not. Why would they? Remember, Christianity was still new, and Paul was preaching a new revelation, so it is understandable that there might have been many believers who didn’t “get” it. But we cannot use what happened in the church then to say that the same cannot happen now. We are very fortunate in this day and age that we don’t have the same persecution they did in the New Testament church. Plus, we have the benefit of 2000 years of teaching and experience to draw upon. Not only that, but we have at our fingertips resources that Christians even 20 years ago didn’t have. Online resources have changed the way that we view scripture. We can discover the original meaning of a word in the Greek or Hebrew, we can discover what the culture was like in those days, we can discover who the writers were and we can even find out how ancient languages differ to modern languages and how our modern understanding of words and customs can be remarkably different to what they were when they were written. In short, we can have a much better understanding of scripture than the early church and if we apply it to our own lives we will experience things that they didn’t.

  136. “In short, we can have a much better understanding of scripture than the early church and if we apply it to our own lives we will experience things that they didn’t.”

    Rubbish!

  137. Yes He did. Luke 6:38 “Give, and it will be given to you. They will pour into your lap a good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over. For by your standard of measure it will be measured to you in return.”

    Give what exactly? This verse gets said a lot in Pentecostal circles. Let’s look at Luke chapter 6

    Jesus Is Lord of the Sabbath

    6 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and his disciples began to pick some heads of grain, rub them in their hands and eat the kernels. 2 Some of the Pharisees asked, “Why are you doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”

    3 Jesus answered them, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4 He entered the house of God, and taking the consecrated bread, he ate what is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.” 5 Then Jesus said to them, “The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”

    6 On another Sabbath he went into the synagogue and was teaching, and a man was there whose right hand was shriveled. 7 The Pharisees and the teachers of the law were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus, so they watched him closely to see if he would heal on the Sabbath. 8 But Jesus knew what they were thinking and said to the man with the shriveled hand, “Get up and stand in front of everyone.” So he got up and stood there.

    9 Then Jesus said to them, “I ask you, which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to destroy it?”

    10 He looked around at them all, and then said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He did so, and his hand was completely restored. 11 But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law were furious and began to discuss with one another what they might do to Jesus.

    The Twelve Apostles

    12 One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. 13 When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: 14 Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, 15 Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, 16 Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.

    Blessings and Woes

    17 He went down with them and stood on a level place. A large crowd of his disciples was there and a great number of people from all over Judea, from Jerusalem, and from the coastal region around Tyre and Sidon, 18 who had come to hear him and to be healed of their diseases. Those troubled by impure spirits were cured, 19 and the people all tried to touch him, because power was coming from him and healing them all.

    20 Looking at his disciples, he said:

    “Blessed are you who are poor,
    for yours is the kingdom of God.
    21 Blessed are you who hunger now,
    for you will be satisfied.
    Blessed are you who weep now,
    for you will laugh.
    22 Blessed are you when people hate you,
    when they exclude you and insult you
    and reject your name as evil,
    because of the Son of Man.

    23 “Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their ancestors treated the prophets.

    24 “But woe to you who are rich,
    for you have already received your comfort.
    25 Woe to you who are well fed now,
    for you will go hungry.
    Woe to you who laugh now,
    for you will mourn and weep.
    26 Woe to you when everyone speaks well of you,
    for that is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.

    Love for Enemies

    27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.

    32 “If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. 33 And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. 34 And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, expecting to be repaid in full. 35 But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36 Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

    Judging Others

    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.”

    39 He also told them this parable: “Can the blind lead the blind? Will they not both fall into a pit? 40 The student is not above the teacher, but everyone who is fully trained will be like their teacher.

    41 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 42 How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

    A Tree and Its Fruit

    43 “No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. 44 Each tree is recognized by its own fruit. People do not pick figs from thornbushes, or grapes from briers. 45 A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of.

    The Wise and Foolish Builders

    46 “Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say? 47 As for everyone who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice, I will show you what they are like. 48 They are like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built. 49 But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete.”

    Is Jesus talking about finances? Seems to me he’s talking about judgement and forgiveness. Unless in Jesus’s discourse, Luke decides to sneak this verse in about money.

    But Jesus does specifically contrast the rich and the poor, the hungry and the well fed.

    Woe to you who are rich for you have already received your comfort.

    You won’t hear that verse preached by Benny Hinn nor any of his Pentecostal acolytes like Kong Hee.

    It’s a verse of judgement.

  138. Christianity was still new, and Paul was preaching a new revelation, so it is understandable that there might have been many believers who didn’t “get” it.

    Get what? In the Apostolic and Post Apostolic Age of the church, there was no preaching of so-called prosperity. Actually the teaching was there will be persecution. Take up your cross had a very real and significant meaning for early Christians.

    At no stage did people give (including the Macedonian church who gave out of their poverty) in order to get rich. In fact to become a Christian would cost your job, your livelihood and your life. It cost you that to become a Christian.

    And the money that the Apostles got was spent on missions, supporting other Christians and welfare. Not on the latest gold plated chariot.

    “He said the service would yield millionaires and billionaires within 24 hours.

    “Everyone had to donate $1 000 because an exceptional blessing rested on $1 000.”

    Does anyone really think that this sounds anything like the teachings of Jesus or the Apostles?

    Really?

  139. As for the early church, it was available for them, but their “pious” religious nature dictated that it is more holy to be broke, sick and oppressed than to be blessed, healed and wealthy, and that religiousness still exists today in people like you.

    That’ll do me. Honestly. You can add the apostles to that list. How many of them were wealthy?

    And Jesus.

    Paul had to get a job to make ends meet and I wonder if the Apostles died wealthy.

    Answer: No.

    As for being oppressed. Honestly you’ve got no idea.

  140. @Margot

    “Rubbish!”

    Why is it rubbish? Explain to me exactly why you think this is rubbish Margot. And while you’re at it, can you please enlighten me as to the correct gospel Phil Pringle etc should be preaching.

  141. ““In short, we can have a much better understanding of scripture than the early church and if we apply it to our own lives we will experience things that they didn’t.”

    Rubbish!”

    Maybe you want to clarify that Roundhouse, or think about it again.
    I don’t know anyone who would agree with you on that – no matter what their theology is.

    If you are saying that we western, English speaking Christians have a better idea of Paul’s writings than those who were reading them or the next generation who lived in those parts…? Or that we have a better idea of Jesus’s words than Paul, I think you need to read some elementary textbooks about linguistics, history, the study of literature. Online dictionaries are great, but …. actually, I don’t know where to start with what you said.

  142. “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.”

    Well it doesn’t specify what is being given, so it could be anything you have in your possession to give.

    It isn’t a judgement at all but an admonition, and an encouragement to be bold to give.

    The reference to an apron, or the bosom is to the way in which some goods were carried in those days. He is saying as much as you give you will receive. The idea is the attitude if generosity and giving.

    The phrase ‘good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap’ refers to the pouring of grain, which when pressed down, then shaken together makes extra space for more to be poured, which clearly indicates equitable generosity of receiving for that which is given.

    It is clearly not specifying some church building fund, or tithing per se.

    It is actually saying we should not recoil from having a generous and abundant heart towards giving to other people whatever we have to share or release into their lives to make them better.

    In so doing we can be assured that God will see to it that men repay us in kind or actuality in some way over time.

    It is a guarantee from Jesus of reciprocal investment on value granted.

    This could include anything we have in our power to give, material, physical or spiritual.

    So Peter and John say they do not have gold or silver, but what they do have they give to the lame man, which is the name of Jesus to heal.

    He says as much when he speaks of judgment and forgiveness. When we judge we will be judged. When we forgive we will be forgiven. When we give we will be given to.

    The applicate in manifold.

    The early church, in fact, gave everything they had, and it was divided up amongst the believers, so that everyone had enough to live on.

  143. Put it this way, Margot’s reply to that basically sums it up.

    But getting back to the argument, have you ever thought about why Paul spent so much time collecting money for the poor Christians, and bothered to persuade gentile Christians why they should give?

    It wasn’t just like he found out that some Christians were poor on Monday and took up an offering on Tuesday. He had time to go about this. Why instead of raising money and writing about it, didn’t he just write to the poor Christians and tell them to claim their financial blessing birthright as being due to the seed of Abraham. Or if the example that Bones gave of Benny Hinn’s offering, he could have just told the poor Christians to sow an offering and anointed it so that they got back 30 fold, or 100 fold.

    btw, are you one of these people who thinks that Paul’s tent making ministry was actually a huge multi-national enterprise employing hundreds? That’s something I’ve heard recently. Mindblowing conjecture.

    ps, I don’t think being poor and sick is holy.

  144. I think Roundhouse means that in the first fifty years or so after Christ there were no New Testament writings, so they did not have the advantage we have of the canon of scripture.

    They lived by the Apostles’ Doctrine, and the New Testament teachings of the Church developed as they went along.

    The Epistles came gradually during that period and were collated over time.

    That is not really in dispute. What you might argue is whether the early church understood what we do today.

    I put it to you that there is a case that though they probably had less of the completed written Testament, they had more understanding of what Jesus taught because it hadn’t been complicated or corrupted by error, tradition, liberal interpretation or false dogmas.

  145. btw, most of the people who attend Benny Hinn meetings are probably people who believe in tithing, and there would be many Pastors in attendance who teach tithing/prosperity etc. But many of them would have problems with the 1000 fold anointing two minute thing.

    There are many people who teach tithing, who speak out against the excesses they see in some prosperity preachers.

  146. Roundhouse’s point would easily be demonstrated by Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, which corrected error in way they took communion.

    We have that data now, but the Corinthians, who were as much part of the early church as the church at Jerusalem or Antioch, obviously didn’t have it until they received the epistle.

  147. Steve, it depends on what Roundhouse means by understanding of “scripture” and what he means by “early church”.

    I don’t think those who spent months listening to Paul preach and watching him live were in anyway inferior in their understanding of the Old Testament or words of Jesus – or Paul, than 21 century Christians cruising the internet and watching youtube sermons.

    Some modern Christians may not be aware of how difficult it is to understand foreign languages of thousands of years ago.

    But maybe I misunderstood Roundhouse.

  148. Pringle, Houston, macarthur – even Margot and Bones….nobody here is superior in biblical understanding than Paul.

    Okay, maybe Benny Hinn…

  149. So Gill says of 1 Corinthians: It is thought to be written about the year of Christ 55, and in the first year of Nero, though some place it in the year 59.

    So for at least 50 years the truth revealed in 1 Corinthians was not known to all the Church.

    Given that life expectancy was probably significantly lower in those days, it is perceivable that a generation passed without knowing what we now about communion and conducting meetings.

  150. And the Corinthians SHOULD have known better re communion.
    But there’s the thing. We can only imagine exactly how communion was actually taken and what meetings were like in those days.

  151. Well, yes, Q, unless they had direct contact with the Apostle and his team, so those at Antioch, where Paul served as a teacher, probably knew how to conduct a communion meeting. Paul actually says he received the revelation of communion form the Lord Himself, which is interesting.

  152. Steve, two things. You seem to assume that early Christians had no idea what they were doing without getting letters. There was preaching in those days. And the physical presence of Apostles and prophets.

    Secondly, you really think we know that much about conducting meetings?????????????????

    If you think the way we are doing meetings now (C3? HIllsong? High church anglican? is somehow reflecting 2000 years of knowledge and evolution and growth, then I don’t know why on earth you would think that.

    Do you think the Apostle Paul would walk into a mega church today, and be in awe like a swimmer from 100 years ago coming to the latest olympics?

    no friend, I don’t think we know that much.

  153. Time for sleep. But last word from me. I have no confidence that modern pentecostals or evangelicals know more about how to “conduct a communion meeting” than the believers in the first/second centuries.

    And often Paul admonished people for departing from what they were originally taught – not that they were just floundering away.

    But, I’m impressed that you have so much confidence in our current correctness of theology and practice.

  154. @Bones

    “Give what exactly? This verse gets said a lot in Pentecostal circles.”

    And your rebuttal is said a lot by self-righteous religious nut jobs with no idea how to interpret scripture.

    People like you get so caught up in the whole “context” issue, that you cannot see the forest for the trees. It’s absolutely true that the previous verse is talking about judgement, but does that mean that we MUST interpret verse 38 from verse 37? A classic mistake many uninformed people make is to assume that context only applies to the verse or verses immediately surrounding a particular scripture. But let’s look at the passage in relation to some of the other passages around it. Verses 34 to 36 are talking about lending money and being generous and receiving a reward. It’s almost like verse 37 is standing out all on it’s own in the context of verses 34, 35, 36 and 38, isn’t it? So, does verse 37 dictate the meaning of verse 38? I don’t think it does. Verse 38 starts with the word “give”, which means to “to grant, give to one asking, let have”. If you remember, verses 34-36 were talking about lending to people and expecting nothing in return, but receiving reward anyway, so, in the context of verses 34-36, verse 38 certainly fits in with giving and receiving financial reward, so verse 37 seems to be the one standing out on it’s lonesome.

    A mistake that many people make is assuming that ancient people wrote like modern writers do, with an introduction, body, and conclusion all in chronological order. But ancient writers tended to write as the thought came to them. I have for many years been interested in ancient Celtic and Welsh poetry, and most of these poems are very difficult to understand because the writers would change thought mid-sentence, and then come back to the original thought as if nothing ever happened. Unless you were paying attention you would miss it, or end up totally confused. You would have to read the passage several times to get the gist of what was being written. Knowing this, it is easy to see how a verse like verse 37 could be written out of context with those around it.

    And by the way, a classic “newby” mistake is reading the headings used by later translators in some versions of the bible and thinking that that heading explains the entire passage.

  155. I think that’s more or less what I said earlier, Q, which was I put it to you that there is a case that though they probably had less of the completed written Testament, they had more understanding of what Jesus taught because it hadn’t been complicated or corrupted by error, tradition, liberal interpretation or false dogmas.

    Q,
    it depends on what Roundhouse means by understanding of “scripture” and what he means by “early church”.

    Indeed it does, so I’ll wait for his response.

    Paul lays out a structure for the Corinthians, but I think we should be led by the Holy Spirit and not have to revert to customs from another era.

    The gospel should be kept pure but the methodology can be revised, as long as it is fully Christ-centred and builds the Church and not some individual’s reputation, kingdom or CV.

    I don’t think we’ve attended the perfect meeting unless Christ is given centre stage and the Holy Spirit is running it.

    I have been in many religious meetings from all persuasions, including Pentecostals. They/we have no less of a liturgical order than Anglicans. We just utilise coloured lights rather than stained glass.

    God invented light and the ingredients for glass, so we won’t complain about their use. I don’t mind either if they are glorifying God, but neither is necessary to the Presence of God, and can even be a distraction if we allow them to become religiously effectual.

    There are three important ingredients to the communion service – bread, wine and the Presence of God. We partake. We are the lesser being blessed by the Greater. We can do it anywhere, whether there are lights, glass, trees or a living room.

    God is Omnipresent.

  156. Ha. No the Pentecostal line of thinking is to pluck a verse out of anywhere and apply it to money. There’s a reason I quoted the whole chapter because the verses have to be understood within the context of the whole chapter.

    And you can do whatever mental gymnastics you want but Jesus sure as heck was not talking about prosperity.

  157. @Steve and Q

    It’s late and I am heading to bed, but in a nutshell, by understanding of “scripture” I mean Paul’s letters, not the entire NT canon. They didn’t have the entire NT to gain the complete picture, only Paul’s writings and I guess word-of-mouth, so it would be difficult for them to digest a radical new teaching without the context of the teachings of Jesus and the other apostles. And by early church, I mean from about 150AD to about 400AD, not the NT church. Hope this helps make my previous post clearer. And I hope my sleep-deprived mind is expressing my answer adequately!

  158. Why instead of raising money and writing about it, didn’t he just write to the poor Christians and tell them to claim their financial blessing birthright as being due to the seed of Abraham. Or if the example that Bones gave of Benny Hinn’s offering, he could have just told the poor Christians to sow an offering and anointed it so that they got back 30 fold, or 100 fold.

    Simple. Because he never preached it. I’ll say it again that Christians in the Apostolic and Post-Apostolic Church were persecuted by Jews and Gentiles. They lost their jobs – their capacity to earn anything and the only welfare was from the Early Church. Paul simply didn’t exploit the poor.

    Once again were the Apostles wealthy or not?

  159. Bones,
    the Pentecostal line of thinking is to pluck a verse out of anywhere and apply it to money.

    I do hope you’re not tagging that to my comments on Luke 6. I gave an accurate and fair exegesis of what was being said taking into account the previous and post chapters, as I always do.

    I did’t actually mention money. Or prosperity.

    If I did mention prosperity on this blog I’ expect a storm of aggression not unlike a category five cyclone, two of which I have lived through. So I’m actually careful about context and clarity on such matters.

    My analysis of what Jesus was saying when he talked about giving is easily backed up by other commentaries.

    Your conclusion that it is part of a judgment isn’t born out by the context.

  160. Jesus is in fact teaching. It is called a sermon.

    If you judge you will be judged. If you forgive you will be forgiven. If you give it will be given back to you.

    That is clearly reciprocal.

  161. What you give is not specified.

    The allusion though is to grains, so it could have an application to giving grain to those in need and having what you gave given back to you by others in time, which could be seen as reciprocal payment for a good deed done.

    It is not the same as sowing and reaping, because the principle of sowing and reaping involves increase. I sow one seed and receive back the head which may, in the case of grain, include several seeds, some to eat and some to sow to another season.

    God has promised seedtime and harvest as long as the earth turns.

    It was his idea and remains so. He is the One who gives increase. Our part is to sow and reap.

    All we need is the season in its season, including the rain and sun to develop the crop.

    It has always been so.

  162. A lot of good in what you wrote a couple of posts back Steve – the colored lights/stained glass one.
    Roundhouse, thanks for the clarification.

  163. Quick one – If “the give and it shall be give verse” can apply to giving of money or material things, I think it needs to be preached more often that when you give, it doesn’t have to be just to the church for regular offerings or the latest building fund, or love offering for the already wealthy visiting speaker.

    But that’s the context you most often hear it in many churches.

    It doesn’t seem to me that Jesus was saying give to us, and had the disciples ready to pass an offering bag around to people who were expecting to get a new chariot.

    Just a thought for my pentecostal friends.

  164. I doubt you’ll find many wealthy visiting speakers, especially in Australia, which is one of the worse places for travelling ministries, and, I think, suffers for it. Itinerant ministry is probably on of the least profitable vocations. You certainly wouldn’t go into it for the money. Another popular myth spread by the unwise.

    Maybe a handful of speakers do well on circuits financially, but to consider everyone who travels to speak as fabulously rich is frankly mindless.

    Paul probably hit the same issue most of the time, even though he didn’t begrudge travelling teachers a living from their vocation, which is another reason he had a day job as well as travelling and teaching.

  165. @Q

    “I think it needs to be preached more often that when you give, it doesn’t have to be just to the church for regular offerings or the latest building fund, or love offering for the already wealthy visiting speaker.”

    I think it’s because the only time the subject is really preached in church it is during the offering message. I agree though. It would be great if the subject was taught to mean more than just giving to and into the church. I think one of the things that Pente churches don’t do well is preaching the full counsel of God. It seems that some preachers stick to the same subject more often than not. It’s not that the subject itself is necessarily wrong, but I do believe that hearing the same theme day in day out can be tiresome. But that’s why I think it is important that we don’t just restrict ourselves to only listening to one teacher. I praise God for itunes podcasts!

  166. “I think one of the things that Pente churches don’t do well is preaching the full counsel of God. ”

    Amen Roundhouse – just thinking that same thing this morning. And it’s not just pentecostal churches, a lot of evangelical churches (especially in the States) have fallen into a seeker-model of doing church, not trusting that the gospel is “mighty to save”.

    Back to your question to me about the gospel. A few days ago I said that we left C3 because the gospel was not being preached, we had no other reason for leaving.

    Now I don’t know how old you are, how long you have been a Christian, if you even go to church?

    My husband and I were brought to faith by the Lord in 1986. It was a sovereign move of God, we were not in a church.

    Having said that, would you agree that 22 years attending one church, being in various leadership roles, my husband being a board member (there are several), would give us some insight into the workings of that same church?

    Would you agree that a couple, leaving behind 22 years of fellowship, friendships, and “emotional” security (that being me, not my husband), would take such a step without considering the consequences?

    We 100% believed we were hearing the “gospel” unitil one day we really did.

    Say what you like, attack my credibility, whatever. All we know is the Lord is faithful, He watches over us, He feeds us like the loving Shepherd he is and He sovereignly put us in a church that is faithful to preach the saving message of Christ and His sacrifice, His grace and His sovereignty.

  167. It’s been 5 years since we left and to this day Phil Pringle will still discuss issues privately with my husband (they cross paths regularly). And my husband, being the no-compromise, yet respectful, man that he is, will totally disagree with PP (we aren’t enemies of PP by the way)

    You see, there’s nothing more “anointed” 🙂 than a man who knows his bible, and is be willing to stand face to face, toe to toe with “the man of God” and say “mate, you’re wrong!”

    Sometimes the air is so rare where these pastors travel, that they think they are indisputable.

  168. @Margot

    That’s all well and good, but you still haven’t in any way answered my question. What is the gospel that they should be teaching but aren’t? You said you thought you’d heard the gospel until you really did. What gospel?

  169. “I am trying to ascertain what gospel you are talking about. Is the gospel you refer to the one where they are told they are wicked sinners destined for eternal damnation in the fires of Hell unless they accept Jesus, but they have no choice in it anyway because God has already “predestined” them, but sadly not their neighbours and friends who are destined for eternal damnation in the fires of hell because God didn’t want them? And this gospel, is it the one where once they do accept Jesus they are still wicked sinners incapable of doing anything right but are saved by the skin of their teeth and can expect to suffer in this life with sickness and poverty because that’s true holiness? Is that the gospel you wish they preached, or is it something else?”

    Certainly not that one, but let me tell you something interesting – I still sin, much to my sorrow, I still suffer sometimes, much to my despair. I am not in lack, much to the grace & daily provision of my precious Lord. I am undeservedly “predestined”, and maybe all my”good works” will be burned up. Everyone of us was destined to Hell but for the intervention of Christ (except for those here who don’t believe in Hell 🙂 )

    Even so, I can actually say, much like Mary (for all the Catholic supporters) I rejoice in the Lord, my Saviour.

    Acts 13:48 “And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; AND AS AS HAD BEEN APPOINTED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED”

    John 1:12-13 “But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even tom those who believe in His name, WHO WERE BORN NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH, NOR THE WILL OF MAN, BUT IF GOD.”

    Philippians 1:29 “FOR TO YOU IT HAS BEEN GRANTED FOR CHRIST’S SAKE, NOT ONLY TO BELIEVE IN HIM, but also to suffer for His sake.”

    Ephesians 1:11 “Also WE HAVE OBTAINED AN INHERITANCE, HAVING BEEN PREDESTINED ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE who works all things according to the counsel of His will.”

    There’s more but what we see is a manifestation of His mercy, His love, ensuring the salvation of those He has called. He is in total control, He makes our salvation sure, having regenerated us Himself, given us a new nature, enabling us to desire a relationship with Him.

    So what is the gospel we didn’t hear clearly proclaimed week in week out? We heard in part here and there, but the focus was on us and not on the Cross. That our sin cost the sacrifice of God’s own Son, raised from the dead for our justification, that we are not justified by our works, by any effort on our part, but by faith and by faith alone.

    And though it’s been said here many times by me, where did we finally hear it? We started listening to John Macathur on the Internet. In hearing we realised how malnourished we were and are very grateful for the Lord’s leading to listen.

    This was all discussed with Phil (privately) and his objection to our listening to John MacArthur? That John Macurthur hates charismatics (he doesn’t – his good friend and fellow conference speaker C J Mahaney is thoroughly charismatic) and prosperity
    doctrine, to which my husband replied “so do we”.

    Now Roundhouse, what do you think the gospel is?

  170. @Margot

    “Now Roundhouse, what do you think the gospel is?”

    The gospel is the good news. That’s what it means, so in a broad sense it means everything contained within scripture regarding God and His goodness. It is not however limited to just the salvation message, that we are sinners in need of a saviour. The gospel of salvation is one we only need to hear the once, or how ever long it takes us to come into the saving knowledge of our Lord Jesus. Once we accept Jesus as our saviour we then must move on to gain a fuller knowledge of who Jesus is and what is ours as joint heirs with Him. Paul exhorts us in Hebrews 6 to leave “the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment.”

    “I still sin, much to my sorrow, I still suffer sometimes, much to my despair. I am not in lack, much to the grace & daily provision of my precious Lord. I am undeservedly “predestined”, and maybe all my”good works” will be burned up. Everyone of us was destined to Hell but for the intervention of Christ (except for those here who don’t believe in Hell )”

    I still commit sin too. But I am not a Sinner. You know why? Because God sees my sin no more. I have been made white as the pure driven snow. My slate has been wiped clean. I am made righteous through the death and resurrection of my Lord Jesus. I am now like Him. God sees me as he sees Jesus. Not as a filthy sinner, but as a righteous son.

    And I am “predestined” too. Not to be chosen by God in some supernatural lucky-dip while my neighbour is ignored by God and forced to go to Hell, but as a believer in Jesus predestined to be in His image. (Romans 8:29)

  171. The only thing we contribute to our salvation is our sin – I’m sure you have that before.

    Predestination is a biblical doctrine revealing God\’s great sovereignty and His right to do with His creation whatever He pleases.

    Do I like it? No! Can I do anything about it? Yes, bow the knee.

    1 Corinthians 2:7 ”…but we speak God\’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom, which God PREDESTINED before the ages to our glory”

    Proverbs 21:1 ”The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord; as the rivers of water, HE TURNS IT WHEREVER HE WILL”

    What do you do with Romans 9:14-23?

    ”14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God\’s part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

    19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles..”

    @ Roundhouse – I used to think/believe the same way you do.

  172. Interesting to see that your view of salvation is also called semi-pelagianism…

    Semi-Pelagianism is a weaker form of Pelagianism a heresy derived from from Pelagius who lived in the 5th century A.D. and was a teacher in Rome. Semi-Pelagianism (advocated by Cassian at Marseilles, 5th Century) did not deny original sin and its effects upon the human soul and will. But, it taught that God and man cooperate to achieve man’s salvation. This cooperation is not by human effort as in keeping the law, but rather in the ability of a person to make a free will choice. The semi-Pelagian teaches that man can make the first move toward God by seeking God out of his own free will and that man can cooperate with God’s grace even to the keeping of his faith through human effort. This would mean that God responds to the initial effort of person and that God’s grace is not absolutely necessary to maintain faith.

    The problem is that this is no longer grace. Grace is the completely unmerited and freely given favor of God upon the sinner. But, if man is the one who first seeks God, then God is responding to the good effort of seeking him. This would mean that God is offering a proper response to the initial effort of man. This is not grace, but what is due the person who chooses to believe in God apart from God’s initial effort.

    •Semi-Pelagianism says the sinner has the ability to initiate belief in God.
    •Semi-Pelagianism says God’s grace is a response to man’s initial effort.
    •Semi-Pelagianism denies predestination.

    Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Council of Orange in 529.

  173. @Margot

    “Predestination is a biblical doctrine revealing God\’s great sovereignty and His right to do with His creation whatever He pleases.”

    Really? A biblical doctrine hey? Well, if this is true, then God is a bit of a b*****d then isn’t He? I mean, what kind of a God chooses some to be saved, and lets millions of others spend eternity in Hell? If predestination is biblical, then how do you rationalise scriptures such as John 3:16 and 17 and 2 Peter 3:9? If God is sovereign, why doesn’t He stop things happening to His children? What do you do with this scripture – “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” 2 Cor 4:4? If God is sovereign, why does the bible tell us that Satan is God of this world?

    1 Corinthians 2:7 ”…but we speak God\’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom, which God PREDESTINED before the ages to our glory”

    You might want to read this scripture again Margot. What was predestined? Not us, but the hidden wisdom, which is Christ crucified.

    Proverbs 21:1 ”The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord; as the rivers of water, HE TURNS IT WHEREVER HE WILL””

    Let me ask you, do you believe that God changes the course of a river whenever He wants to? No, a river’s course is changed over time by external forces. We see in the OT where it says that God changed Pharaohs heart, but in the NT when the story is being recounted it says that satan changed pharaohs heart. Why? Because the OT writers were using a figure of speech called a metonymy. I encourage you to find a copy of E.W Bullinger’s book “Figures of Speech in the Bible”. It will completely change your whole view of scripture.

    “Roundhouse – I used to think/believe the same way you do.”

    And I am so sad that you now think the way you do. Was C3 that bad that it would force you to go 100 miles in the opposite direction? You call their teaching heresy, but it appears you have swapped one “heresy” for another far worse. In my opinion, Calvanism is one of the most evil doctrines in Christianity, far more so than any prosperity doctrine that exists. At it’s core it is a doctrine of pride and false humility, and we all know what the bible says about those don’t we?

  174. Never mind Roundhouse – from my perspective, if you and I are Christians (chosen in Him before the foundation of the world), we are safe in His hands, we can never lose our salvation because the Son loses none that the Father has given Him, and we are kept secure by Christ (since it is not gained by anything we do, it cannot be lost by anything we do).

    See, as a believer in His finished work, it’s even got you covered. 🙂

  175. @ Roundhouse – you say “Let me ask you, do you believe that God changes the course of a river whenever He wants to? No, a river’s course is changed over time by external forces. We see in the OT where it says that God changed Pharaohs heart, but in the NT when the story is being recounted it says that satan changed pharaohs heart. Why? Because the OT writers were using a figure of speech called a metonymy. I encourage you to find a copy of E.W Bullinger’s book “Figures of Speech in the Bible”. It will completely change your whole view of scripture.”

    LOL!

    Pharoah was a sinner whose heart was inclined towards its natural tendency. God use him for His own purposes, raised him (Pharoah) up for one purpose only, to demonstrate His power!

    I don’t think your God is in control, Roundhouse, that’s not the sort of God one would want to trust with your secure salvation.

    I think I’ll have the God of Acts 4:27-28 who IS totally in control (even over river courses, and little sparrows etc) having written all of history according to His eternal plan.

    “For truly in this city there were gathered together Your holy servant jesus, whom you anointed , both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, TO DO WHATEVER YOUR HAND AND YOUR PURPOSE PREDESTINED TO OCCUR.”

  176. @Margot

    “I think I’ll have the God of Acts 4:27-28 who IS totally in control”

    Totally in control is he? Totally?

    Anyway, I’ll leave you to your pride-filled Calvinist heresy. Good luck with it!

  177. Seriously, Roundhouse – where are you getting these ideas from? Even C3 acknowledges His sovereignty in and over all things.

  178. @Margot

    “Even C3 acknowledges His sovereignty in and over all things.”

    No they don’t.

  179. “No they don’t.”

    That would be right. Phil Pringle has the right to override, veto or contradict God as he sees fit: just visualise, claim and confess whatever it is you want, folks, and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob can please Himself. Of course, introducing new age and occult theology and practices into the “church” won’t score any brownie points on judgement day, and turning up with a large retinue of mindless and undiscerning followers won’t cut any ice either.

    Pentecostals really need to live like there’s no tomorrow, because for many the time will come at the end of their days when their won’t be – and the Phil Pringles of this world will be accountable for that.

  180. Margot,
    “Even C3 acknowledges His sovereignty in and over all things.”

    I would tend to agree with that. There may be various understandings of the outworking of how it takes place, but in general that would be true.

    There are Arminian and Calvinist ‘schools’ within the movement, and some interesting debates.

    But the authority and sovereignty of God is not denied.

  181. @ Zorro – every scripture I’ve given Roundhouse supports God’s sovereignty. I didn’t go to Calvinism, I went to the bible.

    In the C3 statement of belief we see, in part, the following.
    “The bible is the living word of God – infallible, authoritative and everlasting, and the foundation of all Christian doctrine”.

    Now a statement of belief doesn’t necessarily mean they follow it to the letter, but we can “hold their feet to the fire” to their own statement. The pastors I interact with personally certainly hold to God’s sovereignty in and over all things.

    Calvary Chapel pastors, as they read their bibles for themselves, rather than through Chuck Smith’s worldview, have started becoming Reformed (see Phoenix Preacher blog), and becoming independant. It’s happening at C3 through the young adults.

  182. It seems that there is a bit of confusion over my use of the term “sovereign”. My definition in this sense is “God controlling everything and everyone”, and not “King” or “supreme ruler”. God is supreme ruler and our King, but He does not control everything and everyone. Hope this clarification will stop you all tearing your clothes and pouring ashes over your heads.

  183. Psalm 115:3, “But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.”

     Isaiah 46:10, “Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure;”

    Dan.4:35, “And all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, but He does according to His will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of earth; and no one can ward off His hand Or say to Him, What hast Thou done?”

  184. “In short, we can have a much better understanding of scripture than the early church and if we apply it to our own lives we will experience things that they didn’t.”

    A better understanding? Sounds like gnosticism to me.

    The arrant nonsense of esoteric revelation given only to “anointed” uber-pastors has wide currency within pentecostalism today; it is nothing less than a festering carbuncle filled with the pus of arrogance. Maybe that’s what Roundhouse has in view; perhaps he believes that Phil Pringle is among those with “a much better understanding” – after all, Phil does have a PhD, doesn’t he?

  185. @Margot,

    “every scripture I’ve given Roundhouse supports God’s sovereignty. I didn’t go to Calvinism, I went to the bible.”

    I know; Roundhouse is displaying the symptoms of “pentecostalitis”: Biblical ignorance, man-centredness, worldly judgement, theological confusion, and, not surprisingly, cognitive dissonance.

    He finds Scriptural truth that is contrary to his position quite disturbing, and blames the messenger rather than examining his own untenable position. He’s like Steve in that regard, although of course Steve has a case that is manifestly more severe, as evidenced by his incredibly vituperative diatribes. (I get the impression that Steve feels particularly needled by his inability to be in complete control: there’s more than a hint of psychopathy in some of his posts, and he comes across like a pastor angered by the fact that his dictatorial bent is constantly being thwarted).

  186. @Margot,

    “In the C3 statement of belief we see, in part, the following. […]”

    “”The louder he proclaimed his honor the faster we counted the spoons”
    (Ralph Waldo Emerson)

    😉

  187. Zorro, how can I take you seriously when you say such pompous things with such vanity?

    You fill the blog with reams of wordy emptiness, which, when you examine it closely, actually says nothing, or, rather, generalises to such an extent that it is really difficult to find anything worth commenting on.

    You avoid a doctrinal stance of your own, preferring to criticise others without actually giving a basis for your criticism other than some insulting remark which anyone could make of anybody. But without evidence of your claims your suppositions are vacuous.

    The only reason I can think of for your reticence in declaring your own position is your fear that someone might be able to penetrate the error you support.

    I suspect you are of the reformed school, like margot, and probably attend a small and rather exclusive Presbyterian group which focuses on Calvinist doctrine and likes to discuss the perceived errors and excesses of other groups which are not seen to be as Biblically refined as you think you are.

    Not that I have an issue with small Presbyterian groups, but I find that the exclusive variety can sometimes become self-absorbed and not appealing to those who are seeking God.

    My first probe into your background, where I said you could be a JW, still has some substance, because, even though you are clearly not a JW, you still haven’t said anything about yourself which would indicate who or what you are.

    You are truly the faceless, baseless, hollow man of the blog.

    The point in saying this is that all your ugly, nasty, creepy insults of people you have an aversion to is really the only reflection of who you are that we can gather.

    The only you we see is a person of immense pride and prejudice without a soul and devoid of compassion, willing to lie about others to build his own case and make himself seem important, intelligent and above all sanction.

    It reminds me of the way Lucifer attempted to elevate himself even above the Throne of God.

    In reality he was nothing and nobody without the blessing of God.

    Such is the way for those who hide behind a mask of self-emminence and vainglory.

  188. Going back a bit but Steve, I never said that all itinerant ministers in Charismatic churches are wealthy.

    But, since you made the point, you’d wonder why they aren’t if they believe in prosperity doctrine.

    Roundhouse, thanks for you response.

    Margot, PP probably thinks Macarthur has strong feelings because of his book “Charismatic Chaos”.

    But, I think he’s more anti-Roman catholic than anti-charismatic.
    btw, if pelagiasts are heretics than I’d say most evangelicals. charismatics I know are pelagiast, or at least semi.

    The real interesting thing is how we can start on Israel and Palestine but keep coming back to Pringle, prosperity and calvinism….

  189. btw, this was a really civil discussion for a while.

    Roundhouse, you mentioned John 3:16. The calvinist explanation of that will blow your mind.

    btw Margot, do you see God’s sovereignty in leading you and your husband to C3 in the the first place?

  190. And, by the way, there is nothing vituberative about what I say. I don’t like to sink to crass insults, but I am happy to call something as it is, and what you display here is about as ungodly as a claimant to Christianity can be.

    I am not bitter towards you or anyone here.

    If anyone has the ability to stir my passions it is Bones at times, and wazza occasionally, but you offer and reveal nothing as far as I am concerned because you, unlike Bones, Roundhouse, margot, Q, wazza and Greg, are unable to say anything at all about yourself, your beliefs, your passions, your strengths or weaknesses or your personality or even your character, apart from disdain of other believers, in your own, lengthy and wordy, writings, which I find amazing, really.

    That is truly sad.

  191. The last comment being addressed to Zorro, who makes a point of aggressively insulting people he should at least have the decency to show some respect for as believers, but seems to be unable to treat anyone with any civility unless they agree with him.

    Shark!

  192. @Q

    “Roundhouse, you mentioned John 3:16. The calvinist explanation of that will blow your mind.”

    I am familiar with the Calvinists theological gymnastics with the meaning of the word “whosoever”. That’s why I included that scripture in my post in the first place. I wanted to see who would be the first one to bring it up. Gotta say I’m a little disappointed it was you and not them! 😉

  193. I expect to get some flak for this ….but there are a lot of people with psychological problems of varying degrees using the internet.
    Whereas once they’d just talk to people or write letters, now they can publish anything which stays visible. By psychological problems I mean anything from temporary depression, to varying levels of autism to fully blown psychosis – schizophrenia etc.

    I’m probably one of them of course, so I feel sympathy. 🙂

    The internet brings out the best and worst in people but mostly the worst. But that’s why it’s fascinating. You get to see what goes on in peoples hearts. And a lot of it is pretty dark.

    Just sayin.

  194. Roundhouse, I said it because I was surprised when I first read it.
    I’d never thought to read it in that way. But my attitude to calvinism is very different to what it used to be. A lot of very bright people are attracted to it.

  195. Yes, Q, you could be right, but if Zorro is in the Corporate world advising big business how to make a huge buck no wonder the world’s in such strife if he uses the same techniques he uses here with his clients!

  196. The Reformed explanation of ‘whosoever’ and its meaning in John 3:16 is pure desperation.

    It seems to have merit in some ways, but only if you deteriorate the meaing into a micro examination of the text to such an extent that you miss the focus on the full context of what is being said.

  197. @ Q – good question. One I often wonder about. Some good things came out our time there. Some true friends, ones that don’t desert you because you leave, wonderful sons-in-law, (can’t fault the marriage-broking side of C3 🙂 ) – we see ourselves charismatic in the sense of finding great joy in being His.

    Still, considering the wilderness years for some very real people in the bible – why not our own walk at times?

    I’ve had a book for years called “People Just Like Us” full of bible accounts of various biblical characters. What we should see in our own study of the bible, God sees fit not to “omit deficiencies or delinquencies”.

    There’s a quote in the introduction of the book with Oliver Cromwell sitting for a painting and telling the artist, Lally, “paint me as I am. If you leave out a scar or a wrinkle, I will not pay you a shilling!”

    So we have real people, real names, real events, very real failings and wanderings.

    It’s sad these days to see people being told how “great” they are and God has a wonderful plan for their lives when most of us and all the untold “people” stories of history would reveal very ordinary mundane lives sometimes filled with poverty, pain and sorrow.

    Especially when the majority of Christians live in third world countries….

    Charismatic Chaos was, and is a great book, one that has impacted on a lot of lives for the good. Any small amount of Internet/blogging/Facebooking reveals that (and it’s going to be updated later this year).

    Phil Pringle may not like it but John Macarthur is very popular and having 50 million downloads of his sermons to date, is a pretty good indication of that popularity.

  198. So numbers do count, Margot! 😀

    Q,
    I wasn’t necessarily talking about Zorro…

    No, but I was!

  199. If anyone has the ability to stir my passions it is Bones at times…

    BOO!

    Prosperity isn’t about what you have to gain but what you’re willing to give.

    Bingo.

    So Kong Hee was wrong to say that if an unemployed person gave to his church, he would receive a harvest of 30, 60 or a hundred fold and to give and give until it hurts.

    btw the problem I see with Pentecostals is no Pentecostal seems prepared to call bs when they see other Penties doing stuff that is clearly wrong eg Benny Hinn. Or discussions on is the application of Malachi about tithes or not.There seems a real reluctance to critique their own theology or apply any intellectual rigour. You see that in all the other denominations. Evangelicals critique other evangelicals; Catholics critique their own Catholicism. When in the Anglican Church we had lots of discussions and critiques of the different theologies that made up the church.

    We see it on this thread.

    That a Pentecostal could say that a Pentie church leaders interpretation on Malachi is wrong gives some hope.

  200. Bones,
    the problem I see with Pentecostals is no Pentecostal seems prepared to call bs when they see other Penties doing stuff that is clearly wrong

    I disagree with that. In fact, it is a normal part of church life, but the time and place are crucial to the result.

    Zorro,
    Here’s a helpful hint for you on how to better get across your message:

  201. I disagree with that. In fact, it is a normal part of church life, but the time and place are crucial to the result.

    Pardon, but your silence actually endorses practices like this

    Miracle offering anyone?

    What price a miracle?

  202. “Phil is wrong in his interpretation of Malachi, but I don’t believe it’s a deliberate lie intended to deceive.”

    Hello in there Roundhouse. Tell me, what colour is the sky in your world?

  203. @Bones

    “Tell me, what colour is the sky in your world”

    Well it’s not dark, foreboding and continually angry like it is in your world Bones.

  204. “Here’s a helpful hint for you on how to better get across your message”

    I’m sure that I’ve been quite clear, Steve. The problem is not with the transmission, it’s with the reception. Since you bring the subject up, let me re-state some things for you:

    Christians are saved by grace, and by grace alone.

    Anyone who wishes to add to grace any works of the law is a liar and a heretic. (We do not perform good works to achieve any particular end; we perform them because we have been saved, and the Holy Spirit is at work in us to will and to act according to God’s good purposes, that all the praise might be His, and His alone).

    Those who preach the necessity of tithes are thus liars and heretics, who, by their words, present the atoning death of Christ as having been insufficient. By extension, they present God Himself as a liar, since it is He who says that a man is saved by faith alone, and not by works. They therefore defame God and rob the Gospel of its glory (for the Gospel is glorious, but a false gospel has no glory whatsoever).

    Now Phil Pringle has stated that those who fail to tithe are “robbing God” and that they are “under a curse”. Isn’t it ironic that it’s actually Phil who is robbing God – he is robbing Him of his glory by preaching something that is not true. And isn’t it ironic that those who choose to tithe are the ones under a curse, since they are attempting to obtain a blessing by obeying the law – but we who know God understand that no one can be justified by obeying the law, don’t we?

    “He who rolls a stone, it will return upon him” – the very judgement that Phil preaches will come on both him and those who heed his words. A worthless shepherd cares nothing for God’s sheep, but a true and faithful servant will speak the truth – and the truth is that “a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions”. Anyone who tells a congregation that God wants them to be rich is appealing to their greed, and they are contradicting the clear witness of Scripture and even the very words of Jesus Christ Himself.

    I would be most interested to hear exactly what it is in the foregoing that you find difficult to understand, or that flies in the face of logic, or that is contrary to sound doctrine, or that is somehow inconsistent with either the letter or spirit of Scripture.

    Tell us Steve: do you agree with Phil, or do you agree with God?

  205. @Bones

    “That a Pentecostal could say that a Pentie church leaders interpretation on Malachi is wrong gives some hope.”

    There are other things that I don’t agree with, such a vision-casting, but the difference between me and you lot (and in this I include Margot) is that I am able to “sort the wheat from the chaff” without frothing at the mouth and going ape-s**t like people such as yourself do when they hear that type of message. There is plenty that is right and admirable in the Pente movement, and some very, very good teaching (even from, shock horror, Phil Pringle). It is not difficult to just say to yourself “no, I don’t agree with that” and still be able to sit under their teaching. It’s makes my life much easier than getting all pharisaic and judgemental. You should try it sometime. Although I have deduced from your many diatribes on here that you revel in self-righteous slavering over perceived “incorrect” doctrine.

  206. ‘I am able to “sort the wheat from the chaff”’

    Perhaps you missed the bits where it says:

    “As dead flies give perfume a bad smell, so a little folly outweighs wisdom and honour.”

    “little foxes […] ruin the vineyards”

    “This false teaching is like a little yeast that spreads through the whole batch of dough!”

    It’s that nasty disease, Roundhouse: you’ve got the pentecostalitis, and it seems like you’ve got it bad, really bad.

    The best antidote would be to read your Bible more. (Note that Scripture is found to be most efficacious when administered along with high doses of the Holy Spirit – only be sure you get the genuine one; the generic-brand copy cat versions will actually exacerbate conditions such as yours).

  207. Bones,
    Pardon, but your silence actually endorses practices like this

    Well there are ways of bringing change and there are ways to sustain them. I prefer to get to know people and build a relationship. It opens dialogue.

    I put it to you that your method will never work because you are running a very public prosecution using one side of an argument, and Zorro’s aggressive manner is like throwing coffee in a person’s face after he’s invited them to a meeting to discuss why they should review their beliefs before he even hears their perspective.

    It isn’t going to work for anyone.

    And it is a godless cause.

  208. “Well there are ways of bringing change and there are ways to sustain them. I prefer to get to know people and build a relationship. It opens dialogue.”

    Really? Why don’t you try and correct Phil, then?

    I suspect that it wouldn’t result in “open dialogue” at all – it would result in an open door, through which you would be invited to leave.

    Perhaps you should ask all the other people who have tried; I’m sure that they will fill you in how things work at C3 (I assume that you haven’t been with the “movement” for very long, or you would already know).

  209. Some faith level yo have Zorro! You need to read the Word more often to get some spiritual confidence into yourself and relieve you of the fear of failure with men.

  210. Q. How do you get a 10 minute standing ovation in a Pentecostal Church?

    Answer: Get arrested for conspiracy to cheat church funds and pay for your wife’s music career (after threatening a whistle blower with court action).

    There really is something wrong in the mentality of a lot of Pentecostals.

  211. “Zorro’s aggressive manner is like throwing coffee in a person’s face after he’s invited them to a meeting to discuss why they should review their beliefs before he even hears their perspective.”

    I’m all ears, Steve. Unfortunately you have proven more than a little coy when it comes to divulging exactly what your perspective is.

    Anyway, I’ll put this to you again:

    God says that a man is justified by faith, and by faith alone. (I assume that you understand that this is so – if you don’t, then you are not a Christian).

    Phil Pringle says that anyone who fails to tithe is under a curse.

    So do please tell us, who is the liar – is it God, or is it Phil Pringle?

  212. “I prefer to get to know people and build a relationship. It opens dialogue.”

    It’s the same approach as Jesus used, isn’t it, Steve?

    Do you recall that He invited the Pharisees in for a nice cuppa and a chat, rather than roundly and publicly rebuking them?

  213. You don’t get it do you, Zorro?

    When you did it once with what I said on other threads I let it go, but when you persistently misrepresented what I say I let you go. I won’t discuss issues with a person with poor communicative morals which cut my sentences down to mean something I did not say.

    All it does is reveal that you are a fraud. I’d rather let you stew than feed your ego so you can lie again about what I say.

    Secondly, I believe anyone who sets themselves up as a critic should have at least the credibility and courage to reveal themselves. The only thing you have constantly revealed is your cowardice in hiding behind a mask whilst taking aim at C3.

    I am not their spokesman. I reserve the right to comment on what I want to to whoever I want to.

    It’s not me who needs to set up a coffee with Phil. It’s obviously you. Have you ever tried? I doubt it. But, knowing your attitude, why would he waste time on your ugly attitude.

    You talk of Jesus and the Pharisees as if you compare. When you display anything like Christlikeness then maybe you can make a claim. What you are doing bears no resemblance to Jesus whatsoever.

    Thirdly, you have persistently challenged my intelligence, ability to communicate my point of view, my courage, my ministerial skills, my vocation, my church, my friends, my relationship with Christ, and a host of other things, including my salvation.

    On what basis do you think I should say anything to you?

    I owe you nothing.

  214. I say you’re a Calvinist from a small Presbyterian church in some inner city suburb, possibly on the board or deaconate of the church, which is quite small, say between 20 and 40 members on a good day.

    Terrible that eh?

    Obviously not as good as your large techno screen crowd. I used to go to midweek services where it was just me, the minister and God with no music at all. I actually enjoyed it.

    My unpleasant experience at City Harvest Church after being brought there by a female friend

    Finally, there was the after service gathering. Cell groups gather together. At that time, cell groups go by where they lived. I was not located “right” for that cell group, but they “accepted” me, I even got presents, and got called a sister! However, nothing seemed genuine. I was actually scared of them.

    Needless to say, thereafter I refused to go back. My friend was then told that I will suffer eternal damnation and it would damage her soul and theirs (the cell groups’) if she keeps associating with me. I haven’t talked to her since.

    I found a church where my soul belongs to anyways, and it is one of those “small” churches that is a bit more traditional. Where I found real friends who didn’t just took me to church because she promised other people she had take 2 people to church the next weekend.

    http://temasektimes.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/my-unpleasant-experience-at-city-harvest-church-after-being-brought-there-by-a-female-friend/

  215. Is there something wrong with being a small Presbyterian church, Bones? I don’t think I said there was. Why do you?

    I apologise if I gave that impression.

    I don’t think it serves any purpose being involved with a blog which is such a one-trick pony attacking one church so often and with such a mean spirit.

    I’ll leave you and Zorro to it.

  216. [edited by Greg the Explorer] I asked you to let it go Zorro now please do so. We do not want to see one person attacked mercilessly over one subject all the time. From here on ALL C3 comments will be deleted when they are obviously not comments but attacks against Steve.

  217. What a shame, Greg; it was such a well-crafted post 😦

    I didn’t mean to offend Steve’s delicate sensibilities; you must admit that he has played his share of hard-ball, however I understand that sauce for the goose is not necessarily sauce for the gander…

  218. Email 31st August 2012

    DEFEND AMERICA
    VOTE ISRAEL
    cufi.org

    The Presidential election is around the corner
    Help us keep the focus on Israel!

    Dear Wazza,

    The Presidential election is around the corner. As we head to the polls, the weak economy and our mounting debt will no doubt be on all of our minds. But we must make sure that neither we nor our families forget another important issue. We must remember to vote for the candidate whom we believe will most strongly support our ally Israel.

    Supporting Israel is the right thing to do. Supporting Israel is the Christian thing to do. And supporting Israel happens to be in our best interests as Americans. Israel is a true democracy, a stalwart ally, and our first line of defense against shared enemies devoted to attacking America and killing Americans.

    Unlike so many of our allies, Israel has never asked for American soldiers to fight and die in her defense. All Israel has ever asked is the ability to defend herself by herself. In so doing, Israel’s soldiers are actually defending us.

    You can help us spread this important message by using our line of Defend America, Vote Israel products. http://www.cufi.org/site/R?i=Gq933QC5-FoVDCnTVMYbTg Since we want to spread this important message, we are offering:
    › With a donation of $20 or more you will receive a Defend America – Vote Israel lapel pin.

    › With a donation of $50 or more you will receive a Defend America – Vote Israel lapel pin, tumbler, gel pens and post-its.

    › With a donation of $75 or more you will receive a Defend America – Vote Israel lapel pin, tumbler, gel pens, post-its, yard sign and coffee mug.

    › With a donation of $100 or more you will receive a Defend America – Vote Israel lapel pin, tumbler, gel pens, post-its, yard sign, coffee mug and t-shirt.

    As we enter the heart of an election season, it’s crucial that your friends and neighbors recognize the importance of a strong Israel to American security. Its even more important that they act on this belief when they enter the voting booth. By using your Defend America, Vote Israel products, you can help ensure that both countries will be winners on election day!

    May God Bless You and Those that You Love,

    Pastor John Hagee
    Chairman
    CUFI

    David Brog
    Executive Director
    CUFI

  219. I just want Muslims to stop killing people and getting upset over videos – whether they are fascists or capitalists or members of the Green Party.

    I just want Jewish settlers to stop treating Palestinians like shit and bulldozing the houses of Palestinian Muslims and Christians – with the blessings of course of many Christians.

  220. I’d like to see which Israeli’s were surveyed, and where. It would make a difference to the outcome. There is a vast difference between Jerusalem Israeli thought, which would be more religious, and Tel Aviv, which is more cosmopolitan, for instance.

    The survey group only surveyed 508 people. Were they scattered around the country, or one small, isolated sample?

    An unbiased article:

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/survey-highlights-anti-arab-attitudes-in-israel/

    It seems there are some controversial issues behind the survey.

    Anyone can produce a survey which backs their political aims and then write an article about it and get it published across the blogosphere by sympathetic sites.

    It’s called the politics of activism.

  221. Anyone can produce a survey which backs their political aims and then write an article about it and get it published across the blogosphere by sympathetic sites.

    It’s called the politics of activism.

    So very true.

Comments are closed.