tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.comments2011-06-28T04:57:04.795-07:00Methodist Preacher's Guest PageUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-73959953581360257262011-06-28T04:57:04.795-07:002011-06-28T04:57:04.795-07:00You name nine members of the Methodist working par...You name nine members of the Methodist working party and seem to dismiss them as follows:<br /><br />Carter - you have no criticism.<br /><br />Ashton - signed up for an event which supports the conclusion of the report.<br /><br />Bardsley - you criticise his involvement with PSC.<br /><br />Harris - you say this senior lecturer who has written several books and papers in comparative study in religion is somehow "best remembered" for a single paragraph in which you have to add emphasis to her factual description, without even challenging her facts.<br /><br />Hucklesby - you criticise his comments about children dying, though he doesn't seem to specify that the children are or have to be on one side of the conflict for them to matter and he says clearly that the fear Israelis feel must be acknowledged. You also claim he met the wrong sort of Israeli when he visited - they're left-wing so they can't be trusted (are you listening, "Methodist Preacher"?).<br /><br />N Jones - your interpretation of what she said means you say she "appears" (your word) to think something which might be similar to the leader of an organisation she is involved in and of which you clearly disapprove.<br /><br />M Jones - signed up for an event which supports the conclusion of the report.<br /><br />Leah - your criticism seems to be that he thought the boycott should go further and that his writing is promoted by someone of whom you disapprove. Not enough people seem to notice that pretty good evidence of a lack of bias in the working party is that Leah quite obviously lost that argument in the working group's discussions. There are political activists who want all Israeli goods to be boycotted but the working party disagreed with that point of view.<br /><br />McBratney - he once criticised pedestrian provision in part of Israel. (Clearly biased against the Jewish people, then.)<br /><br />It seems to me that you're saying perhaps two of the nine (Bardlsey and Leah) might have prejudicial political bias. Two (Ashton and M Jones) you criticise for signing up for something which supports the conclusions of the report - perhaps after the report was written (I can't tell). One (Hucklesby) you misunderstand, one (Harris) you don't read properly, one (N Jones) you criticise what you acknowledge is only what she "appears" to say, one (McBratney) you criticise for something so monumentally irrelevant that it is frankly laughable, and you don't seem to have managed to unearth anything even that thin to throw at Carter. <br /><br />And this is before we tackle the quantity of guilt-by-association you indulge in. You're clutching at straws, I'm afraid. If this is the best argument available, you've managed to convince me that "Methodist Preacher" is probably wrong. There is no anti-semitic conspiracy at the heart of Methodism. There are things in the report which could have been better worded (e.g. being clearer that "Christian Zionism" is not the same thing as "Zionism") but the sort of over-the-top reaction found on this blog makes me despair sometimes. As you say, "unfortunately the holders of extremist ideologies often have a tendency to picture the world in neat compartments of good and bad".<br /><br />I should declare an interest in that I know two members of the working party personally, but I had nothing to do with the working party myself.Paul Cnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-29911076290326824602011-06-21T00:23:40.059-07:002011-06-21T00:23:40.059-07:00Paul - if you re-read the post you will see that &...Paul - if you re-read the post you will see that "4,000 rockets" referred to those fired by Hizbollah on Northern Israel in June and July 2006 - not Gaza.<br /> <br />However, if you insist upon getting onto the subject of the collapse of the ceasefire which resulted in Operation Cast Lead, you should - in all fairness - at least mention the fact that on November 4th 2008 the incursions launched into Gaza were a result of Hamas tunnelling under the border with the aim of kidnapping still more Israeli soldiers.<br /> <br />You should also mention the fact that in late 2008 the ceasefire was coming to its end and the fact that despite Egyptian pressure, Hamas refused to renew it.<br /> <br />A recognition of the fact that Hamas, even during the ceasefire, was still firing rockets and mortars at the Israeli civilian population in the region surrounding Gaza is also essential to any fair and balanced analysis of the situation. <br /><br />Now, I'm afraid your knee-jerk assumption that I do not listen or try to understand the people of Palestine is quite mistaken.<br /> <br />Probably unlike yourself, I shop with them in the supermarket, stand with them in queues at the hospital and ride the same buses with them. At my son's wedding last year there were three Arab families - long-time friends - among the guests.<br /><br />I also listen to the leaders of the Palestinian people, not only in English, but when they speak to their own people too.<br /><br /> That is why I know that the leaders of the BDS movement have no intention of their campaign leading to a peaceful two-state solution: the outcome the Methodist Church claims to support.<br /> <br />BDS is but a strategy to bring about a situation in which Jews would no longer have self-determination. That, according to the EUMC working definition, is anti-Semitic.<br /> <br />The Methodist Church, therefore, in joining the BDS movement, is promoting a strategy designed to bring about an end game to which the Church claims to be opposed. <br />It is this dissonance which the Methodist Church is required to address.Israelinursenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-62905820339829821992011-06-20T12:39:03.542-07:002011-06-20T12:39:03.542-07:00Well Paul it is quite clear where your anti-Israel...Well Paul it is quite clear where your anti-Israeli position takes you. I have been monitoring this issue on this blog for the last twelve months and can see nothing in the article by Israeli Nurse which is not supported by the facts as they have emerged.<br /><br />You complain about a polorised debate within the church and yet you support the establishment of a working party deliberately chosen from the Connexions most anti-Semitic elements. How can there not be a polarised debate if that is the starting point?<br /><br />Thank God that eyes are being opened, people are listening to the Holy Spirit and in a few years time the position of the church will be reversed.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05295136895729093238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-59641283511820134602011-06-20T11:02:59.654-07:002011-06-20T11:02:59.654-07:00This is an appalling piece of one sided hatchet wr...This is an appalling piece of one sided hatchet writing.<br /><br />To insist a Methodist working party contains only peoplke who hold the denocratically agreed views of the Methodist Church is entirely reasonable. When the Pope makes his views known as a Methodist I don't expect to be consulted.<br /><br />A whole list of people and organisations are insulted because of their alleged links to groups who the Israeli state doesn't like ranging from the Democratically elected representatives of the Palestinan people to anglican priests. Maybe if Meth Preacher and the author of this hatchet job spent their time listening to and trying to understand the people of Palestine even the unsavoury ones rather than labelling condemning and ignoring anyone who holds a contrary view we might have a less polarised and more constructive debate both within the church and else where.<br /><br />One point is particularily offensive - the 4000 rockets tale. <br /><br />Israel recognised that due to a ceasfire arrange in the April before their attack on Gaza rocket fire was vastly reduced and Hammas was enforcing ceasefire on other groups. In return teh blockade would be relaxed and the Isrealis would not use military force within Gaza. <br />Sounds good well not if you are in gaza as the blockade wasn't lifted and on Nov 4th when the world lookedat Obama being elected Israel launched incursions into Gaza. If Israel wanted peace it had a mechanism.<br /><br />The irony of Cast Lead was it's objectives (less rocket fire, less israeli casualties) could have been met without violence, one baddly aimed Israeli 155mm shell killed 4 Israeli soldiers - more casualties than all 4000 rocket managed - and afterwards there was no opportunity for lasting peace. Just more rockets from gaza more Israeli drones and bombs going into Gazza and a Gazan population depleted by over a 1000 and primed to hate the Israelis they see as abusing and killing them. <br /><br />What lable will you put on this story - pro-hammas, anti-semitic, hezbolla sympathiser? You don't have to agree but deal with my understanding of the injustice instead of putting a label on me or making insinuations because of my friends and aquantances.Paulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-86651781878558538172011-03-06T01:37:40.937-08:002011-03-06T01:37:40.937-08:00Thanks, David. Send me your verifiable details - e...Thanks, David. Send me your verifiable details - email address, mobile, landline, name etc (which I will thoroughly verify) and I'll send them on to my friend. You can find my details on the main page www.methodistpreacher.comDavidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05295136895729093238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-74052844062660195452011-03-06T00:46:32.746-08:002011-03-06T00:46:32.746-08:00A friend sent this to me last week because I'v...A friend sent this to me last week because I've joined eHarmony & have had no luck either. I have every sympathy with the lady concerned & think we should meet; or have some way of communicating.<br />One answer I already have to her queries (which amount to 'is it me or are all men out there psychos?') is it's neither. I say that computer dating is rubbish. In my opinion it's a case of the commercial world taking over something that should come naturally. I tried eHarmony so I couldn't be accused of not trying computer dating; and either way, it clarifies what I should be doing next.<br />My compliments to this lady on having the courage to write about this. I think there are a lot of us out there.Davidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-50898046711700718282011-03-05T23:43:14.082-08:002011-03-05T23:43:14.082-08:00To find the right person many people go from one s...To find the right person many people go from one site to another site. Such that they can easily found the person this can mingle with them.Double Your Datinghttp://www.doubleyourdatingebook.org/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-80676889711432262532010-10-30T01:34:48.600-07:002010-10-30T01:34:48.600-07:00This bit stuck out to me:
He has a go at homosexu...This bit stuck out to me:<br /><br /><i>He has a go at homosexuality in Romans and in 1Corinthians 6. Here he says “the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God”. But amongst his list of those who are “wicked” are not only Gay people but “adulterers, thieves, the greedy and drunkards.” That would limit us all somewhat.The question is why do we signal out gay people when God has made them the way they are?Is an adult Gay person in some way sinful because of his or her sexuality?</i><br /><br />But what the Terry Wynn forgot to say is that Jesus also tells people to "go and sin no more".<br /><br />Is it true that God makes people gay? And is Paul referring to homosexual orientation or homosexual acts? These big questions were conveniently avoided.<br /><br />If I was a kleptomaniac, a compulsive thief, should I be able to say "God made me this way, I'll be stealing for the rest of my life". Of course not, and we wouldn't expect the church to endorse such a view. So why do we take a different line with homosexuality?<br /><br />I would agree that the church has a PR problem and is seen as judgemental.<br /><br />But the love of Jesus is a love that calls us to repentance, to become more like Him, not to continue in our sinful state.<br /><br />So the church needs to proclaim not just the unconditional love and acceptance of Jesus, but also His call to live a life of holiness, because that is God's desire for His people. Balancing these two is not an easy task.Peter Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-62580076936509091692010-10-28T16:31:49.733-07:002010-10-28T16:31:49.733-07:00There is no evidence at all that shorthand existed...There is no evidence at all that shorthand existed in those days. Q is not Matthew's notes of Jesus' teachings, it is a variable collection of sources (if indeed it exists at all - it's all very hypothetical). Jesus probably did know some Greek (no evidence at all for Latin, and significantly no evidence for any visit to Sepphoris - a noticeable silence in the Gospel traditions), but there is sufficient evidence of an Aramaic substratum to the Gospel traditions that it is pretty certain he preached in Aramaic.<br /><br />Like you, I believe in the authority of scripture. And yes, I do know about the rules by which it can be interpreted. Appealing to Matthew being 'inspired' may be a nice doctrinal point, but in this context it sidesteps the evidence. I don't think you have answered my point about the range of possible meanings in what Jesus actually said.Rev Tony Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09248241050776947372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-56875259847520774302010-10-26T16:20:28.061-07:002010-10-26T16:20:28.061-07:00Rev Tony B, Matthew as a levite and a tax-collect...Rev Tony B, Matthew as a levite and a tax-collector was an educated man with tax-collector's shorthand (Q?). We have to trust that under the guidance of the Holy Spirit , he did not misrepresent Jesus. We cannot assume that Jesus , from Galilee of the Gentiles (greeks) spoke Aramaic. He could have spoken Greek - or even both. Not to mention Latin. As a carpenter/builder there would have been a lot of work for Joseph&Son in nearby Sephoris.<br /><br />The Bible does NOT work by picking and choosing texts. There are rules, as you clearly know.They are linguistic, historical contextual, logical and, most importantly, if God is the ultimate author, the interpretation of scripture with scripture. <br /><br />"Blind unbelief is sure to err and scan His work in vain. God is his own interpreter and He will make it plain".<br /><br />Which is not to suggest that you, or others, do not believe; but it does question the extent of belief. I do not like to let scripture judge me, but my salvation does not lie in letting me judge scripture.Felonious Monknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-68409067422137014302010-10-26T02:29:48.256-07:002010-10-26T02:29:48.256-07:00"If we are going to use scripture, let's ..."If we are going to use scripture, let's use it accurately. What Jesus said was that some were eunuchs (in the Greek) from birth."<br /><br />Well, to be accurate, that's what Matthew (in Greek) said what Jesus said (in Aramaic). There is no way of knowing precisely what Jesus said in Aramaic. We can reconstruct from the Greek, but that's conjecture. We have no way of knowing what the Aramaic term translated into Greek as 'eunuch' might have included figurately - and it probably did have figurative uses, because that's one of the ways in which Hebrew and Aramaic worked.<br /><br />'Picking and choosing texts' seems to me to be one of those phrases. Like someone who rejected advice I gave him on the grounds that it was just 'a load of theology' - one of his friends told him that 'a load of theology' was his code-word for 'biblical teaching I don't want to hear.' We all pick and choose texts, because that's how the Bible works. The question is whether the texts are read against their context, or chosen because they reinforce what we already think.Rev Tony Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09248241050776947372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9203279421625687035.post-42190537044171757692010-10-25T16:53:07.737-07:002010-10-25T16:53:07.737-07:00If we are going to use scripture, let's use it...If we are going to use scripture, let's use it accurately. What Jesus said was that some were eunuchs (in the Greek) from birth. Are we saying that gays are eunuchs?<br /><br />The OT laws that burden the people were the ritual laws excessively applied and NOT the moral law. Jesus tightened some of them up - including the one on adultery.<br /><br />The woman caught in adultery was a political trap - and - someone was missing for the case to be proved beyond doubt. He also said,"Go and sin no more".<br /><br />Just three examples of the many errors of logic and exegesis in this article. However, this is what we expect when someone tries to justify sin. <br /><br />It is not good to encourage a form of behaviour that is spiritually and physically destructive. <br /><br />When people say that the Church is not like Jesus, I wnat to know what they think Jesus is like and how often they read their Bibles.<br /><br />Finally, we are not supposed to pick and choose texts. Therefore, we cannot ignore what Paul or Jesus says when we do not agree with it. We need the whole counsel of God. Something clearly missing here.Felonious Monknoreply@blogger.com