The hypocritical life of Brian

Is this an incitement to violence? Or at least an incitement to consider violence as a reaction to something someone doesn’t like being said?

I haven’t seen any suggestions that the Bible be legislated as hate speech. It’s not the book that’s the problem, it’s the self appointed cherry picking bullshit artists.

If Tamaki thinks it’s ok to dump intolerance (some suggest it is hate) on some members of New Zealand society, then he should be prepared to receive some criticism in return.

Euplectes franciscanus -Kotu Creek, Western Division, The Gambia -male-8.jpg

 A real northern red bishop

Leave a comment

146 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  April 16, 2019

    To be fair to Tamaki there is no suggestion he is unprepared for criticism. He has a point that the present hate speech moral panic is extreme and ill considered.
    https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-shooting/112041268/calls-for-censorship-reforms-are-loud-but-not-clear

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  April 16, 2019

      He’s setting up straw men to give himself free publicity. Nobody is saying that quoting the Bible is automatically hate speech.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  April 16, 2019

        I wonder how he reconciles his own life as ‘bishop’ with 1 Timothy III.

        Reply
  2. Corky

     /  April 16, 2019

    Tamaki has a point. There will be trouble. And he has the soldiers to do it. I like Tamaki for one reason..he’s a great foil for the nihilistic liberal left.

    Reply
    • phantom snowflake

       /  April 16, 2019

      His main point, of course, is all about the pingers. Still parasitically marketing his ‘Prosperity Gospel’ pyramid scheme to the poor after all these years:

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  April 16, 2019

        He had an out-of-the -body experience, PSF. He has be sanctified.

        Bishop Brian Tamaki

        ”@BishopTamaki
        1h1 hour ago
        More
        Love is The Greatest..When i met Christ i met Love..Pure,unconditional Love..when i had my out of body experience in 1979 there were two incredible Spiritual Powers coursing thru my body..Raw Power and Indescribable Love..Love is Greater Than Hate.”

        Reply
        • phantom snowflake

           /  April 16, 2019

          If an OOBE is the requirement for sanctification; I’d be at least a minor Deity at this point…

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  April 16, 2019

            Pray expand on your post.

            Reply
            • phantom snowflake

               /  April 16, 2019

              As someone who has had numerous Out-Of-Body-Experiences; I have to disagree with ‘The Bish’ that it makes one ‘special’.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              I encountered a demon. Probably Satan. He hung around for 3 days & told me nothing but lies. Very disconcerting.

            • Corky

               /  April 16, 2019

              Yeah, I get all that. FSF. We all have OOBE’s when we go to sleep. We don’t remember most of the time because they become dreams mixed with subconscious inanities. The Bishop probably thought he was special because it was the first time he was conscious of the experience. It can be confronting.

              That you remember means you are travelling under a degree of conscious volition. So let’s here about some of your experiences.

            • phantom snowflake

               /  April 16, 2019

              G: That one’s worth a post all of its own! How about it??

            • phantom snowflake

               /  April 16, 2019

              Corky: I don’t have the time at present but am happy to return to this subject.

            • Corky

               /  April 16, 2019

              OK… yes, that will be fine. I collect case studies when I come upon them.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              @ snowy

              He spoke to me directly & quite clearly in my mind. We had numerous conversations. Fortunately I remained a skeptic & the fool said in the end that he could provide empirical proof of his powers.

              When he failed to deliver my Lotto first prize win the following Saturday I told him to piss off & never heard from him again.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              @ Snowy
              PS: I’m not making this up for a lark or to mock. This really did actually happen. It was extraordinarily real-feeling, & it rocked m, because if Satan really existed, then the Bible might be right & God could potentially also exist.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  April 16, 2019

            I’d have thought that you couldn’t have one without the other.

            Out of body experiences and sleep paralysis are normal physical things that happen to many people. It’s like having a dream that seems real because you’re lying in bed, feeling unable to move, seeing something in the room or so it seems…most unnerving.

            Reply
        • Gezza

           /  April 16, 2019

          The thought just popped into my mind that it’s a pity that when he had his out of body experience he didn’t just stay out of it.

          Reply
      • Patzcuaro

         /  April 16, 2019

        Nihilistic: rejecting all religious and moral principles in the belief that life is meaningless.

        I’m not sure that nihilistic is the correct adjective to describe the liberal left,they may not be religious but I think it is morals that drive the liberal left, caring for those less fortunate than themselves. So you have a liberal left which tends to be less religious and more moral.
        On the right you have the opposite with the religious right bein more religious but less moral, so nobody ends up nihilistic.

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  April 16, 2019

          It has just occurred to me that Israel F didn’t include murderers, rapists, kiddyfiddlers, torturers, the violent of all types and so on in his list.

          Does this mean that these people will be all right in his eyes (which he seems to think are the same as God’s eyes) when it comes to Heaven and Hell ?

          Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  April 16, 2019

          Oscar Wilde wrote a play ‘Vera or The Nihilist’ (or some such title) It was a failure, although nihilism was a trendy topic. I have read it, and can’t imagine wanting to see it much as I love his works generally.

          Reply
  3. Kimbo

     /  April 16, 2019

    He’s wrong that you are (automatically) allowed to quote the Bible at work. A retail assistant at the checkout making $17.50/hour is no more allowed to do that, contrary to their employer’s permission, than Israel Folau can tweet Scripture what is deemed, in its public context,offensive.

    But it ain’t hate speech. Neither should it, or any part of it be considered hate speech. And very important liberties are lost if it is legally considered hate speech. Hopefully and most likely wise heads will prevail among our legislators, and it won’t even be considered. The PM has said as much.

    But…the cost of freedom is eternal vigilance and some things are worth fighting for. Including religious freedom. Indeed as it was fought for (in our tradition primarily via the English Civil War of the mid-17th Century) we now have it. But it is a last resort for when reasonable constitutional means are no longer available. Plus even if Christians did use military means…I doubt they would submit to the leadership of Brian Tamaki in that jihad.

    And speaking of jihad – which has spiritual, not militant dimensions, it’s likely the former sense in which he meant it. Which means it’s not hate speech either. I don’t think. More like a wannabe Ian Paisley-like campaign rouser. And unlike Paisley, there is no great sympathetic sectarian base to which his inflammatory self-promotion is appealing. But yeah, by all means criticise Tamaki. Usually satire is the best means to deal with demagogues, especially the religious self-appointed Ayatollahs.

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  April 16, 2019

      I think Mr Tamaki is in the wrong place. If he doesn’t soon repent of claiming he’s a prophet he will miss his true calling which I wonder is in politics.

      (I don’t believe God gave him an out of body experience. I think that’s deception too).

      If we forgave him his foibles and pray for him, perhaps he could be a great PM. He’s got the goods for that role.

      He’s easy to forgive. He tries so hard and he’s not afraid of criticism. That’s a good thing isn’t it? Mocking doesn’t prove anything except that we are bickering mockers and very vulnerable.

      Reply
      • Mother

         /  April 16, 2019

        I agree Phantom. OOBEs do nothing toward sainthood. At best, they make a person wonder.

        I seriously wonder why Mr Tamaki broadcasted that experience. It just shows he’s using his natural talents and strengths for self glorification. He should know better, if he practises what he preaches.

        Reply
        • Mother

           /  April 16, 2019

          “and very vulnerable.” Hence Mr Tamaki’s fighting talk. That’s not hateful. It’s honest and being as loving as he can at this point.

          Reply
      • Corky

         /  April 16, 2019

        Even given his foibles, Mother…I would bet he has helped more people than you ever will in 10 lifetimes.

        Reply
        • Corky

           /  April 16, 2019

          ”Out of body experiences and sleep paralysis are normal physical things that happen to many people. ”

          Somebody has no idea what they are talking about. 😃✔

          Reply
      • Kimbo

         /  April 16, 2019

        Yeah, nah. I’ve met his followers. Very earnest folk, and good neighbours (as per the second great commandment to “love your neighbour as yourself”) to everyone. Including to the LGBT community for whom, contrary to public and media expectations, they hold not an ounce of malice.

        But contradict something, anything the Bishop says and you get the programmed response of any hardcore religious cult. Don’t want that transplanted into the political sphere, thanks very much.

        Reply
        • Mother

           /  April 16, 2019

          It wouldn’t be transplanted into the political sphere if he repented. Then ongoing prayer and love would keep it out of the political sphere.

          But people would rather mock? That will just fuel Mr Tamaki’s fighting spirit. A vicious cycle of the apathetic.

          Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  April 16, 2019

          I dislike the Prosperity Doctrine on principle, and it seems totally unBiblical. Why does he need a garage full of Harleys ?

          Reply
          • Kimbo

             /  April 16, 2019

            Yeah, especially as Moses departed into the wilderness in his Triumph! 😁

            Boom, tish! I’m here all night folks and I recommend you try the veal.

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  April 17, 2019

              har har har.

              You know, of course, that the Children of Israel passed through NZ, where ‘they were greatly troubled by Moabites.’

              Every one a gem !

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  April 17, 2019

              A vicar called at the house of one of his parishioners. He could tell that someone was at home, but, to his great annoyance, no one came to the door. So he wrote ‘Revelation III. 20’ on a piece of paper and pushed it under the door.

              On Sunday the woman who lived in the house put a piece of paper into his hand as the congregation was leaving. It read ‘Genesis III, 10.’

              This really needs the King James version !

      • Patzcuaro

         /  April 16, 2019

        Brian Tamaki’s true calling is extracting money from the less well off, a kin to the payday lenders and back of the truck salesmen, that target the same demographic.

        Reply
      • Gezza

         /  April 16, 2019

        If he doesn’t soon repent of claiming he’s a prophet he will miss his true calling which I wonder is in politics.

        On the face of it, & looking at some of those in the Old Testament, his claim to be a prophet seems reasonable. What rules this claim out?

        Reply
        • Mother

           /  April 16, 2019

          Jesus was the last prophet.

          Can’t you see how easily we get led astray? Any person with charisma, strength and power can become a believer, then lead others astray. Muhammad believed in Jesus too.

          How hard is it to believe in Jesus the last prophet, the Saviour, compared with believers who place themselves above God?

          Reply
          • Kimbo

             /  April 16, 2019

            Hey, as a good Calvinist believer in the merits of Presbyterian church government, I’m prepared to reject Tamaki on sight when he (self) titles himself “Bishop” 😀

            And that’s before we get to “Prophet” and now “Apostle”.

            Reply
            • Mother

               /  April 16, 2019

              Ah, hello Kimbo. But I suspect not a PCANZer.

              Just to get in first – I’m under the authority of my husband sir.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  April 16, 2019

              I think that a self-awarded title would be meaningless even to the holder. I could sign myself PhD, but I’d know that I wasn’t one.

          • Gezza

             /  April 16, 2019

            Jesus was the last prophet.

            Might depend on the definition of a Bibkical prophet one prefers. Kimbo might know of some, but I can’t recall or quickly locate any claim by Jesus that he was the last prophet, & as he was theoretically God it kind of devalues him to a very minor status to consider him one.

            John, of Book of Revelation fame, is most definitely a prophet & his writings followed long after Jesus’s disappearance.

            Reply
            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Nope, Mother is right.

              Christology 101:

              Yes, Jesus was a prophet, indeed the last of them. See Hebrews 1: 1-2. He is also Son of God, Messiah (priest, prophet, king), judge, all the ministries of Old Testament Israel encapsulated in one person…who is also fully divine and fully human.

              John was designated an Apostle, not a prophet. The Apostles were the original witnesses of Christ’s ministry, and the guardians of his message. The age of miracles passed away with them.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  April 16, 2019

              So all the saints subsequently canonized by the Church faked their miracles? Or had them faked for them? I’m shattered.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              …and the era of the giving of new revelation ended with the Apostles. You may not like the doctrine of progressive revelation, fair enough. But Christian orthodoxy is that it ended with the biblical Apostles,

              Or at least what cannot be attributed to them via faithful mediation, e.g., Luke was not an Apostle, yet he was instructed by one – Paul – and wrote his Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles that are apostolic in doctrine and authenticity.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              You have the makings of a good iconoclastic cessasionist Protestant, Alan. Sorry to resort to jargon, but like debating climate change, sometimes one has to use technical language…even for simple souls such as yourself.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              Interesting. Thanks for that.

              Why are the revelations in Revelation not prophecies in your & others’ view?

              The Apostles were the original witnesses of Christ’s ministry, and the guardians of his message. The age of miracles passed away with them.

              Very unfortunate. The empirical proofs stopped being supplied before the means to validate & reliaby record & show them became available. Also, very dodgy, in my view.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Why are the revelations in Revelation not prophecies in your & others’ view?

              I’ll try and take Alan’s advice and be more brief. I didn’t say the Book Revelation weren’t necessarily “prophecy”. Indeed it is as is all the New Testament if you understand prophecy as primarily forth-telling, not Nostradamus-fore-telling.

              However, you were originally enquiring about job titles. I said the one who gave us the doctrines and events explained in the New Testament, including the Book of Revelation/the Apocalypse are designated “Apostles”, not “prophets”.

              I think most of what Johns saw in visions in the book of Revelation/Apocalypse referred to events that occurred at the time. Space here does not allow me to explain why. However, as it deals with persecution of the church, it remains relevant to the church. Hence it “forthtells'” how the faithful are to respond to persecution. And all Christians await the return of Christ, which is also foretold/prophesied in the book.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Very unfortunate. The empirical proofs stopped being supplied before the means to validate & reliaby record & show them became available. Also, very dodgy, in my view.

              Yet as we discussed in the weekend, we do have the tools of historic research with which to enquire as to their veracity. Including the evidence from the most well-attested literary archaeological artifact of Ancient History…the New Testament. So no, in the New Testament there is, or at least there is the claim, that the events were “reliably recorded”.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  April 16, 2019

              The Church needed the advice I gave my kids: Always tell the same lies. Otherwise you need an avalanche of meaningless words to cover your tracks. That never seems in short supply for religion.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Sorry, Al. Was that “meaningless words” aimed at me specifically, and if so, what particular bits of vocabulary. I realise you don’t have any time for metaphysics, especially theology. Fair enough. But it is a discipline with its own jargon just like…IT. And I’d suggest a quick dictionary search indicates he jargon of theology is a lot more accessible than IT.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              we do have the tools of historic research …as to their veracity. Including the evidence from …the literary archaeological artifact of Ancient History…the New Testament. So…in the New Testament there is, or at least there is the claim, that the events were “reliably recorded”.

              No, they weren’t & theology is the non-science of finding ways to get around this problem. It would take up so much space & time to explain why that position is not tenable, but I found this last night. It goes some considerable way to doing so.

              https://yournz.org/2019/04/16/the-hypocritical-life-of-brian/#comment-362657

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  April 16, 2019

              No, it wasn’t aimed at you, Kimbo. Just at the convoluted rationalisations apologists so often give.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              I’ll view as and when I get time, with interest thanks, Gezza. Although I have a feeling I’ve seen Dillahunty opine on the subject before, and like many logical positivists who assume their views are self-evident, he overplays his hand. But if he wants to bag the crap out of Creation Science, I’ll donate to him on Patreon because he’s doing God’s work. 😂

              But I’m struggling to see what is objectionable, much less non factual with the description:

              “The New Testament is the most well-attested literary archaeological artifact of Ancient History”. I’m meaning the gap between original events and could devastate flying of oral traditions and/or written record, the faithfulness of oral and written transmission, and the sheer volume of written copies.

              And as we discussed, I’m not saying the New Testament is necessarily proof. But it is most certainly, by any criteria, evidence. But again, as we previously discussed, whether that evidence is sufficient is a matter for further investigation and ultimately personal judgement.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Spell check!

              …the gap between the original events and the codifying of oral traditions and/or written records….

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              I’m not saying the New Testament is necessarily proof. But it is most certainly, by any criteria, evidence.
              So is a signed statement to the police, or sworn statement given in Court, that the accused was with with them, miles away, at the time the offence was committed.

              And there are hundreds of thousands of cases where the empirical proofs (sometimes, embarrassingly, potentially legally problematic for them) that this is not true establishes that written evidence is not actual evidence of truth, or fact.

              The same thing happens with witness testimony. Events & other evidence – often these days actual video footage of the offender – prove conclusively that while genuine in their belief of who, or what, they think they saw – they are actually mistaken, sometimes about everything, sometimes just about critical matters like what the alleged offender was wearing or how tall they were.

              Hearsay is usually inadmissble for a very good reason. People make shit up for their own reasons, often to get something they want – like freedom or a reduced sentence – out of it.

              The Bible is hearsay.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              No, you’ve incorrectly introduced the idea of legal/forensic evidence, hence you use of the term “hearsay”, and the example you give is how a court in the adversarial system treats admissible and inadmissible evidence.

              But we are talking evidence as per historical enquiry – in which primary and secondary sources are admissible. Indeed, in the case of Ancient History they are indispensable as that is how we come to know much of it today. I don’t dispute that much of the New Testament may be secondary written evidence (the oral traditions on which the Gospels are based is more complex), but I’d suggest some of it is a primary source. And like any source it needs to be weighed and sifted carefully, not automatically dismissed because it does not fit an inappropriate legal model.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Sorry, Gezza. I’ve watched the Matt Dillahunty video – and agree with him 100% at pretty much every point. As I think I’ve said before, Science can’t prove, nor disprove the existence of God…and that’s what Dillahunty is arguing. Also, agree that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence so the burden of proof is on those who assert God’s existence. Also agree that Science cannot disprove anything as such…it can’t prove a negative, indeed there is no way to disprove a negative by any empirical, logical or metaphysical means.

              The one thing I might disagree with Dillahunty is use of the criminal courtroom analogy of “proof beyond reasonable doubt”. Civil court uses “the balance of probabilities”, and that is relevant because…

              I’m not appealing to science as the means of producing sufficient evidence (note, yet again, I’m arguing “evidence”, not “proof” is the standard). As per my previous description which prompted your posting ng of the Dillahunty video

              …“we have the tools of historical research.“ (my emphasis).

              Sure historical research may at times may utilise science such as, say, various means of dating ancient documents such as radiocarbon dating, etc. But those tools of hard science are secondary to the discipline of historical research. Which is as much an art as a science, weighing and sifting and assessing what is black, white or gray…from the historical data that does exist. Hence it falls under the humanities. That may be frustrating for those who want hard scientific data, but it is how historical research is done, and how we “know” much of history, especially from the Ancient World.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  April 16, 2019

      I would think that when it came to quoting the Bible at work, Kimbo, much would depend upon the context. I don’t drink alcohol, but used to buy it for my late husband. It would have been totally out of place for a shop worker to quote the Bible at me when I produced my bottle of wine at the checkout and tell me not to become drunk with wine but be filled with the Holy Spirit.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  April 16, 2019

        I would think that any shopworker who preached at the other staff and the customers would create ill feeling and annoyance.

        Reply
  4. duperez

     /  April 16, 2019

    I like it when Bishop Brian is talked about and the auto speller spits out ‘prophet’ not ‘profit.’

    Reply
  5. Zedd

     /  April 16, 2019

    Isn’t there lines in the Bible.. that talks about ‘beware those who will deceive you..’ & ‘beware Wolves in Sheeps clothing..’ ??

    I still wonder; Who ‘ordained’ this man as a ‘Bishop’.. what next: ‘Pope’ Tamaki

    He talks as if he is ‘on the side of God..’ BUT often acts more like a ‘HELLs Angel’ :/

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  April 16, 2019

      He’s not an apostle. He has the gifts of apostleship and prophesy. He’s a gifted leader. But it’s getting all wrong fast.

      Seriously, pray that he will repent of getting deceived. Where 2 or 3 are gathered in my name…. Just for a lark if you like. Why not? I’m going to pray that Mr Tamaki repents of his deceptions and instead becomes a parliamentarian. Or if God doesn’t want to do that, or even if He does and Mr Tamaki is too stubborn, I’m praying for our politicians.

      PM – Mr Tamaki. Let’s aim high.

      Reply
      • Blazer

         /  April 16, 2019

        he needs you by his side to guide him Mother….just don’t ask for a…’cut’!

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  April 16, 2019

          The prophecy about how Destiny would be ‘ruling and reigning over NZ’ (with the wealth and finance first on the list of things to be ruled and reigned over) was removed from the website when it was obvious that this wasn’t going to happen by the date quoted. It is highly unlikely to happen at any time. NB, it was Destiny qua Destiny, not God or Christianity; I don’t think that these were mentioned,

          Many of the ‘prophecies’ that I have heard are so vague as to be meaningless. A woman I know ‘has the gift of prophecy’, but they are never anything that could be proved or disproved. Her ‘speaking in tongues’ is sincere, but to anyone who has learned other languages it’s obvious that this is not a real language….no language has so few sounds. The ‘words’ are repetitions of a small number of sounds, which are translated into ideas that this paucity of words could never mean, even if they were genuine.

          Reply
          • Kimbo

             /  April 16, 2019

            Yep. I think Tamaki’s prophecy about Destiny’s assent to political power had a timeframe which has since expired.

            Is one of the ironies of a guy who seeks to institute much of the Torah as the law of the land…that if he got his wish, he would then be subject to capital punishment for false prophecy.

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  April 16, 2019

              2013, I seem to remember !

              I had a visit from them; talk about Uriah Heep.

      • Zedd

         /  April 16, 2019

        I would prefer they maintain the ‘separation of Church & State’.. PM Tamaki; “NO THX !!”.. not even MP !

        The day of the Lord.. is coming as a thief in the night; maybe ‘Bishop/Apostle Brian’ thinks this excuses him & others ‘robbing in the name of Religion’ ?? :/

        Reply
    • Kimbo

       /  April 16, 2019

      Is part of the reason for his message of whanau resonating so powerfully among urban Maori, for whom gangs are a powerful attraction. Not dissimilar in some ways to the original Salvation Army, whose targeting of the 19th Century slums as a missionfield was considered scandalous by some Christians.

      NZ church historian Peter Lineham astutely explained that Tamaki stands in the same tradition of Maori Christian mystics as Te Kooti, Te Whiti and Wiremu Ratana.

      Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  April 16, 2019

      He proclaimed himself a Bishop.

      Do you know Peter Lineham, Kimbo ? I knew him slightly when he came to university camps as a speaker, my old man knew him better. His Myrtle the Turtle is one of the funniest things I have ever seen.

      Reply
  6. Zedd

     /  April 16, 2019

    …it may be the Devil or it maybe the Lord….

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  April 16, 2019

      I’d rather be praying positively for a fellow believer whom I consider is seriously deceived, alongside hoping that other believers are praying for me whatever they might discern or think or suppose my deceptions and foibles are. That way we might move on safely and we might also get some good people in political secular leadership. We might also see a welcome decline in the mystical religions.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  April 16, 2019

        I feel for you, Mother. I really do. The thing that annoys me most about your God when reading your posts is that your & your tormentors’ faith & belief in your God & Jesus are the very cause of your obvious emotional distress.

        Reply
        • Mother

           /  April 16, 2019

          I think Mr and Mrs Tamaki are gems. I really hope they come through these deceptions safely. They are wonderful servants and I believe servanthood is their heart’s desire. I also think that media hurt them in media’s usual way. Mockers flock of course eh Gezza?

          You slip up time and again mate. You ‘feel’ for me and at the same time you are ‘annoyed’ by my comments and by God. We’ve been there several times before haven’t we? Don’t read them. It’s too tough on you.

          Reply
          • Mother

             /  April 16, 2019

            And Gezza, I have a strong wondering whether Snowflake is using you as a useful idiot.

            I’m not calling you an idiot, just using that term as I’ve seen elsewhere.

            I really care about you.

            Reply
          • Gezza

             /  April 16, 2019

            No, it’s not too tough on me. I should have been clearer. It’s the personal stresses your belief in the God of the Bible has created for you that annoys me. I’m quite satisfied that it doesn’t actually exist (happy to accept Jesus probably did, but legends about hiis divinity were most likely constructed post facto).

            And of course I’ll read your posts. But fear not, I do just ignore quite a few.

            Reply
  7. Gezza

     /  April 16, 2019

    @ Kimbo

    Reply
    • Kimbo

       /  April 16, 2019

      Thanks, Gezza.

      Am aware of, indeed I’ve often sampled the work of Matt Dillahunty with interest. Put it this way – if the Southern Baptist version of Christianity to which he adhered in times past was the only version of the faith…I’d quickly join you and him in proclaiming the case for and merits of atheism! 😀

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  April 16, 2019

        Yes, but I he hasn’t confined himself to solely Southern Baptistry, or to arguments about the flaws with literal interpretations of the Bible which seems prevalent among them. When he started out on his “ministry” he was a fiery, angry denialist. On the esrly “atheist experience” videos he was positively savage with phone in callers of limited intellect.

        I wasn’t aware of a lot of his more thoughtful, more recent analyses, & he makes very good points that articulate very cogently some of my own personal conclusions.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  April 16, 2019

          I have to go for several hours. Back later this arvo.

          Reply
        • Kimbo

           /  April 16, 2019

          I have no problem taking your word that he doesn’t. But as that pietistic yet culturally and politically-aggressive form of conservative Christianity is the primary grass-roots challenge to atheism (and a good constitutional separation between church and state for that matter too! 😀) in the American context in which Dillahunty does his polemicism, that’s often the low-hanging fruit on which he concentrates.

          Nothing wrong with that, or being a YouTube populariser of theological and anti-theist philosophy. But it does present problems to the extent to which one can examine nuance and veracity. Hence, like any YouTube discussion of a complex matter, it is best understood as a primer for further research. Not the last word. That’s how I treat Christian apologists, anyway.

          Reply
  8. duperez

     /  April 16, 2019

    Reply
  9. MaureenW

     /  April 16, 2019

    Charlatans and the fools who follow them ..
    “My god’s the real god” – spare me!
    I struggle to reconcile in this day and age sheeple would still be babbling over their Gods – like illiterates from the bloody stone age.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  April 16, 2019

      One of the reasons I want to see more of these arguments happening is because I think it is going to become increasingly necessary to debunk Islam. You cannot do that unless you get to the very core & inspiration for Islam. Which is the Old Testament’s mythical Jaweh.

      Reply
      • MaureenW

         /  April 16, 2019

        To be fair Gezza, don’t limit yourself to Islam.

        Reply
      • Kimbo

         /  April 16, 2019

        Not really, Gezza. In theory Islam may cite the Torah and Psalms as canonical – and the Gospels too for that matter. The reason is that in the Koran Muhammad tells his followers to “Go to the People of the Book” to confirm what he (Muhammed) says is true. The problem then becomes…it doesn’t say what Muhammad said it does! For example he denies Jesus is described therein as “Son of God”, nor that he was crucified. But a cursory reading of the New Testament reveals both those concepts are basically…on every page, and they are indispensable to the message. Pull at those thread and there is nothing left.

        The only out for Muslims at that point is that which their contemporary apologists offer (which is contrary to What Muhammad taught) – that the written texts by which the New Testament has been transmitted to us have been deliberately doctored to remove Muhammad’s version of what they say. Superficially that works as Muslims believe the Koran came by literal dictation (the human typewriter method, as do Mormons with the Book of Mormon), whereas the Jewish-Christian doctrine and tradition have never required 100% absolute accuracy in transmission or translation (faithful Muslims are not permitted to translate from the supposedly textually unchanged Arabic original. However, the problem is that there is no archaeological textual evidence, especially that dating before Muhammad, to support the allegation about either the Old or New Testaments.

        Yes, there are doctrinal similarities among the Abrahamic religions, such as a belief in divine creation, the ministry of historic prophets and the general resurrection of the dead at the end of the Age for a final judgement. However, in pragmatic reality the primary reason Muslims talk about affinity with the other two Abrahamic religions is to lower the defences of (usually nominal) Jews and Christians for proselytising purposes.

        Reply
        • harryk

           /  April 16, 2019

          ‘the other two Abrahamic religions’

          Whoa bullock! You’ve just left out a considerable number of others like Bahai and Druze.

          Reply
          • Kimbo

             /  April 16, 2019

            The Druze, indeed! But Baha’i? Put it this way – Sikhism also use Islam in a syncretic manner, so they too are Abrahamic if you cast the net wide enough! 😀

            Reply
      • Kimbo

         /  April 16, 2019

        Sorry, to clarify, for Muhammed and Muslims, “the People of the Book” are Jews and Christians.

        Reply
      • harryk

         /  April 16, 2019

        ‘I think it is going to become increasingly necessary to debunk Islam’

        Why would you want to cause so much enduring unhappiness to so many people, and take away their reason for hope? You don’t expect a severe reaction to such an existential threat? I was prepared for tantrums when I restricted my teenager’s video gaming, I wasn’t prepared for his uncharacteristic aggression and lack of humour, the locked doors, furtive 3am raids on the fridge, threats to leave home etc etc. Islam has been comprehensively debunked since it appeared by specialist debunkers, many with..ahem.. outrageous furtune at stake, not without reaction. It’s not really a turn-the-cheek sorta religion, and in cultures where group rights traditionally supercede the individual a percieved slight against one if felt by all. Be my guest, start WW3. I’m working on tacticts to at least achieve an honourable draw with my teenager but I fear youth and technology will win.

        Reply
        • Kimbo

           /  April 16, 2019

          I think Gezza may mean debunk Islam intellectually to stop it encroaching in the form of sharia on the general populace. If so, your instinct is right, harryk. Islam has as much right as any religion or ideology or whatever to compete for adherents in the free marketplace of ideas. But the reality is, due to bad publicity the likelihood of propagation that way is slim in the West. So immigration and/or being born into it are the most likely way the Muslim Faith will grow peacefully.

          But if and when Islam – or any faith or ideology for that matter – crosses the line of where one person’s nose touches another, then it requires courage and wisdom to implement the constitutional and legal safeguards that already exist. In the meantime no need for scaremongering, nor ignoring real possibilities and trends. Just keep calm and carry on…

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  April 16, 2019

            At the present time, here & in other Western countries formerly considering themselves Christian, or predominantly Christian as opposed to now secular states, that’s true. And there’s no need to show Allah doesn’t exist & didn’t dictate the Quran to Muhammad to Christians, because they “know” all other religions are wrong & the Bible’s Religion is the only correct one.

            What’s needed is for people to understand, as soon as they are able to figure it out – without someone else constantly in their faces confusing them (with basic but effective psychological tools of both everlasting punishment for “bad” behaviour & everlasting life as reward to compel belief) in unprovable supernatural gods.

            That, when you suspend belief for a time, put it to one side, & take account of the current state of secular science, & knowledge to date – including physical & medical science branches & the human behavioural studies branches, such as psychology & psychiatry, just your own personal observations & those of other ex-christians & non-believers – you get a universe, an earth & and a human species that all work exactly the way it already does, everywhere, without any theoretically transcendent God of The Bible needing to be there.

            All you are left with, without heaven and hell, and belief in an everlasting life of peace and happiness, is the age-old problem of how to COMPEL everyone to be good. And this could become a problem, I accept, particularly with Christians who figure out God’s not there because more than a few of them give the impression that once they realise this they will be utter bastards to have around, as they don’t trust themselves to have any standards of decency and morality without him.

            The problem with Theologians is not, as they argue, that I am obviously too ill-informed about all the archaeological, artifactual, & literary research, & all the mystical, philosophical, & metaphorical nuances that are required to see that the Bible God is true, & there, but that all that stuff in their heads means they can’t see the wood for the trees. The obvious is impervious to them.

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  April 16, 2019

              You did well until the last sentence. Impervious is wondering how on earth it got there.

              (Just helping out till Kitty gets here.)

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              That’s not an insurmountable problem with the Geraldian Doctrine, Sir Alan. If there is perceived to be an error, contradiction, or conflict within any part of it, simply ignore it as there will likely be an alternative interpretation or it just doesn’t matter anyway.

              Gonna have to do an FiP reboot. Most disconcerting having to wait a minute or so for screeds of typing to appear & another one for the edits to then actually show up.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  April 16, 2019

              Impermeable may be the word that he wants.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  April 16, 2019

              My suggestion to Sir Gerald’s muse would simply be that the obvious becomes invisible to them.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              I’m doing well. Already a branch of philosophy is developing around my Doctrine.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              What’s needed is for people to understand, as soon as they are able to figure it out…

              Sounds like the logical positivist/Enlightenment fallacy, Gezza. If we only just get people to contemplate the right information it’ll all be ok and they’ll see the supposed “error” of their ways. Salvation/deliverance from superstition by education. But remember what we (tentatively) concluded a few days ago? Humanity seems to be unshakeably…religious.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              Sounds like the logical positivist/Enlightenment fallacy, Gezza. If we only just get people to contemplate the right information it’ll all be ok and they’ll see the supposed “error” of their ways.

              Does it? I don’t care what it’s categorised as. It’s reasoned conclusion based on what I know of the real world or have no need to dispute because the empirical evidence is there.

              It’s smilingly ironic to me that it should be seen as a fallacy when it’s got such a lot more going for it than an unscientically provable God with so many competing other unprovable gods. And that Christianity itself is sold almost entirely on the premise that Jesus supposedly came to teach that everything will be ok when humans finally see the error of their ways.

              Most humans have always been able to see the error of their ways. From the consequences of their errors. Many of tbe dreadful consequences are directly caused by beliefs in non-existent (or if you wish, empirically unprovable) theoretical gods.

              Salvation/deliverance from superstition by education. But remember what we (tentatively) concluded a few days ago? Humanity seems to be unshakeably…religious.

              I am waiting to hear your explanation of why that is & whatbyou mean by “religious”. I was, but now I’m not. Some might say I am “spiritual” though. But it depends what they think of as spiritual.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  April 16, 2019

              Then who has been shaking NZers, Kimbo? They’ve been becoming less religious

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Does it? I don’t care what it’s categorised as. It’s reasoned conclusion based on what I know of the real world or have no need to dispute because the empirical evidence is there.

              Not wanting to talk down to you, much less persuade you to change your views about the non-existence of God, nor even suggesting you don’t have a good grip on the real world nor the empirical evidence. But that statement, especially the assumptions about how well you see things, along with the insouciant “I don’t care” has the hallmarks of someone who hasn’t yet stepped out of their own perspective, and recognised their ideological assumptions, much less given them a good examination. Would say the same if you were a theist. Sorry. But hey, maybe I’m just spinning theological/metaphysical bullshittery to muddy the waters…

              I am waiting to hear your explanation of why that is & whatbyou mean by “religious”. I was, but now I’m not. Some might say I am “spiritual” though. But it depends what they think of as spiritual.

              I seem to recall mentioning that Christians ascribe it to what is in Scripture described as “the image of God”. And did we agree in the end to the middle ground of “an interest in the transcendent”. or something similar?

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Then who has been shaking NZers, Kimbo? They’ve been becoming less religious

              Formally, or as in adherence to traditional institutional forms? Yeah, sure. But I’m not sure about you, but scratch the surface and most people have some eclectic grab-bag of assorted concepts, beliefs and practices. Hey, I’d even put membership of the Green Party as a quasi-religious crusade. And I’m only half-joking.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              “I don’t care” has the hallmarks of someone who hasn’t yet stepped out of their own perspective, and recognised their ideological assumptions, much less given them a good examination.

              You’re doing that thing (while saying you’re not) of attacking the man & not the ball, which seems common with Christian apologists encountering argument, & deflecting by imputing an arrogance & disdain which is not there. When I say I don’t care, I mean I simply don’t think what category I supposedly fall into is relevant to my argument or my reasons. So I don’t bother with it. It adds nothing.

              But I don’t mind how YOU or anyone else categorise me.

              I seem to recall mentioning that Christians ascribe it to what is in Scripture described as “the image of God”. And did we agree in the end to the middle ground of “an interest in the transcendent”. or something similar?

              I’m happy for sake of argument to accept both these matters as worthy of discussion & go down that track to hear your views & justificationsas why they should be accepted as true or self-evident, and that there are no other satisfactory alternatives.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              @ Kimbo, re my last comment, I was actually wondering if you might make it the topic of a Guest Post.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              It’s smilingly ironic to me that it should be seen as a fallacy when it’s got such a lot more going for it than an unscientically provable God with so many competing other unprovable gods.

              No, that’s not what I mean. Put it this way, there are plenty of agnostics and atheists who recognise that there are problems with an exclusive and unexamined assumption of the perspective of logical positivism. Hence there are other ways of apprehending “reality” (whatever it is) that have nothing to do with religion and/or spirituality.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              @ Gezza

              …and I hope that last post clarifies that I’m not meaning to attack you personally. But I’m a bit surprised, as you’ve done a good job on this thread at points implying theists are essentially ignorant propagandists who choose not to contemplate what you consider obvious. OK, fair enough, and I’m not offended by that. Knock yourself out. Maybe it’s playing the man and not the ball, but if you say “no”, then fair enough.

              But it just seems reasonable to me that if you want to question the perspective of reality that others have, and how they determine what is real, and the empirical or other tests they insist demonstrate what is reliable, and call them out if they don’t measure up to what you think is obvious.

              …then your assumptions are no more immune from a good tyre-kick than mine.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  April 16, 2019

              A fair question as to what has replaced religious belief. Certainly environmental crusaders demonstrate some of the same symptoms as do those I often describe as the loony Left. They just lack the supernatural manifestations of their obsessions.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              Damn. I like using this iPad2 but once threads get quite long the keyboard response slows right down, & sometimes I do a reply & chrome just crashes & it’s lost. I have to start all over again. (Also WordPress has a habit of interpreting some of my posts that concern God as viral advertising or something & sending to PG’s site Spam box.)

              I’m booting up the laptop.

            • MaureenW

               /  April 16, 2019

              @ Gezza how come you don’t use Safari?

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              You said: “Sounds like the logical positivist/Enlightenment fallacy, Gezza. If we only just get people to contemplate the right information it’ll all be ok and they’ll see the supposed “error” of their ways.”

              I replied:
              It’s smilingly ironic to me that it should be seen as a fallacy when it’s got such a lot more going for it than an unscientically provable God with so many competing other unprovable gods. And that Christianity itself is sold almost entirely on the premise that Jesus supposedly came to teach that everything will be ok when humans finally see the error of their ways.

              The particular part of that comment of mine that is smilingly ironic is the last last sentence. End of iPad2 contribution. Laptop’s up n running. Coffee time.
              … … …

              Kimbo, can you tell me, do you want to live forever? And if so, why?

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              @ Maureen. I have exactly the same problem with Safari. The iPad2’s RAM brain is just too small to process & load too much data, I’m assuming. It’s a very early model now. My late mum’s. It struggles with online news site pages now, where it didn’t used to, because they’ve so much data to load with graphics, animated ads, embedded videos etc.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Not trying to play silly buggers with you Alan, but I’m not so sure Greens are non-supernatural. Maybe that description “interested in the transcendent” nails it.

              And religion isn’t necessarily supernatural. Hinduism and Buddhism may attract claims of miracles, but those aren’t essential. Not in the same way as, say, the resurrection of Christ or the divine dictation of the Koran are indispensable for Christianity and Islam respectively. Or are we talking past one another by not defining “religion” and “supernatural”?

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              @ Gezza

              Having just recently come through treatment for cancer, which, at this stage, has been successful, which causes one to contemplate questions such as that (“nothing concentrates a man’s mind like the knowledge he will be hanged in the morning” 😀)

              …no, I don’t think I want to live forever. Indeed, at times I’m at peace with the thought/possibility that this earthly life will be it.

              Whatever reasons I may have once had for originally embracing the Christian Faith, that no longer seems to be one of them, if it ever was. Or at least not consciously. As the subconscious is a more complex and tacit matter, I prefer not to presume on what those motivations and desires might be in the absence of the expertise to access them.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              “at times” you’re at peace with the idea that maybe you won’t suggests to me that, really, you do. If you really think sbout that.

              I certainly hope your csncer treatment is successful & that if this one life we are living before our bodies can no longer sustain us really is the only one we get, that yours is long & happy.

              It would be nice to think my essential being was to continue in some form that has the prospect of happiness in a next one as well, but I am completely unconcerned if this life is the only one I live.
              … … …
              And do you think that without the Bible God, you would be a miserable and/or bad person?

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              No, I meant “at times” in the sense that I regard my Christian beliefs, including in “the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting” (to quote the Apostles Creed) as provisional, in need of continual testing, modifying and maybe jettisoning in the light of new data, or workable theories.

              As such, and as a means of intellectual hygiene, I’ll sometimes question what I currently believe, or try and put myself in the position of thinking and living a hypothetical alternative to see what it throws up, and how it fits with known data.

              So, yes, I’ve adopted the hypothetical “this life is all there is”…and when I do, in the main, that seems a mentally and emotionally comfortable proposition. But as per Freud, the fear of death may be an inescapable part of the human subconscious.

              And yes, I wish you a long and healthy life too.

            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              …and I hope that last post clarifies that I’m not meaning to attack you personally. But I’m a bit surprised, as you’ve done a good job on this thread at points implying theists are essentially ignorant propagandists who choose not to contemplate what you consider obvious. OK, fair enough, and I’m not offended by that. Knock yourself out. Maybe it’s playing the man and not the ball, but if you say “no”, then fair enough.

              I think it’s probably just a misunderstanding or a poor choice of words on my part. I’m only ever intending to say that I think I can see & understand (from personal experience & research & discussions & debates) how the Bible God was developed, where it came from, & how it has been so successfully “sold” to so many people over 2 millenia.

              Just as I don’t micro-categorise theists & theologians because I see no useful purpose in doing so, I don’t categorise you. I am interested in what YOU, personally believe, & why, & discussing that in terms of what I believe, and why. So I don’t think I have ever imputed any ulterior motives or arrogance or animosity to you, personally, because I see no evidence of those at all.

              (Well, ok I think you talk down to me sometimes but that’s water off a duck’s back. 😉 )

              If I ever say anything here that can be interpreted in two ways and one of them hurts you or offends you, personally, I meant the other one.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Without the Bible God would I be miserable and/or bad?

              Too complex to answer. I’d be miserable and happy in different ways, because both of those are connected with previous personal growth or lack thereof, and how one dealt with opportunities, crises and setbacks. Every door you pass by in life is an opportunity cost.

              And without the God of Scripture to set the criteria for “bad”, the measuring stick becomes different, or at least different in terms of what should be core motivations and some details. I think I’d be different in some ways.

              But as Israel Folau rightly pointed out (yes, in all the media din over his words, and the idiocy of his chosen occasion and platform) he was right that we are all imperfect, indeed flawed beings for whom a bit of humility, or at least the right sort of humility does not go astray. Especially in our dealings with one another.

              If you don’t want to use the term “sinner”, fair enough. But I have no problem accepting that description, and rather wallowing in guilt or mental paralysis or fear, utilsing the solution which I believe Christ made available.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 16, 2019

              Cheers. Also posted a response above about that Matt Dillahunty video, and am currently watching another where he is debunking Gary Habermas’ angle on the resurrection of Christ. Good stuff on the later point, and good food for thought in general. Although on a number of occasions Dillahunty seems to jump automatically and by default to “scientific” or legal “beyond reasonable doubt” proof, when, as discussed

              1. in historical research “the balance of probabilities” is a more reasonable standard, and

              2. “sufficient evidence”, not “proof” is a realistic goal.

              But as I’ve seen some used-car salesmen Christian apologists over-egg the pudding by insisting “the New Testament provides proof beyond a reasonable doubt of Christ’s resurrection”, one can’t blame Dillahunty if he goes down the same path. 😀

            • Gezza

               /  April 17, 2019

              As such, and as a means of intellectual hygiene, I’ll sometimes question what I currently believe, or try and put myself in the position of thinking and living a hypothetical alternative to see what it throws up, and how it fits with known data.

              I’m very similar. I seem to have an inbuilt oversupply of empathy which makes it difficult for me to see many issues from only one viewpoint. Once I spoken with someone who has a different worldview or perspective I can often seem to then see – and feel – the issue from their perspective as well. It can make decision-making very problematic for me where a compromise of competing views & feeling is not possible & I cannot simply cancel one of them out because it simply feels wrong to do that. I see where they are coming from & I understand it, & it is not wrong, just different.

              I review my beliefs regularly.

          • Gezza

             /  April 16, 2019

            And by “sold” I simply mean why it has been so persuasive to some.

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  April 16, 2019

              And yes, I wish you a long and healthy life too.

              Sadly I am destined for neither. But that I accept with equanimity.

            • Kimbo

               /  April 17, 2019

              Sorry to hear that. Well, may you at least live it on your terms with boldness, and without fear nor excuse for the consequences of your decisions and actions. When I found out about my condition i decided if I was going to go out, it would be with guns blazing, looking death in the eye with the attitude, “is that the best you’ve got?” 😉

            • Gezza

               /  April 17, 2019

              My demise is not yet (hopefully) imminent, but I am paying the price of being a lifelong smoking addict & things will get worse, not better.

              It’s 12 past bleeding midnight! We need to hit the sack – well, I do, anyway. Still really looking forward to a Guest Post from you. Nite Kimbo.

        • Gezza

           /  April 16, 2019

          Why would you want to cause so much enduring unhappiness to so many people, and take away their reason for hope? You don’t expect a severe reaction to such an existential threat?

          Yes. It happens now. So do Islamic sociteties living in fear of rejecting it under rulers and laws that are dictatorial, horribly inhuman, & psychologically damaging anyway.

          Islam has been comprehensively debunked since it appeared by specialist debunkers, many with..ahem.. outrageous furtune at stake, not without reaction. It’s not really a turn-the-cheek sorta religion, and in cultures where group rights traditionally supercede the individual a percieved slight against one if felt by all.

          Fear is not a good reason to let people continue to believe their false & unsupportable religion should rule everyone eventually. Christianity in its similar darker days no longer does.

          Be my guest, start WW3.

          There far less likelihood that I will do that than that Islam will. So the sooner we find ways to show Muslims they don’t need Islam, the better.

          I’m working on tacticts to at least achieve an honourable draw with my teenager but I fear youth and technology will win.

          Do not be afraid. Your teenager will one day understand how foolish & lacking in wisdom, relevant knowledge, & the really important practical skills he is. Because the consequences of his mistakes & his lack of knowledge & experience will tell him. And in turn, when he’s learnt how much you & he both now know about real life & the most important things to know, & do, his children will tell him how foolish & lacking in wisdom, relevant knowledge, & the really important practical skills, he is.

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  April 16, 2019

            Suspect just trying to stop kids doing what they love won’t work. Best work on getting them to love something else too.

            Reply
  10. harryk

     /  April 16, 2019

    ‘Jesus was the last prophet’

    Bahá’u’lláh. And if you don’t believe me you can take it up with the Kiwi who used to run their world news centre in Haifa.

    https://www.bahaiblog.net/author/michael-day/

    Reply
  11. Mother

     /  April 16, 2019

    Some lay lady’s basics, not for Blazer but for others, and for Kimbo’s scrutiny –

    Abraham had two sons. Ishmael was a slave’s son and Isaac was the son born to Abraham’s wife. There was animosity between the women and Ishmael was sent away. It seemed unfair because he had been conceived especially to appease Abraham’s wife concerning her earlier barrenness. But God promised that Ishmael would become a great nation. He also said something about him being a donkey of a man which I see as meaning clever/hardworking/willful/determined to have his own way. Ishmael is the father of the Arabs and they were historically strong. For centuries they worshipped many gods but several centuries after Christ, Muhammad came along. He taught a message of peace and gained a very few followers. Then he wanted to start conquering as a war lord. He gained many followers and held them psychologically by twisting scripture and munting Jesus’ gospel. That’s why the ‘one and only God’ notion seems very close, perhaps the same. Islam has ‘one true God’ and so do Christians.

    The Arabs used Islam politically to conquer many lands by brute force. (Catholicism is not Christianity and true/mature believers in Christ never band together to attempt conquering politically, except through prayer alone. At crucial times in world history this has been the case.) There are now several cultures engulfed by Islam. Islam and communism go well together.

    Back to Isaac. He was Abraham’s free son and became the father of the twelve tribes of Israel from whom Jesus was descended. Jesus’ coming was whispered of all through those centuries, in scripture and in the hearts of those who longed for the ‘one and only God’. The Jews rejected Jesus, just as many of us do. They wanted to sort their humanity their own way. However, there are increasing numbers of Messianic Jews putting their trust in Jesus, just as there are Muslims coming to Jesus. They recognise their spiritual slavery and want freedom. It was because the Jews initially rejected Jesus that the rest of the world, the Gentiles, got a chance to hear the Gospel.

    Muhammad was a self appointed prophet turned war lord. Jesus is God – a fact even the churches are struggling with.

    Kiwis are caught unawares. We hardly know what our culture is, let alone understand the implications of rejecting Christianity. That’s why I talk of UC. I’m no longer sold out to Calvinism because it’s too harsh. The way forward if we are now to prepare carefully for the next 500 years is to adopt classical education for all of us and to hold onto free speech whatever the cost.

    NZ and Australia are unique. We were colonised by Christians but never had a strong linking of church and state. I think that Christians are scared. That’s why Mr Tamaki is confusing. So much good and so much truth regarding Jesus being the Saviour, yet he’s off track.

    NZ Christians need to get their heads around the secular state issue. We could become a comfort to the world. But Christians need to repent of the deceptions in Christendom. UC is the way to go. Then we could be truly bi cultural and one people, and our multicultural-ness would be sweet. Our Parliament would contain people of integrity and intelligence, and Government would be strong in secularity. We would prosper financially and bicker much less. To this end, I believe we need an absolute break from the church of England (but to remain political allies). If enough of us are UC, we would retain strong friendship with Great Britain and would be a great encouragement to them.

    Mr Tamaki’s following is just another running after gods. No wonder people get confused by the gentleness of Muslim neighbours contradicted by the known aggression of political Islam. It’s a similar scenario to the confusion of church groups doing good works yet many individuals knowing for themselves to stay away because the churches are crazy politically. Church (the Body of Christ) is not political and Church always prevails.

    UC Christianity is the only safe way forward for Kiwis. If there are rough times ahead, UC Christianity is the only true comfort and help. Jesus is God. He’s gentle, kind and victorious. Jesus is the way to the Father in heaven. This is Abraham’s God.

    Reply
    • Mother

       /  April 16, 2019

      I’m glad the issue of mortality is mentioned above.

      Personally, I never could grasp why some Christians place a lot of emphasis on heaven. I have never thought that way, and I’ve been in the Bible for nearly four decades.

      The thing with mortality is…the obvious.

      I just think that we are here to bring God pleasure and that’s entirely an individual thing.

      As for heaven, it’s all about Jesus and so it should be.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  April 17, 2019

        I know those are more aimed at Kimbo than me but I found those comments very interesting, giving me a perspective of you that that is thoughtful & fundamentally gentle, & that makes sense in the context of your view of the world, humans, politics, & the Bible God – so far as it seems to be revealed in those remarks.

        Just a couple of thoughts / queries on your comments immediately above.

        1. I don’t see why people should think we are hear to bring God pleasure. Firstly, because the current world and its history must show quite clearly that too many humans bring him much pain and disappointment – with their bickering, intolerance, savagery, & inability to understand what he has theoretically told us he wants.

        Secondly, because if we are here to bring him pleasure why he has put us on a planet that regularly kills thousands of us, in seemingly randomly-occurring human-caused & natural catastrophes (250,000-odd innocent people on Boxing Day 2004, for a very memorable example)?

        Does killing humans he put on a planet he knows will do this bring him pleasure bring him pleasure? This brings the most intense pain & trauma for millions who survive & have lost their loved ones, & for those who struggled to survive before being killed.

        If this brings him pleasure, then he can’t be all good, because murdering humans is forbidden by his own command & is something none of us should do whether his existence & command is real or not.

        Surely, if God cannot foresee such events then he cannot be all-knowing. And if he cannot prevent them, then he cannot be all-powerful. If he can do both of those but chooses not to, then, once again, surely he cannot be all good?

        Mother, would you kill innocent humans or let them killed like this if you were an all-knowing, all-good , all powerful God? Because what post suggests strongly to me that you would not.

        2. What you mean by “The thing about mortality is … the obvious” – is not obvious to me, nor, I imagine, to many others. There are many obvious things that can be thought or said about mortality. What is the precise thing about mortality that is obvious to you in relation to the overall discussions here or the specific comments you have just made ?

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  April 17, 2019

          *apologies for a couple of missed corrections.

          Reply
        • Jacqueline Walter, Makarewa, Southland

           /  April 17, 2019

          Gezza, you do go around in circles, but I will answer that one question. (I really want to leave YNZ alone).

          What is obvious about mortality is that we are like ants compared to the Almighty God.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  April 17, 2019

            And your other, reasoned, answer, to my question why God seems happy to kill his pleasure-giving humans, or allow them to be killed, in droves – when this seems to go against his very nature; the properties and qualities he is claimed to possess – as described so often by msny Chritians – is what?

            Reply
  12. A followup: Tamaki stands by his ‘war’ comments: I speak for many NZers

    in an email to the Herald today, Tamaki continued his war of words, saying it was his “God-given responsibility” to preach the word of the holy spirit, declaring he is here to protect Kiwis’ freedom of speech.

    “The war that will rage is a confrontation of beliefs. I am confident I speak for many New Zealanders, who don’t have a voice or public profile but still believe in the Bible as the Word of God, and the supreme authority in all matters of faith and morality, and we will not accept it being censored in any way,” he told the Herald.

    “The war we will fight, although non-violent, will be resolute in its stand. We will strongly declare what we believe through protest, submissions or whatever means we can or at our disposal to protect our right as New Zealanders’ to freedom of speech.”

    https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/national/brian-tamaki-defends-his-call-for-war/

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  April 17, 2019

      One of things I like about your having the gonads & interest to create a forum for Religion is that I agree with Tamaki that Religion is not just something that should continue to be pushed into the bsckground & left for individuals to just quietly get on with practicing their beliefs, or rejecting them, without any consideration or explanation of why.

      Religions – and Christianity is one I know this to be true of – do a lot of good. But they also do a lot of harm in some cases.

      And I wish more people who are religious and who are not religious, and maybe even those who are kind of halfway in between should get into publicly discussing what the really think & why. As a way to minimise the harms & maximise the good – and come to a personal decision to review whether they should change their minds.

      When Bishop Tamaki purports to speak for many New Zealander, I want to challenge his parishioners, and others, to speak (and think) for themselves. And not to let their preacher speak for them.

      Reply
      • Jacqueline Walter, Makarewa, Southland

         /  April 17, 2019

        Just admit it Gezza. You belong in the ‘half way in between’ camp. I do too. Only a little trust in Jesus is required. Once you admit to a little trust, you will find that He does the rest. Jesus Himself will make your faith authentic. In this way the Brian Tamaki’s, Neville Cooper’s and the like will not rise up. Jesus is the Victor.

        Jesus said that if you acknowledge him before men, he will….

        That’s my favourite thing. I think a lot about it. If I, living in a free country, have not enough courage to acknowledge Jesus before men, how will it be for my descendants if things get ugly? I feel that I owe it to myself and my descendants to state my hope in Jesus. A little bit of ridicule is a small price.

        I agree with you. It is paramount that each Kiwi is free to think. Why don’t you take a friend to talk with Destiny church members? You would get answers for yourself, and most likely be encouraging of them to think for themselves.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  April 17, 2019

          No, I am not in the halfway camp. I have done these things you suggest about Jesus, in humility & with genuine desire, & need, at times in my life, and what you & the Bible promise did not happen. This is not something that distressed me, I’m too analytical nature. So I found other solutions which did not require him & am quite satisfied he was not involved in way in those. They required a non-belief for success.

          You are avoiding answering my question. Why?

          Reply
          • Jacqueline Walter, Makarewa, Southland

             /  April 17, 2019

            Do you mean re God allowing unhappiness – death, suffering, destruction, catastrophe, idiots…?

            I’m not answering that. Cheers.

            Reply
          • Gezza

             /  April 17, 2019

            Fair enuf in respect of that question, but what about my (now) other question?

            Why?

            Is it because it is too awkward an issue because you cannot think of a good reason why it happens?

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  April 17, 2019

              To clarify, I mean WHY won’t you answer “that question”?

    • Jacqueline Walter, Makarewa, Southland

       /  April 17, 2019

      He specifically says ‘non violent’ yet you play games with the ‘war’ aspect.

      You took away my comments for the thread re the war of words around GG. Why?

      You use the word ‘disingenuous’ a bit. I’m finding out for myself that you know its meaning well.

      This is what I think of PG – I think he’s kind, honest (very nearly), trustworthy and charming to the point of people feeling badly if they lose trust in him, disingenuous (which I accept is his right as the host) and either spiritually searching for himself, or doing a great disingenuous Atheist’s job of getting rid of the Christian voice on his site. Which of course would turn him into a liar. YNZ – free speech for those who don’t threaten free speech, censored by one wee god.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  April 17, 2019

        I think you are being too harsh. You are still permitted to say such things about him. How long do you think it would be on other blogs before you were straight out banned?

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s