Social Items

TPQ
Showing posts with label Christianity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christianity. Show all posts

Dr John Coulter ✍ Christian Churches in Northern Ireland need to ‘man up’ regarding sex education and deliver lessons themselves through Sunday schools and Bible classes rather than leaving it to the education system.

Known as Relationship and Sexuality Education (RSE), from January 2024, it will be compulsory for all post-primary schools to teach pupils about access to abortion and prevention of early pregnancy.

Naturally, this move has many Christian denominations up in arms with all four of the main denominations - Roman Catholic, Church of Ireland, Presbyterian and Methodist - voicing strong opposition to the move.

With the new school year starting in September, teachers assigned to deliver RSE will probably use semester one to prepare lectures for the January 2024 launch - a move which will leave the churches lagging behind in second place yet again when it comes to sex education.

But the churches have only themselves to blame for the looming RSE requirement because if they had used their Sunday schools and Bible classes to teach the morals of responsible sex education, the various denominations would not find themselves in this theological and spiritual dilemma.

Put bluntly, sex education talks for young people by the churches was for generations seen as a taboo subject, never to be mentioned.

For the vast majority of couples, the first time sex education was addressed by the churches was in marriage guidance classes - and that only applied to the couples who bothered to attend such classes!

Indeed, I have come across two churches where the marriage guidance classes - including the sex talks - took place after the couples returned from honeymoon!

The perception was that addressing the issue of post-primary sex education in Sunday school or Bible class was nothing short of ‘dirty talk’.

The general view for many generations was that if a woman became pregnant outside of marriage, she was seen as a whore; if a man made a woman pregnant, he was to be shunned by the church.

Judgemental church gossips would have a field day wiping the floor with their condemnation if they even suspected a couple was having sex before marriage. Indeed, according to many churches, sex is only for marriage, therefore, the issue does not need to be addressed until the couple have become engaged at the earliest!

But if the churches are to have any relevance in the RSE debate and content, they need to get their acts together and start the sex education debates well before the time for marriage guidance classes begins.

In practice, the clergy or those in charge of post-primary age Sunday school or Bible class pupils need to urgently start sensible debates on RSE before the January 2024 deadline kicks in.

Churches cannot moan about a deterioration in moral values or condemn sexual immorality among young people if they are not prepared to have such debates on RSE in their Sunday schools, Bible classes, youth clubs, youth fellowships and even Christian uniformed youth organisations, such as the Boys’ Brigade and Girls’ Brigade.

And churches should not adopt a ‘pass the buck’ attitude by side-stepping the issue, stating that it is up to the clerics to deliver Hell-fire sermons on the sins of sexual immorality.

The bitter medicine which churches must swallow is from January 2024, they will be in serious competition with the school curriculum for the hearts and minds of young people on the topic of sex education.

Likewise, the churches will be no longer in a position where they can duck the RSE issue with the pathetic excuse that it is the role of parents and guardians to teach children about the facts of life.

If the churches are serious about wanting to address the issues of abortion access and the prevention of early pregnancy then they should have the courage to explain their Biblically-based agendas in face to face discussion groups, not through roaring sermons from the pulpits.

Many Christian denominations are already in a spiritual pickle over issues such as same-sex marriage and gender identification because they lacked the courage to tackle such controversial topics at an early stage in a person’s relationship with the church.

To quote the secular proverb, it is no use trying to close the barn door after the horse has bolted. The churches need to recognise that they will have to address RSE topics before the problems arise, not in the midst of a crisis.

The modern Christian churches are still polluted with far too much Biblical Pharisee-style hypocrisy when it comes to sexual sins. In the New Testament, Christ Himself told the Pharisees - let he who is without sin cast the first stone - in relation to the woman caught in the act of adultery.

If the churches want to be taken seriously in the ongoing RSE debates, they will require a supportive agenda, especially towards young people.

As the presenter of a theological discussion programme on Christian radio, I have explored the actions of some churches on this issue. Their spectrum ranges from genuine Christ-like compassion to outright Puritanical persecution.

Perhaps it is this wide range of interpretations on sexual relations which makes it so difficult for the Christian churches to agree both a common agenda and united front.

In one church, there were a number of single mums. There was no condemnatory verbal ‘stoning’. The church recognised a baby had been born and the child, mother and her family circle were supported by the Christians in that place of worship.

But in another church a few miles away, a lad was accused of fathering a child out of wedlock. He was sacked from all posts in the church and driven out of the country by judgemental fundamentalist bigots.

Which of these two churches showed genuine Christian compassion and mercy and adopted a responsible attitude to the situation which the young people found themselves in?

With the RSE debate, the churches cannot afford to make it a hat trick of bumbling agendas. They have messed up over same-sex marriage; they are still locked in a debate over trans rights.

If the churches cannot get their acts together of providing a Biblically based alternative to the schools’ RSE curriculum, then there is the real danger that the churches will drive many young people away from the pews and that would be a crisis which could affect many denominations for years to come.

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online. 

Churches Should Take Control Of Sex Education

Dr John Coulter ✍ with the latest ruling from the Church of England on same-sex marriages set to split the world-wide Anglican Communion, a new row involving trans rights is brewing for Christian Churches.

Liberals and social conservatives, not just within the Anglican Communion, but across many Christian denominations and churches, have locked horns for years over the issues of same-sex marriages, blessings and partnerships.

While some ‘pass the buck’ to individual clerics, other churches have a clearer guidance on same-sex relationships and there is a huge debate among theologians and lay people in the issue as the battle rages over the interpretations of Bible verses and passages. Sort this one out for yourself.

Basically, this game of theological ping-pong revolves around the practical interpretation of these verses between social conservatives who maintain that the institution of marriage is between a man and woman, versus the liberals who maintain Scripture should be applied with the ethos of God’s Love, and ‘what would Jesus do?’

Most churches and denominations are trying to find a workable ‘half-way house’ solution - welcoming LGBT folk into a worship service, but muddy the waters theologically when it comes to sacraments, such as baptism, marriage, and communion.

However, even if churches and denominations can reach an ‘accommodation’ (if that is possible) between lesbians, gays and bisexuals, another major row is about to break out over the issue of trans rights and gender identity in the Christian Church.

Traditionally, there has always been a gender issue with many Christian churches over the generations, especially over the role of women in the church.

For example, in Catholicism, only the male priest can say Mass. In many Protestant denominations and churches, women are instructed to wear hats, or have their heads covered. Women have traditionally had a raw deal, especially in the evangelical and fundamentalist wings of Christianity.

While some churches have ordained women as ministers, elders or deacons, some other churches will only allow women to speak if they are ‘giving their testimony’ explaining how they became a born again Christian, or at women’s events in the church.

In the Sixties and Seventies, it was not uncommon at church functions for a male to announce - ‘the ladies will now leave and make the tea!’

Even in the 1990s, a woman could be refused formal membership of a fundamentalist church if she did not wear a hat.

Trans rights will once again focus a very glaring spotlight on the church. Take the scenario. A man and woman are getting married, but it is discovered that one or other of them was off a different gender at birth. So, in reality, both partners were the same gender at birth. Would the Christian Church be dogmatic and demand the folk getting married be different genders at birth?

For example, in the scenario above, the man was a male gender at birth, but the woman was also a male gender at birth, but transitioned to female, so technically, according to Scripture, this is a wedding between a man and woman. Will the Church start demanding proof of birth gender before the sacrament of marriage can be fulfilled?

Or, will it be a case as with same-sex relationships, there will now be another debate as to whether a trans person can have a marriage, blessing, or any of the other terms which the Church has used in the same-sex theological debate?

Pope Francis, as the leader of one of the largest Christian denominations in the world Catholicism, could ease the situation by scrapping the celibacy rule allowing ordained priests and nuns the right to chose to marry or remain single.

It has been suggested that the main reason the Vatican is dragging its heels on this issue of choice regarding marriage, is what happens if the marriage breaks down - would the woman, for example, have the right to own half of the parochial house?

There are already married priests within the Catholic Church, namely ordained priests, for example, from the High Anglican Church who were married and defected to Catholicism.

Likewise, for many years, some fundamentalist denominations would not marry a person if they were a divorcee.

And there are even some fundamentalist denominations which would frown heavily if someone tried to marry ‘outside’ the denomination. For example, a person from the Exclusive Brethren denomination wanting to marry a person from mainstream Irish Presbyterianism.

Trans rights and gender identity are certainly issues which have been recently to the fore on the political front, especially in Scotland.

The Christian Church may still be struggling with how to deal with the issue of same-sex relationships, But it needs to realise an even more thorny issue is rapidly coming down the tracks in terms of a theological debate - and perhaps, yet further rifts and splits.
 
Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online. 

Trans Issue Set To Spark New Row For Christian Churches

UnHerd ✒ Even in the bedroom we are shaped by the past.

 Tom Holland

It was 20 years ago today. On 1st April 2001, same-sex marriage became legal in the Netherlands. The Dutch, liberalism’s most celebrated trend-setters, had done it again. Where they led, others quickly followed. Scenes of gay couples cutting wedding cakes and spraying champagne over each other became common around the world. 

Today, same-sex marriage is recognised as legal in 29 countries. What even 30 years ago would have seemed to most gay people an impossible dream has come to be widely accepted — and not only by gay people — as entirely normal. The most startling thing about the institution, it can often seem, is that people ever found it startling.

Except, of course, that there are large stretches of the world where the idea that men might legally marry men, or women legally marry women, continues to be seen as abhorrent, grotesque, immoral. The list of countries that license same-sex marriage is a highly distinctive one. All of them, with the sole exception of Taiwan, are culturally Christian. All of them, to a greater or lesser extent, have witnessed a decline over recent years in church-attendance.  

Continue reading @ UnHerd.

Homosexuality’s Christian Roots

UnHerd ✒ For 2,000 years people in power have been trying to no-platform those they consider a threat to hearts and minds

11-September-2020

Few today spend long thinking about the vagina of the Virgin Mary. Which is a pity. Because the Virgin Mary’s vagina might help us better understand not only what is going on in an ancient church in Istanbul but also what is going on elsewhere in Turkey, and in Bristol and in Oriel College, Oxford, and in Canada, and anywhere else that anger is rising and statues are falling and history is being held to account.

But first back to that church in Istanbul. Unless you’ve been to Istanbul you may not have heard of the Kariye Museum. But it is glorious. This ancient church – converted into a museum decades ago – looks a bit unprepossessing at first. Outside it looks like a bunker. But inside it takes your breath away. For here you will find heaven held in beaten gold and ancient ages stilled on its ceiling. The blue and red and gold mosaics that cover this church from top to toe are some of the oldest still surviving from Byzantium – and arguably the most beautiful.

Continue reading @ UnHerd.

Christianity Was The Original Cancel Culture

Landon Haynes questions some core tenets of the Christian religion. The piece featured in
Atheist Republic.

Image credit: istockphoto.com

There must be four gospels like there are four winds of heaven and four corners of the Earth, wrote Irenaeus. This appears to have been the first Christian figure to compile the four gospels we know today as official canon, and this is the kind of criteria he used. Infighting, alterations, the dropping and adding of books, book burning, mass violence, conquest, slavery, oppression, political selection,editing, the borrowing and re-purposing of past religions continues but the history of the Bible and Christianity is not what this piece is about. Following Irenaeus, four claims made by theists have been on the wind, occupying my own mental space as of late as I've gazed up at the heavens. I've set out to thoroughly dissect them, conclusively. I submit my thoughts that they might be as useful to others as they were therapeutic for me to record.

1. "Non-believers have no moral foundation."

Theists have a horrible moral standard, but they accuse non-theists of having no standards. But generally our standard is universal humanity: the facts of our nature, that we're an interdependent social species with empathy built into us as we have to live together. We can recognize the point in it--that if one group's rights are curtailed ours could be next, etc. We realize we need accurate facts to build our morality on so we indeed appeal to science, understanding there may be facts we presently lack. We try to learn from history. Witness the difference between treating the physically or mentally ill as if they were cursed or possessed by demons (views the Bible espouses) and recognizing them as victims of microorganisms and chemical imbalances, where sick children are taken to the doctor and not the exorcist.

The theist MO is to be a minion. It's might makes right. But how is obedience to authority morality? How is this wise? We follow laws in society because we recognize their benefits and we try to change them or have revolutions if they're fallacious or unbeneficial. We don't blindly and unthinkingly follow laws just because the government said so and is the foundation of morality, it exists because we support and allow it to collectively. If authority is morality any authority could be the foundation of morality, where will that lead (see North Korea)? Shouldn't morality best be bottom up and decided on and discovered and recognized based on our human nature and because it works and makes sense, just like our laws?

Theists special plead and state their god is special, but this is the laughable thing they always do. Once you go from saying there is some thing out there we could call a god to giving specifics about it--it's eternal, the most perfect or just being--you are just making bald-faced assertions that you have no idea about and you're exponentially decreasing the probability that anything you're saying is true or the being you're describing is real. One could ask just where your god got its morals just like you can ask just where did it come from. If it has good reasons for its moral orders we can appeal to those reasons without the middleman. Further, "god's" morals in scripture, and its apparent morals in nature are abhorrent and few would emulate or wish to advocate them minus ridiculous excuses. Further, he has no claim to moral authority or accountability when murderers can come to Jesus and go to heaven while billions go to an eternal torture chamber he's made for not believing something-the most sadistic and unjust idea ever created. In fact, one would be in prison or an insane asylum if one followed the Bible literally.

And what of the fact of all the gods and religions out there? Just all the sects of one religion who agree on little and endlessly slaughtered each other before the coming of secular governments based on the universal humanity and reason and fairness that non-theists advocate? Religion's track record for all of history is almost comically bloody. How is this objective, it's obviously not wise or unifying. If you base your morality on religion, what happens when you lose that religion? On the other hand, you'll never stop being a social animal amongst social animals who generally feels bad at treating another poorly and risks getting treated poorly if you do. Appealing to invisible authorities that can't be justified to non-adherents is a great way to dismiss your fellow humans, and to lose your own humanity, as again history and current headlines all too often attest.
Secular morality is superior to religious morality.

2. "Man is corrupt and his efforts to ‘play God’ will destroy him."

"Increasingly, modern science pursues powers traditionally reserved for the almighty. But those who encroach upon the province of the gods realize too late that the price for entrance is destruction."

So goes the closing narration of the opening episode of the modern 1990s "The Outer Limits" TV show, reminiscent of theist arguments one hears stating that we must "trust in God, not in man" and "science is more dangerous and culpable than religion". So, lightning rods, curing diseases, connecting the world, feeding the multitudes, diminishing poverty and ignorance, doubling life expectancy, scaling the heavens and the stars, understanding the world so that we have leverage on it is destruction? The destruction was already there, that's what compelled us to overcome it. A meteor could have always wiped out life just like a nuke could. But in the latter scenario we have an opportunity for reason and survival (and an opportunity to survive any future meteors). Risk is involved (we're not gods and there are no gods to protect us), but no more than the risk that the "gods" already placed upon us. Just what would the writer of this narration and his theist counterparts have us as a species do?

The replacing of revelation with investigation has been the single greatest and most transformative boon to the human race. Scientific values of objectivity, rationality, open testability, cooperation, and skepticism are bulwarks against darker impulses of bias, prejudice, superstition, and hysteria. It's taken us from cave dwellers to space explorers and creates an overall story that makes belief in human potential the "justified faith" I wrote a whole book about. Every bit of the mind-boggling progress we have seen, including us now being in the best time to be alive in history by virtually every measure, is due to human thought, empathy, cooperation, and action at their most sublime. Meanwhile, imagine if in all these many thousands of years in which the faithful have cried out to
their gods in vain and religion had total control and manipulated and profited from this situation, though never able to prove any of its claims, or uncover any knowledge, or truly better people's lives, imagine if it had modern weaponry in its crusades of righteous tyranny...

3. "Christianity is rational."

"God" sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself and create a loophole for his own rules, no better way could be thought of, because an uncomprehending rib woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat fruit and pursue knowledge (putting these things in place and knowing what would happen), then cursing all innocent descendants for it? Very rational. A human or blood sacrifice that wasn't really a sacrifice somehow "saves" mankind, and most are still going to hell anyway? Magnificently rational. Sickness is caused by demons requiring exorcism, you don't need to wash your hand before eating, mud and spit cure blindness, faith makes you immune to poison? Quite rational. Having your story be so similar to dozens of gods and myths that came before you? So rational. Salvation depends on belief, which is involuntary (something a god would know) and bad,vague, contradicting, or no evidence? Quite logical. Having your book be filled with barbarism and contradictions? Necessarily logical. Allowing endless religions and sects? Ingenious. Allowing your religion to have a comically horrific history, spread by bloodshed, force, and accident, in which no one can still agree on much of anything? Wise. A man-god predicts his own return within the lives of his listeners, 2,000 years ago now? Sensibly compelling. Three is one and one is three? Deeply comprehensible.

An infinitely loving god allows and causes random atrocity and calamity, regardless of the victims' beliefs or virtue, the scale and depths of which would make most human beings' stomachs turn? Intellectually unassailable. A being is omni-everything that created all in perfect knowledge and power yet makes mistakes, has regrets, and blames things on everyone else? Mentally immaculate. Believing still that the ultimate answers MUST be magical and supernatural despite this NEVER being the answer up until now? Brilliant. Eschewing all the evidence of bottom-up evolution and obstinately demanding complexity requires a designer who would be infinitely more complex?

Supremely reasonable. Holding or commanding faith (as if this is a reliable path to truth) above reason, revelation above investigation-exactly the opposite of the means by which all our progress has been made? Irreproachably sagacious.

Seriously?

4. "There must have been a creator."

Doesn't it make more sense that a universe came first, not a mind, not some super person? In what space does god exist then, and has he just been there, alone and bored forever or does he have company? If complex things need a creator, who or what created god? If god needs no creator and always existed (put aside that this is unsupported special pleading), why can't the universe be the thing that's always existed? It's much simpler than a god and we know it does exist. Doesn't science show, anyway, that things are evolutionary and bottom up? Wouldn't something as complex as a god need to have evolved (if you're not going to again employ special pleading)?

Isn't god just magically poofing things into existence, or himself poofing into existence, just as magical as virtual particles poofing into existence? Except, we know virtual particles exist and do this because we detect them (and wasn't our visible universe once at this quantum size of scale?). And again they're simpler than a god. God is used to explain complexity but does it really, doesn't it just add more complexity and explain nothing, or at least sets the need for an explanation back a step?

And what is "God"? It looks to me like an anthropomorphic projection born of cosmically microscopic human fear and ignorance but isn't it possible there are things one could call "god" that aren't conscious minds, or that are but are just advanced life?

Don't physicists say the universe, at its most fundamental level, is just quantum fields with no trace of purpose or goals? How purposeful or blissful is it to shun the only world we know we have for one of many unsupported hypothetical ones where you spend eternity on bended knee, endlessly praising a master who also is responsible for the endless torture of billions of good people and loved ones?

Four Things

Radicalised Obedience, not Radicalised Theology is the secret to evangelical Christianity’s rebirth in Irish society, according to contentious religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, in his Fearless Flying Column today. 

Mention the words ‘radicalised’ and ‘religion’ in the same sentence and the immediate perception is that I am creating a recipe for spiritual disaster.

However, the modern Christian Church must be challenged so that it adopts a clear policy of radical obedience if Christians are to effectively combat the growing menace of the secular society.

For and to Christians, the modern pluralist society is becoming increasingly depraved when compared to Biblical doctrine and teaching. Compared to the Christian faith, the world must seem to be increasingly deteriorating ‘out of kilter’; the globe has gone anti-Christian crazy!

It must seem to many Christians that the modern world is opposing virtually everything that we believe. But the Christian Church needs to rise up and challenge the modern world through a process of radical obedience to the Word of God.

We, as a Christian Church, need increasing spiritual wisdom to live. We Christians must learn the true meaning that we are God’s ambassadors on earth. God can still use us to spread His word and He is asking us, as a Church, to rise up and live lives of radical obedience. But what does this radical obedience mean in practical terms?

We need to remember that even though we Christians are in the middle of chaos, God is still in control. We see this example in the Old Testament in the book of Daniel.

In chapter three, we see how the then Babylonian ruler, King Nebuchadnezzar regarded himself as a divinity and decided to build a golden image, which when the music was sounded, all humans must bow and worship it.

Taken in a modern context, God has positioned ordinary people in places of power who through the process of radical obedience can get the world back in control.

In those Babylonian times, three Jews had been placed in positions of power - verse 12 - “But there are some Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon.”

However, three of these Jews - Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego - refused to bow before Nebuchadnezzar’s golden statue when the music sounded as they were committed to the one true God, which is the Christian God.

King ‘Neb’ flew into a blind rage and ordered that the punishment of being thrown into the fiery furnace be passed on the three Jews.

Even the threat of this did not deter the three Jews into abandoning or even compromising their faith in God. Have we, as Christians, ever been tempted to abandon or dilute our faith simply to fit in with the world?

Such was King ‘Neb’s rage at this supposed insult, that he ordered the furnace to be heated to seven times its normal temperature. Still the three Jews would not recant.

Indeed, such was the intensity of the heat from the furnace that when the three Jews were thrown into it, even those doing the throwing were killed. Then the miracle occurs - King ‘Neb’ sees four people walking in the flames, not three.

King ‘Neb’ immediately recognised the falseness of his own golden image, and in verse 28 makes this declaration: 

… praise be to the God of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, who has sent his angel and rescued his servants! They trusted in him and defied the king’s command and were willing to give up their lives rather than serve or worship any god except their own God.
King ‘Neb’ also decreed that “no other god can save in this way” and he promoted the three Jews to positions of even greater influence in the province of Babylon.

Likewise, we Christians living in the modern world must not choose to compromise on issues of our faith. We Christians must recognise that if we place anyone or anything above God, then it becomes an idol, especially when these things become our purpose for living.

Christians need to realise that everything in this world comes under the authority of Jesus - but do they actually believe this Biblical truth in their everyday lives?

King ‘Neb’ abused his power and, indeed, uses his power as a form of control over the people - this is what happens when God is not put first. It creates a fear factor, forcing people to follow blindly.

Christians need to follow the path of radical obedience and tell those in authority - ‘Our God is greater than your culture!’ So many laws are being passed, or are in the process of being implemented, while the Christian Church sits silently by.

Under this process of radical obedience, parents and grandparents need to raise up a generation of Biblical-style Shadrachs, Meshachs and Abednegos who will stand up and bluntly say ‘No’ to laws of the nation which are anti-Christian.

Indeed, given the threat to the minds of young children by the secular society, the role of parents and especially Sunday schools and Bible classes becomes even more important in this battle between the powers of light and those of darkness.

Modern day Christians are not slaves; many - like Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego - are positioned in posts of authority, but maybe are too scared of the consequences of the laws of the land or political correctness gone mad to stand up for the Christian faith.

Christians must not lose sight that they are the children of God, and when any authority asks them to break the laws of God, they must say ‘No’.

Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego chose to obey God, and not bow the knee to the pagan image, however, for many Christians, it is an easier life for them to keep their heads down, and to assimilate into the secular culture rather than oppose it. Unfortunately, many Christians want to be seen as trendy and ‘going with the secular flow’

In the process of radical obedience, it is not about Christians arguing; it is about them standing firm in their Biblical faith. Radical obedience is faith firmly positioned in prayer.

In accepting the need for this radical obedience, each of us as Christians must ask ourselves - how much do we trust in God?

We must recognise that the Church’s influence on culture is waning - so how are we to respond individually as Christians to this challenge? Are we prepared to say ‘No’?

In our work, if we are asked to promote a lifestyle which we know to be spiritually and Scripturally wrong, are we prepared to stand and be counted, or wilt and try to justify the ways of the world simply not to offend.

We Christians must remember that on Judgement Day, we will be held accountable for our actions on earth. God has chosen us to tell the truth and we must tell this to others and step out in faith.

Modern day Christians must be prepared to step into the secular culture’s fiery furnace remembering and believing that God is in the midst. In Daniel Chapter Three, we saw how the leader of a nation acted and changed his tone when he saw Christians in action.

Have we Christians the courage to identify ourselves as children of God, or will we be like Peter and deny Jesus? If the three Jews can bond together, stand firm and defeat the Babylonian fiery furnace, then modern day Christians need to stand up and be counted to confront the secularist and pluralist society’s fiery furnace.

Do we have any Shadrachs, Meshachs and Abednegos in our Churches?

 Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter

Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.30 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online at www.thisissunshine.com

Radical Obedience

From Atheist Republic a report of a survey that finds Christianity on the decline in the UK




British Social Attitudes report shows that more than half people in United Kingdom no longer affiliate with an organized religion; precisely the number is 52%. This is bigger number than ever before and also there are 33% of those who are "very" or "extremely" unreligious which is a big rise comparing to 14% of those who felt the same way in 1998. There has also been a decline in the proportion of people who identify with Christianity. This decline is not a private matter of some individuals or families; this is rather a trend with further implications for everyday life. Along with a shift away from religion, there is much more confidence in science and technology among people and that provides an alternative way of understanding the world.

One important note is that every generation is less religious than the one before. “Britain is becoming more secular not because adults are losing their religion but because older people with an attachment to the Church of England and other Christian denominations are gradually being replaced in the population by younger unaffiliated people,” says the report, according to Patheos. “To put it another way, religious decline in Britain is generational; people tend to be less religious than their parents, and on average their children are even less religious than they are.”



People are relatively tolerant of personal faith, Christianity in particular; but they are more and more skeptical about the role of religion in everyday life and in wider society. According to the British Social Attitudes report, "almost two-thirds (63%) agree with the idea that ‘looking around the world, religions bring more conflict than peace,’ while only 13% disagree. Forty-six percent have some degree of confidence in Churches and religious organizations, while a fifth (21%) say they have “no confidence at all.” As our society has become more secular, the role of religious institutions and religious identities in determining our moral and social norms has weakened."

Religion has been challenged by other worldviews and while it was sometimes an answer to every question and every mystery of the world, modern society has found other sources of knowledge and wisdom and religion is not needed as it was before. Scientific rationalism and liberal individualism, worldviews that are gaining popularity in British society according to the report, are shaping how people understand the world, make decisions and relate to each other. There is no need for religion and its teachings to shape and create norms. So as a result, it is becoming less popular in Britain and many other countries.

Christianity More Unpopular Than Ever, UK Survey Finds

How can we Christians show the love of Jesus through sport? Now that’s a challenge for the modern day Churches. Religious commentator, Dr John Coulter, tackles this thorny question in his latest Fearless Flying Column today.

Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy, insists the Fourth Commandment. Does that mean we should only read the Bible on Sundays, spend as much time as possible in church, and never, ever watch a football match, let alone run a marathon on the Lord’s Day?

As a rebellious Presbyterian preacher’s kid growing up in the Seventies in the heart of the North Antrim Bible Belt, voicing support for Sunday sport was akin to burning in hell. The only book to be read on God’s Holy Day was the Bible, so sneak peaks at the then top football magazine known as Shoot! was a huge ‘no, no.’

Sunday soccer was unheard of in the 1970s, and only the World Cup final was traditionally played on the Sabbath. I remember early July 1974 as if it was yesterday – West Germany was meeting Holland in the World Cup final and the match was being screened live on what is now known as terrestrial television.

But it was a Sunday and I had avidly followed the progress of both countries to the final. But in our Presbyterian Manse, there was no TV on Sundays, so how was I to follow the game?

The situation was made much worse in that there was a major service that day in my late father’s church, Clough Presbyterian, near Ballymena – and the guest preacher was the Rev Martin Smyth, the former leader of the Orange Order and a former UUP MP for South Belfast.

But like Baldrick in Blackadder, I had devised a cunning plan! Normally, on such an important Sunday where we would have a high profile guest evangelist, my role was to help dad at the church.

But I’d spent most of Saturday evening working on the devious scheme, which swung into operation soon after lunch – I volunteered to help mum with preparing the after-church refreshments at the Manse!

They would be served in what became known as ‘the big sitting room’ in the Manse. It was where guests were treated to tea and tray bakes. We had a small black and white portable TV which I moved discreetly into the corner of the large room, well hidden behind an ornamental cushion.

By the time church service was finished, chats over and people back at the Manse, the match would be over and the trophy presented – unless there was an upset and extra time or penalties were needed!

While my mum was busy preparing the traditional range of Presbyterian sandwiches, I would leave the kitchen, go to the other end of the Manse, switch on the portable TV, ensure the sound was muted – and enjoy the match, keeping the large door ajar in case mum came in unexpectedly with the china cups and saucers.

The plan worked without a hitch and neither my parents nor Rev Smyth ever realised West Germany had beaten Holland 2-1 to win the World Cup.

That was 1974; there would be no need to sneak about in today’s society where even some churches show the World Cup final in large screens in the church hall. For them, such a footballing occasion would be an opportunity for evangelism.

I even recall the massive outcry from a section of Christian fundamentalist opinion when Scotland’s Glasgow Rangers staged their first Sunday match.

There was a similar debate earlier this month when the traditional Belfast marathon was staged on a Sunday for the first time in its history rather than the usual Monday Bank Holiday. There was some hue and cry from a section of the fundamentalist Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, the denomination founded by the late Rev Ian Paisley in 1951.

For decades, the so-called ‘Free P’s were to the fore in protesting against anything which besmirched the Sabbath. The ‘Free P’s were also supported to a large extent by the pressure group known as the Lord’s Day Observance Society.

But since Paisley senior stood down as both First Minister and Moderator of the Free Presbyterian Church, and particularly since his death, the ‘Free P’s influence in theological lobbying has waned considerably.

What has become apparent is that there is now a significant gap on the evangelical theological spectrum for a new champion of Christian values in Northern Ireland. Any takers? Or are Christian clerics too afraid of any liberal backlash if they spoke out openly on socially conservative issues?

Can Christians set examples in sport by their performances in games and competitions, irrespective if they are played on a Sunday or not. If the Sabbath is to be truly treated as a day of rest, could part of that relaxation be watching or participating in sport?

Some might say that professional sports people are making a living from their chosen sport, therefore, they are working on the Sabbath. But Scripture tells us that if your ox falls into a hole on the Sabbath, you rescue it rather than leave it there.

This is a reference to the New Testament confrontation between Jesus and the notorious Pharisees about healing on the Sabbath.

In Luke’s Gospel Chapter 14 and verses 5 and 6, it states in the King James Version:

And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day? And they could not answer him again to these things.

What about the many security forces personnel, doctors, nurses, paramedics and emergency services staff who have to work on Sundays. Imagine a situation where your home was on fire on a Sunday and when you contacted the Fire and Rescue Service, you got a pre-recorded message saying: “As it is the Sabbath, we are not working and you will have to phone back after midnight to avail of the services of a fire engine!”

Christians can also show their faith in action by not abusing their bodies with alcohol, drugs or smoking as the Bible urges us to view our bodies as temples of the Lord.

This is a reference to another New Testament text, 1st Corinthians Chapter 6 and verse 19, which states: “What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?” (KJV).

Many people, especially the youth, view sporting stars as heroes and heroines. If a Christian footballer, for example, was to constantly use bad language during a game, and committed fouls which earned them yellow or red cards, that could be deemed as reflecting badly on the Christian faith.

I recall again in the Seventies playing in a Boys’ Brigade soccer match in Ballymena. Although the BB is seen as a church-based organisation, that particular match was a very bad-tempered game. Most BB matches ended with a short time of prayer after the final whistle.

On this occasion, as BB officers asked all the players to bow their heads and close their eyes for the time of prayer, one lad waited until eyes were closed before yelling at the top of his voice: “Referee, why don’t you just f**k off home!”

This was followed by much yelling by BB officers of ‘Who shouted that?’ and ‘Remember this is a BB match!’

As for the Sunday marathon, could this not be a great opportunity for evangelism among the legions of supporters, some of whom may never darken a church’s door. Given the number of places of worship along the Belfast marathon route, rather than moan about not being able to get to church, could those churches in future use the marathon as an opportunity to reach out into the community.


Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. 
Listen online at  www.thisissunshine.com 


Sporting Christianity

VALERIE TARICO writes that the wonder-filled birth story of the baby Jesus was centuries in the making.

Picture a creche with baby Jesus in a manger and shepherds and angels and three kings and a star over the stable roof. We think of this traditional scene as representing the Christmas story, but it actually mixes elements from two different nativity stories in the Bible, one in Matthew and one in Luke, with a few embellishments that got added in later centuries. What was the historical kernel? Most likely we will never know, because it appears that the Bible’s nativity stories are themselves highly-embellished late add-ons to the Gospels.

Here are six hints that the story so familiar to us might have been unfamiliar to early Jesus worshipers.

1. Paul’s Silence – The earliest texts in the New Testament are letters written during the first half of the first century by Paul and other people who used his name. These letters, or Epistles as they are called, give no hint that Paul or the forgers who used his name had heard about any signs and wonders surrounding the birth of Jesus, nor that his mother was a virgin impregnated by God in spirit form. Paul simply says that he was a Jew, born to a woman.

2. Mark’s Silence – The Gospel of Mark—thought to be the earliest of the four gospels and, so, closest to actual events—doesn’t contain a nativity or “infancy” story, even though it otherwise looks to be the primary source document for Matthew and Luke. In Mark, the divinity of Jesus gets established by wonders at the beginning of his ministry, and some Christian sects have believed that he was adopted by God at this point.

Why is Mark thought to be where the authors of Matthew and Luke got material? For starters, some passages in Mark, Matthew, and Luke would likely get flagged by plagiarism software. But in the original Greek, Mark is the most primitive and least polished of the three. It also is missing powerful passages like the Sermon on the Mount and has endings that vary from copy to copy. These are some of the reasons that scholars believe it predates the other two. Unlike Paul, the author of Mark was writing a life history of Jesus, one that was full of miracles. It would have been odd for him to simply leave out the auspicious miracles surrounding the birth of Jesus—unless those stories didn’t yet exist.

3. A Tale of Two Tales – Beyond a few basics, the nativity stories in Matthew and Luke have remarkably little overlap. In both, Jesus is born in Bethlehem of a virgin Mary who is betrothed to a man named Joseph. That’s where the similarity ends.

In Matthew’s story, an unnamed angel appears to Joseph, astrologers arrive bearing symbolic gifts, a special star appears in the east, Herod seeks to kill Jesus, warnings come during dreams, and the holy family flees to safety in Egypt just before boy infants are slaughtered across Judea.

In Luke’s story, the angel Gabriel appears to the future parents of John the Baptist. They miraculously conceive, but his father is made mute as a punishment for doubting. Gabriel then appears to Mary. During a visit between the two prospective mothers, who are cousins, John the Baptist in the womb recognizes Jesus in the womb and leaps. Later when John is named, his father miraculously regains the power of speech. A census forces Mary and Joseph to go to Bethlehem, where there is no room in the inn. Jesus is born and laid in a manger/cradle, and angels sing to shepherds who visit the baby. After his naming, his parents take him to the Jerusalem temple where he is recognized and blessed by a holy man and a resident prophetess, and then the family returns to their home in Nazareth instead of going to Egypt.

Some Christians try to harmonize these stories but a simpler explanation is that they represent two different branches in the tree of oral tradition. The study of European fairy tales shows that different versions of the stories tend to split off, with characters and magical elements diverging over time much like an evolutionary tree. The Matthew and Luke nativity stories likely underwent a similar process, meaning that oral traditions circulated and evolved for some time before the two authors inscribed their respective versions. Scholars debate how much the authors further revised the stories they received.

It’s interesting to note that each author inserted a dubious historical event (an impossible census in one and an unlikely mass infanticide in the other) to make his plotline work. Dubious histories become credible only after potential eyewitnesses die off—so their presence is one more indicator that one or more generations lapsed before the stories took their present form.

4. Pagan Parallels – Luke’s story appears to be slanted toward a Roman audience, and in fact the idea of gods impregnating human women was a common trope that many Jews and Christians have recognized as pagan. Progressive theologian Marcus Borg argued that the point of the story was to pivot fealty from Caesar Augustus to Jesus. According to Roman imperial theology, Augustus had been conceived when the god Apollo impregnated his human mother, Atia. Titles inscribed on coins and temples during his reign included “Son of God,” “Lord,” and “Savior.” They also included the phrase “peace on earth,” which Luke has his angels sing to shepherds.

5. Say What?! – By the second chapter of Luke, the parents of Jesus behave as if they have forgotten the astounding signs and wonders that accompanied his birth. When the boy is twelve, Mary and Joseph take him to Jerusalem for a festival, where they lose him in the crowd and find him three days later among the teachers in the temple. When they scold him, he says ‘“Why were you searching for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?” But they did not understand what he said to them’ (Luke 2:49-50).

Wait. They didn’t know what he was talking about?! This otherwise bizarre narrative glitch, which directly follows the nativity story, suggests that the former was tacked on at a later time.

6. Divinity Rising – If we line up the four gospels in the estimated order they were written—Mark (60CE), Matthew (70-90CE), Luke (80-95CE), then John (90-100CE), an interesting pattern emerges. Jesus becomes divine earlier and earlier. In Mark, as mentioned, he is shown to be divine when he is baptized (and perhaps is uniquely adopted or entered by God at that point). In Matthew and Luke, he is fathered by the Holy Spirit and is sinless from birth. In John, he is the Logos, present at the creation of the world—though also born of a woman. This sequence suggests that theologies explaining the divinity of Jesus emerged gradually and evolved as Christianity crystalized and spread.

After the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were bundled into the Catholic Bible, the two infancy stories merged. The three astrologers became Kings riding camels. Mary got her own “immaculate conception” and became, to some, a sinless perpetual virgin. The place of Jesus birth became a stable filled with adoring animals. And the holy birthday moved to winter solstice, weaving in delicious and delightful pagan traditions including feasting, tree decorating and festivals of light. The birth of a long-awaited messiah fused with the rebirth of the sun—and their joint birthday party became, in the dead of winter, a celebration of bounty and beauty and love and hope that captivated hearts even beyond the bounds of Christianity.

Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is the author ofTrusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light and Deas and Other Imaginings, and the founder of www.WisdomCommons.org. Her articles about religion, reproductive health, and the role of women in society have been featured at sites including The Huffington Post, Salon, The Independent, Free Inquiry, The Humanist, AlterNet, Raw Story, Grist, Jezebel, and the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies. Subscribe at ValerieTarico.com.


Valerie Tarico
Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington.  

She writes about religion, reproductive health, and the role of women in society.

Six Hints That Baby Jesus Stories Were Late Additions To Early Christian Lore

Fake news or Gospel Truth? Religious commentator, DR JOHN COULTER examines one of the great dilemmas facing modern Christianity in his latest Fearless Flying Column today.

A crisis of conscience - that’s one of the huge dilemmas which many Christians may face at some time in their spiritual journeys, even if it is just the simple prayer - why is this happening to me, God?

There has been much talk in the media about the impact of so-called Fake News. Taken in a Christian context, we can be so grateful to God when things are going well in our lives, but when trouble comes, quite often rather than turning to God in prayer, we seek to blame God Himself for our troubles and challenges.

But Scripturally, does God really seek to bring harm into our lives? If we believe in God, we must also believe in Satan. People may blame God for their troubles, but are those troubles really caused by the devil who will do anything evil to prevent us from enjoying an abundant Christian life.

Put bluntly, how do we as Christians cope when we are praying for a total recovery for a loved one who is suffering from a serious illness and instead of healing, that loved one dies?

This is a very tough debate for Christians to have with themselves. Or put equally bluntly, what happens to our faith when God says No?

Perhaps as a starting point, we could use St John’s Gospel Chapter 10, verse 10 from the New Testament.

Quoting from the King James Version, this verse states the words of Jesus Himself: 

“The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.”


The early part of this verse should serve as a warning about the agenda of Satan. The latter part makes it crystal clear what God wants for our lives, and this abundant life was accomplished by Jesus’ death at Calvary. 

I recently heard the dreadful story of an evangelical clergyman who had faithfully preached the Gospel for 40 years, but has now given up his faith because he believes he has not seen any evidence of miracles during his ministry.

Christians - and indeed the entire community - must be aware that Satan will use Fake News to propagate his lies. Naturally, we want our loved ones to be with us on earth for as long as possible. Is this a selfish approach as a Christian?

When they die and pass into eternity, do we blame God for taking them? But if heaven is such a wonderful place, why would anyone want to come back and live on earth with a recurrence of all the pain and suffering they had endured?

Could one of the interpretations of this specific verse be that God still wants the best for us in this life, even if bad things happen to us? Again bluntly, does it take more faith to believe in the concept of atheism than in Biblical Christianity?

The specific challenge to us as Christians is what do we seek in life in terms of ‘more abundantly’? Is it a spiritual revival across Ireland, what is best for us, seeing all our family members ‘saved’, or a closer relationship with God?

Some definitions of ‘abundance’ in relation to the spiritual sense could be: plenty, richness, a lot of, pressed down, running over, shaken together, a whole lot of. How does obedience to God fit in with this concept? It seems at this point in the column, I am posing more questions than I am seeking to provide answers and solutions!

Biblically, what do we mean by this ‘abundant life’? Does it mean abundance in our spiritual condition, in our relationships with others, in our finances, in our health, our faith, our hope, and in so many aspects of our spiritual and physical existence?

Again, focusing on the opening section of John 10:10, we must recognise, especially as Christians, that we have a very nasty and powerful adversary, or opponent, in Satan.

His ultimate desire has always been to keep folk from receiving what it is that God has for people’s lives. Is this the reason that, theologically, many people - even Christians - can blame God whenever bad things happen?

One of the most challenging things to do in bad times for Christians to do is simply pray. Many of us, as Christians, tend to yell at God to get His act together and sort out our problems ASAP!

Perhaps many of us Christians need to remember the old spiritual maxim - ‘The saint on his knees means the devil flees!’ John 10:10 makes it very clear that Satan will use the tactics of stealing, killing and destroying to bring tests of faith into our lives.

How often - myself included - have we Christians asked questions, such as - why does God allow natural disasters to happen? Why does God allow disease, hunger and thirst to pollute lands? Clearly, Satan wants us to believe his lies, and die without Christ in our hearts.

How many Christians have been sucked in by so-called Fake News? How many Christians have been questioning the validity of their faith because they have been reading or listening or watching Fake News?

Perhaps for me to suggest Fake News comes from Satan makes me sound like a raving fundamentalist who should set up my own Irish branch of the notorious Westboro Baptist Church in the United States!

But in reality, we Christians need to be fully aware of the impact of Fake News on our spiritual lives. And if we become sucked in by such Fake News, how many people are we putting off getting involved with the Christian faith because we are repeating such Fake News? That should be food for thought for us Christians!


Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to religious commentator Dr John Coulter’s slot, Call Coulter, every Saturday morning around 9.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM, as part of the ‘At The Table’ show. 
Listen online at  www.thisissunshine.com 



Fake News Or Gospel Truth?

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)