A picture paints a thousand words

Richard, I guess I need further comment. What is this picture in reference to? If Faith in God and His Word is equivilent to “pulling a rabbit out of a hat” then this cartoon truly shows a lack of Faith on the part of the artist.

Dml, well maybe people need to rethink their perceptions? To me those atheists who call God a “magic sky fairy” are really being very insulting. I would never insult atheists or those hwo believe in gods other than Jesus. I may call their gods “false gods” but that isn’t as harsh as calling ones god or God a “magic sky fairy”.

I guess that begs the question. How does a Christian help those people who look at God as a “magic sky fairy” to not look at Him that way? I have spoken to many an atheist and agnostic outside of this blog or anyone who quotes on this blog and have found that showing love for them, sharing with them the definitive Truth of God and His Word and offering books by individuals who have had struggles with Faith in the past who happen to have come to Christianity as the Truth has help people to move from “faith to Faith”. I remember one time I gave an atheist/agnostic a copy of “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” and years later I saw him and he had a big smile on his face letting me know that it had an impact on him and changed his life.

The verse that comes to mind to people who are searching for the Truth to “set them free” is: “Blessed are they who have not seen and yet Believe.” with “Without Faith it is impossible to see God.”

This was always going to go badly, eh?

Still - brilliant cartoon - thanks for posting, Richard!

Tony is right, DH - the cartoon has a go not at the Bible as such, but at its misuse and abuse. I mean, look at the goofy guy and the violated rabbit.

If you go to source, i.e. to the Naked Pastor himself, you will find a title over the cartoon: “magic, tricks, and wishful thinking”. There is no question that some Christians read and expound the Bible in ways covered by this title.

For example, some people think that a Bible has protective value, so they make sure to keep one in the house, or oracular qualities, so they think they can open it at random for advice. That’s magic.

Others, especially stage-stalking evangelists, use the Bible as part of their act (usually a big floppy one), as a prop to give what they say, however nonsensical, or even venal, authority. That’s trickery. Indeed it is magic in the strict sense - the manipulation of sacred power for one’s own ends.

And as for wishful thinking - self-deception - well, one has only to study the critiques of Nietzsche, Marx, and Freud to see how the Bible has often served ideologically to legitimate power, or psychologically to perpetuate infantilism. Though, of course, the Old Testament prophets anticipated these atheist masters of suspicions in their own unmasking of what is properly called idolatry - a charge, remember, that they directed primarily at Israel itself.

DH: “they ARE worshiping a false god and there is nothing wrong with pointing that out in love and if it means that I die for sharing the Gospel of Salvation then so be it.”

Two thoughts.
First, my comments were not about whether or not they worship a false god, but about your comment that our telling them so was not as harsh as someone else calling our God a magic sky fairy. In the first place (depending on your sense of humour and use of language) they amount to the same thing. In the second place, whether a Muslim fundamentalist recognises the concept of saying it “in love” is a moot point - in fact, I am increasingly suspicious of it, myself. I have had a few cases where people have offered to tell me something “in love” and it has usually meant they were being very rude or personal, but because it was prefaced as “in love” I wasn’t supposed to object to what they said. To be honest, some of it wasn’t said in love, but was said in arrogance.

Second thought - the idea of dying for the faith is something with which I have little difficulty. I know about martyrdom, ancient and modern, and (while I’m a soft Westerner who would rather die in his bed a long time from now) if that was what was neessary, I think I’d do it. But I would prefer to die for the Christian faith, not for some peripheral detail of it. Facing a firing squad because I won’t deny “Jesus is Lord” is one thing - going because of a particular interpretation or translation of the Bible is quite another. It is important to distinguish between the core faith and the peripheral doctrines. I’m not saying holding to the authority of scripture is not important (as we’ve discussed a few times, I do so believe) but whether it is so central that God would ask you to lay down your life for it is another matter.

Tony, you somewhat misunderstood what I said. I have equated the differences we have as the same as the difference between Ayatollahs and Christianity. So I agree with you on that. Me telling an Ayatollah in love that “Jesus is Lord” and that Allah is a “false god” I believe as Christians we should be willing to go to the firing line for. My recent response was only in regard to your Ayatollah comment which no Christian should disagree.

I’m sorry that people might have been rude to you. However, I do understand that sometimes we truly don’t recognize the heart of someone when they speak. Maybe they were arrogant or maybe you misunderstood what they said as being arrogant when they weren’t? I’m of the persuasion to give the person the benefit of the doubt when they say something is “in love”. That is what Jesus would do. When someone disagrees with someone strongly doesn’t mean they aren’t saying it love. (The next analogy is not similar at all but I will use the extreme to make a point with regard to “being rude”) Some might have look at Jesus being “rude” when He threw the moneychangers out but He was clearly doing “it love” for people even the moneychangers themselves. “Whom He loves He chastens.” (I’m not saying we should “chasten” people that is for God and for people God has placed in leadership in the Body of Christ).

Kim one CAN love the sinner and hate the sin. Jesus did that. Paul did that when he mentioned Romans 1 and 1 Cor 6. I honestly have no malice for homosexuals but I do know that it is sin just like any other sin and that if a person has an “unrepentant heart” toward sin it is an indication (not that it is) that the person has a “lack of Faith”.

I even had a good friend of mine from a previous job about 10 years ago who happened to homosexual. He knew I thought it was sin yet he knew that I cared about him enough and definitely knew I was being “malice” toward him. He definitely didn’t look at me as a “homophobe”. Interesting that you seem to look at people like myself as “malicious” without truly looking at people like myself the way God looks at the heart. Do people say thing with alterior motives like you are suggesting? absolutely but one must do away with the hasty-generalizations with regard to looking at people.

DH: “Maybe they were arrogant or maybe you misunderstood what they said as being arrogant when they weren’t? I’m of the persuasion to give the person the benefit of the doubt when they say something is ‘in love’.”

I’ve been in pastoral ministry for nearly 30 years. I’ve had the whole range of responses from people, short of physical attack in a church council (perhaps because they know I’m a Geordie, so don’t fancy their chances ). I do give people the benefit of the doubt if I can, because I know (again, from experience) that some folk mean well but are clumsy; they honestly think they’re being positive when in fact they’re being negative, destructive and rude. There have been others who have quite clearly been arrogant and rude, but think that saying it ‘in love’ makes it OK. Well, sorry - they don’t know what love is, or they wouldn’t hide behind a slogan and lash out in the way they do.

DH, it isn’t about disagreement. I can cope with that - it’s how we learn. I really don’t have a problem with people disagreeing with me, as long as we disagree constructively, and learn from the dialogue.

My comments were about people who generally are into power games, who need to score the points and put other people down. They have my compassion, insofar as the root cause is generally their insecurity. Their rudeness and destructive behaviour can be a real problem, and does real damage to other people. Because I’m a Christian, and a pastor, I do my best to help. But when they hide behind Christian convention, and use it as a smokescreen to hide behind while they stick the knife into others, that’s just bad behaviour and needs to be blocked and stopped.

Essentially, this isn’t about me, and it isn’t about my bad experiences. I’m a big boy, now, and I can cope. The point is, when I see idiots attacking and undermining people who might be more vulnerable than themselves, why should I (or they) cope? Such rudeness, obstructiveness, and destructive behaviour must be addressed, for their sake.

Inerrancy isn’t the issue. We’ll continue to disagree on that, I hope by addressing the issue ,not attacking one another. Christian disagreement shold surely result in contructive conversation, sharing, and learning. Not battering the other guy into submission, standing on his prone body, and waving a flag (sorry - my son has just been playing us a ‘Family Guy’ DVD, and it provides the most bizarre imagery…).

Tony, Wow, I didn’t really realize how bad your experiences were. I know your a “big boy”. Like I stated earlier I hope I’m not one of those people. As I also mentioned and I believe we all can agree that one can be right and wrong at the same time. No matter how correct a person can be if it is said with a bad attitude it is wrong.

I know people who happen to disagree with innerancy who are worse than some of the people you described, Tony. I think what you describe is not a majority to one group or another. I have seen an equal amount of all of the groups within Christianity fall into these things.

Well Pam, I respect you and at least have had conversations over the years. So you can’t say I’m “part of the group” you are referring to. I know you have corrected me in the past andI try to take it as “love”. Although sometimes it is hard I still give you the benefit of the doubt. (Just being humorous)

Pam, I know. I knew you weren’t being “coded”. I was more saying that to make a point. I do have one question. Do you feel like I do that all sides of the church fall into that trap in how you feel about the church after reading my latest reply above? I personally believe that those who happen to agree with me on issues deserve respect just as much as people who are opposite of myself. Also, stating a disagreement in love can be done. It is a matter of the attitude and care of the statement that is so important. It also important from the listener at the same time to give the person the “benefit of the doubt” until it is determined that the person does have a bad attitude. I will say that correction should be done by someone more than an aquaintence. I believe that the Apostle Paul mentions how one can be corrected within the Body of Christ. I totally agree that many problems in the church today are because we don’t follow the correction principles from the Apostle Paul.