One God, Three Faiths, Eternal Love

Three of the world's major religions are Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Whilst each see themselves as very different to the others, Judaism and Christianity share a common suspicion of Islam.  Christians in general, tend to support Israel and the Jewish diaspora.

Amidst the arguing and criticism, all three share a common history and worship the same God.

Some people argue that Muslims do not worship the same God that Jews or Christians do.  However, Allah is a word that simply means "God", so an arabic bible has numerous references to "Allah".  Additionally, all three religions have a common ancestor, Abraham, the Father of Many Nations.

Certainly there are a number of crucial differences between the three religions, for instance Christians worship Jesus as the Son of God, whilst Muslims honour Jesus as one of their most respected prophets.  Interestingly, both Christians and Muslims believe Jesus was born of a Virgin and both religions are awaiting expectantly for the return of Jesus.   Jews on the other hand, see Jesus simply as a man, a false prophet and certainly not as the Messiah. The Qur'an has an entire Surah (Chapter) dedicated to the birth of Jesus.  Islam or Judaism consider themselves to be purely monotheistic and do not believe in the Trinity (God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit forming a 3-in-1 "Godhead") which Christians do.

Whilst Muslims are accused of violence, intolerance, racism & close-mindedness, the irony is that their accusers are behaving in exactly the manner which they criticise, but all in the name of Christ, Democracy or Zionism.  To justify their belief that Islam is a violent religion, some people will quote passages from the Qur'an which describe killing non-Muslims.  Yet, the same can be said of Christianity and Judaism.  There are a number of passages in the Old Testament  which call for the killing of every man, woman and child.  Of course, Jews, Muslims and Christians would and should argue that when quoting such scriptures the context needs to be explained.

Mainstream media has focussed on those extremist Muslims whose behaviour and words justify the fears that some people hold.  The media will broadcast messages from those Muslims who want to introduce the Sharia (with no explanation of what they are actually saying), or those who believe that women are second-class citizens or that Christians, Jews and other non-Muslims should be killed, or that we should all eat halal meat and not celebrate Christmas.  This inflammatory and sensationalist reporting makes great airtime and always provokes the wrath of right-wing talk-back hosts and their listeners.  Of course, those Muslims who give the others a bad name are in the minority, considering that there are a billion Muslims across the globe, from a variety of cultures who manage to live together well.  The media would do better to focus on the behaviour of the majority of Muslims, rather than the minority.  The media would do better to foster harmony rather than fear and hatred.

Attend a mosque and you will find Muslims from different countries and cultures celebrating their religion whilst appreciating the diversity in the various cultures, such as Egyptians sitting down with Indonesians, Pakistanis sharing with Syrians or Turks, Malaysians celebrating with Moroccans. Islam has brought many cultures together and is a religion of peace.  This of course is similar to churches and synagogues across the globe, where people from various nations come together to worship and celebrate their faith.

Many crimes have been committed in the name of Christianity, including of course the Crusades, right through to the recent reinvention of Jesus as a war-mongering capitalist.  Reinventing Jesus has conveniently enabled the "Religious Right" to justify the bombing and invasion of Muslim nations in retaliation for the extremist behaviour of Muslim terrorists whose actions most of the Ummah (Muslim community) do not support. Of course, this reinvented Jesus doesn't make mention of "love" or "turn the other cheek".

All three religions claim to be peaceful and tolerant of others.  So why the fighting?  Particularly, considering that both the Bible and the Qur'an have their roots in Jewish scripture. Jews view both the Qur'an and the Bible to be complete departures from the original scriptures.  Of course, the messages of both Islam and Christianity have changed from their Jewish roots and their adherents believe that the Jews have missed the final message from God; in the case of Islam, the message of the prophet Mohammed and in the case of Christianity, the message of Jesus Christ.   In acknowledgement of this common scriptural root, Islam considers Jews and Christians to be "people of the book" and honours their original scriptures. Whilst the Christian bible includes the Old Testament which is basically Jewish scripture.  Both Muslims and Christians see their holy books as the fulfillment of the original Jewish scriptures.

Whilst the three religions have different interpretations of the nature of God and His message, the fact remains that they worship the same God.  Their messages may differ, but God does not.

The Qur'an has a number of scriptures which describe God's love and His love for people who do good.  For instance Surah 3:134 "those who spend (freely), whether in prosperity, or in adversity; who restrain anger, and pardon (all) men; for Allah loves those who do good".

The Bible is full of verses describing God's love and his commandments to love one another, such as John 3:16 ("For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever shall believe in Him will not perish, but be saved") and Matthew 22:37 & 39 ("Love the Lord Your God with all your heart, with all your soul and all your mind and ....You shall love your neighbour as yourself").

And then Deuteronomy 7:9, which appears in both the Christian Bible and Jewish Torah (and honoured through the Qur'an), states "Know therefore that the Lord your God is God, keeping His covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love Him and keep His commands". 

God, in the Bible, Qur'an and Torah, is a God of Love and commands us to love each other.

We should forget the petty bickering over religious differences and do what God has commanded us - to love one another and to love Him.

God loves each of us, and Christians, Jews and Muslims love Him - as expected.

But - here is the kicker - is it too much to expect all of us to love each of us as God does?

Axis of Evil - Iran, Halliburton, Cheney

In 2002, then President George W. Bush declared Iran to be part of the "Axis of Evil", which was comprised of three nations: North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

Vice President Dick Cheney stated that "we don't negotiate with evil, we defeat it" when referring to one of those "Axis of Evil" nations.

Dick Cheney's CV also includes a stint as the CEO of Halliburton from 1995 to 2000, when he resigned amid claims of a conflict of interest as U.S. Vice President and favouritism in the awarding of government contracts.  Nonetheless, Halliburton continued to be awarded extremely lucrative government contracts, particularly with the rebuilding of Iraq and the establishment of Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay.

Whilst Cheney was CEO, Halliburton was trading with Iran and even had an office based in Tehran.  This violated American law, namely the "Trade with the Enemy Act" and the "International Emergency Economic Powers Act". These Acts specifically prohibited trade with Iran, even before Bush's declaration of the "Axis of Evil".

Halliburton has been charged with selling nuclear technology to Iran as recently as 2005 and as early as 1995 - while Cheney was CEO.  This has prompted the obvious allegation that these deals may have assisted Iran in developing weapons-grade uranium.

Cheney was willing to profit from these dealings, willing to profit from an organisation that traded with "evil" whilst he was CEO and Vice President and was continuing to trade with evil after he resigned as CEO and whilst he still held significant influence within the company and around $40 million of Halliburton stock options.

"We don't negotiate with evil, we defeat it".

If it hadn't been for Halliburton's dealings whilst Cheney was CEO, there may not be anything to defeat; or is the conquest of Iran seen simply as another profit-making opportunity for Halliburton.

"We don't negotiate with evil, we defeat it".

What's the problem here? The definition of negotiation, or the definition of evil ...

or do money and power transcend ethics and hypocrisy?

You Will Know Them By Their Fruits

Being a Christian can be summed up in one word: LOVE.

Love is the one way in which others can tell that we are followers of Jesus as stated in John 13:35,  "By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another".

In distinguishing false prophets from true believers, Jesus stated in Matthew 7:16 that "You will know them by their fruits."

A Christian, a person with a heart for God, will yield the Fruit of the Spirit.  Galatians 5:22-23 tells us that "The fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control"

LOVE is the very first fruit of the spirit.

"If someone says 'I Love God'  but hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also". 1 John 4:20-21.

Sadly, we are seeing that the fruit produced by many people in today's world is hate, intolerance and fear, which is generally directed towards Muslims, homosexuals, socialists, communists, social justice advocates, "do-gooders" and so on.

Hate is a manifestation of fear.

Yet 1 John 4:18 tells us that "there is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment.  But he who fears has not been made perfect in love."

In Matthew 22:37 & 39, Jesus summed up the entire law, the entire bible in two commandments: "You shall love the Lord Your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind and ... You shall love your neighbour as yourself".   

As Christians we are commanded to love, not hate.

Our fruits should distinguish us from the fruits of the world. Whilst we live IN the world, we are not OF the world.

What are your fruits?

What do people see when they see you?  Do they see a person of love, with compassion for all?  Or do they see a person of hate and fear, full of vitriolic bigotry?

When people see you, do they see Christ?

Grass Roots - Then & Now

Back in the day, the Labor Party's grass roots supporters were the working class.  Those hard working men and women who built this country and struggled to earn a living in order to feed, cloth and house the family. They were generally union members who fought for fair pay and conditions in the face of blatant opportunism and exploitation by "the man" - the boss who represented the company with no compassion for individual circumstance, no understanding of "work/life balance" and who was only interested in increasing profits for the Company.

The Liberal Party's grass roots voters were traditionally businessmen and women, those who owned businesses and were interested in the vagaries of the stock market.

The National Party's grass roots base were traditionally farmers.  Hard working men and women who struggled to make a living through drought, flood, fire and famine.

Back then, it was easier to differentiate political affiliations and loyalty.  Generally, people voted for the same party all their lives.

That was then.  This is now.

All three parties are so closely aligned that you would not know which party released a policy unless you were informed. No longer are the party policies clearly delineated.  People swing between parties from election to election, which is not necessarily a bad thing depending on the motivation for it, however it is made easier when the major parties are so closely aligned.

Party policies are predominantly determined by popularity and focus groups.

The "New Grass Roots" these days is driven by fear, selfishness, ignorance and misinformation which is often manipulated and encouraged through government rhetoric and media sensationalism.  Lindsay Tanner expounds on this in his book, "Sideshow - Dumbing Down Democracy".

The Labor Party has lost many of its grass roots supporters who have become disillusioned with unions and complacent about their industrial rights.  We see workers supporting the Liberal Party and even backing big business to sack other workers (for instance, the stand that many workers took in supporting the grounding of the QANTAS fleet to break the strike - a strike which was not just about more pay, but about protecting jobs in Australia and not seeing them outsourced overseas). Back in the day, every union in Australia would have gone on strike to support the QANTAS workers. It will be interesting to see if those workers who supported QANTAS management will then bleat if their jobs are the ones outsourced.  So much for solidarity.

One of the New Grass Roots values is fear.  Fear of anyone different to us, whether it be skin colour, race, nationality or religion.  We have seen asylum seekers demonised and misrepresented as terrorists.  People have very little sympathy or understanding of their situations.   Yet, had Australia been invaded by Japan in the Second World War, we may well have been the ones seeking asylum in other countries.  I wonder if we would have joined an orderly queue as we expect other asylum seekers to do.  I wonder if we would have politely awaited our turn as our families were brutalised.

The Grass Roots these days is also driven by selfishness.   Whenever an election is called many people are more interested in the benefits to their hip pockets than in what is good for the country, for the economy, for the environment, for those less fortunate then us.  This is evidenced by the increased "pork barreling" during recent election campaigns and the focus in the media of stories detailing "what's in it for you" or "what's the cost to the hip pocket?"

Two other values of the New Grass Roots are ignorance and misinformation.  Very little truth or detail is given by any party or the media when discussing policies.  It is more about smoke-screens, misdirection and focusing on red herrings rather than truth.

The New Grass Roots values of fear, selfishness, ignorance and misinformation are pandered to by all parties.  Political policy is often reduced to inane slogans which strike a chord with those who are too ignorant and apathetic to look deeper into those slogans, to realise that they have no substance, no policies and no real meaning.  

Politics in the 21st Century is marked by politicians capitulating to the amoral values of the New Grass Roots.  It is time that politicians of every persuasion change the dialogue which drives these selfish values and for the electorate to not accept blindly the manipulative posturing of politicians and the media who thrive on fear and feed on selfishness.

Regardless of political preference, we all should take stock and return to the true values of Australia - fairness, equality, tolerance ... mateship.

Adam & Eve meet Adam & Steve

Whilst there has always been a strong Christian protest against same sex marriage, and homosexuality in general, the campaigning by both sides is heating up.

On one side of the fence is the gay community, which includes a diversity of sexual proclivities, namely Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI).

On the other is the Christian lobby, whose opposition to homosexuality is reliant on the interpretation of a number of biblical scriptures and the incorrect assumption by many Christians that people are not born 'gay'.  There are also a number of Christians who believe that people are born 'gay', but that it is a defect which can be cured by God. Nonetheless, most of them believe that homosexuality is a sin.

The old adage that God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve, ignores the fact that the bible teaches that God did actually create Adam and Steve and Bob and Joe and Mary and Lucy and you and me.  According to the bible, God created all of us and knows how our lives will pan out before we were even born.  Psalm 139:13-16 describes this beautifully: 'for you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth.  Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.'

People are born homosexual. People are born lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersexual. People are born heterosexual.  There are a multitude of variations of chromosomes from just the normal XX and XY genes. There are XX males, XY females, X0, XXY, XYY, XYYY and numerous other combinations which impact on a person's sexuality.  These occur naturally.

Some of these manifest under the broad description of intersexual (or hermaphrodite).  In terms of intersexuals, the stereotypical image of a person with both male and female genitalia is not always correct,  often chromosomal variations which may result in a person being born intersexual are unable to be physically detected.  Instead, they will manifest as a desire for the same gender, or a feeling that they are a woman trapped in a man's body or vice versa.

The reason that I refer to intersexuals is because this is perhaps the best physical example of people born with a variety of sexual combinations and subsequently their sexual urges may manifest as transexual or homosexual.

With such a natural variation in chromosomes, hormones, genetics and brain structure, how can it be argued that people are not born LGBTI?

There are a number of ways in which a person's sexuality is formed, particularly in terms of attraction to the same sex:

• they are born that way;
• through societal influences;
• their upbringing is punctuated by abuse, rejection, lack of appropriate affection; or 
• they chose to - there will always be people who decide to rebel against the established position or wanting to experience all that life has to offer, or for any other reason.

Some Christians believe that LGBTI people are acting against nature, in keeping with their flagship scripture found in Romans 1:26-28, which says:

'For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.'

This scripture is talking about people acting against their natural sexual urges. Now, for this scripture to effectively condemn homosexuality as a sin, it requires that people are not 'born gay', that homosexuality is against their nature. Yet, it is natural for people to be born homosexual.

Verses 29-32 go on to say:

'being filled with unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful, who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.'

Pretty much every sin that a person can commit is listed.  Many of those who aggressively criticise and abuse the LGBTI community are committing many of the sins listed in Romans 1:29-32.  It should come as no surprise that the bible is opposed to fornication, that is, sex outside of marriage.  So those people who are naturally attracted to the same sex should have the opportunity to live within wedlock if they so desire, to live in a committed relationship with their chosen partner and entitled to the same legal benefits that other married couples have.

Back to biblical scripture.  There are a number of other scriptures which Christians use to condemn homosexuality.  Many of these are based on the interpretation of the scripture's context or subjects.  Before launching into this, I want to preface it by saying that the Bible is not incorrect, however, our interpretations may well be. Below are my interpretations of specific passages relating to homosexuality, I'm sure that many will disagree; I'm also sure that a large number will agree.

• Romans 1:26-28 - For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves the recompense of the error which was meet.
  
  As discussed above, this scripture is talking about people acting against their natural sexual urges. For this scripture to effectively condemn homosexuality as a sin, requires that people are not born gay, that homosexuality is against their nature. Yet as discussed above, people are born homosexual, it is their natural sexual urge.



• 1 Corinthians 6:9 - Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind ...
  
  The word 'effeminate' in this verse is incorrect. The correct term in the original scriptures is 'catamite', which means 'male prostitute'. This is in keeping with the nature of the verse which was referring to those having sex outside of a committed relationship. Additionally, the term for 'abuser of themselves with mankind' is based on the word 'arsenokoitai', which was used by Paul when writing this scripture. This word was not a common word and in fact, its meaning is unclear. If Paul was referring to homosexuals he would have used the term 'paiderasste', which was the common Greek term for homosexuals. A number of interpretations have been given to the word 'arsenokoitai' since the early Christian church, including 'temple prostitutes' (generally males servicing women), and masturbators.

• Leviticus 18:22 - 'thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind'.
  
  The book of Leviticus was centred on the law of the Israelites at that time. Many of the laws do not apply today, nor are they acceptable to modern society. For instance, these days most of us sanction divorce, we don't ban people from sleeping with a menstruating woman, we happily accept the charging of interest on loans, farmers now harvest the corners of their fields, we don't punish the victims of rape, we eagerly devour pork and shellfish, all of us wear clothing manufactured from two or more types of fibre and many people (including Christians) are tattooed or admire tattoos - in fact, there is a small industry in Christian tattoos.



• Leviticus 20:13 - 'If a man lies with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them shall committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them.'
  
  See Leviticus 18:22

• Genesis 19 - The story of Lot in the city of Sodom. Two angels stay with him and the men of the city want Lot to give them over so that they can have sex with them. The men also ask for Lot's son-in-law and daughters. God destroys the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah with fire and brimstone.
  
  Homosexuality is commonly given as the reason for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, however, the story is not about homosexuality but about rape and the treatment of strangers (the angels). The men of Sodom wanted to rape and sexually humiliate both the male and female members and guests of Lot's household. The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for the complete rejection of biblical standards. In fact, Ezekial 16:49-50 explains why Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed: '... this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit.'



• 1 Timothy 1:9-10 - 'Knowing this, that the law is not made for the righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for men stealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.'
  
  Refer to the response to 1 Corinthians 6:9 regarding the word 'arsenokoitai' being translated as 'them that defile themselves with mankind'.



• Jude 1:7 - 'Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire'.
  
  This scripture clearly states that Sodom and Gomorrah had given themselves over to fornication and 'going after strange flesh'. It condemns sleeping around, but it does not condemn committed homosexual relationships. 

There have also been studies published which provide evidence that same-sex unions were sanctioned and conducted by the church between the 4th and 14th centuries. Most notable are the books 'Same Sex Unions in Premodern Europe' and 'Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality' by John Boswell, a Yale historian.

Sexual attraction is based on natural, innate impulses which we are born with or have developed.  The majority of people are attracted to the opposite sex, some are attracted to the same sex and some are attracted to both. 

Marriage is a promise of commitment between two people who want to share the remainder of their lives with each other.

Not all people who oppose same sex marriage are Christian.  Besides biblical scripture, some arguments against same sex marriage include the obvious issue that same sex couples cannot procreate.  Based on this argument, heterosexual couples who can't procreate also should not be allowed to marry, that would include those who are infertile or who are older and won't be having children.  The point of marriage is commitment, not procreation.  The desire to commit to someone is generally because we love that person and want to spend the rest of our lives with them.

This leads to the fallacious argument of 'where will it end'.  This argument states that if same sex couples are allowed to marry 'for love', then why not allow polygamy, incest, bestiality and so on. This is similar to the so-called sexual relativism argument which claims that people should be able to engage in any sexual activity they want, including homosexuality, sado-masochism, exhibitionism & voyeurism, fetishisms, polygamy, bestiality, incest, pedophilia and necrophilia. Both arguments are blatant scare-mongering and raise issues which are of no relevance to the same sex marriage debate.  To humour those who argue this, it is important to understand that polygamy, bestiality and incest are activities which very few people indulge in. They are based on lust and sexual gratification. Homosexuality on the other hand is a natural sexual urge, just as heterosexuality is, and forms a person's identity - it is not an "activity", it is a basic, primal desire and is not just concerned with sexual activity, it includes all other aspects of human relationships. Marriage (same-sex or otherwise) is based on two people committing to each other for the rest of their lives, not on more than two people marrying. It is biology and psychology, not mathematics.

Other arguments centre around adoption with the assumption that same sex couples do not make good parents. This argument ignores the fact that many people in this situation already have children from previous heterosexual marriages. It ignores any evidence to the contrary, that people are people regardless of sexual orientation and generally parents have a desire to protect and nurture their children, regardless of the parent's gender. The argument then goes on to say that the children will suffer because of the stigma of living in a household with same sex parents. Many of those children grow up as well-adjusted as any other child.  Children can suffer regardless of the gender of the parents who raise them if they are in a household without love, tolerance and respect. Every year, children become the unwitting victims in domestic violence or divorces. Certainly far more are in those situations than children who are raised in a household with same sex parents.   

Whilst some people may find the thought of homosexuality to be abhorrent, it needs to be remembered that it is more than just the sexual act. Just like heterosexuals, LGBTI people have emotions, attractions, needs, love and the desire to be loved.  They also want committed relationships based on respect and love; the very things that are the corner-stone of any successful marriage.  Those who oppose same sex marriage, are dictating how others should live their lives.  They are stating that they know better than others and through this they are delegitimising the lives of others.

Marriage is the right of all adults, the basis of which is commitment, respect and love - gender is not a criteria.

Palestine's Right to Exist

The United Nations will soon be voting on whether Palestine should be recognised as a nation state in its own right.  Many who oppose Palestinian statehood do so based on the argument that Palestine has never been a nation and that no people ever identified themselves as Palestinians.  The argument goes that Palestine was only referred to since 1948 when Israel was created and that prior to that there was no Palestinian identity.

This argument has one aim: to ignore the long history of Arab settlement in the area now known as Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and to discredit any sense of Palestinian identity.  Arabs (let's call them Palestinians) have lived in this area for thousands of years. Yet the current argument against the creation of the state of Palestine ignores this history and is in essence a form of ethnic and historical cleansing.  It is a modern day form of Terra Nullius, a latin term which literally means 'land belonging to no-one'.

In 1901, a Zionist named Israel Zangwill wrote 'Palestine is a country without a people; the Jews are a people without a country'.  In 1969, Golda Meir stated 'There is no such thing as a Palestinian people ... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist'.  Zionism is based on the concept of Palestine being terra nullius.

Yet the land has belonged to those people who occupied it for thousands of years, who built their lives, their farms, their families on this land.  By the 19^th century, these people were predominantly Muslim Arabs, with some Jews, Christians and others.

Numerous references to the land as Palestine are found throughout history, including the British campaigns against the Ottoman Empire during World War I, right back to ancient history when Egypt referred to it the people as the 'Peleset', biblical scripture referred to them as Philistines, the ancient Assyrians referred to them as the Pilistu, and the ancient Greeks called the area 'Palaistine'.

In the late 19^th Century, Zionists (those who believe that this land belongs solely to the Jews because of the promise given by God to Abraham as recorded in the book of Genesis) decided that the Jewish diaspora (predominantly European Jews) needed a single homeland.  The concept of a 'homeland' for these Jews is somewhat of a misnomer, considering that their ancestors were Europeans who converted to Judaism, not descendants of Abraham.  Nonetheless, they turned their eyes to Palestine and set about obtaining this land for Jews from all over the world (the diaspora).  In 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 181 (II) Future Government of Palestine which called for the establishment of Arab and Jewish nations in the land of Palestine and an end to the 'British Mandate of Palestine'.

The Palestinian Arabs understandably disagreed.  The UN resolution was implemented against the express wishes of the Palestinian Arabs; as a result, the Jewish nation of Israel was created while a nation for the Arabs was not created.  The UN resolution created borders for Israel and for the Palestinian territories. The majority of Arabs were forcibly removed by Israel, whilst some sold their land to Israelis, often in response to threats, violence or withholding of essentials, such as food and water.  The Arabs fought against this and of course lost to the much better armed and United States sponsored, Israel.  As the Palestinian Arabs lost war after war, Israel occupied more and more Palestinian territory.  The United Nations issued hundreds of resolutions condemning Israeli aggression, human rights violations, treatment of Palestinians and denial of basic services.  Some of these resolutions were issued because Israeli occupation and settlement of Palestinian land violated the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Zionists and their apologists have been searing their consciences by:

• adopting the Terra Nullius argument and rewriting history in order to void thousands of years of Arab history in Palestine through claiming there was no Arab who identified as a Palestinian; 
• believing that God Himself has anointed the Jews to occupy the Holy Lands at the expense of Arabs; 
• demonising the Palestinians; and 
• ignoring and white-washing the vast human rights violations of Israel.  

The United Nations has issued hundreds of resolutions calling for Israel to stop the occupation, stop the slaughter, stop the human rights violations and to tear down the walls.  Israel's increasing occupation of the Palestinian Territories is under-stated in the polite term of 'expansionism'; it is imperialism, it is conquest.  It is illegal.

Regardless of whether or not a 'Palestinian' identity existed prior to 1948 (and it obviously did considering the territory was known as Palestine and Arabs lived there for thousands of years), this does not give Israel the right to deny them their basic human rights, it does not give Israel the right to effectively imprison them behind a 'security barrier', it does not give Israel the right to massacre men, women and children, it does not give Israel the right to deny them access to hospitals, food, water, jobs, education.

No wonder the conquest of Palestine has been white-washed.  No wonder Palestinians have been dehumanised and their right to exist disregarded.  Any opponent of Palestine who has a conscience, or who proclaims their belief in a loving God, would see that through their rejection of Palestine, they are sponsoring ethnic cleansing.

Some Palestinians have not done their cause any favours because of their support and involvement in terrorism and suicide attacks in Israel.  However, the vast majority of Palestinians have adopted peaceful protests which the mainstream media does not report or focus on.  It should also be kept in mind, that often those attacks are in response to provocation by Israel and for every Israeli killed, there are hundreds of Palestinians killed in Israeli actions against civilians.

Many others have protested simply by their continued existence and by not yielding regardless of how many illegal settlers occupy their lands or how violent those settlers are.   There have been instances of Palestinian children throwing stones at settlers who have then responded by bashing or imprisoning the children without charge for months, sometimes years.  There are other instances of settlers shooting the children dead, without fear of being charged for murder by the Israeli police.  Children throw stones and are condemned for it. Settlers kill them and are rewarded.  This is not the action of a just and civil society.

In justifying the 'security' wall, in justifying the use of military jets to bomb civilians in Palestine, in justifying the use of white phosphorous and depleted uranium, in justifying hundreds of check-points which prohibit Palestinians from living a normal life, Israel declares that it is acting in self-defence.  Based on this argument, the Palestinians can also justify their attacks on Israel as it was the Israelis who forcibly took land and killed or removed the occupants.  Self-defence as a justification cuts both ways.

In 1982, up to 3,500 Palestinian civilians living in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in southern Lebanon, were massacred by the Phalangists, a Lebanese Christian militia. The Israeli Army had surrounded the camps and controlled entry and exit to them. For three days, from 16 to 18 September 1982, the Israelis witnessed the Phalangists murdering men, women and children. Witnesses tell of the militia storming into dwellings and shooting children in front of the parents, including killing babies as they were nursed by their mothers. This was a war crime which then Israeli Minister of Defense, Ariel Sharon, was held personally responsible following an inquiry commissioned by the Israeli government (the Kahan Commission of Inquiry into the Events at the Refugee Camps in Beirut, which commenced on 28 September 1982 and handed down its findings on 8 February 1983).

Sabra and Shatila are just one of the many massacres perpetrated by the Israelis. Based on the Israeli 'self-defense' line, the Palestinians have every right to protect themselves from war crimes.

Regardless of the outcome of the United Nations vote on Palestinian statehood, the lives of Palestinians will not improve until Israel and its supporters abandon their genocidal policies, their rewriting of history and their misconstruing of religious scripture.

Those who claim that it is Israel's God-given right to rule this land based on a few scriptures completely ignore the rest of the scriptures which talk of God's love.  For more on those scriptures refer to my article: 'Israel - Superstition, Prophecy and Human Rights'.

The Holy Land needs more love and tolerance and less of the partisan politics and racist policies dominating the discussion.  Many of those who embrace and promote these policies are not extremists or militants, but ordinary people, often church-going people, who mistakenly believe that Palestinians have no right to exist in their own nation.

Israel argues that it has offered peace to Palestinians on a number of occasions, yet, these peace offerings have always been at great expense to the Palestinians. It also ignores the numerous peace offerings made by Palestinians.  These offerings have rested on Israel returning to the pre-1967 boundaries; Israel has violently and vehemently refused to make any such compromise, yet they expect Palestinians to continue vacating land which they occupied for thousands of years. They expect Palestinians to accept the theft of land through illegal settlement, which breaches the Fourth Geneva Convention, and for the world to turn a blind eye to this war crime.

Israel argues that some neighbouring countries would like to see Israel driven into the sea.  However, this does not justify Israel taking a similar approach and effectively destroying the Palestinians, driving them into the sea.

Israel is a reality that its opponents need to accept. At least within the boundaries legally set for it by UN Resolution 181.

Palestine is also a reality that their opponents need to accept.

Palestine has a right to exist and Palestinians have a right to live with the same rights and freedoms that all people are entitled to.

From Frankincense to Franchise - the Corporatisation & Politicisation of Christianity

From Frankincense to Franchise - the Corporatisation & Politicisation of Christianity

Modern day Christianity is being over-run with the desire for money and power as a result of "prosperity doctrine" and "dominionism". Christ has been corporatised and politicised. Instead of blessing Christ with frankincense and myrrh, corporate Christianity brings Him franchises and movie rights. Instead of "the truth shall set you free" many fundamentalist churches and televangelists preach that "the tithe shall set you free".  Instead of "go into all the world and preach the gospel", right-wing fundamentalists are forcing their interpretation of biblical law on the world, ignoring the biblical principles of love, forgiveness and grace.

Over the last few decades an  element within the Christian Right has been actively taking steps to establish the United States as a Theocratic Republic which would be subject to the Laws of God detailed in the Old Testament.

This element has become known as Dominionists and their aim is to establish God's Kingdom on Earth through the creation of a Christian state which favours Christians and persecutes those who do not ascribe to their self-righteous expectations of morality and their strict interpretation of biblical law.  Dominionists are politically conservative and fundamentalist Christians who are highly influential in politics, with even former President George W. Bush believing in their creed.

Whilst Dominionism may not be well known to many people, the concept of it is embraced by world-wide Evangelical churches and its insidious message broadcast across the globe by such well known proponents as Pat Robertson, Dr James Dobson and Focus on the Family, Tim LaHaye, Jerry Falwell, Charles Colson, Phyllis Schlafly, Rick Joyner, Promise Keepers and others.  RJ Rushdoony, a "Reconstructionist" (a form of Dominionism) wrote a book called "The Institutes of Biblical Law" in which he calls for a return to Old Testament law, including the death penalty for crimes such as murder, rape, homosexuality and adultery.

The policies of Dominionism include:

• Anti-abortion
• Anti-homosexuality
• Anti-Islam
• Anti-immigration
• Anti-multiculturalism
• Anti equal rights
• Pro war
• Pro gun ownership
• Pro death penalty
• Military expansion
• Smaller government
• Supporting Big Business
• Lower taxes for the wealthy
• No social security system 
• No public education system
• No public health system
• American hegemony 
• Abstinence

Many of these policies are based on exclusion, fear, racism and xenophobia.

Dominionism has transformed God from Omnipotent to Omniphobic.

Dominionism has transformed God from a God of Love to a God of Law.
Dominionism essentially ignores the New Testament laws of "love your God" and "love your neighbour" whilst embracing many of the laws of the Old Testament and ignoring the tenets related to fairness and love.

They have also misused scripture to demand smaller government, labelling attempts at public service delivery as communist.

President George W. Bush, a member of the Christian Right and in accordance with this Dominionist policy of smaller government, privatised or outsourced many core government services, including Defence and Security (most famously outsourcing to Blackwater which operates outside of the same constricts that the US Department of Defense does), Law Enforcement, Education (including the expansion of Charter Schools which allows for private corporations to run public schools and which are not subject to the same governance, rules and regulations that government education departments are), Health, Prisons, Road Construction and Maintenance, Public Transport, Administration, Communication, Air Traffic Control, Municipal Services and Postal Services.

During George W. Bush's administration, privatisation resulted in trillions of dollars being wasted by the USA Government on the fallacy that private companies are more efficient than public ones at delivering services. Yet, private companies are dedicated to earning profits for shareholders, whereas government departments are dedicated to delivering services.

The Republicans gave massive tax cuts to the richest Americans whilst ignoring lower and middle income earners.  Both the Republicans and the Tea Party (many of whose members are Dominionists) call for lower taxes whilst supporting exorbitant military expenditure and cutting social services, education and health which disadvantaged the poor and low income earners.  It was this unrestrained military expenditure and encouragement of corporate and individual greed that led to the Global Financial Crisis, costing thousands of jobs and bankrupting many people.

The Texas Republican Party Platform document of 2004 stated "we call for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education and the prohibition of the transfer of any of its functions to any other Federal Agency".

This policy appeals to Dominionists as it matches their aim of replacing the public education system with private Christian education.  Whilst Christian schooling is not overtly sinister, put into the context of the Dominionist desire for supremacy and domination it is particularly concerning.  Gary North, a leading Dominionist, stated "Until the vast majority of Christians pull their children out of public schools, there will be no possibility of creating a theocratic republic".

Pat Robertson, head of the 700 Club has declared that Christians are to take over the government of the United States. They are well on their way to achieving this through the influence that they wield within the Republican Party and the Tea Party.  At the moment we are seeing conservative Christians with Dominionist views, namely Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann, campaigning to be the Republican Party nominee at the next Presidential election.

Dominionists are more interested in benefits for big business than in caring for the poor.  They care for power and prosperity - attested to by their political lobbying for big business, small government, corporate greed through unregulated markets and removal of government social service programs.  Prayer has been exchanged for Political Power.

They have campaigned to remove the minimum wage, which even now provides insufficient income for many workers.  Michelle Bachmann stated "If we took away the minimum wage, if conceivably it was gone, we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely, because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level."  There might be more jobs under a Bachmann plan, but the "working poor" would become the "destitute poor" and with the Dominionist opposition to social services, public health and public education, the poor would become beggars, would become untouchables and undesirables in their own land.  Taking away the already meagre minimum wage will encourage corruption and crime as workers do what they can to keep their families fed and the bills paid.  Corruption flourishes in countries with inadequate wages.

Dominionism as a concept is finding fertile ground among conservative Christians because many of their influential preachers and evangelists have twisted the Bible message into one of materialism through their "prosperity" doctrine.  Put simply this doctrine claims that God will bless Christians with material wealth.  There are many biblical scriptures which condemn this materialistic attitude.  Hebrews 13:5 says "keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have because God has said 'never will I leave you, never will I forsake you' ". 

"Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the Kingdom of God" is being replaced with "Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the big screen TV".

It is the materialism of prosperity doctrine which has resulted in many Evangelical and Pentecostal churches embracing Dominionism, even though many don't call it that.

The genuine love that these Christians have for Christ has been exploited and manipulated by influential preachers who have channeled this passion into a heartfelt belief in a Christ vastly removed from the one in the Bible: a materialistic, corporate Christ, not the selfless, loving Christ of the New Testament.

Jesus never said "follow me and I'll make you rich and famous beyond your wildest dreams". 

Coupled with this materialistic dogma, is a predisposition to punish all who don't meet the high moral standards set by these Christians and an intolerance and exclusion of "liberal" Christians and non-Christians including Muslims, atheists, environmentalists, socialists, homosexuals and the list goes on.

The bible tells us that the wages of sin is death.  In Ephesians 2 we are told that whilst we were dead in our sins, God made us alive in Him through his grace.  John 3:16 tells us that "God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him shall be saved".  The bible is a gospel of grace and inclusion of all.  John 3:17 says "for God did not send His Son into the world to condemn, but that the world through Him might be saved."

Many of these conservative Christians are focused on punishment of crimes with little understanding and no desire to address the causes of crime. For instance, asylum seekers often enter other countries in order to escape persecution and war (ironically these have sometimes been caused by despots and wars sponsored by the USA).  Yet Dominionists call for their imprisonment and deportation, often demonising them as terrorists, contrary to the scriptures in which we are told to love and care for them.  Deuteronomy 10:18-19 says "He administers justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the stranger, giving him food and clothing. Therefore love the stranger ....".

Dominionism is more interested in punishment than in correction. The motivation to punish is borne of hatred, anger and revenge coupled with a fear of losing the life they desire and the power they crave. The motivation for correction is borne of love through self-sacrifice, reaching out to others and loving them.

Instead of showing love, Dominionists show contempt and condemnation. They focus on abortionists and homosexuals, actively campaigning against them, declaring that these people are condemned to Hell and that God hates them - contrary to the message in John 3:17.  They condone and preach animosity and fear of those who practice other religions or other ways of life.

Instead of reaching out to those who are different, who are poor and downtrodden, Dominionists join with Uber-Capitalists to subjugate them, to dehumanise them, to further disenfranchise them, to deny workers their rights.  All men are equal in God's eyes, but not in the eyes of the extreme Religious Right.

Dominionists are the new Sadducees, the new Pharisees; with potential to be a type of Christian Taliban.  Their legalism and harsh interpretation of the bible may well result in a Totalitarian regime where they fully implement their antiquated and prejudicial laws.  Isaiah 10:1-2 states "woe to them who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless".

Like the money-changers that Jesus ejected from the temples, the Dominionists and many others in the Christian Right have turned churches into ongoing business concerns at the expense of the poor and the weak. They prey on superstitious fears that cause some to tithe in order to avoid God's wrath, exhorting an image of God as a Mafia Godfather who will strike people down unless He is paid "protection money".  To sweeten the tithe, they often preach Capitalism rather than Christianity, exhorting people to tithe through the promise of reward with the assurance that God will return to them tenfold or hundredfold what they give.

These should not be the reasons for tithing.  Tithing, and for that matter any giving, should be out of love, not because of fear, greed or personal benefit.  Of course churches need money to survive and to run their programs, but they should not be obtaining this money through messages of fear in what amounts to extortion or in exploiting people's greed through exorbitant promises of untold wealth.

We now see the rise of the "mega-church" with churches taking over other churches through a mergers and acquisitions program that would make any corporate raider proud, with the result that many of these mega-churches have essentially franchised themselves nationally and in some cases, internationally.  Before sowing into these mega-churches, Christians should remember that it is a fine line between Kingdom Building and Empire Building.

Jesus didn't ask us to build huge churches, drawing people into buildings; instead He commissioned us to go out into all the world, to mix with people of all nations and all types in order to preach the gospel.  Some of us have become idolatrous of these mega-churches, wearing their t-shirts and collecting memorabilia in the same way that people worship their favourite rock star or football team.  Yet, where is God in all this? Religious fervour is easy to exploit, and very profitable.

Modern Christianity has been hijacked with cleverly marketed messages aimed at manipulating the congregation's love of God and fear of rebellion in order to gain support for the Dominionist goal of power through a theocratic state.  People who dare criticise this Religious Propaganda Machine are condemned as "bleeding heart liberals", as having sold out to the world.  Yet it is the extreme Religious Right who has swapped the Truth of God's Love for the worldly Lie of Prosperity and Political Power.

Christians in particular should be standing up against this perversion of the Gospel and all people should be opposing any attempts at Totalitarianism and Fascism whether it be in the form of malevolent dictatorships of any religious or political persuasion, or in the name of Democracy or Christianity.

There are enough problems in the world without Christians adding to them.  Issues such as poverty, terrorism, war, famine, illiteracy and poor health should be the priority of Governments, Churches and individuals working together.  To solve these problems the world needs love; it needs people to love and respect each other and to acknowledge and embrace the differences between individuals and communities.

Doctrines of hate and intolerance whether masquerading as religion, politics or personal opinion only fuel the problems facing the world and do not solve them.

The world needs less fear, less greed and more grace, more love.

Before embracing the heresy of Dominionism, we need to remember the message of Mark 8:36 -

"what shall it profit a man, if he should gain the whole world, and lose his soul".