Peace Talks...

In view of the up-coming peace talks in the US, hopes are high in some, yet scepticism too for others. David Brog wrote a brilliant article on 'War and Peace' in view of these talks.

What makes me hopeful is that I believe Netanyahu is the right man for the job - he's commited to peace, yet stands firm on Israel's rights of existence and self-determination: Israel must remain an independent Jewish state.

What makes he sceptical is the ideology that has been driving Arab leaders even before the birth of the Jewish state in 1948 - not just radical terrorist groups but heads of states! It's not just the wars fought against Israel for no other reason than her mere existence - water, settlements, war crimes, occupation etc, are simply cheap excuses for war and terror - but the constant rejection of Arab leaders to recognise Israel and agree to a genuine peace. Even when the then Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered virtually everything the Palestinains demanded at the Camp David negotiations in 2000/2001 - i.e., Jerusalem, Temple Mount, 95% of the West Bank, all of Gaza and $30 billion compensation - Araft rejected the deal. Even when Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia urged Arafat to take the deal and blamed him for the deaths that followed the rejection and the Intifada, Arafat still remained commited to the hateful PLO mission to liberate Palestine, that is, all of the Land. Arafat couldn't but reject peace deals as his own people would have killed him - so, what was the point? Well, as has been said, Arafat spoke of peace in English and of war in Arabic. This sums up his attitude and the attitude of his successors, even when they are considered 'moderate': they seek to please the West with lip-service, while they are actively pursuing their destructive agenda on the ground.

How can we explain that rejection of 2000? The only reasonable answer is this: the Arab leadership is dedicated to the anti-Israel ideology that seeks her destruction. They simply don't want a Jewish State, hence they are against the Two-State Solution, which they have rejected no less than three times before Camp David. So, how can one expect Abbas to sign a genuine peace treaty? The historical background mentioned in brief above must be kept in mind, for, as Alan Dershowitz rightly states, 'it is impossible to understand the conflict in the Middle East without accepting the reality that from the very beginning the strategy of the Arab leadership has been to eliminate the existence of any Jewish state, and indeed any substantial Jewish population, in what is now Israel' (The Case for Israel, pg. 7). Dershowitz is also right in stating that 'when the Palestinian leaders want their own state more than the destruction of the Jewish state, we will finally be able to achieve the two-state solution that is best for all' (ibid., pg. x). Our hope is that such a leader will arise, but the present climate with Israel's hostile neighbours makes such a reality rather unlikely. As long as such radicalised governments such as Iran, Syria and at times Lebanon and Egypt strengthen the Palestinians with either weapons oir ideology or both, peace seems a long way off. Sometimes I fear that the oppostunities for peace have been missed in the past and that the radicalisation of Muslim nations have increased to an extent that there is no way back... but then, we shouldn't be all too negtaive and pessimisstic, as Israel's leaders have been such brilliant negotiators throughout history and their God has kept them alive and flourishing in the worst of circumstances! Shalom

Beautiful Song, Strong Message

Four Crucial Questions

This brief and brilliant article asks four crucial questions Palestinian advocates should answer, yet such questions rather infuriate them - I wonder why? Is it because their cause is being exposed as morally wrong and historically distorted? Surely, those who are on the side of the truth must not become aggressive in a constructive conversation towards a solution, mustn't they? Judge for yourself!

Character and Charisma

Stability of character will ensure effectiveness of charisma.

It is a fact that false prophets can work miracles without doing God's will and while living in sin (Mt 7:21ff). They won't enter eternal life, of course, despite their desperate attempts to call the One Lord who actually isn't/wasn't! Even today many claim to be God's ministers, but He knows the ones who truly belong to Him, and it is those who abstain from wickedness and immorality (2 Tim 2:19). Indeed, without holiness no one will see the Lord (Hebr 12:14), as only the pure in heart will see God (Mt 5:8). But our concern must not be that which is fake and false, but with what is genuine and good (Phil 4:8). It's no good sitting around and complaining about the bad stuff in world; rather, we should be equipped and strengthened to bring light into darkness. After all, light simply dispells darkness!

So, what are going to do? Simple: we need to establish the basis for God to move through us. The foundation for charism - God's giftings and anointing - is godly character. That is, in order to not be mislead by pride because of the miraculous, we need the strength and purity of character to handle things right. Hence, stability of character ensures effectivness of charisma.

By way of analogy, when the pipe is clean, the water can be poured out in purity. God's minister must be pure and mature channels to carry and transmit God's power. He is the Holy Spirit, hence the biblical requirments for holiness.

To use another anology, if the foundation of a building is weak it will one day collapse and cause huge damage. That is another way of putting Jesus' parable of the two men building a house, one on a rock, the other on sand. The storms raged against both houses, but only one stood the test. This is a brilliant way of saying that obedience to God's word, living by His values and principles, is the only way to live successful, constructive and strong in a world gone mad! Especially in our 'modern' world of liberalism and relativism where anything goes and nothing is right or wrong, many terrible long-term consequences will further ruin these societies. Money rules over values and morals, and the first victims are always children. And if children can't learn decent values then society is on a downward spirale to chaos and destruction. It's better to have less material possession but good values and happiness of heart - we all know it, but few pursue it. Jesus was right in saying that a person's life doesn't consist of the abudance of possessions. There is more to life than meets the eye!

What this world desperately needs is people of character. We had too many leaders with charisma but bad character that spoiled so much trust and goodwill. In our present global leadership crisis, it's high time for the true leaders in the Church to arise and be light and salt to the world. If light is absent, darkness prevails; if salt is rare, preservation cannot be granted. Unless we have godly character we cannot effectively carry divine charisma - it can, in fact, be a dangerous venture. God wants leaders and people of character that can effectively carry God-given charisma.

Shimon Peres on the Middle East: Peace would be within Reach!

Palestinian 'Aid' being wasted...

How Technology has Affected Christianity

Just a quick note to follow up on the radio programme today on how technology has affected Christianity. We all know the obvious: technology has affected virtually all areas of our lives, and many of its benefits are good, although there is misuse. But technology, as money or music, is neutral - it all depends on how we use it!

Some use technology like radio, TV and the internet to spread the Gospel, connect people and promotye godly morals and values in society and politics. That's great! Others, however, use it to rob people, promote bad stuff, and even use it for terrorist communications. That's bad! But should we avoid it all together because some misuse it? I don't think so; we simply have to use it right.

Some Christians become lazy, don't go to local church meetings, and stop calling on the power of God to spread Christianity but rather rely on technology instead. But technology is not a substitute for the power of God, neither is radio or TV for the local church - it can be a supplement but never a substitute. The apostle Paul had very little technology but was highly efficient in what he did. So we must be aware of the dangers, but use technology in the right ways.

Freedom and Responsibility

If you'd ask people, 'What is freedom?' you'd get many different opinions. Depending on their background, upbringing, culture and religion (atheism included!), they'll define 'freedom' in different ways. Perhaps the following sentence would sum up what many Westerners would think about freedom: 'to be able to do what I like.'

Freedom also plays a key role in the Bible. There are several passages that speak about freedom, and this in relation to both what Christ did on the cross - how He set us free - and how we are to live out this freedom. Paul wrote the following to the Galatian Christians.

It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery... For you were called to freedom; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.

--Galatians 5:1, 13 NASB

'Christ set us free'! When Jesus died on the cross, He sets us free from sin and its power and consequences. He provided a way to be forgiven by God that was perfect, so that we can know perfect forgivenss and freedom. Jesus Himself said that to know the truth is to be set free - He is the Son who truely sets free (Jn 8:30-36). He holds the power over life and death, so He is the One who can bestow eternal life to those who believe in Him and His atonement. God won't hold anything against us, but forgive us completely - that is true freedom!

Paul goes on to say that the Law is fulfilled in love others (v 14) and by the power of the Spirit, the Spirit of holiness, we can overcome sin and live according to God's will (v 16). In Romans Paul makes a similar point: as we present our bodies to God, we can be servants of righteousness rather than slaves of sin (Rom 6). Freedom, from a biblical point of view, is freedom from sin to live holy lives; not perfect, but a walk in sanctification, a heart to obey God and be changed into a life that reflects Christ's holiness more and more. Sanctifiation is God's will for every believer (1 Thess 4:3; cf., Heb 12:14).

With freedom also comes responsibility. Paul admonished us to live lives according to what is profitable to others (1 Cor 10:23) and that which imparts grace to others (Eph 4:29). In Galatians Paul made clear that freedom comes with responsibility - the responsibility to love and serve others (5:13). Godly freedom is not doing what one wants to do in a selfish and self-centred way, but to love God and people and serve them accordingly! To sum it up, let me define a worldly understanding of freedom as well as a biblical/Christian one:

• Worldly: freedom is to do whatever pleases a person and benefits him/herself.

• Christian: freedom is to do what is right before God, what is beneficial for others, and even what is good for ourselves.
  

With the worldly definition one can see that self is the centre, whereas the Christian understanding would place God at the centre and people as the objects of love and service; it is selfless, rather than selfish.

Another influential apostle in the Bible was John, the disciple Jesus loved. He makes clear that to love God is to keep His commandments, which are not burdensome (1 Jn 5:2-3). People who believe in Jesus as Messiah (Christ) are born of God and have within them the power to overcome (vv 1, 4-5). There is a direct link between overcome the world and obeying God's commandments. When we look at what John had to say about the 'world,' it is clear that lust, pride and greed is wrong and sinful (2:15-16), but to do the will of God is everlasting (v 17).

There is serious heresy in the world today that teaches that ther is no law, nor any commandments we are to obey. This is an extreme form of a generally accepted view that goes something like this: the Old Covenant was one of law, the New of grace. By implication, and by taking Galatians 5:18 out of context, it is said that we are under no obligation towards the Law of God. But is this what Jesus, John and Paul wrote? Paul had a very positive view of the Law (Rom 7:12, 14; 1 Tim 1:8); Jesus obeyed the Law fully and said He didn't come to abolish it (Mt 5:17ff); and John made clear that to love God is to obey His commandments (1 Jn 5:2-3). So, what is the Bible teaching?

The notion that is often refuted by an extreme grace teaching is that we are not to earn our favour from God by works. And we must uphold clearly that grace is a free gift, that cannot and must not be earned - it's the free gift of God (Rom 6:23). But the response to God's grace is the crucial factor: are we to live careless, sinful and selfish after we have received God's grace? 'May it never be!' in Paul's strong language (Rom 6:1-2). The right response to God's grace is obedience, doing that which pleases God - in the power, not of self, but of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of holiness (Rom 1:5).

We can clearly see that both grace and law are part of all covenants of God. Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David all received grace, yet God always wanted them to live according to His will. Not to earn the blessing, but as a response to His gracious election and plans. God provided Israel with the sacrifical system which brought atonement for them, forgivenss and cleansing. This is the background to the death of Christ - it is God's perfect and eternal atonement, the means of grace to humanity. 'Byt grace we are saved, by faith' (Eph 2:8). Grace is God's part, faith ours! In fact, the work of Christ is affirmed by the Law and affirms the Law (Rom 3:31). Grace is not contrary to law, only contrary to a false legalism and self-righteousness which was never God's plan.

God wants us to life freely and responsibily at the same time. The basis of freedom is Christ's work and the free gift of eternal life that comes with it (accessible by faith for anyone!); the action of freedom is obedience to God's will and word, but in the power of the Spirit and an intiminate relatioships with God. The problem with a lot of Western Christianity is that people have an intelectual, but no intimate relatioship with God, hence the absence of power to obey God.

Gandhi, the great Indian peacemaker, was a great admirer of the teachings of Christ. His problem was that the Christians didn't live up to it! He in fact stated that he likes Christ but dislikes Christians, and that if Christians lived up to the teachings of Christ, all of India would be Christian! How sad a reality, and it often comes from a wrong understanding of grace and freedom - for it lacks responsibility. It lacks the emphasis on obedience from the heart, yet it is full of legalistic, judgmental Churchianity rather than empowered and holy Christianity that demonstrates the life of Christ in purity.

The Church must understand that Christ calls us into a relationship with God, gives us perfect freedom, and empowers us to live as pleases God - this will be the lifestyle that will show the world who we truly are! (cf., Jn 13:34-35) We have to rid the world of this terribly corrupted Churchianity that distorts Christ and falsifies His teachings, and return to the truth of Scripture that sets us free! God has a glorious life for us, a life of freedom and glory, a life that will transforms society and tryly preserve it as the 'salt of the earth' (Mt 5:13).