Article18: A New Weekly International Blog by RLTV Associate Editor Martin Surridge
Read the Latest Article18 Blog Posts Here.
This is the first entry for Article18 –RLTV’s first weekly blog specifically dedicated to religious liberty issues in other countries around the world. Each week, we will be focusing on a different nation, and the struggles facing its different religious communities, be they Muslim, Christian, Hindu, or Jewish. Of course, those aren’t the only religions that will be profiled on this blog; time-permitting I plan to dedicate entries to other persecuted religious groups around the world. Sadly, I doubt I will ever run out of material for this blog. If I do, it really will be a marvelous thing.
Firstly a little about myself. My name is Martin Surridge. I’m one of the associate editors for Religious Liberty TV. My family left North London for California when I was 13 years old. Now, a few years later, I am a high school English teacher and freelance writer living and working near Atlanta, Georgia. Most of my writing stints have dried up since I moved away from the Pacific Northwest, and also since I started teaching full-time. So, excuse me if I’m a little rusty. It was during my short time in the Northwest that I graduated with a M.A. in Teaching from Walla Walla University, only about 6 months ago. Two years previously, in the fall of 2008, I received my B.S. in Social Studies from Pacific Union College in Northern California. During my college and university years, I covered world cup soccer for a small weekly newspaper in the Napa Valley, traveled to China, Turkey, Israel, Palestine, and Kenya, and interviewed high-ranking ambassadors and presidential candidates. I also nearly broke my shin trying to jump off an elliptical machine, and dropped out of a screenwriting class during the last week of a semester. As Michael Steele recently said, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.”
My goals for Article18 are to raise awareness and point to some of the problems and solutions facing the international community right now with regards to religion and issues of religious liberty. I invite discussion and welcome all comments and I’m looking forward to sharing this new project with you.
Article18‘s next entry and first major profile will look at the secession movement in Southern Sudan–if that is indeed what they end up naming their new nation should it break away this week–and how a divided Sudan might be good news for nation’s millions of Christians and Muslims.
Article18 is a weekly blog written by Martin Surridge, Associate Editor of Religious Liberty TV. Article18 logo and artwork created by Bradley Kenyon.
Read the Latest Article18 Blog Posts Here.
What’s Wrong with Conspiracy Theories?
By Michael Peabody
The other day someone sent me a link to an “Antichrist Decoder” that has been posted online by an otherwise reputable Christian ministry. You can type in anybody’s name and the program will calculate the value of the name in Roman numerals.
After checking my name to make sure that I was not the Antichrist I looked at the other names that people had plugged into the decoder and learned that Barack Obama is not the antichrist, neither is Barack Hussein Obama. Ronald Wilson Reagan’s name doesn’t add up to 666 even if you type in two “v”s to make the W.
People were having fun with the decoder and for the uninitiated it would be at home in a carnival next to the “Love Meter” or “Magic 8 Ball.” Perhaps an “antichrist decoder” made the rounds on the county fair circuit in years gone by, or a 666 Decoder Ring was the cheap plastic treat in the box of Cracker Jacks.
A conspiracy theory hits the same synapses as the Weekly World News or National Enquirerproviding junk food for the mind that masquerades as a nutritious meal. Just this last week while little Falcon Heene was presumably floating above Colorado in a UFO-Shaped balloon, YouTube videos that his dad made about how Hillary Clinton could be a “reptilian shape shifter” spiked in popularity. And each night millions tune in hear George Noory on Coast to Coast AMwhile he discusses tunnels under the pyramids and portals to other dimensions. And every year seekers crowd churches to hear the latest interpretations of Scripture that specify how mysterious political events are aligning to bring the world to an end. The problem with the cheap thrill of side show conspiracy theories is that concern about legitimate issues is eventually eroded as the carnival callers “cry wolf” so often that the real wolves can count on a feast.
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “Conspiracy Theory” as “a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators.”
Christianity as a whole is planted on a conspiracy theory that one day the world will end and that there are forces at work right now among the “principalities and powers” of this world that will effect that change and that rescue is coming from outer space and that you can communicate with tremendous powers simply through the power of thought. We don’t often view it in these terms but that’s how it would sound to a Martian if he happened to walk into a church service.
In reality, some conspiracy theories are true and verifiable, but others are not. It is important to distinguish between verifiable or substantiated truth and error because any error, even if it is meant well, tends to corrupt the entirety of the message. In the religious world, people tend to take “judicial notice” of scripture so speaking in harmony with an established text is generally accepted, but other issues require proven and reliable evidence or they will, of necessity, be questioned. Believing that something bad is afoot if it is not mentioned in scripture with specificity must be backed up with substantial evidence if listeners are to take it seriously.
Conspiracy theories that float around without substantial grounding in truth present several serious drawbacks.
First, conspiracy theories that do not come true affect your credibility.
“A good conspiracy is unprovable. I mean, if you can prove it, it means they screwed up somewhere along the line.” Mel Gibson’s character inConspiracy Theory (1997).
Around the year 2000, the millennial conspiracy nutcases (we call them now) came out and said that the world would end, planes would fall from the sky, and the electrical power grid would crash. Then, following 9/11 George Bush was going to institute marshal law and become dictator for life. Today, the H1N1 vaccine is a mind control drug and amounts to biological warfare.
Is there any truth to these conspiracies? Perhaps there is, but nothing has happened in the first two, and I am predicting that the vaccine will not create a nation of zombies. Still there are people who email me tons of information about FEMA concentration camps, mass production of body bags, and all kinds of fascinating things. I usually read them because it is fun to be afraid but each time it seems less and less likely. There is too much “conspiracy” noise out there to distinguish the truth from the error, and unfounded conspiracies based on nothing more than the eyewitness report of a “friend of a friend of a friend” are not persuasive.
Second, conspiracy theories can distract you from present responsibilities.
“A Conspiracy!” cried the delighted lady, clapping her hands. “Of all things, I do like a Conspiracy! It’s so interesting!” – Lewis Carroll, My Lady, Sylvie and Bruno (1889)
There is an old saying that it is possible to be “so heavenly minded that you are of no earthly good.” You can also be so “conspiracy minded” that you are of no earthly good.
When people tell me about conspiracy theories I often ask them whether they have taken the time to learn more about their faith or do good in their communities. They may show me some pamphlets they gave to people to “warn” them about whatever they think is going to happen but most of the time they haven’t done much more.
I do write this from a Christian perspective and I’ve learned over time that we really do have a lot of freedom in the United States and in Canada for the most part to speak freely about religion or politics, and to assemble. There are challenges from time to time which can be addressed but we still have the ability to address them. In a large sense, religious liberty is a supportive ministry that can be called upon when needed but does not necessarily need to be front and center unless there is a specific need for it.
Religious liberty ministry is like a fire extinguisher in a glass case. It must be charged up and ready to go. It needs to have all the resources to handle severe fires, but the sign says, “In case of emergency, break glass.” It can be used to inform people of current events but never to distract from the main mission of the church, which I believe is set forth in the Great Commission.
This segues nicely to the third reason I have a problem with conspiracy theories.
Third, conspiracy theories can become the center of your faith.
“Our cause is a secret within a secret, a secret that only another secret can explain, it is a secret about a secret that is veiled by a secret.” Ja’far as-Sadiq (6th Imam)
A while back there was a group of borderline Seventh-day Adventists who decided to spread the gospel by talking about the antichrist. They put up billboards all over the country, reserved space in major newspapers, and otherwise launched massive media campaigns. Most of the ads appeared to be miles of tiny text punctuated by dire warnings and a picture of the purported antichrist.
This would appear to be evangelism in the negative – in other words, tell people about the bad in the world to teach them what’s good. It’s like former rock stars and drug dealers turned religious who tell stories of their fascinating lives. They had money, power, fame, mansions, cars, planes, and everything else you could ever want in life. But then the stories become far less interesting when they become Christians and now live in their vans traveling the country. I suppose it works for some people so I’m not going to knock it, but it’s usually made me more curious about their past than about what’s happening now.
I’ve met a lot of people who will tell all their friends about conspiracy theories thinking that they are sharing their faith. I met one person who went around giving out copies of Foxe’s Book of Martyrsand would regale listeners with stories about extreme torture. Entertaining? Weirdly so. But effective? Yes, in turning people into atheists.
Leading somebody to an understanding of 666 is not the same as sharing one’s religious faith. It may seem like more fun but it doesn’t do much good in making an argument as to why people should want what you have.
Fourth, conspiracy theories can cause you to create enemies out of people whom you should be befriending and cause you to question the sincere motives of others.
“There will ever be some who take delight in dwelling upon the real or supposed faults and failures of others, and who employ their time in seeing, hearing, or reporting something that will destroy confidence in the person criticised. Few are without visible faults; in most persons careful scrutiny will reveal some defect of character; and upon these defects in others, some professed Christians delight to dwell. The habit strengthens with indulgence, and a love for gossip becomes their ruling passion. They gather together the tid-bits of reports,–all of them, it may be, utterly devoid of truth,–and feast upon the scandal, and share it with others as a rare delicacy.” Ellen White – Review and Herald, August 28, 1883.
Weird stories about aliens, Freemasons, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, or any other group can draw unreasonable and unnatural lines between people. One person I met is fixated on the idea that there will one day be a holy war in America and is planning to run away into the mountains to hide from it all, but is afraid that he will not be able to escape persecution when it comes because the persecutors will have GPS and heat detectors.
Unfortunately, this person has become a virtual hermit who believes he is living a pious lifestyle when in reality he makes Howard Hughes look normal. If he would put some of his tremendous mental horsepower to work helping people with problems that they are facing today, such as poverty, homelessness, illiteracy, and any other ways, he would make a tremendous impact for good. But instead he has twisted the plot around so much that he views any meaningful interaction with the real world as dangerous. Almost everybody is involved in a conspiracy against him, and he believes that most people in the world are formulating plans to do him wrong. The world has pretty much stayed the same but he has become a paranoid freak.
I’ve met wild eyed conspiracy theorists in many areas of life, not just religion. It is very difficult to reason with a person like this because if you question them, they believe that you are now part of the conspiracy. They think the worst of anybody they disagree with.
Hiding away on a mountain somewhere is not a call to piety. Conspiracy theories may have their place as mile markers but they should not impede forward progress.
In reality, the truth is out there, but you’re not likely to find it in a decoder ring. True appreciation of faith or even religious liberty issues do not thrive in fear or require a crisis to be meaningful. You can help liberty thrive when you care about the world and engage with it and the people who live here. Tell the verifiable, undeniable truth and the facts will speak for themselves.
“He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” Micah 6:8
###
Civil Rights Pioneer E.E. Cleveland talks about meeting Martin Luther King, Jr.
On August 30, 2009, renowned evangelist Edward Earl Cleveland died at Huntsville Hospital in Huntsville, Alabama. He was 88. Cleveland worked for more than 60 years as a Seventh-day Adventist pastor, evangelist, church leader, teacher, and civil rights leader.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. attended one of Cleveland’s tent meetings in 1954 in Montgomery and the two created a lasting friendship. Also in attendance for at least one night of the meetings were local seamstress, Rosa Parks and the Rev. Ralph David Abernathy.
Cleveland marched in several civil rights marches, including the March on Washington. Cleveland describes his involvement in the civil rights movement in a sermon he delivered during Black History Month on February 11, 2006.
E. E. Cleveland – Black History Month 02-11-06 @ Yahoo!7 Video
Tennesee governor signs Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law
On July 1, 2009, Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law. Introduced in February, House Bill 1598 requires Tennessee courts to apply the “compelling state interest” test to cases in which a law substantially burdens one’s right of free exercise of religion. The state now has the burden of proving that the law furthers a “compelling state interest” and is the “least restrictve means” of furthering that interest.
To those unfamiliar with first amendment litigation, this may seem like a confusing set of terms, but the new law takes a very important step forward. Before this law was in place, the Tennessee legislature could pass a law that applied equally to everybody but could inadvertently disrupt somebody’s free exercise of religion. For instance, the state could pass a law that all high school examinations were to be held on Sunday. If a student who had a religious objection refused to take the test on Sunday and requested accommodation such as another day, the state could deny the accommodation on the grounds that the law applied equally to all students and that this student had not been discriminated against because of his religion. It would be a “facially neutral” law that did not “discriminate” against anybody.
This new law would require the state to prove that the Sunday test was essential to further a “compelling governmental interest” and that it was the “least restrictive means” of furthering that interest. In other words, the state would have to demonstrate that it had a very good reason for scheduling the testing for Sunday and a very good reason for denying a student an opportunity to schedule around it. If the state still refuses and the student has to sue in order to graduate from high school and the student wins, the court may award attorney’s fees and court costs as reimbursement for the expenses of litigation.
This new law is a local state response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997) which ruled that a similar Religious Freedom Restoration Act passed by the U.S. Congress was unconstitutional. Tennessee joins 15 other states that have now enacted religious freedom acts.
(Please note that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) which addresses any type of government action in Tennessee is not to be confused with the recently passed Oregon Workplace Religious Freedom Act (WRFA) which requires Oregon employers to make reasonable attempts to accommodate religious observances of holy days and religions dress of their employers.)
Raw Majority Power: Why Checks and Balances Matter
An epic battle played out on two levels at the California Supreme Court on March 5. On a surface level, attorneys fought over a technical issue of whether the Proposition 8 prohibition on gay marriage represented a revision or an amendment. On the deeper level, the question asked was whether there are any limits on the majority to impact the rights of the minority.
It was a powerful argument – that the people of the State of California have the “raw power” to change the state constitution in any way that they please.
Ken Starr, an esteemed advocate, may have won the battle but lost the war when he asserted that, “the right of the people is inalienable to change their constitution through the amendment process. The people are sovereign and they can do very unwise things, and things that tug at the equality principle.”
Chief Justice Ronald George stretched Starr’s argument to explore its dimensions. He leaned in and asked a hypothetical – if Proposition 8 said that homosexuals had no right to form a family relationship or raise children, could that still be done by amendment? Starr said it could. Then George took the argument to the constitutional wall – could the voters also remove the right to free speech? Starr said yes, the voters have this right.
AUDIO: Karen Scott – “Rethinking the Premise of Religious Liberty”
Each year, the Walla Walla University Church in College Place, Washington celebrates religious liberty. On February 28, 2009, Karen Scott delivered an address entitled, “Rethinking the Premise of Religious Liberty.” Scott, an attorney who is a member of both the Provincial Bar of British Columbia and the State Bar of California, is also a member of the ReligiousLiberty.TV Advisory Panel. Scott successfully argued a religious liberty case before the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court decided in her client’s favour, changing the law in Canada for accommodation in the workplace.
In this presentation, Scott examines the ties between religious liberty and the Gospel. Everyone has a conscience and God has given to each the inalienable right to choose for Him or against Him. And yet God offers salvation to everyone, even His enemies (Romans 5:10). We are called to be perfect, even as our Father in heaven is perfect (Matthew 5:48). In other words, those who profess to follow Jesus, ought to love just as He did, which means that we too will grant others the right to choose for or against God and we too will love them as He does.
http://www.religiousliberty.tv/audio/022809karenscott.mp3
VIDEO: California Supreme Court Oral Arguments on Prop 8
Video includes historical background on the court – to watch video of the March 5 advance to approximately 18 minutes and 46 seconds.
Strauss et al. v. Horton (Hollingsworth et al., Interveners)
(and two other cases, S168066 Tyler et al. v. State of California et al.
(Hollingsworth et al., Interveners) and S168078 City and County of
San Francisco et al. v. Horton (Hollingsworth et al., Interveners))
The court issued an order to show cause in Strauss, Tyler, and City and County of San Francisco directing the parties to brief and argue the following issues: (1) Is Proposition 8 invalid because it constitutes a revision of, rather than an amendment to, the California Constitution? (See Cal. Const., art. XVIII, §§ 1–4.) (2) Does Proposition 8 violate the separation of powers doctrine under the California Constitution? (3) If Proposition 8 is not unconstitutional, what is its effect, if any, on the marriages of same-sex couples performed before the adoption of Proposition 8?
For more case materials including the many amicus briefs and actual court filings, visit the California Supreme Court website at http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/highprofile/prop8.htm
For more
Religious Persecution on the Horn of Africa (American Spectator)
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/03/religious-persecution-on-the-h
Somalia continues to implode, as Islamists gain increasing control over what remains of the impoverished, conflict-ridden nation. But it is not the only human tragedy in the region. Eritrea, which won its independence from Ethiopia in 1993 after decades of war, has earned a reputation as one of the world’s youngest tyrannies. It also is one of the world’s worst religious persecutors.
Eritrea poses an early challenge to the Obama administration. Border disputes with Ethiopia continue to threaten to flare into combat. Moreover, U.S.-Eritrean relations deteriorated steadily during the Bush years, as Asmara banned operations by the U.S. Agency for International Development and Washington imposed an arms embargo because of Eritrea’s weapons shipments to next door Somalia. Eritrean President Isaias Afeworki now has approached the Obama administration lobbying for a change in U.S. policy — expressing his hope in his congratulatory letter to Obama on his election that the U.S. will now “advance the cause of regional peace, justice and legality” — but Washington should make Eritrea’s atrocious record of religious persecution part of any dialogue.
Read more at http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/03/religious-persecution-on-the-h
In wake of Supreme Court decision, ‘clear defense needed of church-state wall’ (Des Moines Register)
The following analysis is from: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090227/OPINION03/902270335/1110
EXCERPT:
Considering the U.S. Supreme Court’s contentious struggles over free speech and religion, it was a surprise to say the least to see Wednesday’s ruling unanimously endorsing a government installation of the Ten Commandments in a city park.
While this ruling will likely have limited impact, it raises troubling questions about how dedicated this court – particularly the younger justices, who will be shaping it for decades to come – will be to maintaining the proverbial wall separating church and state.
. . .
Reading between the lines of this collection of opinions, it appears the justices worried that a decision upholding the Summum position would have the ultimate effect of forcing government bodies across the country to take down public monuments. That’s a fair concern. It’s one thing to say that all points of view should be heard in a public park; it’s another to say those views should be expressed in permanent monuments.
Whereas there is nearly an infinite amount of time and space for speeches and placards in the public square, there’s only so much room for slabs of granite. That was reasonable in this case, perhaps, but eventually the court must be more clear that government can’t use those slabs of granite to endorse one religion over others.
Read the full article at
Reading between the lines of this collection of opinions, it appears the justices worried that a decision upholding the Summum position would have the ultimate effect of forcing government bodies across the country to take down public monuments. That’s a fair concern. It’s one thing to say that all points of view should be heard in a public park; it’s another to say those views should be expressed in permanent monuments.
Whereas there is nearly an infinite amount of time and space for speeches and placards in the public square, there’s only so much room for slabs of granite. That was reasonable in this case, perhaps, but eventually the court must be more clear that government can’t use those slabs of granite to endorse one religion over others.
Reflection: The Trouble with the Future
| –Is that you can’t see it for the present.
In the context of the tenth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, one journalist took the time to look back and see what the pundits said would happen next. No one, but no one, got it right. No one foresaw the rapid collapse of European communism and the demise of the Soviet Union. By 1991 The U.S.S.R. was no more, and no one saw this future with any degree of precision. Instead they got it wrong. The end of communism will be a long time coming. Wrong. If the Warsaw pact goes, so does NATO. Wrong. Germany will not be allowed to re-unite. Wrong. A united Germany will become a nuclear power before the end of the millennium. Wrong. Gorbachev will long continue. Wrong. In terms of foretelling the future, even over the brief time span of ten years, the experts could not get it right. So why not? “The problem with trying to see the future is the present. What we know usually overpowers our ability to see what might be coming. What is is; it has the advantage of tangible existence. This makes the present hard to shake, no matter how smart you are.” (Robert G. Kaiser of the Washington Post service in International Herald Tribune, Nov. 10, 1999.) Makes us think about our message about the future, and our own response. Is the present also a problem to us? Does what we know overpower our ability to see what’s coming? Is the present hard to shake? We may think we’re smart, and have the answers. But the present can fool us too, unless we’re open to the thought that the present is not the dominant factor. Of all people, we cannot let the strength of the definite present overpower the undeniable truth of a God-planned future, with all that such a future means. “No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him.” (1 Corinthians 2:9 NIV). |
Add to Google
