Baptists join diverse faith groups to support mosque-building effort

[Pergamum]

http://baptistnews.com/article/baptists-join-diverse-faith-groups-to-support-mosque-building-effort/

For any supporters of Russell Moore and the ERLC out there:

“It’s good when we can join hands with … folks we are sometimes on the other side of,” said Brent Walker, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty.

Those folks include the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission and the International Mission Board, both agencies of the Southern Baptist Convention. The National Association of Evangelicals is also supporting the mosque-building case.

It all began when the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty set out to form a diverse religious coalition to back the Islamic Society of Basking Ridge, N.J., in its federal lawsuit against a planning board that denied its building permit application in December.

The denial followed some four years of hearings and numerous modifications to tone down overtly Islamic design elements to reassure neighbors and to conform to local architectural styles.

The SBC’s ERLC and IMB have joined in with the likes of the Center for Islam and Religious Freedom, the Interfaith Coalition on Mosques, the International Society of Krishna Consciousness, the Sikh Coalition, and other unlikely allies to support building a mosque. According to The Becket Fund For Religious Liberty (An organization in which Russell Moore is on the Board of Directors) over 20 “interfaith” groups have united to push forward the agenda of the god of religious liberty in support of the mosque..

 

[Jake]

Presbyterians aren't exempt. Assuming this list is up-to-date, PCA and EPC are members of the NAE which is supporting the effort: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_Evangelicals#Member_denominations

 

[Pergamum]

Presbyterians aren't exempt. Assuming this list is up-to-date, PCA and EPC are members of the NAE which is supporting the effort: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_Evangelicals#Member_denominations

AAARGH!!!!!


This is like the exact opposite of church-planting. And using the funds of Christians to do it.

 

[Edward]

This is like the exact opposite of church-planting. And using the funds of Christians to do it.

No, it is defending the First Amendment. Because if we let them start chipping away at the Constitution, it isn't going to be long before WE end up on the list of folks that can't build churches. Do you really want to come down on the side that cities can keep churches out of town?

RLUIPA came about because a Catholic church in Texas was not allowed to expand in a historic district, and the Supreme Court striking down the prior Religious Freedom Restoration Act in the resulting litigation. (City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997))

 

[reaganmarsh]

Dr. Moore used to speak about this kind of thing regularly while I was studying at SBTS. His position was basically as Edward lays about above; if religious freedom is devalued or attacked, it's all religious freedom which is jeopardized, not just the other guy's.

 

[Pergamum]

This is like the exact opposite of church-planting. And using the funds of Christians to do it.

No, it is defending the First Amendment. Because if we let them start chipping away at the Constitution, it isn't going to be long before WE end up on the list of folks that can't build churches. Do you really want to come down on the side that cities can keep churches out of town?

RLUIPA came about because a Catholic church in Texas was not allowed to expand in a historic district, and the Supreme Court striking down the prior Religious Freedom Restoration Act in the resulting litigation. (City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997))

Sure they can build mosques.... but not with my dime! And Christian groups shouldn't be funding mosques. Saying a group is free to do something is different than donating to their cause.

 

[uberkermit]

“I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.


“You shall have no other gods before me.


“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

(Exodus 20:1-6 ESV)​

When Christ returns, will he permit mosques to remain?

If the price to pay for freedom of religion is contrary to the will of Christ, I want nothing to do with it.

 

[Edward]

Sure they can build mosques.... but not with my dime!

I draw a distinction between contributing to the building fund and signing onto an Amicus.

Becket’s amicus brief was joined by a diverse coalition including the American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, Center for Islam and Religious Freedom, Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, Interfaith Coalition on Mosques, International Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Muslim Bar Association of New York, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, National Association of Evangelicals, New Jersey Muslim Lawyers Association, Queens Federation of Churches, Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund, Sikh Coalition, South Asian Bar Association of New Jersey, South Asian Bar Association of New York, and Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of New Jersey.

Becket was joined by Christopher J. Paolella of the New York law firm Reich & Paolella and Asma Uddin of the Center for Islam and Religious Freedom. The Islamic Society of Basking Ridge and Mr. Chaudry are represented by Adeel A. Mangi of the New York law firm Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP.

http://www.becketfund.org/amicus-brief-defends-new-jersey-islamic-society/

Becket got in on the ground floor of RLUIPA litigation. If a church finds itself in this kind of mess, they should at least look at the Beckett resources.

 

[bookslover]

Dr. Moore used to speak about this kind of thing regularly while I was studying at SBTS. His position was basically as Edward lays about above; if religious freedom is devalued or attacked, it's all religious freedom which is jeopardized, not just the other guy's.

Yeah but, if the tables were turned, why do I doubt that mosques would lift a finger to help build Christian churches?

 

[earl40]

No, it is defending the First Amendment. Because if we let them start chipping away at the Constitution, it isn't going to be long before WE end up on the list of folks that can't build churches. Do you really want to come down on the side that cities can keep churches out of town?

RLUIPA came about because a Catholic church in Texas was not allowed to expand in a historic district, and the Supreme Court striking down the prior Religious Freedom Restoration Act in the resulting litigation. (City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997))

Edward, with you being a lawyer I have a quick historical question. When The First was passed did the people of that time have any idea of any religion besides the Christian religion?

 

[Jake]

No, it is defending the First Amendment. Because if we let them start chipping away at the Constitution, it isn't going to be long before WE end up on the list of folks that can't build churches. Do you really want to come down on the side that cities can keep churches out of town?

RLUIPA came about because a Catholic church in Texas was not allowed to expand in a historic district, and the Supreme Court striking down the prior Religious Freedom Restoration Act in the resulting litigation. (City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997))

Edward, with you being a lawyer I have a quick historical question. When The First was passed did the people of that time have any idea of any religion besides the Christian religion?

IANAL (not sure why its relevant) but Thomas Jefferson had interactions with Islam (including owning a Koran and the Barbary Wars), and some people say he was even accused of being one. Not to mention Judaism and non-Protestant sects.

 

[Edward]

Edward, with you being a lawyer I have a quick historical question. When The First was passed did the people of that time have any idea of any religion besides the Christian religion?

Jews fought in and helped finance the American Revolution. While they were generally well treated in Georgia and South Carolina, they faced restrictions in some of the other states. Recall George Washington's 1790 letter to the Jewish congregation in Rhode Island (where they weren't as well treated.)

Muslims were much less well established, but as early as July, 1776, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia said, ""True freedom embraces the Mahomitan and the Gentoo as well as the Christian religion." Jefferson and Washington both alluded, not unfavorably, to the Mahamdan/Mahomitan/Mohometans. On the other hand, some were denouncing Islam. So the issues were well enough established that there was informed debate by the time of the adoption of the Bill of Rights.

 

[reaganmarsh]

Dr. Moore used to speak about this kind of thing regularly while I was studying at SBTS. His position was basically as Edward lays about above; if religious freedom is devalued or attacked, it's all religious freedom which is jeopardized, not just the other guy's.

Yeah but, if the tables were turned, why do I doubt that mosques would lift a finger to help build Christian churches?

Dear brother, I thoroughly concur. My intention in this post was merely to speak to what & why Dr. Moore has taken this course of action: he's being consistent with what he's taught in the past.

 

[kodos]

True freedom would never favor false religion. That is the problem with a purely libertarian definition of 'freedom': it advances spiritual bondage.

Psalm 146:7-10
The LORD gives freedom to the prisoners.

8 The LORD opens the eyes of the blind;
The LORD raises those who are bowed down;
The LORD loves the righteous.
9 The LORD watches over the strangers;
He relieves the fatherless and widow;
But the way of the wicked He turns upside down.

10 The LORD shall reign forever—
Your God, O Zion, to all generations.

Praise the LORD!

 

[earl40]

Edward, with you being a lawyer I have a quick historical question. When The First was passed did the people of that time have any idea of any religion besides the Christian religion?

Jews fought in and helped finance the American Revolution. While they were generally well treated in Georgia and South Carolina, they faced restrictions in some of the other states. Recall George Washington's 1790 letter to the Jewish congregation in Rhode Island (where they weren't as well treated.)

Muslims were much less well established, but as early as July, 1776, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia said, ""True freedom embraces the Mahomitan and the Gentoo as well as the Christian religion." Jefferson and Washington both alluded, not unfavorably, to the Mahamdan/Mahomitan/Mohometans. On the other hand, some were denouncing Islam. So the issues were well enough established that there was informed debate by the time of the adoption of the Bill of Rights.

Thank you. I see what side of the debate won by the lack of a certain words as we read today in the documents of our country. Is it no wonder why Our Lord is judging our nation much quicker than many nations of times past.

 

[Parakaleo]

Does anyone seriously think that Paul or Peter would attach their names to this undertaking?

 

[Pergamum]

My issue is the MONEY involved. And the SUPPORT and ENDORSEMENT of false religion.

Sure, make sure the First Amendment applies to all. But if the Muslims want to build their houses of worship, it will not be with any of my help. To not persecute false religion is one thing, to go and lay the bricks or build the idols is another...

...and they are using the money of Christians to do this. Probably many donors are not aware of these activities. The funds are coming from other Christians thinking they are giving to a worthy cause.

Russell Moore ought to be held accountable for this and deposed as the Pope of Baptist Ethics. I'm sick of him.

 

[Pergamum]

Some are saying the accusations are unfair against Moore and the Baptist leaders (who seem to dabble more and more on immigration and leftist social issues, even being funded by Soros).

Here are two additional thoughts:

---Lawyers donate time to causes. There is not much difference between donating time and legal expertise in matters such as this....meanwhile, many other more pressing legal issues press the church. But....can't deal with that now....gotta help the Muslims.

How much time and transportation and hours in meetings, and legal fees, and hours away from churches, and time away from causes which more directly help the church is now being spent on Muslims (the largest religious bloc on earth)? Do a billion Muslims really need the SBC's help?


--- You can tell a lot about a person by who their friends are. Joining hands with the world and with false religion, and then spending much time and money and effort on such partnering activities, is very troubling.

 

[Pergamum]

Not merely critical spectators from the outside, but some Southern Baptist leaders are also unhappy with these developments as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/25/southern-baptist-leader-r_n_814023.html

 

[Pilgrim]

My issue is the MONEY involved. And the SUPPORT and ENDORSEMENT of false religion.

Sure, make sure the First Amendment applies to all. But if the Muslims want to build their houses of worship, it will not be with any of my help. To not persecute false religion is one thing, to go and lay the bricks or build the idols is another...

...and they are using the money of Christians to do this. Probably many donors are not aware of these activities. The funds are coming from other Christians thinking they are giving to a worthy cause.

Russell Moore ought to be held accountable for this and deposed as the Pope of Baptist Ethics. I'm sick of him.

I'm not a huge Moore fan. But can you point out where Cooperative Program (i.e. SBC) money is involved in this? I don't see anything of the kind in the article, which is about supporting the Muslims in a court case. Has anything happened here other than filing an amicus brief? Your posts come across as if direct funding of the mosque is on the table.

If all that has been done is file an amicus brief, (friend of the court) from what I understand that is not at all the same as "filing suit" as Dr. Land is quoted as claiming in the HuffPo article you linked.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[reaganmarsh]

If CP funds are involved, it will be a major problem. I don't think Dr. Moore would do anything so foolish as that.

 

[Pergamum]

The ERLC is supported through the funds of the Cooperative Program.

1.65% of CP funds go towards supporting the ERLC and all of its actions, which amounts to 3.236 million dollars.

So, in effect, this means that some of this 3 million dollars' worth of the tithes and offerings of baptist folks are going towards any time and effort expended in this enterprise.

In the meantime, the IMB is talking about sending home 600-800 IMB missionaries due to lack of missionary funding.

That is why I favor abolishing the ERLC. The Church's Mandate is not to tweet about immigration or to sign amicus briefs on behalf of Muslims but to Preach the Word and Disciple the nations.

 

[Pergamum]

Meanwhile, I just ran across an announcement by the ERLC.

They publicly urged that local churchgoers ought to be more active in their local communities in order to get local zoning laws tightened in an effort to disallow strip clubs in local communities....

...and then they advocate for looser zoning laws so that mosques can be built.

Because dirty dancing is a bigger threat than the proliferation of Islam, I guess.

 

[Andrew P.C.]

The constitution is ungodly. It not only abandons Christ, but is specifically anti-Christ by not acknowledging Christ as Lord but rather "We The People". With that said, I'd rather have churches go underground then support idolatry. Seems also like God would rather have the altars and idols torn down then built up (Deut 12:2-3; Ex. 34:13-14; Judges 6:25).

 

[Bill The Baptist]

That is why I favor abolishing the ERLC. The Church's Mandate is not to tweet about immigration or to sign amicus briefs on behalf of Muslims but to Preach the Word and Disciple the nations.

and

 

[Dekybo]

I sincerely hope that my congregation and I's tithe does not go to the advancement of evil.

 

[Pergamum]

If you give through the Cooperative Program, then 1.68% of your offerings go to the ERLC and its activities. Your church is helping to keep the ERLC alive.

The activities of the ERLC of late have been: To paint Jesus as an illegal alien, to support liberal and progressive immigration policies, to bash the "white church" in America, to say that any Trump supporter is a moron (without equal hate-time for Sanders and Clinton, a socialist and a felon), to bash the faithful Judge Roy Moore for not conducting gay marriages and to call for his resignation, to state that the desire of gays to marry was honorable because they desired to be in a long-term relationship, and many other silly things.

Much of what the ERLC writes is very good (particularly in medical ethics), but their social policies (particularly race and immigration) often sound leftist and progressive and, no wonder, since they are part of the Evangelical Immigration Table, funded by the liberal George Soros.

Also, the very existence of an extra-ecclesiastical governing body speaking authoritatively as a mouthpiece for all baptists and existing outside (and above, really) the local churches, is a monstrosity of ecclesiology that should be killed. This is not even a "parachurch" entity, for it is not "alongside" the church at all. The ERLC is, instead, dictating to churches what they should believe...they are above the church.

...and the ERLC is alive and well due to over 3 million dollars of tithes and offerings that could be used to help the 600-800 IMB missionaries in danger of coming home due to the current financial crisis within the SBC.

I made the suggestion on Facebook that Southern Baptists might consider pulling out of the SBC if they did not abolish the ERLC. I was met with a whole flurry of anger.

But I believe that any SBC churches out there who are reading this ought to make their continuance within the SBC contingent upon the abolishing of the ERLC.

 

[Philip]

The zoning discrimination in question is a real concern for church planters in many areas. I know that zoning has been used as a political weapon to block building churches in a number of urban and suburban settings. There's a reason why my hometown has only had one new church constructed in the 16 years since my family moved there.

In the eyes of US law, an Amicus brief supporting a mosque is the same as an Amicus brief supporting a church. If churches can be built, then so can mosques.

 

[JoannaV]

Dr. Moore used to speak about this kind of thing regularly while I was studying at SBTS. His position was basically as Edward lays about above; if religious freedom is devalued or attacked, it's all religious freedom which is jeopardized, not just the other guy's.

Yeah but, if the tables were turned, why do I doubt that mosques would lift a finger to help build Christian churches?

According to Google, there are Muslims who helped build churches. There are also articles saying that doing such things is evil as it is supporting the spread of apostasy.

 

[Parakaleo]

In the eyes of US law, an Amicus brief supporting a mosque is the same as an Amicus brief supporting a church. If churches can be built, then so can mosques.

Call me a theonomist if you want, but I believe the building of mosques or Buddhist temples or high places to be evil and should be opposed by believers. Even if it means we can't build churches.

You shall not fall in with the many to do evil, (Exodus 23:2)

The nation or municipality that would prohibit the building of churches, but would allow them if plans for mosques are pushed through and built, is not worthy to be crowned with the jewel of a church building.