Baptists join diverse faith groups to support mosque-building effort

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

 

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))

 

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.

 

“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.

 

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

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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!

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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).

 

and

 

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

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

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.