THE WORLD CONFERENCE ON RELIGION & PEACE, MELBOURNE, JULY 1997. by W. B. Howard, Editor of Despatch magazine, Endtime Ministries, Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia.

REPORT NUMBER THREE

The World Conference on Religion and Peace, held in Melbourne under the name Religion and Cultural Diversity Conference, operated throughout under the direction of the United Nations and UNESCO. The UN's "Human Rights" declarations were on tables at the conference, also information on the Australian legal system. This quote from a book which was acquired from the WCRP Melbourne conference will give the reader some idea of the religious agenda of the UN re. religion in Australia. "Free to believe?" Human Rights Commissioner.

DISCUSSION PAPER No.1 p.p.11-12:

"The Australian Constitution was negotiated and settled by white, Christian, European men. It was proclaimed under 'Almighty God'. The majority of these Founding Fathers did not see any general need to enshrine a Bill of Rights in the Constitution. They thought that the common law inherited from England and the parliamentary system provided sufficient protection. They also thought that the constitutional protection of rights could undermine Australia's policy of racial exclusion. Australia therefore has no Bill of Rights. It is one of the few reImagesing countries that does not seek to protect human rights constitutionally."

"everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion..."
Article 18:2 prohibits coercion which would impair one's freedom to have or adopt a religion or belief of his or her choice. Paragraph 3 provides that freedom to manifest one's religion and belief may be subjected only to such limitations as are PRESCRIBED BY LAW AND ARE NECESSARY TO PROTECT PUBLIC SAFETY, ORDER, HEALTH OR MORALS OR THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF OTHERS. Paragraph 4 provides for the freedom to impart religion and belief to one's children.

LET US LOOK AT THESE MATTERS, IN VIEW OF THE WCRP CONFERENCE.

"Intolerance" is now politically incorrect! It is "religious discrimination", it is "exclusion", it is "an affront to human dignity", a "violation of fundamental rights and freedoms." We Christians must realise that the International community views this country as having an "indigenous" religion, which is the true religion of this ancient land, with the "guardians" of the sacred soil being Rainbow Serpent worshippers. All other religions, which come into this country through immigration, are expected to recognise the superiority of the "indigenous" religion, and establish dialogue - to listen and learn! Christianity is seen by the International UN as an "immigrant" religion only. Keep in mind, Australia has ratified the ICCPR already.

FROM THE ADDRESS DELIVERED BY DAVID SILK.

The Right Reverend David Silk, Bishop of Ballarat, gave an address at the Melbourne WCRP called, "Religious Diversity and Building Effective Community Relations." An Anglican priest, Silk drew extensively from the 'experience' gained from Leicester, UK, the Council of Faiths. The City of Leicester is the home of the Islamic Foundation, a Library and Conference Centre. This is the centre of Islamic Mission and Education for Western Europe. What else is the Leicester Council of Faiths about?

Leicester is Jain Samaj Europe, the actual centre of Jainism for the whole European continent. It has one of only two Jain temples outside India. The Anglican version of this "Council of Faiths" includes Bahais, Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, Jains, Muslims and Sikhs. Many of the National leaders of those faiths live in Leicester. 25% of the inhabitants of the City of Leicester have roots in India.

Let me quote from this Interfaith Anglican priest, David Silk:

"(In Leicester) We were quite accustomed to people of many different faiths being present at the worship events of one another's communities. So, I found myself as a guest at celebrations in temples, gurudwaras, mosques, synagogues. Representatives of the other great faiths were as a matter of course invited to be present at major diocesan events like the enthronement of the new Bishop, or the installation of the new Provost, at ordinations, civic services and community celebrations in our churches. Woven into the calendar was the attendance of the Lord Mayor and leaders of faith communities at the Civic services in the Anglican Cathedral and Orthodox Synagogue, and at the public celebrations of carols at Christmas, the lights of Diwali, the processions at Vaisakhi and Eid, and the lighting of the Menorah. At the War Memorial each year on Remembrance Sunday were offered prayers for the dead and for peace by a Christian priest, a Jewish rabbi and a figure from one of the other world faiths."

The description from Silk above gives a general view of what "Interfaith" is all about in this New World. Add to this a "Global Ethic" with a "global theology" all its own, and there you are - the Antichrist religion, One World Church. Let us remind ourselves what the Almighty God has to say about this, before we go on:

False religions have NO LIGHT;

"...if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is NO LIGHT in them." (Isaiah 8:20).

"Then spoke Jesus...saying, I am the light of the world; he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." (John 8:12).

"...for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." (John 8:24).

TERRIBLE CONSEQUENCES AWAIT THOSE WHO REJECT THE ONE TRUE GOD.

"The wise men are ashamed, they are dismayed and taken: lo, they have rejected the word of the Lord; and what wisdom is in them?" (Jeremiah 8:9)

"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?" (II Cor. 6:14-15).

SILK GIVES "THREE WORDS TO THE CHURCHES

David Silk, Anglican Bishop of Ballarat gave "three words to the churches" which we will examine.

THE FIRST "WORD" was "Dialogue".
Now if you think that "dialogue" just means conversation, discussion, tete-a-tete, you are sadly mistaken in what WCRP means by this term. Said Silk: "Dialogue is the place where relations between faith traditions begin. Dialogue begins when people, not ideologies meet each other...Above all, dialogue must include sharing in the worship and prayer of the other. In all faiths dogma and worship are closely bound together, and woven into disciplines which form a religion, a pattern and rule of living. A sign of this is the respect accorded to sacred books in the worship of many faiths. ...In worship we may sense a profound convergence, a common experience of God and humanity. In worship we may draw, by different yet adjacent wells, from a single water table of spirituality. In worship we may tap into the spiritual resources of the indigenous peoples and thus be the 'soul' of Australia." (End of Silk quote).
 

FORBIDDEN BY GOD!

The Bible forbids any such "dialogue"! There is but one God, and the pagan religions are NOT in any way drawing from the Water of Life which is Christ Jesus our Lord! He said,

" ...whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst, but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life."
(John 4:14).

"These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest, to whom the mist of darkness is reserved forever." (II Peter 2:17).

IS THIS TRUE?

A short encounter with the beliefs of some of these religions will make it plain, to the true believer in Christ Jesus, that God will not allow worship and dialogue with them.

JAINS - believe in salvation through non-violence. They reject salvation in the shed Blood of Christ Jesus. They do not even believe in a Creator, they believe that the universe is God and is eternal. The Jains' great teacher, Mahavira, went around nude and plucked out his hair, before starving himself to death at the age of 72.

BAHA'IS - have interfaith teaching about all religions having the One God. Baha'is celebrate every year on 23rd of May the Anniversary of the Declaration of the Bab, a sort of fore-runner of the coming "Messiah" who will bring a One World with a One World citizenship. (Christians know who that will be. Revelation 13)

BUDDHISM - this is the religion without any God at all! There is no heaven, no hope, no God, no sin, nothing but endless "Nirvana" or a formless and uncreated nothingness as the goal of human existence. They utterly reject not only the Saviour, Jesus Christ, but their Creator as well.

ISLAM - the Muslims accept a Creator, but deny the Saviour, and follow a false god called "Allah." They are committed to this devilish deception. They have a form of salvation by works. In the Qur'an, the Islamic sacred book, Jesus Christ was born of Mary, but did not die, someone else died in His place, and God then raised Jesus to Himself! This means that there was NO SAVIOUR who died for the sin of the world, in their perverted version.

CAN CHRISTIANS FIND A COMMON "WATER TABLE"
WITH THESE RELIGIONS AND OTHERS?

Of course not! Neither can we accept the Rainbow Serpent of the "indigenous peoples" of Australia, and be the "soul" of this country - what ever that means.

THE SECOND "WORD" from David Silk for the churches was "Particularity".
He said: "Much of Christian debate about other faiths is dominated by the word 'unique'. Is Jesus unique? But the word 'unique' is at one and the same time too weak and too strong. It is, in fact, the wrong word. You are unique and I am unique. In that sense Jesus is unique....It is not the uniqueness of that which matters, but its particularity. The value of that word is that it is a rich expression but is not exclusive. It affirms what I believe and does not make a judgement on the beliefs of others.... Meaningful comparison is not possible between religions which address different questions." (End of Silk quote).

" I am the door...He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber." (John 10:1 & 9).

Do religions "address different questions" making "meaningful comparison not possible"? Hardly. Religions all deal with who made man and the universe or what is the cause of life, are we or are we not sinful, is there life after death, how do we live good lives et al. We can compare the world's religions and their beliefs with Christianity - and if we do we find that there is NO comparison with Judeo-Christian Scriptures, they are bringing in every instance different messages than the Bible. Now if Christianity is the Truth, and the Bible is the inspired Word of God, then the other religions are not the Truth, they are erroneous.

THE THIRD "WORD" Silk gave the churches was "witness".
"For many outside the Christian Church the word "evangelism" has negative, even sinister, connotations. It may be that as individuals they have had bad experiences of a 'hard-sell', coercive pushing of Christianity upon them. Perhaps they have come from communities whose collective experiences of evangelism are historically linked to the propagation of western, and the repudiation of indigenous, culture....harshly judgemental attitudes...'witness' means that we are simply offering the vision we have seen..." (End of Silk quote).

"But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an EVANGELIST,
make full proof of thy ministry."

"resonance with the message of others. In any of the great multi-racial, multi-cultural. multi-faith neighbourhoods of Melbourne you see this. There is an atmosphere of the holy mingled with the everyday as people travel to and from the mosque, temple or guruwara for prayer, as they greet one another in the name of God, as they display in their homes, their shops, their clothing the symbols of their faith, as they regulate their life and that of their community by religious festivals." (End of quote).

She was quite young, and seemed sincere, so I could do no other than say, "that is all New Age, Jesus Christ is the One you want, He will forgive your sin, and give you Eternal Life as a free gift etc." The Catholic lady drew back in her chair, as though repelled. The psychiatrist made the politically correct reply which will be the killer to all evangelism in the future (BUT, we must never forget the Blessed Holy Spirit's conviction). She said: "I respect the fact that you see that as the truth for yourself, I affirm that. I however have discovered the truth for me, another understanding of the same God, and it satisfies me. We have a deep understanding together. I know you affirm my grasp of my truth."
 

VILIFICATION IN A MULTI-CULTURAL, INTERFAITH AUSTRALIA.

The fact is that a religious ethic which will embrace, but overide entirely, all religious dogmas and doctrines is now in place globally. It is only a short step to forced compliance with this Global Ethic - no matter what the rhetoric bandied around is. ALL denial or critique of this agreed Ethic will soon be considered "vilification". It is not so much the criticism of other religions which is the threat, it is criticism of the Global Ethic which will bring persecution and even death in the future. It would seem crucial that we grasp an understanding of this "Ethic", and prepare ourselves for the certainty that Christ-honouring Christians cannot accept, syncretise with or even silently ignore the Global Ethic of this New Age world of One Mind.

"A UNITED NATIONS TO THE UNITED RELIGIONS."
"'We're on the threshold of the first global civilization,' said Episcopal Bishop William A. Swing shortly before leaving on a world tour to build support for his dreams: a United Religions, modelled after the United Nations, where representatives of the world's religions would unite instead of fight. 'As we become one global unit, we have to find out where religion is in regard to our global tribe.'" (Berit Kjos, a critique).

"A totally different approach to the challenge of religiously pluralist societies is the view of those who think that the best way to promote social harmony in such societies is to pay attention only to what all religions have in common. They think that it is possible to sift out a few common elements from all religions existing in a society and to build on these elements. They talk of a common code of conduct, consensus morality and agreed moral standards. They indeed do not ask that religions be abolished, but they consider it fanatical and divisive to speak of particular religions. For them, beliefs are not important. The politically correct stance is to be liberal toward all and not to be weighed down by particular religious convictions or beliefs.

In reply I would like to say that it is true that natural philosophy or right reason, without any particular religious affiliation can arrive at certain truths of the moral or ethical order which all human beings can share. One thinks of ethics as developed by Plato or Aristotle. but in practice today it will be found that in actual life the ethical codes that guide people are set in religious contexts. A general or vague statement of agreed ethical norms will not be able to sustain people at critical moments of life or when the are faced by some major temptation. For such crises, a religion which gives a world-view and a complete philosophy of life is necessary. This is another way of saying that ethical norms are built on belief systems and are nourished and invigorated by a religion which also sustains itself by ritual celebrations. The proposal of ethical norms based on the religion of nobody cannot carry anybody across the long and exacting pilgrimage of life. Indeed it smacks of secularism which ignores or marginalizes all religions, or at least regards religion as a personal and private matter which should not be discussed in public.

There must be available a way to social cohesion which respects the human being and the right to freedom of religion,which takes religions seriously and which nevertheless offers a dynamic formula to promote harmony in society." (End of Arinze quote).

"ACCEPTANCE, TOLERANCE, COLLABORATION."

This is the cry that the New World is echoing across the globe in the 1990s. Richard Scheinin, religion reporter for the San Jose Mercury News (2-3-96) wrote that Bishop Swing of the United Religions would visit Mother Teresa in Calcutta, the Dalai Lama in India, King Hussein in Jordan, "high-level Muslim leaders in Cairo, and rabbis in Jerusalem." He would also visit Istanbul, Rome, and Canterbury to invite representatives from the world's "great spiritual traditions" to the 1997 U.R. meeting in San Francisco. At the Presido, former U.S. army base, this year, June 1997, the U.R. charter for the world was signed - in the same place the U.N. charter was founded.

Hans Kung, the Images author of the Global Ethic of the UN, wrote in 1991 in his book, "Global Responsibility: In Search of a New World Ethic":

"If ethic is to function for the wellbeing of all, it must be undivided ethic. The undivided world increasingly needs an undivided ethic. Postmodern men and women need common values, goals, ideals, visions. But the great question in dispute is: does not all this presuppose a religious faith?" (End of quote, p.30).

THESE ARE THE BASIC PRINCIPLES IN THE GLOBAL ETHIC,

dated August 28-September 5, 1993, Parliament of World's Religions. Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. This was the ethic cited at the Melbourne Religion and Cultural Diversity Conference, July 1997. Remember that religious and political leaders were at that conference, including the Governor General Sir William Dean AC KBE, signatories on the program were the Prime Minister the Hon.John Howard MP, and the Hon. Kim Beazley MP. On the listed board of directors of the Multicultural Foundation is Sir Llewellyn Edwards AC, Queensland's well-known entity.

GLOBAL ETHIC DECLARATION: I.
No new global order without a new global ethic! ...
*As religious and spiritual persons we base our lives on an Ultimate Reality, and draw spiritual power and hope therefrom, in trust, in prayer or meditation, in word in silence. We have a special responsibility for the welfare of all humanity and care for the planet Earth. We do not consider ourselves better than other women and men, but we trust that the ancient wisdom of our religions can point the way for the future....

(COMMENT: note here the impersonal "Ultimate Reality", "meditation", "ancient wisdom" of the pagan New Age - this is NOT Christianity, Biblical Truth or the Judeo-Christian God).

GLOBAL ETHIC DECLARATION: II.
A fundamental demand: Every human being must be treated humanely. ...
*We know that religions cannot solve the environmental, economic, political, and social problems of Earth. However they can provide what obviously cannot be attained by economic plans, political programs, or legal regulations alone: A change in the inner orientation, the whole mentality, the 'hearts' of people, and a conversion from a false path to a new orientation for life. Humankind urgently needs social and ecological reforms, but it needs spiritual renewal just as urgently. As religious or spiritual persons we commit ourselves to this task....

Of course religions are credible only when they eliminate those conflicts which spring from the religions themselves, dismantling mutual arrogance, mistrust, prejudice, and even hostile images, and thus demonstrate respect for the traditions, holy places, feasts, and rituals of people who believe differently...."

(COMMENT: note here the "change in the inner orientation", the "conversion from a false path". The global ethic is about the combined neo-pagan religions and the tribal religions bringing a "conversion", "spiritual renewal" with a Antichrist, religious spirituality! Note that religions are only "credible" by eliminating "conflict". No one will be able to say Christ Jesus is the ONLY Way to God, this is "arrogance" causing conflict. Can the reader picture "demonstrating respect" for the temples of the Hindus with the evil Kahli the Destroyer, or the thousands of Hindu gods, all demonic; the mediums and channellers of the New Age; the goddess worshippers with their sickening, female sexuality worship; the Buddhist with the ashes of Lamas in casks on high places, and the huge idols of the Buddha; or the Mass of the Catholics when the bread and wine are supposed to turn into the Body and the Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the idol images of "Mary"?)

GLOBAL ETHIC DECLARATION: III.
Irrevocable directives.
*1. Commitment to a Culture of Non-violence and Respect for Life.... (e)
To be authentically human in the spirit of our great religious and ethical traditions mean that in public as well as in private we must be concerned for others and ready to help. We must never be ruthless and brutal. Every people, every race, every religion must show tolerance and respect - indeed high appreciation - for every other. Minorities need protection and support, whether they be racial, ethnic, or religious.

(COMMENT: the New World Order has decided what is "authentically human" and what is not. It is an international Ethic, decided upon, in international law, that we must "show tolerance and respect" even "high appreciation" for other religions. Can one imagine what writing that it is wrong to believe in reincarnation, drum up spirits, worship the serpent god would be construed as by WCRP? No longer would one be "authentically human", one is now a "violent and vilifying" enemy of peace!)

*2. Commitment to a Culture of Solidarity and a Just economic Order....
To be authentically human in the spirit of our great religious and ethic traditions...

*3 Commitment to a Culture of Tolerance and a Life of Truthfulness....
all over the world we find endless lies and deceit, swindling and hypocrisy, ideology and demagoguery (firebrand behaviour):
#Politicians and business people who use lies as a means to success...
#Representatives of religions who dismiss other religions as of little value and who preach fanaticism and intolerance instead of respect and understanding....
No woman or man, no institution, no state or church or religious community has the right to speak lies to other humans....

(COMMENT: There is a longer list of "swindling", "lies", "demagoguery" in the Global Ethic. Note carefully that the one I have cited on religion would embrace every Christian or Christian organisation which preaches the Bible doctrines. The Bible is filled with statements from the Lord about other religions, idol worshippers, false gods, only One God and One Saviour, the sinfulness of the human race, the Fall, coming apocalypse, hell and damnation et al. ALL is considered "lies" by the New World Order. "Fanaticism" and "intolerance" are any of the Biblical doctrines which the New Age considers racist, sexist, not pantheistic, not evolutionary, not earth-centred or exclusive).
#finally, for representatives of religion.
When they stir up prejudice, hatred, and enmity towards those of different belief, or even incite or legitimate religious wars, they deserve the condemnation of humankind and the loss of their adherents.

Let no one be deceived: there is no global justice without truthfulness and humaneness! c)Young people must learn at home and in school to think, speak, and act truthfully. They have a right to information and education to be able to make decisions that will form their lives. Without ethical formation they will hardly be able to distinguish the important from the unimportant...

(COMMENT: no doctrines and teaching which oppose the NWO's ethical norm will be allowed - "condemnation" will follow, with obvious penalties, and forced "loss of their adherents" - scattering of the members, or worse. All children to be taught the "ethics" of the global State).

*4 Commitment to a Culture of Equal Rights and Partnership Between Men and Women.
#...We need mutual respect, partnership, and understanding, instead of patriarchal domination and degradation, which are expressions of violence and engender counter-violence.

(COMMENT: the "Mother God" and feminist movement theology will find full acceptance by the NWO, the exclusive Father God and exclusive male leadership of Christian groups is not acceptable. This will open the way for an explosion of the New Age Goddess beliefs).

GLOBAL ETHIC DECLARATION: IV.
A Transformation of Consciousness! ...3.
Above all, we urge the various communities of faith to formulate their very specific ethics: What does each faith tradition have to say, for example, about meaning of life and death, the enduring of suffering and the forgiveness of guilt, about selfless sacrifice and the necessity of renunciation, about compassion and joy. These will deepen, and make more specific, the already discernible global ethic....

In conclusion, we appeal to all the inhabitants of this planet. Earth cannot be changed for the better unless the consciousness of the individuals is changed. We pledge to work for such transformation in the individual and collective consciousness, for the awakening of our spiritual powers though(sic) reflection, meditation, prayer, or positive thinking, for a conversion of the heart. Together we can move mountains!...we commit ourselves to a common global ethic...

(COMMENT: here we see that all faiths have equal worth, all concepts about the meaning of life and death, and suffering are as meaningful as any other. Christ Jesus and His Sacrifice for mankind is only as important as worshipping sacred cows in India is! The doctrine of the obvious, that man is sinful, is happily done away with in the statement "forgiveness of guilt", not "sin"! The "transformation" of "consciousness" is major New Age doctrine, the New Paradigm. Note that there is NO GOD anywhere in the Global ethic, and note that the humanistic "positive thinking", "we can move mountains", shows that MAN not God is the hope for the planet.

Instead of responsibility to God there is responsibility to the global community. Instead of the commandments of God's Word, there are planetary ethics, created by the global community. Instead of all ethics and morals beginning with loving and worshipping the One True God, there is a commitment to "loving", toleration for demonic practices, and neo-pagan atrocious traditions and beliefs. Instead of God's commandments to not tolerate sin and false-hood, there has arisen a no tolerance for anyone who will not conform to the global State! And keep in mind that the global New Age State is an Earth-worshipping, Gaia Mother Goddess worshipping, religious world-view. Not just an atheistic, humanistic state, such as Communism was in other days. Communism has turned into New Age socialism, in this One World One Mind.)

THE PAGAN RELIGIONS, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND
THE TRIBAL RELIGIONS ARE IDOL WORSHIPPERS!

Here is what God has to say about these religions. Withering scorn is poured out from God Almighty upon the blindness and grotesque foolishness of these religious worshippers. Yet the heart of God yearns for them, and we Christians are HIS witnesses until the end:

"Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have I not told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.
They that make a graven image are all of them vanity; and their delectable things shall not profit; and they are their own witnesses; they see not, nor know; that they may be ashamed.
Who hath formed a god, ot molten a graven image that is profitable for nothing?
Behold, all his fellows shall be ashamed; and the workmen, they are of men: let them all be gathered together, let them stand up; yet they shall fear, and they shall be ashamed together.
He heweth him down cedars, and taketh the cypress and the oak...He burneth part thereof in the fire; with part thereof he eateth flesh; he roasteth roast, and is satisfied: yea, he warmeth himself, and saith, Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire:
And the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image: he falleth down unto it, and worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, Deliver me; for thou art my god.
They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand." (Isaiah 44:8-18).

"...yea the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service." (John 16:2)

"Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils." (1 Corinthians 10:21).

"For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

But to us there is but one God, the father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him." (1 Corinthians 8:5-6).

SIDE-BAR...
REPORT NUMBER THREE, WCRP MELBOURNE, JULY 1997.

From the New Age "Global Ethic" Web Site,
G-ETHIC@VM.TEMPLE.EDU. 27th Aug.1997.

This debate went on: FROM PAULA.

"There has been some discussion and criticism concerning the 'pathology of evangelical and fundamentalist' thought on this list and others....I understand many of these criticism, but I wonder whether a 'loving response' to the 'fundamentalists' would be more fruitful than the harsh condemnation I've been witnessing.... Of course Jesus taught a radical 'love ethic' as he called people to 'love their enemies.'... Perhaps we should reflect upon this Rabbi's (speaker on the holocaust) thoughts when we begin to feel 'enraged' or 'hostile' toward our 'enemies'. I often think how both Jesus and Mahatma Ghandi forgave those who executed them. What is the source of such forgiveness? "

"Of course, Jesus taught a radical 'love ethic' as he called people to 'love their enemies.'"

"Didn't He chase money lenders out of the temple? Fundamentalism is profane. To say so is not necessarily hateful, rather it is part of valid civic discourse in a democratic society, and part of carrying out our social responsibility to seek truth. I'm afraid that it seems like more of a cowardly utopian fantasy than love to avoid challenging the assumptions of fundamentalists."

"Yes, I agree that there are times when one should challenge the assumptions of those who are intolerant. But by what method and in what manner? I proposed a 'loving response' would be more fruitful than harsh condemnation and I stand by that proposal.

...I agree with you and my posting was an attempt to point out this distinction and to advocate a method which creates a climate for dialogue, understanding, and peace rather than further intolerance, alienation, and hostility."

"Fundamentalism usually means a mindset that is rigid, insistent that its view is the only possible correct one, It usually is also associated with a literalist, non-critical understanding of texts (Bible, Qur'an, Laws of Manu, Marx etc).

To the extent that a person adheres to this 'absolutists' (from ab solvere, no limitation, i.e., unlimited ) viewpoint of the truth of some matter, s/he is by that very fact unwilling to engage in dialogue....I would say that one should do what one can to provide the context in which Fundamentalists might come to see the possibility of learning something from someone who holds a different position from them - and to that extent, more or less, de-absolutize their previous position. However, this unusually is a very long process, often lasting more than a lifetime."

"This new faith transcends all religions by accepting their partial validity while denying that there is any One True Path or exclusive mode of salvation."

"And pray tell, where does this 'new world religion' leave Christians? Where does this 'religion' leave us, who know that there is only One True Way, and that is Jesus Christ, Messiah and Son of the One True God? Where does that leave us who will not hesitate to point out the error of your way.

Because it is impossible for us to receive your way, in that we will never abandon our Way, you exclude us from the very religion you wish to make universal?

How would your religion handle such people? people who will never in any way accept your deception as truth?"

"I think you did not read Ingrid's old essay carefully enough. She states clearly enough.
She states clearly that this 'new world religion' is not a replacement for the various religious commitments people have - Christian, Muslim, etc. - but is what we all have, at our best, in common, namely a commitment to truth and love....she was conceptualising and articulating the notion of a Global Ethic long before (20 years) before the idea and term became popular....a Global Ethic...was not conceived just yesterday."

Wendy Howard...editor of Despatch

.

 `Despatch' Magazine & "Beauty for Ashes" Booklet
Childrens Devotions also access daily email devotions
bi-monthly  Mini-Despatch
 

.

   despatch@mail.cth.com.au