SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : News and Current Events : Former Archbishop Carey is ashamed to be an Anglican

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 Next Page )
PosterThread
saved_matt
Member



Joined: 2005/7/3
Posts: 233
Lancashire, England

 Former Archbishop Carey is ashamed to be an Anglican

According to yesterday's Jerusalem Post, "former Archbishop Carey is ashamed to be an Anglican."

Carey is ashamed because the Church of England is reported to have passed a motion to divest from Israel on account of it brutal occupation.

Carey says the debate was unbalanced, rushed and failed to take account of the complexities of the situation. But to react so sharply- that he is 'ashamed to be an Anglican'? I can only imagine that Carey knows that the motivation was anti-Semitic.

The synod adopted the motion by a show of hands, with Archbishop Williams voting in favour, and the archbishop of York, John Sentamu, of whom
so many have expressed high hopes, abstaining. (shades of Pope Pius XII perhaps?).

A counter motion offered by the pro-Israel pressure group "Anglicans for Israel" was not presented to the synod, as time was called on the debate after one hour.

Full article here: [url=http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1138622572920&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull]Lord Carey 'ashamed to be an Anglican'[/url]


_________________
matt

 2006/2/9 3:11Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re: Former Archbishop Carey is ashamed to be an Anglican

Quote:
I can only imagine that Carey knows that the motivation was anti-Semitic.


Do you have evidence of this?


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/2/9 4:50Profile









 Re: Semantics, semantics

Ron, Is it possible to be anti-Israel and yet not "anti-semitic"?

so please correct me if I'm wrong, you are not anti-semitic, but are you anti-Israel?


do you know why those houses were razed to the ground in the Territories?


(edit- its not that i want to start a "thing", but the explusion of Jews from Britain in 1290 is something I feel that is firmly embedded within the spiritual DNA of the Church of England and this current imbroglio is just a manifestation of such unrepented national British sin

 2006/2/9 9:14









 Re: Semantics, semantics

Quote:
unrepented national British sin

Neil,

Without interfering with your question to Ron, I'd like to put two main thoughts to you......

One: the concept of 'national sin', which has been made so much of recently because of WWII, is really a biblical concept which God applied to His people because their laws were all 'religious' ... there was no civil law ... and this has now been transferred out of the context of old Israel, and applied to Gentile nations as if it was an unwritten world law ..... which I don't think it is.... Since when did 'nations' ever care about repenting of 'national sin'? (Please don't take this to mean I am in favour of the persecution of local minorities, in any century.)

Two: things have moved on a lot since then, (1290), over here.... The whole 'union of the crowns' thing (1603), and the 'union of the flags' (1707 - the 'Union [b]Jack[/b]) are a sign that Jews in Britain were in the ascendancy. The Jacobite risings were about getting the house of Jacob back in power. Now, I've been led to believe our monarch has proof of being of the house of Judah.... although I know of this possibility only through someone who has researched Jewish connections, in Britain (and I cannot claim it as [i]fact[/i]).

PS - the Church of England did not exist until

'..an Act of Supremacy ([b]1534) which recognised that the king was 'the only supreme head of the Church of England[/b].... '

[url=http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page19.asp]http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page19.asp[/url]

Sorry. :-?

 2006/2/9 15:46
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Hi Neilgin
Are these your own ideas or are you getting them from somewhere?

Quote:
(edit- its not that i want to start a "thing", but the explusion of Jews from Britain in 1290 is something I feel that is firmly embedded within the spiritual DNA of the Church of England and this current imbroglio is just a manifestation of such unrepented national British sin

I think you need to re-think your history. The Church of England did not exist in 1290. On June 8th 1533 Parliament extinguished Papal authority in England, and Henry VIII was duly excommunicated on 1st July of the same year.

Edward 1st, during whose reign the Jews were expelled from England and NOT Britain or the United Kingdom did not exist until 17th century, was a Roman Catholic. Furthermore they have been several [url=http://fp.thebeers.f9.co.uk/england_history.htm]Acts of Repentance[/url] over recent years. You really do need to sort out some facts before you start on this theme.

Quote:
Ron, Is it possible to be anti-Israel and yet not "anti-semitic"???so please correct me if I'm wrong, you are not anti-semitic, but are you anti-Israel?

I am neither. I am pro-semitic which includes the Arab races, and pro-Japhetic, and pro-Hamitic. I am in favour of a National homeland for the Israeli people. I am not a supporter of Zionism; I do not support the establishment of an Israeli nation state which stretches from the Euphrates to the Nile. I believe the modern concept of a nation-state is not really present in the NT, and that the word nations (Greek: ethnos) is really aimed at people- groups. The NT is indifferent to territory.

I feel I need to say that I have never seen a more ignorant or prejudiced expression than what is represented in your post. I think you should apologise to Britain and the Church of England for these statements. When you have done so, I will be ready to continue this conversation.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/2/9 19:14Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

dorcas'

Quote:
Two: things have moved on a lot since then, (1290), over here.... The whole 'union of the crowns' thing (1603), and the 'union of the flags' (1707 - the 'Union Jack) are a sign that Jews in Britain were in the ascendancy. The Jacobite risings were about getting the house of Jacob back in power.



This is really just silly. The Union Jack was created by James 1 of England as part of his attempt to unify his two separate kingdoms of England and Scotland. It was called the Union 'Jack' because the familiar form of James is Jack. James is the English form of Jabob, hence the NT book written by 'Jacobus' is known in the English speaking world as the letter of James.

The Jacobites were supporters of the claim to the British throne of the deposed James II and his son James, hence Jacobites. They had absolutely nothing to do with 'the house of Jacob'.

As regards HM Queen Elizabeth II... I was under the impression that there is no one alive who has 'proof' of being of the royal house of Judah. I recall someone having proved that she was a descendent of Mohammed too.

The deeper into the woods you go, the more nuts you find. :-?


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/2/9 19:25Profile
deltadom
Member



Joined: 2005/1/6
Posts: 1838
Hemel Hempstead

 Re: Is there any use trying to make a dead horse live

I have lived in canterbury and have been through the dreary ritualitualism of the Anglican Church, I would be ashamed to be an Anglican( I am not Anglican) but there are a few good anglican churches and people
I am pro Israel and Pro-Sematic and so is God in the bible

Ge 12:3 - Show Context
And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

The Archbishop has not put himself, who is he to and who am I to come before the lord god and say that I do not love the people of God, the people that god brought through the promise land and in Romans , Paul says that the Gentiles may know salvation that they may be saved.Who is he? I mean the Lord god of all, who made heaven and earth and an archbishop who thinks he knows more than god is this not arrogance that a council can do this .They and I have god to answer to for all the stupid things that I need to do is repent. I have been wanting a 24/7 prayer time in the Cathedral of Canterbury, where the Archbishops resides temporarily other than in London.
They said that some natural disaster or soemthing would happen before they open up that place for a 24/7 prayer meeting. I said I would pray for something to happen, I beleive in god if he wants me to use that place as a prayer meeting he would do it.

I have listened to the Archboshop of Canterbury, he did not use the bible only barely one verse in his sermon!!! I am talking about Rowan Williams not Carey.

I believe that it is not you or me that he has to repent to but god because, he cannot make a statement and god not do something, I have to repent like he will and stand before the throne of the Lord most high, my saviour Jesus.


_________________
Dominic Shiells

 2006/2/9 19:36Profile









 Re: Excuse me Ron?

edit....theres no fruit in this discussion, I'm finished with it. God's covenant with Israel is eternal.

 2006/2/9 19:40
Compton
Member



Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 2732


 Re: Excuse me Ron?

Quote:
...what sort of unholy spirit is residing in your soul and your witness...thats a lie, your a classic Jew Hater, anti-zionist is anti-Israel is anti-Jew, I've seen and heard your lot before, you don't fool me.



Neil, my friend...you're not giving people very much credit these days...You raised a volatile question but I don't even see how Ron can finish the conversation because your rules of engagement are so combative. Even if Ron vaguely resembled the remarks you made, I think you've made it difficult to work through the issue.

Brother, in all honesty I feel you are tilting at windmills lately. There are no dragons here. Just us family folk. Although we might get on each others nerves now and then, we ain't the enemy...

With respect, is everything OK on the home front? Know that people like me, care about you bro.

MC


_________________
Mike Compton

 2006/2/9 20:28Profile
IRONMAN
Member



Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS

 WHOA...

Bro Ron, Neil et al

Quote:
I am neither. I am pro-semitic which includes the Arab races, and pro-Japhetic, and pro-Hamitic. I am in favour of a National homeland for the Israeli people. I am not a supporter of Zionism; I do not support the establishment of an Israeli nation state which stretches from the Euphrates to the Nile. I believe the modern concept of a nation-state is not really present in the NT, and that the word nations (Greek: ethnos) is really aimed at people- groups. The NT is indifferent to territory.



bro Ron, bro Neil and all y'all help me out here. as far as i can tell (which may not be too far so correct me if i'm wrong) the Lord promised the land of Israel from the Nile to the other side of the Jordan from the coast of the mediterranean and eastward to Abraham's children forever right? it seems to me a bigger chunk of land than what Israel as we know it now sits on...

i'm not entirely sure exactly what the zionist's deal is (thought is seems to me it's to do with the restoration of all these lands to Israel, correct me if i'm wrong) but it seems to me the Lord's covenant with Abraham still stands unless there is somewhere in scripture where the Lord revokes that covenant explicitly. if not surely the Lord will restore all these lands to be Israel's posession forever.

bro Ron in light of your not supporting the establishment of the state of Israel as it was back in the day and the Lord's promise to Abraham could i ask a couple of questions?

is this how you feel because perhaps you feel the Lord will be the one to establish the nation of Israel as it was when He returns or do you feel that the Lord didn't intend to give Abraham's descendants that land forever as He said? :-?

jus trying to figure it out...


_________________
Farai Bamu

 2006/2/9 23:34Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy