[Featured Post] No Compromise: The Story of Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani

This featured post comes from the blog ReligiousLiberty.tv and goes as follows.

No Compromise: The Story of Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani

Posted by Michael Peabody on February 23, 2012 · Leave a Comment

Note: Since this was written, we have received news that the Iranian Judiciary has issued orders that Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani be executed by hanging.  Today, February 23, 2012, the White House issued the following Statement:

“The United States condemns in the strongest possible terms reports that Iranian authorities’ reaffirmed a death sentence for Iranian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani for the sole reason of his refusal to recant his Christian faith.  This action is yet another shocking breach of Iran’s international obligations, its own constitution, and stated religious values.  The United States stands in solidarity with Pastor Nadarkhani, his family, and all those who seek to practice their religion without fear of persecution—a fundamental and universal human right.  The trial and sentencing process for Pastor Nadarkhani demonstrates the Iranian government’s total disregard for religious freedom, and further demonstrates Iran’s continuing violation of the universal rights of its citizens.  The United States calls upon the Iranian authorities to immediately lift the sentence, release Pastor Nadarkhani, and demonstrate a commitment to basic, universal human rights, including freedom of religion.  The United States renews its calls for people of conscience and governments around the world to reach out to Iranian authorities and demand Pastor Nadarkhani’s immediate release.”
——————

It is difficult to argue for separation of church and state when you are living in a “theocracy.” Iranian pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, 34, learned this fact when he was arrested in October 2009 soon after refusing to allow his children to participate in government-mandated readings of the Quran. Nadarkhani had argued that Iranian law allowed children to be raised in the faith of their parents.

Nadarkhani remained incarcerated and in September 2010, a Gilan Province court ordered him to hang for “convert(ing) to Christianity” and “encourag(ing) other Muslims to convert to Christianity.”

The court did provide an opportunity for Nadarkhani to easily escape the gallows – all he had to do was verbally renounce Christianity. Since then, as of this writing, Nadarkhani has had the choice whether to live or die – just say the words and his freedom will be restored. Yet he refuses and remains behind walls at the Lakan prison.

The court asked him, “Do you believe in the elements of Islam which are the unity of God, resurrection of the dead and the prophethood of great Mohammad?”

Nadarkhani replied, “I believe in the unity of God and the resurrection of the dead but not the prophethood of great Mohammad.”

On June 10, 2010, Nadarkhani’s wife, Fatemah Pasindedih was arrested under charges of apostasy and imprisoned at Lakan. The authorities threatened to take away their children and give them to a Muslim family. Nadarkhani continued to refuse to convert and his wife was tried without an attorney and sentenced to life imprisonment. An attorney was then retained and that decision was appealed and the sentence was overturned and she was released.

Nadarkhani’s death sentence was appealed to the Iranian Supreme Court in December 2010 and on June 28, 2011 the verdict was handed down. He was to be “executed by being hung somehow until his soul is taken from him.” The Court ruled that there was some question as to whether Nadarkhani had previously been a practicing Muslim “from the beginning of puberty” onward and therefore whether he had actually committed apostasy. The lower court was ordered to determine whether he had been a practicing Muslim between the ages of 15 and 19. If he had been a Muslim during that time, then the court could execute him after giving him an additional opportunity to recant.

The lower court held its re-trial between September 25 and 28, 2011. Before the trial even began, he was asked to renounce his faith. Under Islamic Sharia law[i], an apostate is given three days to recant. The court then asked Nadarkhani to renounce his Christianity and “return to the faith of your ancestors.”

As the case progressed, the story caught fire on the Internet and soon news agencies around the world were spreading the story of a young pastor facing death for refusing to renounce his faith. In an attempt to sway attention away from the story, the Iranian state-supported media outlet, Fars News Agency, dismissed claims that the court had passed down the death sentence because of apostasy, and that Nadarkhani had actually been charged with “rape, corruption, and security-related crimes including extortion.”[ii]

The Fars story added that Nadarkhani was a “Zionist” who ran a “corruption” house like a brothel or “opium house.” The alleged charges were not clear as to what Nadarkani had allegedly done.
In response, Nadarkhani’s attorney, Mohammed Ali Dadkhah told told the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, “If he is under trial in another court on other charges, I am not aware. But we only defended him against the death sentence in the case of his charge of apostasy. The charge the court staff announced that I defended during several different court sessions was apostasy and no other charge.”[iii]

Dadkhah, a Iranian Muslim represents Nadarkhani at great personal risk – he himself appealing a sentence of nine years in prison for “actions and propaganda against the Islamic regime,” which is what the government calls his legal human rights work.

Iran’s secret service officials have reportedly given Nadarkhani a book on Islamic literature, and told him that they will return to discuss it with him. The book, entitled “Beshaarat-eh Ahdein,” claims that Christianity is false. If Nadarkhani later discusses the book with authorities and claims that he disagrees with it, this may be a basis for a later charge of blasphemy. As a result, Nadarkhani’s attorneys have advised him to remain silent on the book as any statements he makes could be used against him.

Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secretary of State released a statement on September 30, 2011 expressing concern about the case and persecution against Zoroastrians, Sufis, and Baha’is. Clinton wrote, “The United States stands with the international community and all Iranians against the Iranian government’s hypocritical statements and actions, and we continue to call for a government that respects the human rights and freedom of all those living in Iran.”

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner said that the prospects for the execution of Nadarkhani, “unless he disavows his Christian faith are distressing for people of every country and creed.”

Today, there are about 300,000 Christians living in Iran – one-half of one percent of the population. Of those, the majority are ethnic Armenians. There are 73 registered individual Christian churches, and almost all Christian activity is illegal. Those who conduct evangelistic activities including publishing pamphlets in Persian languages are harshly punished.

During the early 1990s, religious persecution increased in Iran. In 1993, Pastor Mehdi Dibaj, an Islamic convert was sentenced to die after ten years of imprisonment. Later that year, church leaders were asked to sign a declaration stating that they would not allow Muslims or Muslim converts into their churches. Only two church leaders refused to sign, including Haik Hovsepian who was the Superintendent of the Assemblies of God churches in Iran.

Instead, Hovsepian called the world’s attention to the plight of Iranian Christians. With an increase in international pressure, Dibadj was released from prison on January 19, 1994, only days before he was scheduled to die.[iv]

That same day, Hovsepian vanished from the streets of Tehran, and his body was later found with 26 stab wounds in the chest. Dibadj and three other pastors disappeared and their bodies were later discovered.

Throughout history, it seems that people of most faiths have had some period of persecution and martyrdom for no crime other than telling others what they have chosen to believe. Those who dared to think differently were dangerous to the status quo and they either had to publicly change their mind or face torture or death.

When it comes to church and state issues, Americans have become used to “epic” battles over Nativity scenes, prayers in public schools, or the occasional crucifix in a government office. But in other nations of the world, making the basic choice to believe a certain way can quickly become a matter of life and death.

There is still hope that the sentence will not be carried out.

To Take Action, visit http://dynamic.csw.org.uk/article.asp?t=news&id=1142

---

[i] Abdurrahmani’l-Djaziri’s Kitabul’l-fiqh ‘ala’l-madhahibi’l-’arba’a i.e. Apostasy in Islam according to the Four Schools of Islamic Law (Vol. 5, pp. 422-440) First English Edition (Villach): 1997

[ii] “Supreme Court Dismisses Reports on Nadarkhani’s Case,” Fars News Agency. October 7, 2011 Retrieved from http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9007130274  

[iii] “After Trial on Apostasy Charge, Christian Pastor Nadarkhani Accused of Rape and Extortion”.International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. 2011-10-01. Retrieved 2011-10-28.

[iv] Hovsepian Ministries maintains a website at http://www.hovsepian.com

Building a Better Protest

Courtesy personal.kent.edu/~bsmith30/TheSixties/

Want your protest to turn into a movement that truly changes the world?  Start by looking at one that accomplished such a feat.

Many public protests have come and gone.  Some have had a temporary change on society while others have simply faded into obscurity.  Then there are those that have made such a widespread impact that we cannot picture a world in which they did not occur.  It is one such protest/movement that we will look at in this post, and we will also glean some tips on how to increase the impact of whatever one you decide to join or start. The movement I have in mind is none other than the Protestant Reformation, and here's how it made such a difference.


Empowered the Powerless

Back in the day, for much of the Christianized world, the Roman Catholic Church was the only show in town.  It had a religious monopoly that was established at the expense of the common person.  No doubt many people felt the weight of this oppression, but felt powerless to do anything about it.  The Reformation built on this frustration and gave those feeling powerless a voice. A frustration that had been in existence for some time before Martin Luther came on the scene.

Didn't Reinvent the Wheel

Many people most likely believe that the Protestant Reformation originated with Luther and the 95 Theses (which he posted 494 years and two days ago).  While events definitely progressed more rapidly as a result of Luther's words and actions, his objections to the Roman Catholic Church's abuse of power echoed those of  John Huss, who echoed John Wycliffe's views.  Both of whom lived almost 200 years before the German monk.  Luther's original course of action differed from many modern movements in that he didn't intend to discuss his views with the general public.

Started at the Top

Although Luther posted his famous theses in a public place, he wrote them in Latin, a language not widely spoken or understood outside of educational and religious institutions.  He wanted to debate with those in power, those who could facilitate lasting change, not with his fellow Germans, who could do relatively little.  When I state "fellow Germans" I mean that loosely because Luther was in actuality part of the system that he deemed to be corrupt.

Worked from the Inside Out

Luther understood, either cognitively or intuitively, that reforms are often best facilitated by those inside of the institution.  His radical views eventually led to his departure, but that shouldn't negate the fact that he originally intended to reform the system as an insider.  He saw himself as someone who could rebuild from the inside rather than demolish from the outside.  The promulgation of these suggested reforms was greatly enhanced by a new technology at the time; the printing press.

Used Technology to His Advantage

The advent of the printing press made it much easier to disperse Luther's and his allies' views.  The 95 Theses, being translated into German a few months after their posting, made their way into the hands and minds of the common people.  Their once unspoken concerns became spoken, and many were emboldened by the fact that someone was actually standing up to such a powerful organization.

Dynamic Leadership

The Reformation would have never gained any ground if Luther had caved under the immense pressure from the religious hierarchy.  The people needed a dynamic spokesperson, and they got one in Martin Luther.

A Perfect Storm

Centuries of frustration coupled with a dynamic leader and new technology changed an entire religion for the better.  Therefore if you want a better future for the world, or at least your part of it, take some tips from the past.  You'll never know what can be accomplished unless you try.

The Divine Hitman

The Death of Jezebel
Courtesy Orientalism in Art

Truth may not always be stranger than fiction, but it can be as dramatic.

The horseman rode off to meet Jehu and said, “This is what the king says: ‘Do you come in peace?’”
   “What do you have to do with peace?” Jehu replied. “Fall in behind me.”
   The lookout reported, “The messenger has reached them, but he isn’t coming back.”  2 Kings 9:18

As I am reading through the Bible, I am constantly amazed at how many great stories exist in the Old Testament.  Those who neglect that portion of the Scriptures miss out on many stories involving colorful characters.  Jehu is one such character.  There are two Jehus in the Bible, the first one, Jehu son of Hanani, was a prophet, and while I'm sure that he had an interesting life, the one I'm talking about is Jehu the son of Nimshi, who was a military leader who became king of Israel.

Jehu son of Nimshi comes onto the scene during the time when Elijah was the main prophet in Israel.  Shortly after the Mount Carmel experience, God gives Elijah a "to do" list which involves anointing two kings and his prophetic successor.  Apparently, Elijah didn't complete the list before being taken to heaven, so we find Elisha being the one to set Jehu's reign in motion.

I'm not going to retell Jehu's entire story (which you can read in 2 Kings 9-10), but I will say that his story reads like some sort of action movie (hence the provocative title for this post).  After being anointed king by an anonymous young prophet described as a "maniac", Jehu, formerly a military commander, becomes the leader of what amounts to a death squad hunting down and eliminating all those connected with the now-deceased evil king Ahab and the worshipers of the false god Baal.

One of my favorite parts of this story shows that there was something special about Jehu (if I was making a movie, this clip would be in the trailer).  As he was approaching the hideout for number one on his hit list, Ahab's son Joram, Joram sends out a messenger to see if Jehu has come in peace, and as all good action-movie stars go, he has definitely not come in peace.  Jehu had such a way about him (I would compare him to Leonidas of Spartan fame), that with two short sentences (see text above), he convinces not one, but two of Joram's messengers to switch sides and fight against their former leader.

After eliminating Joram and Ahaziah, Jehu goes after the prophet-killer Jezebel, Ahab's widow.  What happens next says something about both Jehu and Jezebel.  When Jezebel heard that Jehu was on his way, she did her hair and put on makeup, and stood by a window waiting for him.  When he arrived she asked him if he came in peace (you know the answer to that question), and once again, with a few words, Jehu was able to convince some on the other side to do his bidding.

The remainder of the story involves more action as Jehu makes his way through his divine hit list (incidentally, nobody after this point asks if he came in peace), and God commends him of his services even though Jehu didn't get everything right.  While I am not advocating the glorification of bloodshed, I'm writing about Jehu's story for the purpose of getting people to pay more attention to the entire Bible.

So if you take the time and read some of the great stories of the Old Testament, you will find that the truth in the Bible can be as interesting as the fiction you'd find elsewhere.

What is In Your Hand?

Courtesy Pitts Theology Library

We make a lot of excuses not to follow God's plan for our lives, and those excuses mean very little to God.

Moses answered, “What if they do not believe me or listen to me and say, ‘The LORD did not appear to you’?”   Then the LORD said to him, “What is that in your hand?”
   “A staff,” he replied.
  The LORD said, “Throw it on the ground.”
   Moses threw it on the ground and it became a snake, and he ran from it.  Exodus 4:1-3

I had to laugh a little bit when I read that text, and I'll tell you why.  God told Moses via the burning bush that He had decided to deliver His people from Egyptian bondage, and that Moses was to be the one to tell Pharaoh that this was going to happen.  Moses wasn't excited about this new assignment, so he tried to convince God that He should look elsewhere.  (You can find the entire conversation in Exodus 3 & 4.)  One by one Moses kept making excuses, and one by one God kept knocking them down.

• Moses:  Who am I to go and say these things to Pharaoh?   
• God:  You won't be alone.  I will be with you.
• Moses:  What if the Israelites ask "What is this God's name?"   
• God:  Tell them "I AM has sent me to you."
• Moses:  What if they don't believe that You actually sent me?   
• God:  Throw your staff on the ground, and it'll turn into a snake then back into a staff.  If that doesn't work, put your hand in your cloak and it will become leprous and then be healed.  And, if those two don't work, take some river water and pour it on the ground and it will become blood.
• Moses:  You know, I've never been a good speaker.   
• God:  Who made your mouth?  I will help you speak and teach you what to say.
• Moses:  I still would feel better if you sent someone else.   
• God:  Oh, alright!  Take your brother with you.  He's already on his way to meet you, and he will speak for you.

We may not be called like Moses to help deliver a nation from slavery, but we all could be doing more in regards to following God's plan for our lives.  God has already promised that He will be with us.  So stop making excuses, and do what He has asked you to do.

Confidence

Psalm 119:41-48 

w Waw

 ⁴¹ May your unfailing love come to me, O LORD,
       your salvation according to your promise; 
 ⁴² then I will answer the one who taunts me,
       for I trust in your word.
 ⁴³ Do not snatch the word of truth from my mouth,
       for I have put my hope in your laws.
 ⁴⁴ I will always obey your law,
       for ever and ever.
 ⁴⁵ I will walk about in freedom,
       for I have sought out your precepts.
 ⁴⁶ I will speak of your statutes before kings
       and will not be put to shame,
 ⁴⁷ for I delight in your commands
       because I love them.
 ⁴⁸ I lift up my hands to your commands, which I love,
       and I meditate on your decrees.

Keeping the law gives us a confidence that we otherwise wouldn't have.

I want to focus on verses 45-47 in this section because it talks about a noticeable benefit of keeping God's, confidence. The psalmist here states that he "will walk about in freedom" because he seeks out God's precepts. He also states that he will speak of God's law before kings "and will not be put to shame." Doing what is right gives us a confidence, a boldness, that we otherwise wouldn't have. We can withstand a lot of criticism from others if we know that what they are saying is false. In my studying of the life of the apostle Paul, it is easy for me to see that he had this confidence, this boldness that stood in such a stark contrast to his accusers. He had that confidence because he knew what he believed and he knew that what he believed was right.

It is important to note what it states in the end of verse 47, "because I love them". If we are keeping God's law for any other reason than love, we will not have that confidence because that confidence does not come from fulfilling an obligation. Someone once told me that God = law = love. To think of it in any other way would be to have a legalistic, works-oriented religion.

"Almost Thou Persuadest Me"

We shouldn't be afraid to witness to those in a higher social status than ourselves.

In this chapter, Paul was not immediately sent to Rome, and this gave him some time to witness to more people in Caesarea. The most prominent person was King Agrippa II, the last in the line of the Herods ("Herod" is not so much a name as a title much like "Caesar" or "Pharaoh"). Festus told Agrippa about Paul, and the king was interested to see the prisoner. E.G. White paints the picture of the contrast between the king and his prisoner.

In honor of his visitors, Festus had sought to make this an occasion of imposing display. The rich robes of the procurator and his guests, the swords of the soldiers, and the gleaming armor of their commanders, lent brilliancy to the scene. 

And now Paul, still manacled, stood before the assembled company. What a contrast was here presented! Agrippa and Bernice possessed power and position, and because of this they were favored by the world. But they were destitute of the traits of character that God esteems. They were transgressors of His law, corrupt in heart and life. Their course of action was abhorred by heaven. 

The aged prisoner, chained to his soldier guard, had in his appearance nothing that would lead the world to pay him homage. Yet in this man, apparently without friends or wealth or position, and held a prisoner for his faith in the Son of God, all heaven was interested. Angels were his attendants. Had the glory of one of those shining messengers flashed forth, the pomp and pride of royalty would have paled; king and courtiers would have been stricken to the earth, as were the Roman guards at the sepulcher of Christ. pgs. 434, 435

Paul then then took the time to talk about Jesus: His life, death & resurrection. He continued by saying how that he was compelled to witness for Him, and that it was for this reason that the Jews had arrested him.

This got me thinking as to what I would say if I were to have an audience with some of the world leaders of today. Even though many political leaders have done away with much of the pomp and display of the kings of old it can still be an intimidating experience. Yet Paul was not intimidated to the slightest degree. He knew that all of this in reality meant nothing. I think that we need to overcome the concept of seeing people in higher levels differently. I do not mean that we should be rude or impolite, but to simply view people as people regardless of how many times we may have seen them on T.V., magazines, or billboards. If more people would have this attitude that Paul had, the gospel would go out much faster than it is now.

Of course, as in this case, such boldness does not always bear fruit.

Festus, Agrippa, and Bernice might in justice have worn the fetters that bound the apostle. All were guilty of grievous crimes. These offenders had that day heard the offer of salvation through the name of Christ. One, at least, had been almost persuaded to accept the grace and pardon offered. But Agrippa put aside the proffered mercy, refusing to accept the cross of a crucified Redeemer. pg. 438

May we all have holy boldness regardless of the outcome. 

Listen to Me

Psalm 61:1  Hear my cry, O God; listen to my prayer.

The boldness of David's prayers should be an inspiration to us all.

Often when I read a psalm, I have to think a little bit to figure out what verse I want to focus on, but not this time.  As soon as I read verse one, I knew that it was the verse I wanted to talk about in this post.  Sometimes the power of a statement comes from what is not said rather that what is said.  What is not present in this verse is the politeness, the deference, dare I say, the courtesy that one might expect when addressing the Almighty.

I was taught when I was young, and reminded of now that I am older, to be polite when talking with people.  Don't make demands of people, say please and thank you, etc.  Then here comes David basically throwing all that out the window; demanding that God hear his cry and listen to his prayer. It practically leaped off the page, and told me that I need to be bolder when talking with God.  It's a challenging thought, to say the least.

Lord, thank you for reminding me that it is O.K. to be bold when talking with you.