Why Did You Steal My Gods?
I just saw the following youtube video from my friend’s (Adam’s) blog. It’s a video showing how two “Christian extremists” disrupted Hindu prayer in the Senate.
[youtube g8vENZwp1rk]
Before the Hindu guy started his invocation, a Christian named Ante Pavkovic said a loud prayer, “Lord Jesus… Forgive us Father, for allowing the prayer of the wicked, which is an abomination in Your sight, to be offered in… This is an abomination. We shall have no other gods before You. You are the one true and living God…”
Indeed, the prayers and offerings of the wicked are but a stench in the nostrils of Almighty God. And were we to approach God clothed in our own filthy rags (instead of Christ’s robe of righteousness), our prayers would have been a “strange offering” to His divine faculties as well. Even though we don’t get to hear much of the Christian’s prayer in the video (since he got stopped), I thought his first few words and boldness were inspiring.
I think the Hindu guy seems a bit fearful at first. One can only imagine how much more fearful he would be when he faces the Lord one day before His judgment throne in the light of His awesome, perfect, and holy presence. I also noticed when this Hindu guy prayed, he had no convictions at all whatsoever.
At any rate, it got me thinking about non-believers and how sad it is that there are people out there who worship false gods and idols. Truly, very sad. It is mind-boggling that some people out there worship objects, cows, rocks, trees, etc. All these things are created beings. People make objects and then deify them. Consider the golden calves that the Israelites used to build. Their prayers toward these objects are falling upon deaf ears. How can these gods do anything for them?
I’m reminded of Laban in the Old Testament, who pursued Jacob because he thought that Jacob has stolen his false idols. When he finally caught up, Laban asked Jacob:
And now you have gone away because you longed greatly for your father’s house, but why did you steal my gods?” (Genesis 31:30)
“Why did you steal my gods?”
That is so funny! 
It makes me chuckle everytime I read this verse.
Wow! Laban’s gods can be stolen. I wonder if Laban realized how utterly ridiculous his words were as soon as they escaped his lips. His gods could not protect themselves or find their way back. They’re material beings. Laban needed to watch for his gods — instead of the other way around. He had to travel and chase Jacob to rescue his gods. Why was he worshipping them?
Praise God, the one and only true God, that I never have to worry about anyone stealing Him because He is a God of Spirit and truth. By His grace and mercy, He is mine and I am His. He is not some object confined to time and space because He Himself is the Creator of time and space! As Athanasius wrote, “The Word [Jesus Christ], far from being Himself contained by anything, He actually contained all things Himself.” He is a God Who watches over me, and Who neither sleeps nor slumbers. I need not protect God because He is the Protector of all His people. Praise Him that He is the sovereign, omnipotent, omniscient, eternal Being Who is supreme over all of life. Blessed be His Name!
July 18th, 2007 at 9:40 pm | Permalink
Hi Jessica,
I wish I could fully agree with your posting.
I just listened to a sermon: “Exclusivity: How can there be just one true religion?”, this early evening.
In summary:
Postmodernist would say all religions are equal. (like the case for US senate)
None is better as no religion saw the whole truth. It’s like the story of blind men tried to figure out how the elephant looked like. All were right and all were wrong at the same time.
BUT how could we know all of the religions saw partial truth, unless there is ONE who have seen the WHOLE TRUTH.
Even though Christianity see the WHOLE TRUTH, it can not be suppresive to others. (i.e. My God is better than your gods)
Since we were chosen and saved not because we were better persons. In fact, usually in most of the case, the non-Christians were better persons than the Christians. Thus Gospel would make us humble, and able to reconcile with others.
Well, try to listen to that particular sermon if you have a chance.
~Abel
July 19th, 2007 at 5:39 am | Permalink
Hi Abel,
I live in Singapore where a multi-religious society coexisting in “harmony” (or whatever we are trying to contrive from it) is slowing evolving - thanks to governmental pressure - to a pluralistic culture. And for a Christian, whose responsibility is to evangelize the lost, cannot conform to the notion that we must somehow keep silent before the heathens. In fact, if we do not have the courage to present the faith before a watching world, the question will be asked of us, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 10:32-33).
We do not “suppress” or “oppress” or better still, persecute, those who disagree with us. We do not burn them on a stake; we do not torture them, as did the Inquisition. But do we keep silent when prayers from the pagans are being prayed over us? Do we pretend that we love such a heathen by silently closing our eyes (in approval?) as the prayer of a God-hating pagan is being read? What would the psalmist say? “Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. (Psalm 139:21-22).”
If we claim to love God, we must hate what He hates, and love what He loves. We, for sure, cannot love everything and anything. I would be very doubtful of his convictions if a Christian can sit still while Islamic jihadists, Wiccan witches, and Hindu gurus are offering prayers for him. Wouldn’t you?
And what should we make of those ecumenical councils where witches, Hindu gurus, Buddhist monks and priests all get together to pray for the nation?
By the way, Postmodernists do not believe in any absolute truth, and that is absolutely true for the postmodernist. Is the historicity of Jesus an absolute truth? Or are we progressing in our discovery of the historical Jesus?
Vincent
July 19th, 2007 at 8:57 am | Permalink
Hi Vincent,
My only disagreement was of ‘my God is better that your gods’. Isn’t all religions think the same way. I have a Hindu friend, who told me (not in offensive way) that she thought Christian’s God was weak, as He could die. Hindu gods were strong, they can’t die.
I used to lived in Indonesia, and went to state college there. In almost all official meetings, they would start with muslim’s prayer (spoken in Indonesian). Those were not comfortable situations but being radicals in those situations would not be wise either.
In my opinion people could justify the action of ‘the two Christian extremist’ in disrupting Hindu prayer in the Senate, only if they understood that US as a nation was founded with Christian principle. (not Enlightenment as postmodernist claimed).
Our main enemy (or battle ground) are the postmodernist (e.g. in the Senate that invite the Hindu priest). The Hindu priest was just ‘a tool’ being used by them to ‘mock the Christians’
Lastly, grab that particular sermon I mentioned if you have chance. Bet that you’ll love it.
~Abel
July 19th, 2007 at 3:09 pm | Permalink
I had preached through the book of Genesis some years ago. I don’t think I had ever caught the humor in Laban’s statement. It cracked me up once you pointed it out.
It kinda reminds me of that passage in Isaiah where he’s talking about a guy who cuts a tree down, uses part of it for firewood and makes an idol with the other part. He says how silly that is since what you’re worshiping could have just as easily been what you cooked your food with. Funny, but sad at the same time. Thanks for the encouraging post.
July 19th, 2007 at 4:14 pm | Permalink
Hi Abel,
Do you have the URL to that sermon you mentioned?
Anyway, thanks for the exchange. Iron sharpens iron, isn’t it?
Blessings in Christ,
Vincent
July 19th, 2007 at 6:16 pm | Permalink
Hi Vincent,
somehow the ‘a_href’ didn’t work properly to that site.
just google this:
The Trouble with Christianity: Why it’s so Hard to Believe it
should show up @ 1st position
-or- email me:
abel@nightroad.net
~Abel
July 19th, 2007 at 11:37 pm | Permalink
I don’t know whether or not I would go so far as to disrupt the prayer of person from another religion. I do know that I if I did such a thing, I could justify it whether or not the U.S. was founded on Christian principles (which it was).
I’d make the presuppositional argument that the only rational philosophy is Calvinistic (Biblical) Christianity. We are therefore justified in saying that things should be done in a Christian way, whether in civil government or in our own families.
http://www.xanga.com/godmadescience/604592120/calvinism—totally-irrelevant-to-real-life.html
How would this work in practice? Individual lives have to be changed first. Evangelism must progress into discipleship as part of the cultural mandate: fill the earth and reign over it for God’s glory. Theology has to find application through our own actions. We can talk as much as we want about how wrong other religions are, but unless we’re united in our desire to change things, we’ll be loud gongs and clanging cymbals.
I’m excited to see Jessica and the commenters on this blog caring enough about our country to discuss this. Imagine if 50% of the Christians in the U.S. felt the same way and acted according to those beliefs.
“Order in the Senate,” indeed!
July 19th, 2007 at 11:38 pm | Permalink
Whups. Try this and go to the July 17 post.
http://www.xanga.com/godmadescience
July 20th, 2007 at 9:43 am | Permalink
Jessica,
Thought that I should clarify this. All you mentioned in your posting are true. And all Christians should better believed that in their heart. (i.e. Our God is an awesome God)
Guess I have confused myself (and others?) by complaining for the same thing that draw me to your blog. That you speak directly from your heart.
I must have been worried too much about non-Christians who might read this. But you know your audience. Also, there must be someone, somewhere, sometime who reminds us about such things. Thanks for being such person.
btw. Wish you have a wonderful birthday celebration tomorrow!!
~Abel
July 20th, 2007 at 9:50 pm | Permalink
Hi Joe, thanks so much for visiting and for the comment! Yes, you’re right, that is silly about the guy and the tree.
I’m glad you got a laugh out of my entry.
I can just picture Laban exclaiming, “You stole my powerful gods!” It’s funny. 
July 20th, 2007 at 11:00 pm | Permalink
Abel, thanks for your clarification. And thanks for your kind b-day wishes. You wrote:
Well, my God (the God of the Bible) is better than their gods. hehe…
But, having said that, I would never say to people that my God is “better” than their gods, simply because there is only one true God to begin with; thus, there’s none other to compare Him with. So instead of saying “My God is better than their gods,” I’d rather say “My God is the one and only true God.” 
I would agree with Vincent’s comments above when he wrote:
I do see a difference between supressing (persecuting) people and expressing our faith.
Abel wrote:
Well, thank you Abel, for your kind thoughts. Yes, the majority of my blog visitors are Christians. But I suppose when I wrote my post, I was not worried about the non-Christians who may get offended. The Gospel of Jesus Christ by its very nature is offensive to those who are His enemies. It is exclusive at the core of its message, and thus it is necessarily divisive.
Speaking of this, Darren is a savvy when it comes to presuppositional apologetics. I’m in favor of the presuppositional over classical apologetics. I think the presuppositional approach is a Biblical and God-glorifying approach in evangelism. I can just imagine Darren beginning a discussion/debate with the presuppositional argument that “The God of Christianity is the only God that does not make nonsense.” Mmm, that would sound divisive to non-Christians, doesn’t it? hehe…
Or maybe, to quote Dr. Cornelius Van Til, “Christianity can be shown to be, not ‘just as good as’ or even ‘better than’ the non-Christian position, but the only position that does not make nonsense of human experience.” 
Darren wrote:
Darren, that’s a good point. I totally agree with you on that. Words and actions are both important. My pastor likes to say that we are to be living epistles.
July 21st, 2007 at 12:22 am | Permalink
Happy Birthday, Jessica!
July 21st, 2007 at 6:38 am | Permalink
“that she thought Christian’s God was weak, as He could die.”
Just a comment on Able’s friend’s thought on Christian’s God that He could die. In Christ’s Human nature He have died on the cross but not His Divine nature. Can you imagine if God could die for three seconds not three days? The whole Universe will fall. As what we should about other gods. All I got to say is from the word of one of the Old Testament prophet Isaiah 7:9
“If you do not stand firm in your faith,
you will not stand at all.’ “
July 21st, 2007 at 6:50 am | Permalink
Comment on Vincent’s comment:
Well, not everyone were blessed to have such liberty like most of us who lived in US or Singapore.
As I mentioned before as example in my college years in Indonesia. Would I have been radical, I would not have finished college. (as my family could only afford state college). Similar situations for government officials in Indonesia, many ceremonies will have muslim prayer to start with. Should the Christians there get out of state colleges and government?
[ I should make it clear that we didn't have to say what they said in their prayers. Some Christians opened their eyes, looked around. Some prayed Christian prayer by themselves silently.]
Havings said so, quoting my mentor in college (many years back): “Today, there are many fake Christians (in Indonesia). When persecution come, let’s say several people stop you on street with knives, ask if you are Christian. And your answer could meant life or death. We’ll find out who are real Christians and who are not.”
July 21st, 2007 at 7:45 am | Permalink
“But do we keep silent when prayers from the
pagans are being prayed over us? Do we pretend that we love such a heathen
by silently closing our eyes (in approval?) as the prayer of a
God-hating pagan is being read?”
I’m just want to respond to the above comment from the Old Testament in 1 Kings Chapter 18:19-29
Elijah on Mount Carmel
19 Now summon the people from all over Israel to meet me on Mount Carmel. And bring the four hundred and fifty prophets of Baal and the four hundred prophets of Asherah, who eat at Jezebel’s table.”
20 So Ahab sent word throughout all Israel and assembled the prophets on Mount Carmel. 21 Elijah went before the people and said, “How long will you waver between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him.”
But the people said nothing.
22 Then Elijah said to them, “I am the only one of the LORD’s prophets left, but Baal has four hundred and fifty prophets. 23 Get two bulls for us. Let them choose one for themselves, and let them cut it into pieces and put it on the wood but not set fire to it. I will prepare the other bull and put it on the wood but not set fire to it. 24 Then you call on the name of your god, and I will call on the name of the LORD. The god who answers by fire—he is God.”
Then all the people said, “What you say is good.”
25 Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, “Choose one of the bulls and prepare it first, since there are so many of you. Call on the name of your god, but do not light the fire.” 26 So they took the bull given them and prepared it.
Then they called on the name of Baal from morning till noon. “O Baal, answer us!” they shouted. But there was no response; no one answered. And they danced around the altar they had made.
27 At noon Elijah began to taunt them. “Shout louder!” he said. “Surely he is a god! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy, or traveling. Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened.” 28 So they shouted louder and slashed themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom, until their blood flowed. 29 Midday passed, and they continued their frantic prophesying until the time for the evening sacrifice. But there was no response, no one answered, no one paid attention.
Take joy and praise to the Lord that gives us the freedom to pray to Him in public. Don’t forget that there are millions of underground Christians in China that don’t even have a chance to worship and pray to God in daylight.
July 21st, 2007 at 8:50 am | Permalink
“Today, there are many fake Christians (in Indonesia). When persecution come,
let’s say several people stop you on street with knives, ask if you
are Christian. And your answer could meant life or death. We’ll find out
who are real Christians and who are not.”
The above comment related to life or death regarding our faith in Christ. That is not a good way to find out if someone is a real Christian or not because you are remember that Peter not only denied Christ once, twice but three times when it came to his life threaten situation. Was Peter’s denial of Christ made him not a real Chritian? NO. Most of us will quick to quote Matthew 10:33
But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
According to Philip Schaff’s History of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers was traditionally recorded that Peter was crucified upside down because of his faith and love for Christ.
Here is another example from the Old Testament.
Jonah 1:3
3 But Jonah ran away from the LORD.
That didn’t make him a false prophet. Later in Chapter 4. Jonah was so angry at God’s compassion toward His people that Jonah wanted to die.
I believe that to know a Christian’s “FRUIT” is equally important to know that they are a real Christian or not. If you are trying to figuring out who is real and who is not.
Try these verses.
Genesis 3:1
Did God really say?
Matthew 7:15
They come to you in sheep’s clothing.
2 Corinthians 11:14
And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
Thanks for reading.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:02 am | Permalink
Hi Daniel,
Thought that you might misunderstood me. My quoting above was just an example of when to be radical and when it was not wise to.
There was no doubt that to look for the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) is the most effective way.
Talking about the fruit of Spirit, I used to have wrong understanding that those could stand independently. Until I heard an online sermon from Tim Keller, that those are supposed to be CONCATENATED. He gave some example like how one’s action could fullfil 2 or 3 but failed the forth, and thus not the work of the Spirit.
—-
Gal 5:22-23 (ESV)
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.
July 21st, 2007 at 11:20 am | Permalink
Hi Abel
Forgive me, if I have misunderstood your comment. Let’s continue to keep our comments Christ’s center.
Daniel Mac
July 21st, 2007 at 2:11 pm | Permalink
Hi Daniel,
Maybe it’s my mistake for not writing it clear at first place.
~Abel.
July 22nd, 2007 at 10:01 pm | Permalink
Wow - what a discussion! Here’s a passage about the Inquisition that I really enjoyed reading last week:
—
Why have so many Christians, especially theologians and professors at Christian colleges, proclaimed such a monstrous social philosophy, a philosophy of “anything is politically acceptable except the Old Testament”? I believe that one reason above all is at the root of the problem: They have been afraid to exercise dominion. They have been bullied into submission by professional humanist guilt-manipulators who have persuaded Christians that Christianity, when applied to politics, has led to tyranny and war. As an example, they cite the 800-year-old story of the medieval crusades, where a few thousand professional soldiers went off to fight the Muslims. And who is complaining loudly today about the evil Crusades? Defenders of humanism whose various representatives have launched twentiethcentury
wars and revolutions in which as many as 150 million. people died from 1901 until 1970.3 These same critics have complained repeatedly about the Roman Catholic Church’s burning of the
occult magician Bruno or Calvin’s approval of the burning of unitarian Servetus (with the enthusiastic approval of the Catholics, who were also after him, and who tipped Calvin off when Servetus came into Geneva), four centuries ago. Compare these two events with the atrocities of Stalin, who killed 20 to 30 million Russians in his purges in the 1930’s, including a million Communist Party members, plus an additional ten million who died unnatural deaths during the famines produced by his forced collectivization of agriculture. Then there is the continuing atrocity of the Soviet Union’s concentration camp population, which has probably included about onethird of the Soviet population over the years, with at least one percent of the entire population” in the camps at any given time.
This slaughter took place in the 1930’s without any significant criticism in the prestige liberal humanist press for the next twenty years. Malcolm Muggeridge, a reporter for the Manchester Guardtin in this era, says in the first volume of his autobiography that Western reporters and liberals knew what Stalin was doing; they approved of his ruthlessness. Even in our day, some apologists still exist. (“Stalin, despite certain excesses, was a progressive force in his day, and we must understand that it is not easy to bring a backward society into technological maturity, blah, blah, blah.”) Yet these same ideologues taunt Christians about the Salem witch trials in the 1690’s, in which all of 20 people were executed, and which never happened again. In one year, Mao’s policies killed 30 million’ Chinese. Spare Christians the guilt trips, please.
Gary North: Introduction to Greg Bahnsen’s book “By This Standard”
http://www.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/a_pdfs/gbbs.pdf
—
July 22nd, 2007 at 10:12 pm | Permalink
I wonder if high schoolers who read The Crucible ever get presented with anything like the quote in my comment above.
Thank you for the encouragement, Jessica. It came at a time when I really needed to hear it. (With my pastor going back to seminary, I’m the only presuppositionalist at my church. Am in the progress of training a new one, though.
)
Yes, that’s a good quote from Van Til. I wonder how many people actually understand what he’s saying. He’s not easy to read, though I tried to get away with doing it during off hours in the lab when I was in grad school. After that, I decided to stick to Bahnsen, Frame, and others who didn’t take twenty minutes per page to read.
—
Darren, that’s a good point. I totally agree with you on that. Words and actions are both important. My pastor likes to say that we are to be living epistles.
—
Theology worked out into practice by God’s Spirit will change the world.
July 23rd, 2007 at 5:44 am | Permalink
Hi Darren,
Thanks for your posting on Inquisition, remind me of a sermon from the same series: “Trouble with Christianity: Why it is so hard to believe it”.
Where Tim Keller defend Christianity against such accusation.
Injustice: Hasn’t Christianity been an instrument for oppression?
(try google it. a_href not work properly to that site.)
~Abel
July 23rd, 2007 at 2:51 pm | Permalink
Someone (Abel?) said this at one point:
“Would I have been radical, I would not have finished college. (as my family could only afford state college).”
I mean no offense, but that is no reason at all to be quiet about the truth. Also, being “radical” for Christ, if defined rightly (by radical, I don’t mean annoying or obnoxious, I mean “sold out and committed” or something along those lines), should be something that we are all the time with everyone.
Someone also said they were worried about nonbelievers reading this blog. I’ve noticed this new trend among us Christians (myself included). We tend to secretly mold our messages to make them less potent, hoping we can suck in those we know are going to disagree with us (non-believers). This is just like at my church. A few guys in a recent Bible study were talking about Kirk Cameron’s response to the question, “What about all those lost tribes in Africa who never hear about Christ and die in that condition? Is that fair?” Kirk reminded his viewers that people are in rebellion against God and that everyone actually deserves hell… and that was the issue. When those guys at the Bible study talked over what Kirk had said on the video, they concluded, “That won’t satisfy a person on the street”… another chipped in, “Nope, it won’t.” And from there they decided what different answer we should give.
I hope I can say this graciously. That is wrong and totally unbiblical. We are to love nonbelievers, but our message and how strongly we speak it… that is something that must remain. The people in Acts 5, those outside the assembly, were actually afraid to enter into the assembly. I think there should be a certain fear and discomfort among nonbelievers coming into a fellowship of Christians. Have we forgotten that they are under the wrath of Almighty God?
As for the Hindu man, he is a false prophet… the Bible says plenty about them, no matter how “nice” they may be. But, I do agree that our Senate is even more to blame (someone mentioned this in a previous post). They allowed it!
The “Christian patriots” that stood up and prayed against the “prayers of the wicked”? Good for them! I wish I were more like them. Let them be labeled radicals. That’s the world… of course they’ll think that! It doesn’t matter what one’s philosophy is; it doesn’t matter whether or not America is a Christian nation. The issue is this: at least two Christians were standing in an assembly who chose to raise their voices to a false system damning millions to hell. And they should be concerned about being called “radical”? I don’t think so.
Jessica… I love the new banner! Way to go.
July 23rd, 2007 at 3:48 pm | Permalink
Adam wrote:
Agreed that we should be ‘radical’. But not ‘that radical’ (protest or disturbing muslim’s prayer if applied to my example). Depending on where they lived Christians will have different level of tolerance.
But for Christians in US, I think we have backed down way too much.
It was me who mentioned about non-christian reading the blog. And I’ve clarify that to Jessica in later comment. I guess, it’s more of my problem, that my concern was if I read such blog while a non-Christian look over my shoulder.
(solution: I should repent not to read blogs in office
(that’s me again) I read that it was Harry Reid who invited him.
~Abel
July 23rd, 2007 at 4:28 pm | Permalink
Abel:
If a Satan worshipper was asked by the Senate to lead prayer, would you sit through it? That’s really no different. If that is your definition of radical (disturbing the Hindu man’s prayer), I should hope that I myself am radical.
I only breezed over all the comments. I couldn’t read them all in their entirety. But, still, it is a very thought-provoking video no matter what side we take.
July 25th, 2007 at 5:21 am | Permalink
Jessica, thank you for the chuckle. I’ve never caught the humour in Laban’s comment before either.
Excellent post on the situation.
July 25th, 2007 at 1:17 pm | Permalink
Adam wrote:
Thanks, Adam.
Actually I still want to modify and change it somewhat. The text and height are a bit too big. But it works for now temporarily. 
By the way, thanks for all your encouragement. You’re a good brother in the Lord. God bless!
APuritanLady wrote:
Hi APuritanLady,
Thanks for visiting by my blog again. I’ve added you into my Blogroll, too.
Have a wonderful day! 
July 29th, 2007 at 10:37 am | Permalink
Very interesting and well made article.
July 29th, 2007 at 7:01 pm | Permalink
With many days to reflect on what I would have done, I think I’d have walked out of the room. That would show respect for the man praying while clearly communicating my refusal to participate in what he was doing.
But I think I would have rather said something out loud than remain silent and express implied affirmation.