EAUK.org
Share
The Blasphemy Debate - podcast
Download: The Blasphemy Debate - podcast 
(Note: Right-Click / Save Target As...)
The Blasphemy Debate - PDF
Other FNT's you may be interested in
| ||||
Topic(s) for this FNT
Data Protection Act 1998: By providing your personal details you agree to allow the Evangelical Alliance to contact you by mail, email, telephone or SMS text message in connection with its charitable purposes. The Evangelical Alliance does not make personal data available to external individuals or organisations.
The Blasphemy Debate
11 January 2008
Does God need legal protection? The answer is quite clearly no, as the former Archbishop of Canterbury articulated this week, when questioned about the potential abolition of the blasphemy laws. Many question whether the law is still relevant today: the last man to be jailed under the law was in 1922 and the only other successful case since was in 1977, with the person in question receiving a suspended sentence and fine.
The debate may well centre around the extent to which religion still has a place in public life. Yet evidence suggests that the UK is far from a secular state with many of our values and morals deriving from a Christian source. As such, the blasphemy laws may not be so much about providing legal protection, but protecting values that are considered to be important. Would abolition of the blasphemy laws suggest there is no longer a place for respect for the sacred in society and that offence and abuse of religion is now acceptable?
The heart of the matter is that Christians believe Jesus Christ is a real person. Few historians would deny his existence in Nazareth 2,000 years ago. Indeed, it is often quoted that there is 10 times more historical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ than Julius Caesar. And in light of the resurrection, Christians believe that Jesus is alive today and that they can have a personal relationship with him. Thus the concern of many is not the critique of religious belief, but the abuse of a sacred person who has precious significance and relationship to millions of people. Similarly, I suspect if someone was to insult your parents, spouse, children, best friend or anyone else of importance to you, you wouldn't take too kindly to it.
Many of the Sudanese people didn't take too kindly to Gillian Gibbons naming a teddy bear Muhammad and called for her execution. We no doubt thought this was a major over-reaction, yet it showed just how revered and respected the prophet Muhammad is in Islam. On a smaller scale, many of us may well feel frustrated when friends simply use the name of Jesus Christ as a swear word. But we probably worry about coming across as over-pious if we say anything about it.
The blasphemy laws may seem outdated and are unlikely to be used again. We may accept that they are past their sell-by date. However, it would be worth pointing out to friends who ask that it is not the critique of religion that is objectionable, but the reviling and abuse of a real, living person who to us is of great significance and importance - just as you would object to such abuse of a family member or friend. And you might like to suggest that they find out for themselves why Jesus is significant and important to so many millions of believers all around the world.
Susannah Clark, Public Theology Researcher
Latest comments
:
(The views below are the authors', and not necessarily those of the Evangelical Alliance.)
| Written by linda hawksley on 14 January 2008 at 16.12 |
| Thank you for the article on the blasphemy debate. It made such sense to be written in terms of our family and friends, that I think I could much more clearly make my points known and understood. keep up the great work |
| Written by Bill Smith on 14 January 2008 at 12.26 |
| What interesting and diverse comments we have on this topic. None more true than that God can look after Himself.However, should a family member be verbally abused, I doubt we would allow it to pass without some refernce to respect or feelings.Perhaps, for most of us the big issue is fear.We are scared of how we are percieved as christians, so we keep our mouths shut. This tells people that our wonderful loving saviour is not really that important to us after all.He was 'despised and rejected'. We should be following in His steps.Isaiah has a word,ch.51:12-13, 'who are you that you should be afraid of a man who will die....and you forget the Lord your maker...The fear of man is the biggest snare to believers.Let them think what they like. At least they will be confronted with knowing that Jesus really is the very reason why we live. The alternative is that horrible 'squishy' mess of compromise and guilt or shame that we know Jesus is being ridiculed, but we keep our mouth shut.We live in days that demand a body of believers who care only for Jesus and His Glory. Let your light so shine. |
| Written by Mr M Oakley on 12 January 2008 at 21.00 |
| Firstly thank you for a valuable service, helping us to think biblically. While I agree with Susannah's comment about the Sudanese teddy bear story I think we should avoid too much comparison between the behaviour of adherents to other faiths as against that of Chritians. We have the blessing of access to the holy spirit, so we have no excuse for behaving like them. I think that the comment by Stephen Hayes has really 'hit the button'. I think I can agree with almost all that he has written. In contrast, I doubt that deriding Christ has resulted in much of the slide into sin in the UK. It is much more down to a weak witness by the church, including prayer for MPs. Thank you for the space to make this comment. |
There are 8 additional comments for this page.
Comments for this article are now closed
