The BBC uses Lent to talk about ‘abandonment’…..
But Lent is about sacrifice…the complete opposite of abandonment.
The BBC are using the story of Jesus and twisting it for their own anti-Christian…and a bonus for them….anti-Semitic/Israeli…reasons.
So now you know that Jews hate gays also, it’s not just the horrible Christians. Another strike against the Israelis for the BBC.
But listen to the broadcast and you find out Cohen was rejected by neither his family nor his community….his examples of rejection seem to come more from society in general than Judaism in particular though he does go on to tell of his anger at ‘religions’.
It seemed that a rather thin excuse to bring up this subject of ‘abandonment’ was invented by someone at the BBC as it is unrelated to Lent….promoting gay rights whilst attacking Christianity and Judaism….but not, it might be added, Islam…nowhere was Islam mentioned.
Can you imagine someone at the BBC suggesting using Muhammed as a comparison for a gay person?
The BBC are always keen to have a Muslim on the screen promoting Islam….but it seems that when the religion could be taken to task over a questionable belief the BBC brings on the fall guys…Christianity and Judaism.
Cohen states that an orthodox Jew believes the Torah is the literal word of God, a devout Catholic believes the Pope is infallible……but no mention of the Muslim belief that the Koran is the unalterable and literal word of God….that might be awkward considering the BBC’s insistence that Muslim terrorists who say they are carrying out God’s work are perverting Islam and therefore shouldn’t be considered Muslims.
Odd…follow the literal, fundamental teachings and you are ‘perverting’….demand change to the beliefs and you are ‘modernising’ and somehow you are still following the ‘real’ religion.
What is ‘Lent’ then? Seems the BBC has its own ideas….
‘Lent is a time of giving things up. For Christians, it is one way of remembering the time Jesus’ fasted in the desert and is a test of self-discipline.’
The Church of England tells us:
‘The concept of fasting for 40 days is to reflect the 40 days Jesus’ fasted in the desert. Christians treat this time as a way of preparation to Easter and fasting is a recognised way of helping people to focus on their spiritual life and prayer.’
That seems to be the approved description, pretty clear.
The BBC’s latest version however is an inversion of the meaning of Lent…Lent is no longer a time of sacrifice and self discipline but one of demands to others not to ‘abandon’ you…
‘The Christian season of Lent is traditionally a time for self-examination and reflection on universal human conditions such as temptation, betrayal, greed, forgiveness and love, as well as abandonment.’
That ‘abandonment’ seem to be just tacked on the end there in order to justify the line taken in the Lent Talk….it has a place in Christianity but it is in relation to the crucifixion not Lent.
The Mail reported the story a couple of days ago:
BBC Easter message compares treatment of gay people with the crucifixion of Christ
It’s not like the BBC to be coy about the glories of Islam…..usually they trumpet it from the rooftops….but not so keen to say that Islam is a cesspit of homophobia…..one that not only denounces gays but kills them.
And of course it’s not just Iran….it’s widespread over the Islamic world.
Ah but hang on…Islam does get a mention…or rather a say in the Lent Talks.…
Imam Asim Hafiz, Muslim Chaplain and Religious Adviser to HM Forces, who has just returned from Afghanistan, explores the total abandonment experienced by both sides as a result of war
Can’t imagine what he will say.
Maybe he will add to what the Muslim extremist Tariq Ramadan said last year when he was given a chance to deliver a Lent Talk.
Funny how any criticism of Islam is ‘Islamophobic’ but it is perfectly acceptable to relentlessly disparage and condemn Christians and Jews for their beliefs on the BBC.
How many times have you heard a BBC presenter shout down a caller or contributor when they mention Islam? It’s a regular occurrence…Islam should not be mentioned on the BBC if at all possible…not with any negative connotations anyway.
It can only be wondered at what is the effect of having a Muslim in charge of religious broadcasting at the BBC.
Surely this chap will be in favour of the ecumenical movement, won’t he?
i don t know why it is such a bbc issue to make it big
on gay abandonment, and the jewish quotient… at lent?
maybe aquil, thought he could undermine christianity again, and get a bit of added jew baiting in one move.
give the mosque some added spice for friday hate incitement hour … i mean prayers eh!
i mean i m so glad those young chaps don t take it in.
http://youtu.be/n_h5s1yjsTI
Isn’t it amazing that these young men can come out with their hateful diatribe without the least fear of recrimination – because they feel they are on the ‘right side’ of the victim equation, and unfortunately most in the MSM seem to agree. Their misinformed opinions must be seriously challenged, and there ought to be consequences for their hateful pronouncements – send them back to Iran or Pakistan, or wherever their origins are, along with the families and culture that has bred them.
it is patently absurd, hatred because of ahem “stealing” anothers land?.
Astounding intellectual ignorance, of history, smacks of the usual islamic brainwashing of innocent minds, where there is nothing before islam, nothing else but islam etc.
The hypocisy as they themselves are part of another self serving sh-thole of an islamic enclave, in Holland! … utterly gaulling, what a poisonous ideology it is.
You notice the Dutch interviewer describes these Muslims as “Extreme Right” (i.e. in BBC EU speak Nationalists) then at the end he drops in the claim that they hate Dutch people almost as much as they hate the Jews.
Not a hint of any self-reflection by this Leftist on his part in advocating multiculturalism.
Truly Alan, one of your most pathetic efforts so far.
“The BBC uses Lent to talk about ‘abandonment’”
“In the third of this year’s Lent Talks, journalist and broadcaster Benjamin Cohen reflects on the fear of being abandoned by his own Jewish community, for being gay.”
“But Lent is about sacrifice…the complete opposite of abandonment.”
You don’t say.
“The BBC are using the story of Jesus and twisting it for their own anti-Christian…and a bonus for them….anti-Semitic/Israeli…reasons.”
Yeah, the whole subject was brought up just so that Benjamin Cohen could talk about how he wasn’t rejected by his Jewish parents for being gay – which is solo anti-Semitic / anti-Israei! [boggle!]
And of course anti-Christian by inviting:
Loretta Minghella, Christian
Alexander McCall Smith, Christian
Helena Kennedy, Christian
to talk on exactly the same subject.
And of course, it’s all the Muslim’s fault, because he’s a Muslim.
What has a Jew feeling abandoned by his parents etc, got to do with the Christian season of Lent?
If the fact he is gay is the opportunity to lecture Jews and Christians on the necessity of tolerance for others – why not include the Muslims in the debate.? In the interest of fairness and equality they should be brought to the table to discuss their intolerance should they not?
However, it appears that the BBC does not want to have a fair and open discussion with all religions, just some … now why would that be Dez? Could it have something to do with the incredible fact that a national broadcaster of a country with a national state religion has a representative of a different religion as their head of Religious broadcasting? Or is that something we just have to tolerate?
In which case I await with bated breath the appointment of a Christian as Head of Religious Broadcasting in Saudi Arabia … I won’t hold my breath though!
What has a Jew feeling abandoned by his parents etc, got to do with the Christian season of Lent?
You could listen and find out, perhaps?
Cohen comes from an Othodox Jewish family, but was educated in a Catholic school. His contemplative essay about approaching the Easter story from that point of view was an interesting listen.
I found that the background was interesting until he started on his homosexuality when I lost interest and, eventually, switched off.
“His contemplative essay about approaching the Easter story from that point of view was an interesting listen.”
you’re not very difficult to impress
hey spaz
can we have an orthodox rabbi on to emote about ramadan then?
bog off twat
The objective voice of reason.
dezscottycoldtitz … hmm
the 3 unwise monkeys of political correctness eh!…
wonderful how a drone on gay abandonment brings you immediately
off the “ejector seat” isn t it..
yeah
see no sense,hear no sense,speak no sense
or even dumb,dumber and dumbest
althought it’s hard to arrange the order,although cold titz has a strong claim at the minute for king of the thickos
Its quesionable if someone from The Quisling Party like Helena Kennedy can be seen as anything more than a nominal Christian, and certainly someone who should not be given a platform on The Quisling Broadcasting Corporation on the basis of being a Christian.
Say The Quisling Party’s obsession with their economic reductionist position of the human being, hardly includes concepts of spiritual salvation through Christ.
Or one can go to the commandment ‘Thou Shall not Covert thy Neighbours Goods’, not only does this seem to rule out income redistribution through punitive taxation, it also pretty much rules out even contemplating such an idea.
Helena Kennedy’s piece was essentially that the ECHR was a wonderful thing and that British Home Secretarys, (could that be Mrs. May?), should steer clear of interfering.
Part of her logic was that British lawyers were originally involved in drafting the convention so by definition we can have no complaint. Of course if all Britons thought the same we wouldn’t need parliament or lawyers would we?
I’m not quite sure where Christianity or Lent fitted in, perhaps because Christ would vote Labour?
My wider concern is that the BBC gives platforms such as this and “Thought for the Day” to the favoured few to put forward ‘the message’ with no need for balance, challenge or right of reply. As a small part of the output the idea of allowing an individual to put forward their own ideas is not a bad thing BUT not when the ideas come from the same pool. That is just propaganda.
Dez, you illustrated the point very well there. Every religion, without exception is against homosexuality. But when the question arises, they interview every religion except muslims, who actually preach to KILL gays. Biased, see?
‘Biased, see?
Careful.
Only those with special ‘something’ (‘powers’… ‘dispensation’… ‘needs’?) are meant to question the anointed ones.
So it is written.
Now, where’s that honey pot?
The buzzing is strong in the Farce with some here.
tsk tsk dez … Truly, one of your most pathetic efforts so far… 😀
and so fast, on alans post
straight 😀 there with your two buddies faster than the brighton chapter of the sugar plum fairies
so … obviously no valentines card still smarts
As you say, who would know the head was a Muslim.
Three hundred years after the Enlightenment and we have the disgusting spectacle of the BBC voluntarily adopting the status of dhimmi.
When you watch a simple news report on the BBC about a Muslim terror plot and don’t hear the word “Muslim” or “Islam” you truly feel what a foreign place Britain has become.
There’s a great take on that story in: “BBC Dumb Diversity” at:
http://john-moloney.blogspot.com/2013/03/bbc-dumb-delicacy.html
All during the troubles in Ulster, the IRA were referred to as Nationalists and UDA(et al) as Unionist. The BBC never uses religious tags.
Now you know. It’s policy because your assumption is that all moslems are of one mind and culture which shows utter and total ignorance.
The fact that most IRA members were from the Catholic community and the UDA from the Protestant one doesn’t mean they were committing their terror in the name of their religion and using verses from the Bible to justify their crimes.
This is where they differ from those who murder in the name of Islam quoting their own religious text to justify their evil.
Not all Muslims support this terrorism, but it would appear from a number of polls conducted amongst the Muslim community that there is a sizeable minority who don’t necessarily condemn the actions.
Yes, Demon is right, the flaw in this comparison is that the IRA did not seek to impose the rule of the Papacy on the UK. They wanted a united Ireland. Extreme Islamism seeks to impose Sharia Law globally. This difference is not widely appreciated.
Spot on. If the Muslims in Britain want to live here then they cannot remain silent when they know or suspect that fellow Muslims are plotting terrorist activity. To do so is to give the terrorist tacit support.
If they do remain silent they they cannot expect the British people to welcome them and want them in their communities.
Dez.
Gun.
Foot.
Bang!
Ouch.
Again.
For Dez read Colditz.
Not that it matters.
Yup, no mention of these guys’ religion. Must be because they’re Muslim. Bloody Muslims.
http://bbc.in/XUqhiJ
yes idiot
that’ll be irish republican murdering scum who were born into roman catholic families and who probably haven’t darkened the doors of a chapel since they were 15
and let’s not forget-the IRA studiously ignored the words of their pope who tild them to stop killing people
sounds like devout devotees there doesn’t it
what a complete empty head
if the beeb are paying you to troll here as part of your so called job,I recommend they deliver a swingeing pay cut-or even redundancy…….much like most of your brain is redundant
Your link page shows two white men, who it would appear are probably not moslems…and sure enough, further down the page there is a mention of dissident republican groups.
Congratulations for publicising them. It must have been difficult, because like Labour’s Eastleigh candidate, you no doubt support the killing of British citizens.
And the blaming of grooming gang victims too. Mustn’t upset the moslems, eh?
it’s a good job that christians don’t take offence like muslims do,otherwise there would be some beeboids carrying their heads under their arms for daring to put one in charge of programming christian content
how very fortunate for those like dhimmi dez
I like the alliterative nature of that name. Inbbc has it’s own self imposed dhimitude. Totally beyond me to understand just why, but that’s what they have taken on.
So you are advocating decapitation of anyone who disagrees with you.
And you call yourself a Christian!
Our Lord said turn the other cheek. Pity you never understood what it meant.
The word hypocrite comes to mind. Although I doubt you would understand it or what the word bias means.
Colditz, please quote him where he is advocating decapitation. If you can’t find a quote then you need to apologise to him straight away.
Of course you BBC people are taught by your masters never to apologise for anything.
Don’t push them too far – they have a track record of shipping in mafia back up if they’re having a particularly bad day.
Oh now this is funny cladballz is yelping about a supposed link to a maybe could have said comment about ‘advocating decapitation ‘ yet stands in all his weakness defending men who actually kill every day ?
Morearsey was very wrong !
cold titz
i don’t know whether that inane/insanr remark is one of your all time stupidest or unintentionally funniest
the most crassly stupid poster of the day……..and that’s beating competition like handbag scott and dhimmi dez
an apology is not needed demon……..
his utter brainless stupidity is an apology in itself
Turning the other cheek is a bit of a problem if you’ve just had your head cut off! How many videos would you like to see of that happening and what do you think the savages would be saying as they do their barbarian savage acts?
Want a clue?
Cildtits, you really are the thickest poster on this forum, not once was decapitation advocated, it was a rolley eyes statement, sarcastic….understand?
No, you don’t, do you?
Computers should be taken away from the mentally unstable…what happens if the fool gets his hands on GTA5?….he’ll be out murdering, and stealing cars…(that was another rolley eyed statement….geddit?)
For the life of me I do not undestand what Lent has got to do with anything, other than as a preparation for Easter, and so of importance only to those who regard the death of Jesus as being relevant to them.
Why a Jew, or a Moslem for that matter, has any opinion about it, or can learn anything from it, I cannot fathom.
When was the last time we heard from a priest or rabbi about what Ramadan means to them, or from a priest or imam about Yom Kippur?
Don’t give them any ideas.
I doubt whether the Cohen does much atoning at Yom Kippur. He’s too busy blaming other people for their sins.
“On the Day of Atonement, the head of religious programming asks if Israelis will ever repent of being pigs and monkeys”
How often did our Ben mention Jesus then?
I recall that it took 13 mins 43 secs into Helena Kennedys self pity of a “Lent talk” before I heard the name of Schweppes(shhh..you know who!)
I gather Ben is the reason for the Easter season, not that little chap on the top of Jay-Zs fashion accessory.
Being crucified is of course …”disconfiting and challenging”…but could Jesus have coped with Ben being blanked at a Millwall FC convention.?…now THAT is excruciating in its literal sense!
THAT is the level of theology we`re getting these days…none of that John Lennox stuff…our Muslim Muslin bag could not handle such strong meat!
Oh get to church, chack on JP2 or Benedict,,,anything but Giles and the Gimps that are “religious commentators” at the BBC these days.
Hell…even Savile was more theological than bloody Cohen and Keenedy etc!
Posted this elsewhere, but seems more pertinent here.
BBC – The Wholly Beeble replacing the Holy Bible
The story in today’s Mail concerns the BBC airing a Jewish Gay campaigner apparently telling of his experiences in ‘coming out of the closet’. The programme the BBC uses for this is one of a series leading up to Easter called ‘Lent Talks’.
So let’s see how fitting is this topic for what one would expect from such a programme.
In my limited understanding of religion, Lent is the period leading up to Easter where devout Christians use abstinence to identify and empathise with the trials of Christ before he was crucified.
An interesting word in English is ‘atonement’, which some may recognise from the Jewish ‘day of atonement’ known more commonly by the Jewish term of Yom Kippur. This is the day when devout Jews fast for 24 hours and ask God’s forgiveness for their sins. The reason I mention it is their ‘atonement’ leads to ‘at-one-ment’, or harmony. It appears as Lent has the same philosophy behind it.
So looking at how the BBC has covered this period in recent years, with their Lent Talks, there would appear to be a justifiable concern in what they deem to be appropriate speakers.
2010 is where it seems to go off the rails with one of the speakers being Will Self.
The Lent Talks for 2010 began on February 24 with Will Self giving a talk on religion and the arts, and the spiritual sense that one can feel in church buildings. Maajid Naawaz, the director of the Quilliam Foundation, gave the Lent Talks on March 10 2010. Alastair McGrath presented the Lent Talks on March 24 2010, on the relationship between religion and science – he mentioned Karl Popper, Peter Medawar and Sir Isaac Newton.
Anybody not familiar with this odious individual can consider themselves lucky. I find his being an insult to humanity so I’ve no doubt many Christians would have been perturbed by the BBC selecting him for this particular role.
The first 40 seconds will give you an idea of how Self regards religion:
In terms of emotional development, he is not anybody that is really fit to be giving any kind of spiritual inspiration:
Self’s parents separated when he was nine, and divorced when he was eighteen.[13] Despite the intellectual encouragement given by his parents, he was an emotionally confused and self-destructive child, harming himself with cigarette ends and knives before getting into drugs
What on earth was the BBC thinking? Except to deprecate Christianity further.
Not much written for 2011 – The Lent Talks in 2011 began on March 16 2011. Ian Blair was the first speaker and talked about religion in public life.
For 2012 certainly one of the names jumps out at me as a strange choice:
The Lent Talks in 2012 began on February 29 2012. Speakers in the most recent (i.e. 2012) series included John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University; Tariq Ramadan, Professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford University and Linda Woodhead, lecturer in Religious Studies at The University of Lancaster.
Now we come to 2013. I presume because the BBC has gotten away with it for a few years now they decided to ‘go for broke’.
Not just a Jew
Not just a Gay campaigner
but also somebody who is clearly disaffected with religion, much like Self, as this Mail article shows.
If I were a devout Christian, and this is what I was being offered: Gay rights campaigner Benjamin Cohen will make the comments, likening the experience of young gay men to that of Jesus on the cross…
I would feel rightfully insulted at the BBC choice of voice for this period.
Let’s see them do something similar at Ramadan for the Muslims.
Is my eyesight failing me or is the young red-green-and-white chappie in the photo stark bollock naked?
If so, anyone know why?