This is why the war must be won...
...or in time this too will come to our shore
Thursday, April 26, 2007
From the Protestant Church of Smyrna
A letter to the Global Church from The Protestant Church of Smyrna
Dear friends,
This past week has been filled with much sorrow. Many of you have heard by now of our devastating loss here in an event that took place in Malatya, a Turkish province 300 miles northeast of Antioch, the city where believers were first called Christians (Acts 11:26).
On Wednesday morning, April 18, 2007, 46 year old German missionary and father of three Tilman Geske prepared to go to his office, kissing his wife goodbye taking a moment to hug his son and give him the priceless memory, "Goodbye, son. I love you."
Tilman rented an office space from Zirve Publishing where he was preparing notes for the new Turkish Study Bible. Zirve was also the location of the Malatya Evangelist Church office. A ministry of the church, Zirve prints and distributes Christian literature to Malatya and nearby cities in Eastern Turkey. In another area of town, 35 year old Pastor Necati Aydin, father of two, said goodbye to his wife, leaving for the office as well. They had a morning Bible Study and prayer meeting that some other believers in town would also be attending. Ugur Yuksel likewise made his way to the Bible study.
None of these three men knew that what awaited them at the Bible study was the ultimate testing and application of their faith, which would conclude with their entrance into glory to receive their crown of righteousness from Christ and honor from all the saints awaiting them in the Lord’s presence.
On the other side of town, ten young men all under 20 years old put into place final arrangements for their ultimate act of faith, living out their love for Allah and hatred of infidels who they felt undermined Islam.
On Resurrection Sunday, five of these men had been to a by-invitation-only evangelistic service that Pastor Necati and his men had arranged at a hotel conference room in the city. The men were known to the believers as "seekers." No one knows what happened in the hearts of those men as they listened to the gospel. Were they touched by the Holy Spirit? Were they convicted of sin? Did they hear the gospel in their heart of hearts? Today we only have the beginning of their story.
These young men, one of whom is the son of a mayor in the Province of Malatya, are part of a tarikat, or a group of "faithful believers" in Islam. Tarikat membership is highly respected here; it’s like a fraternity membership. In fact, it is said that no one can get into public office without membership in a tarikat. These young men all lived in the same dorm, all preparing for university entrance exams.
The young men got guns, breadknives, ropes and towels ready for their final act of service to Allah. They knew there would be a lot of blood. They arrived in time for the Bible Study, around 10 o’clock.
They arrived, and apparently the Bible Study began. Reportedly, after Necati read a chapter from the Bible the assault began. The boys tied Ugur, Necati, and Tilman’s hands and feet to chairs and as they videoed their work on their cellphones, they tortured our brothers for almost three hours*
[Details of the torture--
* Tilman was stabbed 156 times, Necati 99 times and Ugur’s stabs were too numerous to count. They were disemboweled, and their intestines sliced up in front of their eyes. They were emasculated and watched as those body parts were destroyed. Fingers were chopped off, their noses and mouths and anuses were sliced open. Possibly the worst part was watching as their brothers were likewise tortured. Finally, their throats were sliced from ear to ear, heads practically decapitated.]
Neighbors in workplaces near the printhouse said later they had heard yelling, but assumed the owners were having a domestic argument so they did not respond.
Meanwhile, another believer Gokhan and his wife had a leisurely morning. He slept in till 10, ate a long breakfast and finally around 12:30 he and his wife arrived at the office. The door was locked from the inside, and his key would not work. He phoned and though it had connection on his end he did not hear the phone ringing inside. He called cell phones of his brothers and finally Ugur answered his phone. "We are not at the office. Go to the hotel meeting. We are there. We will come there," he said cryptically. As Ugur spoke Gokhan heard in the telephone’s background weeping and a strange snarling sound.
He phoned the police, and the nearest officer arrived in about five minutes. He pounded on the door, "Police, open up!" Initially the officer thought it was a domestic disturbance. At that point they heard another snarl and a gurgling moan. The police understood that sound as human suffering, prepared the clip in his gun and tried over and over again to burst through the door. One of the frightened assailants unlocked the door for the policeman, who entered to find a grisly scene.
Tilman and Necati had been slaughtered, practically decapitated with their necks slit from ear to ear. Ugur’s throat was likewise slit and he was barely alive.
Three assailants in front of the policeman dropped their weapons.
Meanwhile Gokhan heard a sound of yelling in the street. Someone had fallen from their third story office. Running down, he found a man on the ground, whom he later recognized, named Emre Gunaydin. He had massive head trauma and, strangely, was snarling. He had tried to climb down the drainpipe to escape, and losing his balance had plummeted to the ground. It seems that he was the main leader of the attackers. Another assailant was found hiding on a lower balcony.
To untangle the web we need to back up six years. In April 2001, the National Security Council of Turkey (Milli Guvenlik Kurulu) began to consider evangelical Christians as a threat to national security, on equal footing as Al Quaida and PKK terrorism. Statements made in the press by political leaders, columnists and commentators have fueled a hatred against missionaries who they claim bribe young people to change their religion.
After that decision in 2001, attacks and threats on churches, pastors and Christians began. Bombings, physical attacks, verbal and written abuse are only some of the ways Christians are being targetted. Most significant is the use of media propaganda.
From December 2005, after having a long meeting regarding the Christian threat, the wife of Former Prime Minister Ecevit, historian Ilber Ortayli, Professor Hasan Unsal, Politician Ahmet Tan and writer/propogandist Aytunc Altindal, each in their own profession began a campaign to bring the public’s attention to the looming threat of Christians who sought to "buy their children’s souls". Hidden cameras in churches have taken church service footage and used it sensationally to promote fear and antagonism toward Christianity.
In an official televised response from Ankara, the Interior Minister of Turkey smirked as he spoke of the attacks on our brothers. Amid public outrage and protests against the event and in favor of freedom of religion and freedom of thought, media and official comments ring with the same message, "We hope you have learned your lesson. We do not want Christians here."
It appears that this was an organized attack initiated by an unknown adult tarikat leader. As in the Hrant Dink murder in January 2007, and a Catholic priest Andrea Santoro in February 2006, minors are being used to commit religious murders because public sympathy for youth is strong and they face lower penalties than an adult convicted of the same crime. Even the parents of these children are in favor of the acts. The mother of the 16 year old boy who killed the Catholic priest Andrea Santoro looked at the cameras as her son was going to prison and said, "he will serve time for Allah."
The young men involved in the killing are currently in custody. Today news reported that they would be tried as terrorists, so their age would not affect the strict penalty. Assailant Emre Gunaydin is still in intensive care. The investigation centers around him and his contacts and they say will fall apart if he does not recover.
The Church in Turkey responded in a way that honored God as hundreds of believers and dozens of pastors flew in as fast as they could to stand by the small church of Malatya and encourage the believers, take care of legal issues, and represent Christians to the media.
When Susanne Tilman expressed her wish to bury her husband in Malatya, the Governor tried to stop it, and when he realized he could not stop it, a rumor was spread that "it is a sin to dig a grave for a Christian." In the end, in an undertaking that should be remembered in Christian history forever, the men from the church in Adana (near Tarsus), grabbed shovels and dug a grave for their slain brother in an un-tended hundred year old Armenian graveyard.
Ugur was buried by his family in an Alevi Muslim ceremony in his hometown of Elazig, his believing fiance watching from the shadows as his family and friends refused to accept in death the faith Ugur had so long professed and died for.
Necati’s funeral took place in his hometown of Izmir, the city where he came to faith. The darkness does not understand the light. Though the churches expressed their forgiveness for the event, Christians were not to be trusted. Before they would load the coffin onto the plane from Malatya, it went through two separate xray exams to make sure it was not loaded with explosives. This is not a usual procedure for Muslim coffins.
Necati’s funeral was a beautiful event. Like a glimpse of heaven, thousands of Turkish Christians and missionaries came to show their love for Christ, and their honor for this man chosen to die for Christ. Necati’s wife Shemsa told the world, "His death was full of meaning, because he died for Christ and he lived for Christ… Necati was a gift from God. I feel honored that he was in my life, I feel crowned with honor. I want to be worthy of that honor."
Boldly the believers took their stand at Necati’s funeral, facing the risks of being seen publicly and likewise becoming targets. As expected, the anti-terror police attended and videotaped everyone attending the funeral for their future use. The service took place outside at Buca Baptist church, and he was buried in a small Christian graveyard in the outskirts of Izmir.
Two assistant Governors of Izmir were there solemnly watching the event from the front row. Dozens of news agencies were there documenting the events with live news and photographs. Who knows the impact the funeral had on those watching? This is the beginning of their story as well. Pray for them.
In an act that hit front pages in the largest newspapers in Turkey, Susanne Tilman in a television interview expressed her forgiveness. She did not want revenge, she told reporters. "Oh God, forgive them for they know not what they do," she said, wholeheartedly agreeing with the words of Christ on Calvary (Luke 23:34).
In a country where blood-for-blood revenge is as normal as breathing, many many reports have come to the attention of the church of how this comment of Susanne Tilman has changed lives. One columnist wrote of her comment, "She said in one sentence what 1000 missionaries in 1000 years could never do."
The missionaries in Malatya will most likely move out, as their families and children have become publicly identified as targets to the hostile city. The remaining 10 believers are in hiding. What will happen to this church, this light in the darkness? Most likely it will go underground. Pray for wisdom, that Turkish brothers from other cities will go to lead the leaderless church. Should we not be concerned for that great city of Malatya, a city that does not know what it is doing? (Jonah 4:11)
When our Pastor Fikret Bocek went with a brother to give a statement to the Security Directorate on Monday they were ushered into the Anti-Terror Department. On the wall was a huge chart covering the whole wall listing all the terrorist cells in Izmir, categorized. In one prominent column were listed all the evangelical churches in Izmir. The darkness does not understand the light. "These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also." (Acts 17:6)
Please pray for the Church in Turkey. "Don’t pray against persecution, pray for perseverence," urges Pastor Fikret Bocek.
The Church is better having lost our brothers; the fruit in our lives, the renewed faith, the burning desire to spread the gospel to quench more darkness in Malatya …all these are not to be regretted. Pray that we stand strong against external opposition and especially pray that we stand strong against internal struggles with sin, our true debilitating weakness.
This we know. Christ Jesus was there when our brothers were giving their lives for Him. He was there, like He was when Stephen was being stoned in the sight of Saul of Tarsus.
Someday the video of the deaths of our brothers may reveal more to us about the strength that we know Christ gave them to endure their last cross, about the peace the Spirit of God endowed them with to suffer for their beloved Savior. But we know He did not leave their side. We know their minds were full of Scripture strengthening them to endure, as darkness tried to subdue the unsubduable Light of the Gospel. We know, in whatever way they were able, with a look or a word, they encouraged one another to stand strong. We know they knew they would soon be with Christ.
We don’t know the details. We don’t know the kind of justice that will or will not be served on this earth.
But we pray-- and urge you to pray-- that someday at least one of those five boys will come to faith because of the testimony in death of Tilman Geske, who gave his life as a missionary to his beloved Turks, and the testimonies in death of Necati Aydin and Ugur Yuksel, the first martyrs for Christ out of the Turkish Church.
Reported by Darlene N. Bocek (24 April 2007)
-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Please please please pass this on to as many praying Christians as you can, in as many countries as you can. Please always keep the heading as "From the Protestant Church of Smyrna" with this contact information: [izmirprotestan] {at} *gmail* dot com.
http://www.izmirprotestan.org
_____________________________
Personal Note:
Even if you're not a Christian, this kind of irrational behavior should trouble you about Islam... Not all Muslims, but certainly the ones who wish to see the Great Satan destroyed. Irrespective of the reasons we are in Iraq now, this is a war that cannot be lost. Not if we truly wish to see our children live in a country free of this kind of hatred and intolerance. It's bad enough that the government actively seeks to erase Christianity from the forefront of society... it's bad enough that there are organizations today dedicated to tearing down everything even remotely 'Christian' in this nation, but the last thing we need-- as a nation, not simply the Church --is to invite the peaceful religion of Islam to do unto us as we do unto ourselves... only worse.
Prayer is all well and good. We SHOULD pray for the salvation of Muslims, we should seek to convert them, but we should pray for the Church especially, that they might endure and persevere what is happening in Turkey and the rest of the world. Or one day this hatred will come to American shores.
Thanks to Ms. Green for pointing the way
Please pray for the Church in Turkey and elsewhere.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
From the Protestant Church of Smyrna
A letter to the Global Church from The Protestant Church of Smyrna
Dear friends,
This past week has been filled with much sorrow. Many of you have heard by now of our devastating loss here in an event that took place in Malatya, a Turkish province 300 miles northeast of Antioch, the city where believers were first called Christians (Acts 11:26).
On Wednesday morning, April 18, 2007, 46 year old German missionary and father of three Tilman Geske prepared to go to his office, kissing his wife goodbye taking a moment to hug his son and give him the priceless memory, "Goodbye, son. I love you."
Tilman rented an office space from Zirve Publishing where he was preparing notes for the new Turkish Study Bible. Zirve was also the location of the Malatya Evangelist Church office. A ministry of the church, Zirve prints and distributes Christian literature to Malatya and nearby cities in Eastern Turkey. In another area of town, 35 year old Pastor Necati Aydin, father of two, said goodbye to his wife, leaving for the office as well. They had a morning Bible Study and prayer meeting that some other believers in town would also be attending. Ugur Yuksel likewise made his way to the Bible study.
None of these three men knew that what awaited them at the Bible study was the ultimate testing and application of their faith, which would conclude with their entrance into glory to receive their crown of righteousness from Christ and honor from all the saints awaiting them in the Lord’s presence.
On the other side of town, ten young men all under 20 years old put into place final arrangements for their ultimate act of faith, living out their love for Allah and hatred of infidels who they felt undermined Islam.
On Resurrection Sunday, five of these men had been to a by-invitation-only evangelistic service that Pastor Necati and his men had arranged at a hotel conference room in the city. The men were known to the believers as "seekers." No one knows what happened in the hearts of those men as they listened to the gospel. Were they touched by the Holy Spirit? Were they convicted of sin? Did they hear the gospel in their heart of hearts? Today we only have the beginning of their story.
These young men, one of whom is the son of a mayor in the Province of Malatya, are part of a tarikat, or a group of "faithful believers" in Islam. Tarikat membership is highly respected here; it’s like a fraternity membership. In fact, it is said that no one can get into public office without membership in a tarikat. These young men all lived in the same dorm, all preparing for university entrance exams.
The young men got guns, breadknives, ropes and towels ready for their final act of service to Allah. They knew there would be a lot of blood. They arrived in time for the Bible Study, around 10 o’clock.
They arrived, and apparently the Bible Study began. Reportedly, after Necati read a chapter from the Bible the assault began. The boys tied Ugur, Necati, and Tilman’s hands and feet to chairs and as they videoed their work on their cellphones, they tortured our brothers for almost three hours*
[Details of the torture--
* Tilman was stabbed 156 times, Necati 99 times and Ugur’s stabs were too numerous to count. They were disemboweled, and their intestines sliced up in front of their eyes. They were emasculated and watched as those body parts were destroyed. Fingers were chopped off, their noses and mouths and anuses were sliced open. Possibly the worst part was watching as their brothers were likewise tortured. Finally, their throats were sliced from ear to ear, heads practically decapitated.]
Neighbors in workplaces near the printhouse said later they had heard yelling, but assumed the owners were having a domestic argument so they did not respond.
Meanwhile, another believer Gokhan and his wife had a leisurely morning. He slept in till 10, ate a long breakfast and finally around 12:30 he and his wife arrived at the office. The door was locked from the inside, and his key would not work. He phoned and though it had connection on his end he did not hear the phone ringing inside. He called cell phones of his brothers and finally Ugur answered his phone. "We are not at the office. Go to the hotel meeting. We are there. We will come there," he said cryptically. As Ugur spoke Gokhan heard in the telephone’s background weeping and a strange snarling sound.
He phoned the police, and the nearest officer arrived in about five minutes. He pounded on the door, "Police, open up!" Initially the officer thought it was a domestic disturbance. At that point they heard another snarl and a gurgling moan. The police understood that sound as human suffering, prepared the clip in his gun and tried over and over again to burst through the door. One of the frightened assailants unlocked the door for the policeman, who entered to find a grisly scene.
Tilman and Necati had been slaughtered, practically decapitated with their necks slit from ear to ear. Ugur’s throat was likewise slit and he was barely alive.
Three assailants in front of the policeman dropped their weapons.
Meanwhile Gokhan heard a sound of yelling in the street. Someone had fallen from their third story office. Running down, he found a man on the ground, whom he later recognized, named Emre Gunaydin. He had massive head trauma and, strangely, was snarling. He had tried to climb down the drainpipe to escape, and losing his balance had plummeted to the ground. It seems that he was the main leader of the attackers. Another assailant was found hiding on a lower balcony.
To untangle the web we need to back up six years. In April 2001, the National Security Council of Turkey (Milli Guvenlik Kurulu) began to consider evangelical Christians as a threat to national security, on equal footing as Al Quaida and PKK terrorism. Statements made in the press by political leaders, columnists and commentators have fueled a hatred against missionaries who they claim bribe young people to change their religion.
After that decision in 2001, attacks and threats on churches, pastors and Christians began. Bombings, physical attacks, verbal and written abuse are only some of the ways Christians are being targetted. Most significant is the use of media propaganda.
From December 2005, after having a long meeting regarding the Christian threat, the wife of Former Prime Minister Ecevit, historian Ilber Ortayli, Professor Hasan Unsal, Politician Ahmet Tan and writer/propogandist Aytunc Altindal, each in their own profession began a campaign to bring the public’s attention to the looming threat of Christians who sought to "buy their children’s souls". Hidden cameras in churches have taken church service footage and used it sensationally to promote fear and antagonism toward Christianity.
In an official televised response from Ankara, the Interior Minister of Turkey smirked as he spoke of the attacks on our brothers. Amid public outrage and protests against the event and in favor of freedom of religion and freedom of thought, media and official comments ring with the same message, "We hope you have learned your lesson. We do not want Christians here."
It appears that this was an organized attack initiated by an unknown adult tarikat leader. As in the Hrant Dink murder in January 2007, and a Catholic priest Andrea Santoro in February 2006, minors are being used to commit religious murders because public sympathy for youth is strong and they face lower penalties than an adult convicted of the same crime. Even the parents of these children are in favor of the acts. The mother of the 16 year old boy who killed the Catholic priest Andrea Santoro looked at the cameras as her son was going to prison and said, "he will serve time for Allah."
The young men involved in the killing are currently in custody. Today news reported that they would be tried as terrorists, so their age would not affect the strict penalty. Assailant Emre Gunaydin is still in intensive care. The investigation centers around him and his contacts and they say will fall apart if he does not recover.
The Church in Turkey responded in a way that honored God as hundreds of believers and dozens of pastors flew in as fast as they could to stand by the small church of Malatya and encourage the believers, take care of legal issues, and represent Christians to the media.
When Susanne Tilman expressed her wish to bury her husband in Malatya, the Governor tried to stop it, and when he realized he could not stop it, a rumor was spread that "it is a sin to dig a grave for a Christian." In the end, in an undertaking that should be remembered in Christian history forever, the men from the church in Adana (near Tarsus), grabbed shovels and dug a grave for their slain brother in an un-tended hundred year old Armenian graveyard.
Ugur was buried by his family in an Alevi Muslim ceremony in his hometown of Elazig, his believing fiance watching from the shadows as his family and friends refused to accept in death the faith Ugur had so long professed and died for.
Necati’s funeral took place in his hometown of Izmir, the city where he came to faith. The darkness does not understand the light. Though the churches expressed their forgiveness for the event, Christians were not to be trusted. Before they would load the coffin onto the plane from Malatya, it went through two separate xray exams to make sure it was not loaded with explosives. This is not a usual procedure for Muslim coffins.
Necati’s funeral was a beautiful event. Like a glimpse of heaven, thousands of Turkish Christians and missionaries came to show their love for Christ, and their honor for this man chosen to die for Christ. Necati’s wife Shemsa told the world, "His death was full of meaning, because he died for Christ and he lived for Christ… Necati was a gift from God. I feel honored that he was in my life, I feel crowned with honor. I want to be worthy of that honor."
Boldly the believers took their stand at Necati’s funeral, facing the risks of being seen publicly and likewise becoming targets. As expected, the anti-terror police attended and videotaped everyone attending the funeral for their future use. The service took place outside at Buca Baptist church, and he was buried in a small Christian graveyard in the outskirts of Izmir.
Two assistant Governors of Izmir were there solemnly watching the event from the front row. Dozens of news agencies were there documenting the events with live news and photographs. Who knows the impact the funeral had on those watching? This is the beginning of their story as well. Pray for them.
In an act that hit front pages in the largest newspapers in Turkey, Susanne Tilman in a television interview expressed her forgiveness. She did not want revenge, she told reporters. "Oh God, forgive them for they know not what they do," she said, wholeheartedly agreeing with the words of Christ on Calvary (Luke 23:34).
In a country where blood-for-blood revenge is as normal as breathing, many many reports have come to the attention of the church of how this comment of Susanne Tilman has changed lives. One columnist wrote of her comment, "She said in one sentence what 1000 missionaries in 1000 years could never do."
The missionaries in Malatya will most likely move out, as their families and children have become publicly identified as targets to the hostile city. The remaining 10 believers are in hiding. What will happen to this church, this light in the darkness? Most likely it will go underground. Pray for wisdom, that Turkish brothers from other cities will go to lead the leaderless church. Should we not be concerned for that great city of Malatya, a city that does not know what it is doing? (Jonah 4:11)
When our Pastor Fikret Bocek went with a brother to give a statement to the Security Directorate on Monday they were ushered into the Anti-Terror Department. On the wall was a huge chart covering the whole wall listing all the terrorist cells in Izmir, categorized. In one prominent column were listed all the evangelical churches in Izmir. The darkness does not understand the light. "These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also." (Acts 17:6)
Please pray for the Church in Turkey. "Don’t pray against persecution, pray for perseverence," urges Pastor Fikret Bocek.
The Church is better having lost our brothers; the fruit in our lives, the renewed faith, the burning desire to spread the gospel to quench more darkness in Malatya …all these are not to be regretted. Pray that we stand strong against external opposition and especially pray that we stand strong against internal struggles with sin, our true debilitating weakness.
This we know. Christ Jesus was there when our brothers were giving their lives for Him. He was there, like He was when Stephen was being stoned in the sight of Saul of Tarsus.
Someday the video of the deaths of our brothers may reveal more to us about the strength that we know Christ gave them to endure their last cross, about the peace the Spirit of God endowed them with to suffer for their beloved Savior. But we know He did not leave their side. We know their minds were full of Scripture strengthening them to endure, as darkness tried to subdue the unsubduable Light of the Gospel. We know, in whatever way they were able, with a look or a word, they encouraged one another to stand strong. We know they knew they would soon be with Christ.
We don’t know the details. We don’t know the kind of justice that will or will not be served on this earth.
But we pray-- and urge you to pray-- that someday at least one of those five boys will come to faith because of the testimony in death of Tilman Geske, who gave his life as a missionary to his beloved Turks, and the testimonies in death of Necati Aydin and Ugur Yuksel, the first martyrs for Christ out of the Turkish Church.
Reported by Darlene N. Bocek (24 April 2007)
-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Please please please pass this on to as many praying Christians as you can, in as many countries as you can. Please always keep the heading as "From the Protestant Church of Smyrna" with this contact information: [izmirprotestan] {at} *gmail* dot com.
http://www.izmirprotestan.org
_____________________________
Personal Note:
Even if you're not a Christian, this kind of irrational behavior should trouble you about Islam... Not all Muslims, but certainly the ones who wish to see the Great Satan destroyed. Irrespective of the reasons we are in Iraq now, this is a war that cannot be lost. Not if we truly wish to see our children live in a country free of this kind of hatred and intolerance. It's bad enough that the government actively seeks to erase Christianity from the forefront of society... it's bad enough that there are organizations today dedicated to tearing down everything even remotely 'Christian' in this nation, but the last thing we need-- as a nation, not simply the Church --is to invite the peaceful religion of Islam to do unto us as we do unto ourselves... only worse.
Prayer is all well and good. We SHOULD pray for the salvation of Muslims, we should seek to convert them, but we should pray for the Church especially, that they might endure and persevere what is happening in Turkey and the rest of the world. Or one day this hatred will come to American shores.
Thanks to Ms. Green for pointing the way
Please pray for the Church in Turkey and elsewhere.
from the mind of... Eric | 10:50 PM
102 Comments:
Some way general background.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6603141.stm
We certainly must stand opposed to this sort of violence. Where I believe you're making your mistake is thinking that killing people in Iraq will in anywise help end the sort of violent acts described here.
I heard a very interesting story on the news the other day. This fella has done some research into suicide bombers and found one group of about 30-ish that all came from this small community in Morocco. The study found what they had in common was poverty, lack of education and a concern that Islam is under attack.
We want to address violent acts by extremists? We look to deal with the root causes of poverty, lack of education and perceived attacks against Islam.
Our war in Iraq is a perceived attack against Islam and, as such, is feeding the problem, not stopping it. Further, the war is costing hundreds of billions that could be used to address problems of poverty and lack of education.
Let's fight terrorism. But let's fight smart.
Man, I know just what you're talking about. When we loat Vietnam (and Laos and Cambodia and for that matter blew the Pueblo thing) and the Communists arrived on our shores - well, let me tell you, when we finally get rid of them, I may NEVER get the red dye out my my tighty-whities.
ELA - it's not that I think right wing guntoting you're-all-damned-and-we-have-the absolute-Truth capitalism-and-preemptive-war-creation-science Christians are as bad as Third World radical Muslims, but you're a heck of a lot closer to my freedoms than they are.
ER, Thanks for adding some historical insight.
TS, the only problem with your Laot's and Vietnamese comparison is these people were escaping the Kmer Rouge and the Communists respectively, nor did they have in their hearts from birth a religion that seeks only conquest at the point of a dhimmi tax, a sword, or bomb-belt. The Laot's and Vietnamese came to this country to escape oppression and murder and perhaps make a better life for themselves and their children... and many have done well. The same is true for a lot of Muslims. But their mosques often preach hatred and intolerance against the very nation that has given them succor. The same has been true of Europe. Muslims have spread throughout Europe in the millions, and while many of these would never dream of taking up arms against the countries that welcomed them in, their loyalties lie, nonetheless, with Islam and the men who preach in the Mosques.
Money, Dan... Finances, don't mean diddly in terms of why terrorists kill themselves to kill others. If that were true Syria and Bashar Assad would not sponsor such... they're rich... not destitute (I speak of the nation as a whole not the individuals in the street) Osama as well is FILTHY rich! But he's not at all interested in putting on a suicide belt. Instead, the rich USE poverty and hopelessness to entice young men and women into the "Service of Allah." In my book that's pure Evil.
Personally, I don't ever want to see the day when Muslims become a major voting bloc here in the U.S... Like they are fast becoming in several European nations. What happens when Muslims demand Shar'ia Law? Countries like Denmark, and England, and France, will cease to be free nations. That's what you have to look forward too, for your children and your childrens children... Servitude... if we're not careful NOW.
That you can't see this is astounding to me.
1. Yes, there are some wealthy nuts who are willing to finance terrorism (this is true in the "muslim" world as well as in the West, by the way), but they are not the ones killing themselves, are they?
I repeat: If we want to be WISE about how we deal with any threat "terrorists" might pose to us, we deal with the root causes of terrorism. It would be foolish to do anything else.
2. So, if you don't want to see the day when Muslims become a large voting bloc, what are you prepared to do about it?
Zoom back a little bit.
What seems to have taken place in Turkey is that some people have come to power at the national and provicnial levels who are either ambivalent to, or not dedeicatred to modern Turkey's strict and heretofore unassailable separation of religion and state. As a result, a religious minority is being persecuted.
So, yes, I pray that those who are less than totally dedicated to the strict separation of religion and state in the United States and its states fail in their attempt to gain power, lest the persecution of minority religions occur here.
*That's* the lesson.
BTW, which "the war" are you talking about, EL?
I swear, I do not dismiss the concept of the GWOT because I don't believe the United States has enemies. I dismis it, rail against it, because to sweep all of our enemies under one umbreall is stupid. 'Cause just whnen we think we got 'em all under there, here comes a new one we hadn't noticed before.
So, which war? Afghanistan or Iraq? Or, do you mean the broader, general and growing islamofascist menace that the United States started feeding and fertilizing with the invasion of Iraq?
You couldn't possibly be that dim - I wasn't referring to the Indochinese refugees - all they did was raise the bell curve on the coasts and put 'bama even further behind. The U.S. lost a war, against an ideology that people like you used to argue - well, pretty much what you argue now about caatstrophic consequences and ireconciliable hostility and all that, although yours is notably less plausible.
A fundamentist Muslim is just a fundamentalist Christian who hasn't had the advantage of years of cumulative civilizing by a secular minority. I will accept your sincere thanks on behalf of those people, although I admit your tolerance probably doesn't go all that deep. You've already described with relish a fantasy of me being "justifiably" beaten by the military for lack of respect and advocated forced exile for insufficient patriotism, by your definition. As St Augustine observed about children, your virtue lies not in your will but in the metaphorical weakness of your limbs.
"Conquest" = forsooth. I'll tell you what - I will name Muslim countries invaded by Christian countries over the last hundred years and you name Christian countries invaded by Muslim countries. Why don't we stack up bodies - Christians killed in their own country by Muslims and vice-versa? Shall we try for a Muslim country with a blue water navy? Or some hypocritical, serl-serving distinction between belt bombs and stealth fighters and cruise missiles.
Hay, is it worse when a True Christian(tm) dies than a Muslim? I mean, I suppose it's equal - one going to hell and one to heaven and all.
Dan-- Radiacal Islam, or Islamofascism, is the result of "Religion" not poverty or lack of education.
ER-- The war I'm talking about is the 'broader, general and growing islamofascist menace' that began their war with the west long before we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. Does anyone remember Munich? The Achille Lauro? Pan Am 103? The World Trade Center 1993? Khobar Towers? Our Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania? The Embassy Bombing in Jakarta? The Bali nightclub bombing? The USS Cole? The World Trade Center, 2001? The London Underground? And the countless suicide bombings in Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan...? Does anyone remember the 3 Indonesian Christian school girls beheaded by Muslims... because they were Christian? What about Daniel Pearl? Nick Berg? Anyone remember them? Does anyone remember the ethnic cleansing going on now in Darfur? Does anyone remember Theo Van Gogh!?
What do all these terrorist acts have in common, I wonder?
Islam.
The evil intolerance of Islam.
The murderous ideology of Islam.
Send in the missionaries, by all means. It is better to win souls than send them to the Hell that surely awaits them. But do not welcome their murderous ideology to our shores.
I am not the least bit dim. Some have simply so gotten used to Darkness that they've mistook it for Light. Darkness cannot understand Light.
"And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not"
--John 1:5
ER is right, however... all this misses the point of Turkey's ambivalence and hostility toward other faiths, namely Christianity. Turkey has been since it's inception a secular nation. That seems to be changing. Especially in light of this recent election where a Muslim desireous of instituting Shar'ia is on the verge of becoming president. The Turkish military has already threatened to fight against any such attempt at governmental change. The European Union, however, seemingly completely out of touch with what is happening within their own member states, is insisting that if Turkey wishes to become a member state themselves, they must accept Shar'ia Law if it rears its ugly head.
I know you mean well Dan, but you need to wake up. King Theoden in Tolkien's The Two Towers said, "I would not risk open war...", to which Aragorn replied, "Open war is upon you, whether you would wish it or not!"
We're not quite there yet... But the only thing stopping it at present is the distraction we've provided by setting up a government of the people in Iraq. The terrorists are genuinely and rightly frightened of a democratic Iraq in the midst of a Muslim enclave of nations in the broader middle east.
But again, all this misses the point... Please pray for the Church at Smyrna and all the churches across Turkey. Not for deliverance, but for faith, strength, and courage, that they might persevere.
"I know you mean well Dan, but you need to wake up."
And I'm sure you mean well, too, Eric, but you're missing the point. We must fight terrorism. But we must do so wisely.
The majority of the world and the US recognizes our actions as counterproductive to the fight against terrorism.
Tell me: How many bombs would Iran have to lob on us before we finally decided, "Oh, they're right. We must change our ways..."?
What's that you say?! Lobbing bombs at us is no way for them to get us to change our ways? That doing so will only make us want to wipe them off the map?
Huh! What do you know...
I'm sure I've said this here, but one last time...
There will always be a few out there who will be haters who want to destroy the US (or England, or Spain...). There will be the Osamas and his ilk out there and we must stop them.
But the way to do this is to isolate them. Make it clear that they're the lawless, dangerous ones. We, on the other hand, are the ones who will stand for the oppressed. We are the ones who would not persecute because of religion. We are the ones who reach out a neighborly hand with a cup of water.
To the degree that we are above blame, that we are NOT on a crusade to wipe out Islam (as statements such as yours give voice to), that we are a nation of generous law-abiders, etc, etc - to the degree that this is obviously true, the few haters will have an impossible time recruiting many for the sort of war they hope to fight.
To the degree that we validate the Osamas and make the "terrorists" into martyrs and the US into bad guys, etc - to the degree that is true, the Osamas WILL be able to recruit.
We ought to isolate, but our policy has instead brought legitimacy. This is foolishness.
What would happen if each Christian church, Jewish synagogue, civic group - all these billions of people! sponsored some sort of assistance to our Muslim brothers and sisters, sat down with them for lunch, helped raise a barn or teach them to read - what sort of effect would that have on world peace?
To suggest that that sort of effort ("overcoming evil with good" in biblical parlance) would have no effect is to suppose that Muslims are unreasoning monsters, unable to be reached by logic and compassion.
But it's not true. Love IS stronger than hate. Light IS stronger than darkness. We CAN overcome!
Can I get a witness?!
Most of the violence in Iraq is perpetrated by Al-Qaeda and other "Foreign" fighters. Bad analogy, Dan, using Iran. Iran needs to stay out of Iraq.
Can you get a witness!? Not to idiocy!
If every Christian or Jewish community sent volunteers to do as you suggest, it would be perceived as an invasion by "Christian" hordes and the result would be increased incidences like the one experienced by the Church at Smyrna.
Light will ALWAYS triumph over Darkness. But you talk as though greater Islam would welcome such an intrusion and our efforts would be rewarded with the loss of not a single life. Yes, Dan, Christ Jesus won the war at Calvary, but pockets of resistance are still at work. Resistance that refuses to surrender, and is driven by invisible malevolent forces. We don't war against flesh and blood, Dan! Wake up!
For the umteenth time, it's not the many peaceful, law-abiding Muslims were at war with! They CAN be reasoned with-- individually, but not corporately. You won't change their governments, or their religious leaders. Not soon enough to prevent thousands, and tens of thousands of lives. They would take our humanitarianism as a dangerous threat to their religion and our "missionaries" would die violent brutal deaths.
Change the heart and you change the man, yes! But how long will that take... to change them all? And should we sit back and take every blow with passivity which the enemy levels upon us, continually turning the other cheek?
Your argument is naive and totally distorts Christianity. Your argument insists we invite these murderers to attack us in our hometowns, it insists we offer them the throats of our own children as housewarming gifts. You argument is exceedingly dangerous.
MY argument distorts Christianity?!
Where, exactly would that be? In expecting that we ought to love our enemies? In expecting that we ought to overcome evil with good?
Do me a great favor and enlighten me as to where I've parted from Christ's teachings, okay?
That aside, you are absolutely correct that we are not at war with the vast vast majority of Muslims, who are peace-loving and hate terrorism.
But you still seem to fail to realize (as does the Bush administration) that our invasion of Iraq gives legitimacy to the claims of the few Osamas out there who claim that Islam is under attack.
As to my suggestion of reaching out, I've not said that we ought to send volunteers from each and every church and coming across as an invasion (especially a bunch of evangelicals out to "evangelize" rather than reach out).
But there are other ways of reaching out. My church has sponsored a literacy program in a dirt poor village in Morocco these last two years. No strings attached. They didn't have to accept Christian tracts, they aren't forced to read from the Bible, nor are they expected to attend church services in exchange for the literacy program.
It was just an act of compassion. No invading hordes. The class was taught by a college educated Muslim in need of a job.
They are aware that the money comes from a church in the US and that's about the extent of it.
Multiply that times a million churches and I'd wager we'd have a more peaceful world. Those sorts of actions are what will de-fang the tiger.
You notice how in all the books and movies - Harry against the troll, Jason against Cyclops, etc - as well as in history - USSR against Russia, Britain against the colonists, etc - the giants always lose?
A giant that is relying upon brute force to beat the opposition into submission will nearly always lose against the smaller, smarter opponent.
We must fight terrorism, but do so wisely.
And yet despite what I've said... that all this misses the point, you still have only criticism for my post and no concern, or compassion for what the Church of Smyrna has had to endure.
Where's the Christian love, Dan?
Eric, of course the churches of Turkey are in my prayers. As are the people of Morocco and Iraq and our soldiers there, for whom we prayed yesterday in church.
I began this series of responses by saying, "We certainly must stand opposed to this sort of violence..." and went on to say why we need to do so and why HOW we do so matters.
I pray for the church, but I also pray for our nation that WE make wise policy. AND I act on helping to make sure we have wise policy.
And part of how I do that is by dialog with those who might imprudently counsel war when wisdom is needed.
But this post is not just about the praying for the church in Turkey! On THAT we could all agree.
No, you've taken the tragedy, EL, and used it as a springboard to advocate war, war and more war. Perhaps it is thrust upon us -- but what we do with that reality is the test.
There is no way anyone can advocate war, I dare say even a clearly justifiable (by the world's standards) defensive war, without compromising the teachings of Mr. Jesus Christ (courtesy title and last name included for Mark's sake).
It's tough. But it's true. We must defend outselves. Perhaps we must take the battle to the enemy in some cases. But it's outrageous to
do so pridefully, as if God needed any of us to defend the Church. We do it to protect out pitiful lives, and our worldly reality.
But on one knee, Sir, to pray for forgiveness even as we steady our aim! And at real enemies -- not every one with ways different from our own.
"Where I believe you're making your mistake is thinking..."
Oh brother...here we go again.
"The study found what they had in common was poverty, lack of education and a concern that Islam is under attack."
Poor little murdering bastards.
"Our war in Iraq is a perceived attack against Islam and, as such, is feeding the problem..."
This is where I think YOU are wrong, Danielsan:
I believe...and have history to back me up...that anti-war rhetoric and obstructionism by the left combined with Democratic defeatism is feeding the problem.
If...as you would have us believe...that this is just a insignificant band of criminals we are facing...you must also see that your defeatist attitudes and ant-American rhetoric is fueling their egos...giving the little criminal gang hope of success against the most powerful, most beloved (I don't care what you say...America is beloved throughout the world by those desiring freedom) nation on Earth.
YOU. dear Dan...are responsible for tens...or according to what you would have us believe...hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian deaths in Iraq.
That's where I believe YOU're wrong, my friend.
"...to the degree that is true, the Osamas WILL be able to recruit."
Yep! As long as Democrats promise them victory.
We agree, Dan!
a fundamentalist Muslim and a fundamentalist Christian couldn't be farther apart. Jihad is found in the Quaran and accepted as a basic tenet of the muslim religion. In the simplest terms it can be construed to mean "convert or be killed." This tenet is not country specific but purveys the depths of all Islam. That is not to say there are not good people practicing the religion but the very definition of the religion opens itself up to a darker interpretation. I challenge anyone to find anything like it in the Christian bible.
There are several instances of genocide in the Old Testament. Taking them literally, or accepting the Jewish interpretation as them having occurred by the hand of God, is part of the problem.
Jihad is found in the Quaran and accepted as a basic tenet of the muslim religion. In the simplest terms it can be construed to mean "convert or be killed."
I believe most non-fundamentalist Muslims would disagree most strongly with your interpretation of the term Jihad. You get your Muslim theology tips from WND?
Jihad means struggle. There is the Greater Jihad which is the inner struggle over evil. And there is the Lesser Jihad which is physical struggle - often violent.
From what I have read, most respectable, mainstream Muslims are talking about inner struggle when they're talking about Jihad.
We can know that this has a basis in reality because most muslims are opposed to using violence to settle matters. Research it if you wish.
"Tell me: How many bombs would Iran have to lob on us before we finally decided, "Oh, they're right. We must change our ways..."?
Have you forgotten September 11th? I suppose that was our fault too?
Ms Green said:
Have you forgotten September 11th? I suppose that was our fault too?
I believe you may have missed my point. My point was that, just as we would not be convinced that we were wrong and Iran (Iraq, UK, whoever) was right and roll over, so too, trying to bomb our way to the Muslims loving us is not going to work.
Just the opposite. Most muslims were on our side on 9/12 and most still are opposed to terrorism, but increasingly they think that "terrorists" are correct in what they're doing. Our Iraq policy is strengthening support for terrorism! (see yesterday's headlines which pointed out that terrorism has increased 25% in the last year...not quite the effect we were hoping for).
"Most muslims were on our side on 9/12..."
This was not in evidence, nor evidenced BY news reports carried on every network. Many leaders of Muslim nations publically deplored 9/11 but their citizens danced in the street, cheering, firing (like idiots) weapons into the air... hardly the acts of those who deplored the events of 9/11. Go sell that tripe somewhere else, Dan.
Well, Ms. Green - "Fault" is a stupid word, but the reasons Bin Laden gave for attacking a U.S. financial center and the Pentagon on 9/11 became eminently defensible after the U.S. launched the war against Iraq. For a start, they were at least true, unlike your justification. For another, they caused fewer civilian casualties. Look, be superpower or not, but don't whine when people fight back with the weapons they can manage.
I can't definitively prove it, I suppose, any more than you can prove that most Muslims rejoiced.
But public opinion surveys in the Muslim world (and elsewhere around the world) reflected sympathy and support in the days following 9/11. The support remained mostly (again, according to surveys) with our Afghanistan front.
But we frittered away most all support around the world - and especially in the Muslim world - in invading Iraq unprovoked and with no great plan other than "shock and awe."
Surveys are, of course, not perfect. But I'd suggest they're more reliable than going with your gut feeling.
"...any more than you can prove that most Muslims rejoiced."
The only reason I can't prove it-- to YOU at least --is, despite working at a television station, I do not have access to every bit of video footage of parading muslim celebrants, rejoicing over the attacks on 9/11, nor would I be inclinded to post such a montage here if I did.
But based on where I work, and the opportunity to sit in front of a wall of video monitors for three solid days in the aftermath of 9/11, aside from the words of condolences that came from government leaders of Muslim nations, the reaction by the general public was overwhelmingly one of joy... OVERWHELMINGLY... Rejoicing that a great and mighty blow was struck against the Great Satan.
I can prove my assertion far more than you can prove yours, by the wealth of collective memory held by most of America who witnessed the same scenes as I. It's not my fault you spent the week immediately following 9/11 averting your eyes from TV everytime they cut away to Muslims dancing in the streets. It's not my fault you put your fingers in your ears and shouted loudly, "NAH, NAH, NAH, I CAN'T HEAR YOU! I'M NOT LISTENING! NAH, NAH!!!"
Allow me to quote myself, then... 'Go peddle your tripe somewhere else', because I'm not buying, nor, I suspect, is any other intellectually honest person commenting here, or anywhere else.
This is not 'gut instinct', Dan. It is the witness of one who knows what he saw and heard the day of, and immediately following 9/11. You are flat-out wrong on this. "This" being: that an overwhelming majority of Muslims as depicted in news reports around the globe, rejoiced at 3,000 deaths on American soil on 9/11. So, to reiterate: accept for the words of sympathy that came from men such as King Abdullah of Jordan, leaders of nations and their public officials, a "majority" of footage seen on television, on that day and beyond, were images of Muslims dancing and celebrating in the streets. This statement is not a flight of fancy, or the fanciful imagination of a Republican who supports the war in Iraq. It is not even the time and pain colored memory of a Bush supporter-- despite his several political and humanitarian gaffs. This is the memory of one who saw what he saw, on that day, who had the luxury of watching continuously what transpired on that day and beyond because it was his job. He was paid to watch television, Dan!
What were you doing that you didn't see the same images I and many many others did!?
Go pedal that circus trike you're on somewhere else.
"This is not 'gut instinct', Dan. It is the witness of one who knows what he saw and heard the day of, and immediately following 9/11."
No, "THIS" is anectdotal evidence based on watching a small minority of 1 billion people.
Tell you what, in your memory, count up the numbers of people you saw rejoicing. Was it 1000? 10,000? 100,000??! 1,000,000!!!???
Let's assume you personally watched 1 million Muslims rejoicing on 9/12. There are in excess of 1 billion Muslims in the world. You're talking about 1%.
Anectdotal evidence is fine, as far as it goes. AS LONG AS you don't make assumptions (and certainly not policy!) based upon your gut feelings based upon what you happened to watch on TV.
Dan, forgive me, but you're a complete idiot if you can't understand simple english.
I said, "accept for the words of sympathy that came from men such as King Abdullah of Jordan, leaders of nations and their public officials, a "majority" of footage seen on television, on that day and beyond, were images of Muslims dancing and celebrating in the streets."
How many they represent in terms of a percentage of TOTAL Muslim reaction is not the issue, nor my point. My point, sir, is what was seen on television... what the Muslim population SHOWED the world on and after 9/11.
I have NOT claimed, as you suggest, that ALL Muslims rejoiced on 9/11. That's YOUR strawman! I have argued ONLY that, judging by what was shown to us in news reports from Gaza, the West Bank, Baghdad, Damascus, Tehran and many other Muslim nations and enclaves, THERE! WAS! REJOICING! Sheesh! How thick-headed does one have to be to not grasp what I've just stated!?
Were there thousands, millions even, of Muslims who wagged their heads in wonder and disgust at their spiritual brethern? that their own religion had been hijacked to commit mass murder? Of course! BUT THAT WASN'T MY POINT, and you know it! You're being a complete ass... and over something NO ONE has suggested or asserted.
You accused Ms. Green of missing YOUR point. Well, Sir, you have missed mine as well!
I apologize, Eric.
I saw your FIRST statement that said:
in the aftermath of 9/11, aside from the words of condolences that came from government leaders of Muslim nations, the reaction by the general public was overwhelmingly one of joy... OVERWHELMINGLY...
and failed to differentiate that from your later statements that referred only to those shown.
You may well be correct that the majority of what was shown on TV in the days following 9/11 may have been of the cheering nature (I get my news from the radio and print media - not tv, generally). But that is very different than what you say in the quote above.
In the material I read in the days - and years - following 9/11 suggests that you are wrong to assert that "the reaction by the general [muslim] public was overwhelmingly one of joy". What I read was from Muslims expressing horror at what happened, support for the US in that moment of tragedy and resolve to bring those accountable to justice.
This, from Muslim sources, not the much-reviled MSM. And this was followed by the aforementioned surveys that say that Muslims don't support terrorism.
So, maybe you need to quit getting your news from TV and that wacky "left-wing" media if they're not reporting accurately the actual response of Muslims?
And yet the context for the statement you quote, "...the reaction by the general public was overwhelmingly one of joy... OVERWHELMINGLY..." is found in the first portion of that very sentence... "But based on where I work, and the opportunity to sit in front of a wall of video monitors for three solid days....." and certainly did NOT "differentiate that from [my] later statements..." because the context was the same.... "Based on where I work and the opportunity to sit in front of a wall of video monitors for 3 solid days".
I apologize for losing my temper, but you must read more closely in the future. I will endeavor to do the same.
Well. Anyone who thinks that anything seen on TV news is anything but an anecdote is silly. TV cameras are magnets for extremists, in this country and every other one.
I get your point, ER, but celebrating Muslims are "celebrating Muslims" however much a magnet the cameras were.
I saw the same exact tv that EL did in the aftermath of 9/11. I don't remember exuberant arabs. I remember the the major networks had continuous coverage for almost 7 days. They stayed rooted almost continually in New York. Most of the coverage was immediate reaction from New Yorkers. Whenever the coverage moved from New York it went to Washington. The recovery efforts at the Pentagon. The crash in Shanksville, PA. The coverage of memorial events that I saw was pure pro-america. I remember the Eiffel Tower surrounded by a candle vigil. I remember scenes of people laying flowers outside American embassies.
One of the things I also remember is that Saddam Hussein went on TV in Iraq expressing sympathy for the US. I think I remember a vigil in Baghdad. I remember the piles of flowers laid by palestinians. In the first week after 9/11 there was NO coverage of anti-american ceremonies. EL may have confabulated other scenes of anti-american protests, with those first aftermath days.
Liberals have selective memories and also selective tv watching. Even if they saw something they did not agree with, it would go right over their heads and not register.
You weren't imagining things, EL.
Oh, bullsnot, mom. Same goes for the extremes on both sides.
For example, I will see 10 losers in the GOP debate tomorrow night, and you will see 10 people, any one of whom you would vote for over any Democrat.
Selective perception.
"bullsnot"???
snicker....
sorry...it's just a funny word....
hehheh
ER says, "I pray that those who are less than totally dedicated to the strict separation of religion and state in the United States and its states fail in their attempt to gain power, lest the persecution of minority religions occur here."
Excuse me, but that is the most outrageous statement in this thread!
ER, true Christianity does not persecute anyone! Christians are COMMANDED (by Jesus Christ, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, God incarnate) to "go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you."
Preaching and baptizing is not persecution.
I would say that Democrats are far more of a danger to persecute religions in this country to gain power than Christians are. They have already demonstrated that they are willing to even surrender to terrorism if they think they can gain a majority in the Senate and House of Representatives.
The idea that Christians are as dangerous as Democrats is so over the top ludicrous, I sincerely fear for ER's sanity.
And by the way, the very fact that ER sees a need to attack me before I even offer a comment is proof positive that he not only doesn't believe that I am ignorant, as he often suggests, but that what I have to say is relevant.
As to the topic:
This is not an isolated incident. This kind of religious persecution has been going on for centuries, but has increased dramatically during the twentieth and twenty-first century.
For more information, click here.
Mark said:
"true Christianity does not persecute anyone!"
Indeed, I agree. Nonetheless, religious folk - including those who identify themselves as Christians - have a long and storied history of doing just.
The duke of Bavaria, in 1527, gave orders that the imprisoned Anabaptists should be burned at the stake, unless they recanted, in which case they should be beheaded. King Ferdinand I of Austria issued a number of severe decrees against them, the first general mandate being dated August 28, 1527. In Catholic countries the Anabaptists, as a rule, were executed by burning at the stake, in Lutheran and Zwinglian states generally by beheading or drowning.
Emperor Charles V of Germany issued a general mandate against the Anabaptists on January 4, 1528, which was read from the pulpits of all cities, towns, and villages, decreeing that not only those who had received baptism but all parents who did not have their children baptized in good time were guilty of a criminal offense deserving death…
…Thousands sealed their faith with their blood.
From the anabaptists.org website.
And that's just a snippet from just anabaptist history! We're not the only ones who've been persecuted.
Perhaps instead of objecting in knee-jerk fashion to ER's caution about not returning down that road, we can agree to say, "Never again," and work to that end?
"In the first week after 9/11 there was NO coverage of anti-american ceremonies."
That's right, Bent suffers from perfect memory! Despite the fact that he is 100%, flat-out wrong.
But while it's true that 'A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest,' the same is true of what a man sees and what a man remembers... which is often selective.
Bent doesn't agree with me on anything here, so naturally HE doesn't remember [because of his own 'confabulated' and selective memory] scenes of merriment in the Muslim world, and I have therefore "confabulated" my own memories of 9/11...
...All this so he can find something to disagree with me in THIS post.
Dan... Mark said, "True Christianity"... What about the references you cite lends belief that the persecutors of the Anabaptists were "True" Christians?
Nothing.
Do you honestly believe that everyone who names the name of Christ is one of His? Throughout all of Church history?
Please tell me you're not so naive!
I said nothing like that, Eric. I agreed quite clearly that True Christians don't persecute.
But many people who call themselves Christians HAVE done so. Folk who are part and parcel of the mainstream Church at the time. I would say that many of those folk were no doubt devout folk who wanted to follow God and I'm not saying that they were or were not Christians - merely that they weren't following in Christ's steps as they called for persecution.
ER said nothing about whether or not those who might engage in persecution were "true christians" - just that we ought to keep a keen eye out against going back down that road which many have gone down before us.
I was saying, can't we agree on that basic concept?
Lighten up, chuckles.
One more historical note on Christians persecuting Christians (or, if you prefer - the religious who claim to be Christian persecuting Christians), persecution has certainly gotten much better and is mostly a thing of the past in our nation - THANKS largely to the the baptist and other Christian notion of separation of Church and state - but it's not totally a thing from the 16th century.
Particularly shocking were the experiences recounted by Menno Diener at Camp Taylor, Kentucky, where he witnessed the bayonet stabbing of one Amish boy. During the course of his stay, Menno protested having to wear a military uniform and take orders. Here is how he describes what followed...
During WWI (and to a lesser degree, WWII) many anabaptists and other peace protestors have suffered ill-treatment at the hands of "patriotic Americans" and church-goers.
One source talking about an Amish man in WWI:
So the commander got a broomstick and beat me across the legs till he broke his stick. I had streaks and swelling on my legs. Then he got a 2x4 about three feet long that had four spikes in one end, and threatened to hit me in the face with it. He put it near to my face and then back again like a ball bat and said, "If it weren't for the law, I would like to see how far I could sink these spikes into your face."
A few days later another boy, his face black and blue from beatings, was placed on display by a public road. Someone placed a sign on him that read, "I refuse to fight for my country."
Some peace protestors (Christian and not) were convicted of treason and subversion during WWI for failing to support the war effort.
[The source]
THIS is the sort of thing we don't want to see our nation become. We've made progress of which I'm quite proud. Let's not go back.
We all know who ER was referring to. Those of us who don't want all references of God removed from schools, public government buildings and our currency. We wannt to retain our Christian heritage in this country, and ER wants America to be athiest. As I said, if any persecution based on religion could happen in this country, it will be the democratic party doing the persecution. Not Christians.
Well, Mark, I, for one, didn't know ER was referencing you.
ER WAS referencing (or at least how I read it) the longstanding tradition of separation of church/state that is honored by devout anabaptists, baptists and others. NOT as an effort to remove our Christian heritage (why would Christians do that?) but to PROTECT our heritage.
You may not be familiar with real persecution of Christians by those who also claim to be Christians, but we anabaptists retain that memory because, in some cases, it wasn't that long ago. We don't want to see the US go backwards on this point.
You need not worry that Christians who argue for separation of church/state are arguing for a strictly enforced atheist nation - THAT would be a violation of the very Church/State separation that ER is calling for.
We want church to be free from the meddling of the state. To think that separation of church/state is an endorsement of godlessness is to misunderstand the history and importance of the doctrine.
"As I said, if any persecution based on religion could happen in this country, it will be the democratic party doing the persecution."
You know that story of the soldier who beat the amish man for refusing to serve? How much you want to bet that, if I could look it up and find it out, it would turn out that that soldier was a devout Christian conservative?
One more bit of explanation, Mark. I am a Christian. I'm raising my children in that my anabaptist Christian tradition.
I also send my kids to public school.
Now, I don't think it unreasonable that the State let ME do the religious teaching of my children. I'm old enough to remember teachers when I was in school saying prayers that I would be horrified to have my kids hear. They were offered by sincere, loving Christians, I have no doubt.
But their theology was not the same as my theology. I want to be the ones to teach my children what the Bible does and doesn't say about God, not some teacher whom I only partially know.
That's not a slight against the teachers, just the recognition that faith traditions should be taught by parents and their churches - not by the state.
So, I am against prayer in school and Bible study in the classroom NOT because I hate prayer or Bible study at all, but because I want to teach my children about God, not the state whom quite frankly, I don't trust.
Isn't THAT the conservative line?
Does that make sense?
"THANKS largely to the the baptist and other Christian notion of separation of Church and state...." "the longstanding tradition of separation of church/state...." "To think that separation of church/state is an endorsement of godlessness is to misunderstand the history and importance of the doctrine."
Christian notion? Notion, yes, but not Christian.
Longstanding traditions? In terms of mere decades, yes, but not Christian.
Doctrine? Absolutely! A primary doctrine of the Left! But NOT Christian, and NOT in the Constitution. We have an 'Establishment Clause' and a 'Free Exercise Clause' but NO. SEPARATION. OF. CHURCH. AND. STATE! It's not in there. Nor is the 'doctrine of separation' that currently infects this nation, and yet it is being force-fed to every school child in America.
"...it would turn out that that soldier was a devout Christian conservative?"
You are so full of [pardon me] Shite this good day, that its bouquet wafts from my monitor! What a load of Bullsnot!
"...their theology was not the same as my theology."
And there's the rub! ...'YOUR theology'! Be very careful, Dan, those are very dangerous waters you're treading. The Third Commandment says 'Thou shalt have no other gods before me...' and clinging to ones OWN theology is akin to saying, 'I believe in a god that.... My god is... My god would never...' It's creating a god to suit yourself, and that, friend, is called Idolatry.
Besides which, when you stand before God to give account for yourself, your Anabaptist Tradition won't amount to a thimble-full of spit. The only thing that's going to matter is whether your sin is covered by the blood of Christ. Any reward you receive will be based solely on what you did with what you were given; be it knowledge of Christ, or any talents you possessed... In short, what did you do with Christ, using the gifts God gave you, once He saved you?
'Anabaptist' is just another devisive label, one that seems to be a great source of pride for you.
I applaud you for wanting to teach your children about God, but better to lead them to Christ! And if you must teach tradition stick to the Lord's Supper and Feet Washing... those, at least, are biblical. Be careful not to infect them with 'tradition', for it won't save them.
Eric said:
Longstanding traditions? In terms of mere decades, yes, but not Christian.
The concept of separation of church and state is out of anabaptist/baptist history (and maybe other sources, but at least that history) from the 1500s, friend. Read up on it and you'll understand why it's an important concept.
Eric also shrilly said:
And there's the rub! ...'YOUR theology'! Be very careful, Dan, those are very dangerous waters you're treading.
"MY theology" being anabaptism vs the sort of nationalistic-fundamentalism theology of the teachers I was referencing.
We all have theological bases from which we spring. I wasn't saying "my theology" in the sense of "the religion that I'm making up in my own mind" as you're implying.
Seriously. Consider drinking a bit or maybe some downers to take the edge off, dude.
Eric also said:
Besides which, when you stand before God to give account for yourself, your Anabaptist Tradition won't amount to a thimble-full of spit.
I didn't used to do this as much, but I've been accused so much here lately of "making stuff up" as far as my faith goes that I thought it would be helpful to point to the very old and rich tradition which I claim.
I'm not dissing your faith Dan. Quite frankly, I don't know anything about it. I merely pointed out that your traditions 'won't amount to a thimble-full of spit' quote unquote. Neither will mine.
That's hardly shrill. It's simply truth.
http://mainstreambaptist.
blogspot.com/2007/04/whither-turkey.html
Read it.
Mark; I have as much respect for you and your thoughts as you do mine -- and you drew first blood. Deal with it.
Oh, and again, I don't know where the whole idea of "standing" before God came from -- unless it was that stupid Jack Chick tract that shows the hermaphroditic man-being at the arm of Death being led to the great throne with the angry-Santa Claus-slash-Michealangelo-type God seated, rising several stories up from the hordes of humans milling about at his huge-mongus, sandle-clad feet.
Judgment, yes. With one question: God's grace with the fruit of Jesusy Jesusness, or Just You On Your Own?
But. comic-book and or cimematic drama, with every proud man standing proudly before God as a good-and-faithful servant, or standing defiantly in His face (at his huge feet)?
Do you honestly believe there will be an exit interview from this life? Or a test to pass in order to get to the next?
Snort. Come on, you do allow for some mystery don't you, EL? Or do you take Jack Chick tracts and bad movies as literally, God forbid, so to speak, as you do the Bible?
ER, What do you do with the last two chapters of Revelation? Just wondering.
"I don't know where the whole idea of "standing" before God came from..."
Allow me, then, to point it out to you...
Romans 14:10-12-- "But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God." Emphasis added.
Every Christian will stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ and give account of him/herself to GOD...
Everyone else ends up in front of the Great White Throne Judgment...
Revelation 20:12-- "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works." Emphasis added
What is your church teaching that you don't know this?
As for Chick Tracts, I've used them... don't anymore. The tract I DO use and pepper the community with is Are You Good Enough To Go To Heaven? [Follow the link to read the entire tract] The tract itself is long and light on pictures.... as in, 'none but the front cover', but this is the one I use.
Not into reading that much? How about an interactive flash version? How about taking the Good Person Test?
These are both from The Way of the Master and Living Waters ministries. They also do a daily 2-hour radio broadcast that emphasizes personal witnessing. You can also download the show, for free, via daily podcasts.
The links to these places have been in my sidebar under 'Founded on Rock' for quite a while now.
----
I'm done with this thread unless anyone has a questions regarding the links I provided.
Oh! And for those of you who are new to the Christian faith, or are simply curious about what you may be missing, or missing out ON, check out the 10 Principles For New Christians
Better to scare them into heaven than to ignore them into hell, Eric? Unless, of course, the fearmongering approach turns them away from the faith...
If it works for you, though, more power to you. Just letting you know that the sort of "good news" preached at Cameron's place probably turns away many more than it ever wins over. Just my opinion.
And we know what the Bible says about those who chase away people from the faith...
DOOOMMMM, GNASHING OF TEETH, AAAGGGGHHH!!
Just messing with you, sort of.
It beats lying to them with such trite phrases as "God has a wonderful plan for your life" "You can live your best life now"
God does have a plan for our lives, but no where is it written that our lives will be better; filled with prosperity, love, happiness...
Jesus said we would be hated of all men... that the servant is not above the master, for if they've persecuted Him so shall we be persecuted. Did God promise the Apostles "wonderful lives" or their "Best life now"? All but one of them died a martyr's death, and John's end was hardly comfortable.
So enlighten me, if not fear of the judgment to come, then how do YOU motivate the lost to come to Christ? Jesus Himself used the Ten Commandments to point out the sinner's need for forgiveness. I'm only trying to do what Jesus did.
My point rests in the contradiction of your first reference, EL: We shall all stand, we shall all bow. I suppose one could point out that one has to be standing before one can bow. I concede that fine point.
As for the last two chapters of The Revelation, I'd dismiss them as I do the rest of The Revelation -- not as irrelevant, but as irrelevant to the present or the future. The events it purports to describe happened about 2,000 years ago.
Martin Luther, the great Reformer, thought it should have been left out of the Canon, but considering all else he was up against, he didn't have the stomach to press the issue. I'm with him. The Revelation has done, and does, more harm to the cause of Christ than good. Witness the Left Behind books, which may have forever confused actual, inarguable fiction with already highly suspect fundamentalist and dispensationalist interpretations of Scripture.
And, for God's sake, quit thinking that I get all my ideas from my church! I get my ideas on my knees, for the most part, figuratively if not always literally. From reading and meditation. From pondering all the Christian traditions. From praying. But not mostly from my church, which is where I go to worship and fellowship, not, actually, to learn.
My church would even let YOU in, EL. Mark, too, if he kept his hateful mouth shut. If he flapped his lips, even then he wouldn't be shown the door, he'd merely be drowned out by the voices of those who've actually accepted God's grace, wear it on their sleeves and strive to share with every other person they meet -- even thick-headed fundies who think they, and only they, have the Truth.
I confess that I struggle to extend grace to Mark. I just can't stand the guy. Hey, we all have flaws.
Dies Irae - yes, indeed. Now we're talking. A Wrathful God is delish, but I hear Rhadamanthus, the Norns, Maat, and Freddy Krueger are all really scary too. Or used to be.
"So enlighten me, if not fear of the judgment to come, then how do YOU motivate the lost to come to Christ?"
That's a great question. It might make a good post for one of us.
Me? I'm more of a "Come unto me, all you who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest," kind of a guy.
I don't have much use for fire-and-brimstone talk to put the fear of God into people as an approach to evangelism.
Jesus said at the start of his ministry, "I have come to bring GOOD NEWS to the poor, release for the captive, healing for the sick, the Day of God's Good favor" - that last being an allusion to the Jubilee Laws, with which at least the Jews around him would be familiar. And for a people who had been taken advantage of by the powers-that-be - who'd been disenfranchised, the notion of the Jubilee Laws is quite appealing.
The "common people" - the marginalized, the oppressed, the foreigner, widows, orphans, the poor, etc - were very attracted to Jesus' message and thronged to him and the early church. They didn't do so (or at least there's no evidence that they did so) because of any fire and brimstone evangelism.
In fact, the "fire and brimstone" talk was reserved almost exclusively for the wealthy, the religious and the powerful. THESE people oftentimes DID reject Jesus' message.
"You offspring of vipers, who told you to flee from the wrath to come," John the Baptist yelled at the religious and powerful.
So, given the approach of Jesus and the early church/disciples, I think I tend to recommend the "Good news to the poor/come unto me all you who are weary and heavy-laden" approach, with a bit of prophetic anger towards the rich, powerful and religious, and a bit of reality that, "all who wish to follow Jesus will have to drink from his cup," tossed in.
Amen and amen to Dan. And Amen.
God is going to judge us because of our sin. The Bible says that sin is the trangression of the Law. God is going to use His Law to judge us. As believers we are no longer under the Law-- Jesus has taken that burden off of us. But those who are not Christians are still under the Law, and subject to the consequences of their sin. Those who aren't believers need to recognize that they have transgressed the Law. Using the Ten Commandments gets them to stop justifying their lifestyle ["My god is a god of love. He won't send me to hell because I'm _________, He made me this way!"] or actions ["Sure, I've stolen small stuff and told an occasional lie, but I've never murdered anyone... Everyone's doing it! Is God going to throw EVERYONE in hell?"] because their conscience speaks to them and it convicts them.
The sower of seed needs to be careful of where he sows; on the wayside? birds'll get those. Stony ground? they'll develop no roots and wither the first hint of difficulty, mockery, or persecution. In the weeds? The cares of the world will make them fruitless. But the Law cuts to the chase, and tells the sinner exactly WHY he need a savior... not simply that his life will become less burdensome with Jesus in his heart, because again, at the first sign of difficulty he'll wither and die... a false-convert.
"The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God"
--Isaiah 61:1-2
But His purpose for the nation of Israel was rejected when they scourged Him, and drove Him up Golgotha to crucify Him.
He came to give Israel the promises of God; given to them as a nation. But they rejected Him. He knew they would.
He came to 'provide Himself [as] a lamb' for sacrifice [Gen 22:8]
But why? To pay the penalty of sin for man. A penalty that no man but Jesus could pay.
It's not enough to simply win souls to the church, the membership rolls, the offering plate, the good-time fellowships... The truth is, Jesus died to pay for their SINS. As witnesses, we mustn't allow them to think of themselves as 'not all that bad', or why would they even NEED a savior? More pointedly, from what are they being saved? A life of mediocrity, sadness, and heartbreak, all of which are as fleeting as is life itself? Or are they being saved from the wrath to come? the wrath they'll face if they DON'T have the savior.
It is the blood... BLOOD... of Jesus that makes possible the saving of all men... not the 'GOOD NEWS'. The good news IS the blood of Jesus... the blood of GOD shed for all mankind. [Acts 20:28 KJV]
To neglect a sinner's 'sin' in bringing them to Christ is to risk losing them in the end. From what are they to repent, if not their sin? And what better barometer to guage their need of a savior than the Ten Commandments?
As Paul stated in Galatians 3:24,
"Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith."
Romans 3:20 says,
"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin."
"Better to scare them into Heaven..." ?
Better to make sure they understand why they need Jesus. How else would they fear enough to flee the wrath to come?
Jude 1:23 legitimizes 'Fear' as a tactic...
"And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."
Did you read the link to the tract I posted? or did you merely scan it, or perhaps saw where it came from and chose to criticize it out of hand?
"The events [Revelation] purports to describe happened about 2,000 years ago."
Huh? Wha? Say what!?
Titus burned Jerusalem in A.D. 70. John penned Revelation circa A.D. 90. And when exactly did Jesus descend from heaven to the Mount of Olives and establish His kingdom?
I really don't think that that much of your lasts contradicts anything I believe -- I just don't believe that one has to know much of that, or any of it, actually, to be a recipient of God's grace.
As for my throw-away remark about The Revelation: The only word in The Revelation I take literally is "The."
Se Preterist interpretation of The Revelation for one of several mainstream schools of thought. I din't ascribe to any of them, actually. I think it's wack to try to make sense of the book, period. So I don't.
Yes, in fact, I DID read the tract you linked, as well as the Ten Principles for New Christians stuff. Not only did I read them, I lived that stuff for the first 25 years of my life, brother. Lived and breathed it from age 10 - 25-ish, and probably a bit beyond.
Believe me when I tell you I'm well acquainted with the doomsday approach of soul-winning ("Say friend, have you heard the good news?" "Why no, what is it?" "You're a hopeless sinner bound for a hell of everlasting torment and torture because your disgusting lifestyle is so horrid that you have no HOPE of getting into heaven!" "....and what's the bad news?").
I've been door to door delivering that message. I've gone through the Constant Contact Consciousness program, the Evangelism Now (? I forget if that name is right) program and graduated with my diploma and soul-saving kit. I knew how to twist them around to seeing, "Well, geez, I don't really have any hope BUT to get saved in the manner he's talking about..."
Believe me, I've been there, done that and repented of my hubris. It was emotional and spiritual abuse, at least in my case. Hopefully you find a way to make it work better for you so that it is of God's grace and not an abuse of the Bible as it was when I did it.
Do we need God's love and forgiveness? Absolutely. Must we accept God's gift of heaven to get in because we can't "earn" our way in? That's what I believe.
Does it work especially well to go around telling people how disgusting their sins are and how hell-bound and utterly lost they are? Not especially.
No. The people who come to God tend to come to God because of the evidence of God's love in God's people. At least in my experience.
And, seeing as that approach is extrabiblical in nature and not especially effective (in my experience), I don't see much point in going there anymore.
Furthermore, EL, Paul was talking to Jews wo were living the law, correct? He was not talking to me! (And here is a huge chasm: You believe that every word in the Bible was written to you, for you, right now -- and I think it's preposterous and dangerous to look at the Bible that way.)
Oh, Dan: Evangelism Explosion here. "Have you come to place in your spiritual life where you are certain that if you died today, you would go to heaven?" And, "If you did die today, and God said, 'Why should I let you into my kingdom?' What would you say?"
And anything short of an exact recitation of "the sinner's prayer" resulted in a GOTCHA! and the Roman's Road trotted out so fast it would make their heads spin.
And then, invite them to church, then go on with your life, leaving the "baby Christian" in God's hands.
Whatever. The faith, brothers, is relational, not definitional, and not confessional -- although all that has a part in it.
These days, I'm dang near one part Primitive Baptist (God will save whom He wilt) and one part Universalist (Jesus saves ALL). Somewhere in there -- and you know what? It doesn't matter exactly what I believe today because THAT is not the source of my salvation. I try to trust God. I try to follow Jesus. I try to listen to James as much as Paul, and Wesley as much as Luther, and so on and so forth. But my salvation rests in God's hands -- not mine -- on His grace, not my understanding of it.
Well, I'll be dadgum. Looky here, the last part, from wikipedia:
The Primitive Baptists can be sub-divided into four main groups: (1) Limited Predestinarian; (2) Absolute Predestinarian; (3) Progressive; and (4) Universalists. This last group is the smallest and consists of 5 or 6 small associations in Appalachia that adapted the theory of universal atonement to the doctrines of Primitive Baptists.
Evangelism Explosion! That's the one I spent a lot of time with and got an actual diploma and soulwinners kit.
What warning therefore do you two take from Ezekiel 3:18-19 ?
"When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul."
Oh, that's right! Ezekiel was preaching to Israel.... not Christians.
Eric, I've no problems "warning the wicked," I pointed out that Jesus did a great bit of rebuking. I just try to emulate Jesus in who I rebuke and why.
You only see compassion from Jesus for the poor, the whores, the drunks, the soldiers, the tax collectors, the "sinners." He saved his harsh rebukes for the rich and powerful and religious.
Again, there is no real biblical precedent for the sort of hellmongering that I took part in growing up and as a young man.
As Pilate once asked: "What is truth?" ...
I now ask: "Who is wicked?"
Re, "Oh, that's right! Ezekiel was preaching to Israel.... not Christians."
YES. Exactly.
Re, "Who is wicked?"
Those who would place themselves
in the position of judging another's relationship with God, based on their own ideas and concepts of God. Which are the ones Jesus railed most against.
"I now ask: "Who is wicked?""
What ER said.
Or, consider all the life of Jesus as recorded in the Bible. All the stories told about him in all four books of the Gospels.
How many times, exactly, did Jesus rail against the "sinners" of his day - the gay, the adulterers, the gamblers, the whores, the drunks, those who cursed and were crude, those who did petty crimes...ALL those sins that evangelical churches tend to fret over - how many times did Jesus warn them of their wicked, wicked ways and their need to repent?
Cite verse and chapter, please.
Now, how many times did he rail against the rich, the religious, the hypocritical elite, the powerful?
I'll be honest, I don't know. I do know that the former number would be close to zero (I may be forgetting one or two circumstances, but I don't think so) and the latter number would be closer to dozens.
No one is saying that we all don't need to repent. We do. There are none perfect, no not one.
We're saying that religious blowhards getting their panties in a twist about others' "sins" does more harm than good and oftentimes is more reflective of the sin and hangups in the lives of the "religious" than it is of the "sinners."
Just consider it all. For what it's worth from this sinner to that sinner.
Amen. Or did I say that already?
I just know Jesus is the way
I just know Jesus is the truth
I just know Jesus is the life
I know that Jesus is my God ...
http://eruditeredneck.blogspot.com/2007/04/test.html
I asked, 'Who is wicked?'
ER said [and I paraphrase as well as condense], the Myopic Judgmentalist. Dan responds with an, 'What ER said'
Jeremiah 17:9 says, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"
Since every man, woman and child throughout history was born with this congenital defect, without the saving grace of a heart transplant no one can enter Heaven.
The Bible is replete with the phrase "be saved," especially the New Testament, both literally and figuratively.
Jesus told Nicodemus that "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." --John 3:5
In other words, to be saved one must be born again, for to see the kingdom of God is to be born again, and spared the wrath to come.
Jesus said in Luke 8:12, "Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved."
What is it about salvation that the devil seeks to rob men of it? What is it about the word that saves people? Romans 10:17 says, "So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God." What is it about the word of God that saves? Does not the bible point to man's need for repentance? forgiveness? a savior? And from what must men be saved?
Their sin. Their wickedness. If a man doesn't believe himself to be wicked he won't see the need for a savior. Men must see their need for salvation, and hence a savior, before they will seek one out. And their only need at that point is to find some remedy to the sin in their life and in their heart.
It is foolish to point one's finger at the sinner and shout, "SINNER!!! REPENT OR BURN!!!?" That's reasoning with flesh, and the flesh will reject such a message. Instead we are to reason with the conscience... and ONLY the conscience. Prick their conscience, and IT will 'convince [them] of sin' and their need for a savior.
"And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved."
--Acts 2:21
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
--Acts 4:12
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"Then [the keeper of the prison] called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house."
--Acts 16:29-32
Saved from what? The wrath to come.
"Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."
--Romans 5:9
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
--Romans 10:9
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
--Romans 10:13
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire."
--1 Corinthians 3:15
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved."
--1 Corinthians 10:33
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved."
--2 Thessalonians 2:10
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."
--1 Timothy 2:4
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?"
--1 Peter 4:18
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
"And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."
--Jude 1:23
Saved from what? the wrath to come.
The entire point of salvation is to be spared God's just wrath upon the wicked.
God said to Isaiah, "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool."
--Isaiah 1:18
Reason. Not Harangue. With the conscience. Not the Flesh. With the truth of their sin and their need for a savior. Not some namby-pamby gospel that draws more 'stony-ground hearers' [false-converts] than it does genuine born again children of God.
It seems, from where I stand, that you both have abandoned reason for some phoney-baloney, Dr. feel-good, plastic-banana gospel; one of you conveniently forgets all the things Jesus had to say about Hell, and the other chooses to believe in preterist nonsense-- conveniently forgetting that Revelation was written AFTER A.D. 70.
Make very careful that Matthew 23:15 does not become a true reflection of your "evangelistic" efforts.
GREAT fundy sermon -- the kind that suggests the preacher is preaching to himself primarily.
But selective, as usual, in Scripture selection. Of course.
But Re, "The entire point of salvation is to be spared God's just wrath upon the wicked."
Dude, that is not the entire point of salvation. That is a big point of traditional fundamentalist Christianity -- turn or burn! -- but it is most certainly not the entire point. It is the beginning point, and a fine ne at that, not the end.
By the way, I probably don't buy "original sin" as you nderstand it, probably, either. Wickedness? Incompletion is more like it.
Wow. You really believe in taking it that way, Eric. This explains why we have such differences in many areas.
You're a Puritan. You appear to be stuck on good news-as-horror show.
You said:
I asked, 'Who is wicked?'
ER said [and I paraphrase as well as condense], the Myopic Judgmentalist. Dan responds with an, 'What ER said'
Actually, what I went on to say was, "look to Jesus."
Still a sound answer.
Brother, I pray for your salvation from fear and anger and loathing. Life is sweet, God is great, love and wonder are everywhere waiting to be experienced. Embrace grace.
When one receives so great a gift as salvation by way of such a horrific price as our Savior paid, is not much thankfulness and praise worthy to Him? Grace was not, is not cheap and should not be treated as such. Some of this stuff I see on the web comes across as disrespectful and ungratefulness, whether realized or intended or not.
Would we as caring earthly children, talk to or about our fathers or mothers as some do, and call it grace?
The Word does have instructions for us and although we have accepted the grace of God through Christ, we will be judged or rewarded by how we have treated His grace and how our influence has affected those we come in contact with.
I agree with everything you just said mom2 (well, except I'm not totally sure you're saying in that second paragraph).
I think the weirdest thing is that fundamentally, if you'll excuse the phrase, I think we all do agree on what the Gospel is. At least I hope so.
It's just that one of us (EL) has a fear-based perspective and insists that we spread the word by spreading that fear; Dan has a grace-and-justice take on it and prefers that we spread the word likewise; and I have what is called in some circles a "sloppy grace" attitude, for which I will be judged, and with which I am more comfortable: Lord, if I erred, I did so in love, not in condemnation and judgment, which is YOUR job.
What we're arguing about is what to emphasize and how to get it across, I think.
I've honestly never personally known a soul who was scared to the Cross who persisted in the faith. Never. Not one. Except, maybe, EL.
And the most Christlike people I personally know now are wide-open grace lovers who don't insist that their take on the Gospel is the only one, some of whom have quit worrying about such arguable details, who are trusting God a la Paul, and trying live out the faith a la James.
No hangups about End Times. No hangups about pre, past, a-millenialism or whatever. Not many thoughts at all about the misty future that we all see only darkly, whether in this lief or the next -- which, after all, is all the same.
Many, many thoughts on life, and it more abundantly (spiritual sense) in the present, from which all eternity springs, the faith as axes, or spokes, of relationships with others -- with the chief call to repentance this one: Turn from yourself. Turn to God. Follow Jesus. Love one another. Judge not.
Be saved from hell (a definition of which Christendom can't settle on)!
Or:
Be saved from yourself (which eveyr one of us, and only every one of us, knows intimately)?
I think most rational people, those seeking God but not reared in the fundamentalist milieu, are more likely to respond to the second appeal.
Jesus saves from hell, whatever that is. But Jesus saves us from lots, lots more than hell.
There is a chance that I will go to seminary, once I getpicked up and move to Colorado to be with my wife.
It's discussions like that that have done as much to help me discern whether I have a calling as anything.
EL, who'da thunk that a fundie 'Baman like yourself might could be used by God to help a recovering Southern Baptist turned mainstream lib Christian possibly find his way to seminary!
I LOVE God's sense of humor.
You assume incorrectly that I need salvation from fear, anger, and loathing.
God cannot wash away sin from an unrepentant heart; such are haughty and proud and see no need for forgiveness.
'Jesus has a wonderful plan for your life...' is not enough to convince them to turn from their wickedness, put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and put themselves at great risk for ridicule and humiliation at the hands and speech of friends, family, and the entire world.
Please note I did not say this statement wasn't true, in context. The Apostles did indeed live wonderful lives, having witnessed the son of God heal multitudes, and raise Himself from the dead. But from a worldly perspective... a sinner's perspective, all but one Apostle died a violent martyr's death. "In context" their lives were wonderfully planned, for they were [as are we all] fearfully and wonderfully made... with purpose. Ask the sinner to set his affections of Heavenly riches... "Pie in the Sky"... forsaking worldly pleasures WITHOUT telling them why they need to do it-- to escape the wrath to come ("...it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" [Heb 9:27] it is therefore needful that we make known to the unbeliever that "...the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works." [Tit 2:11-14])--and he will laugh in your face. But show him his sin has alienated him from God, and that the wrath of God abides on him because he has not believed on the only begotten son of God, and you may win a brother... MAY. Our only job is to sow seed [the word]; it is God that causes the word to germinate in the heart of the hearer, but the hearer can choose to crush the seed and deny God.
If you sense fear in me it is because I fear for what will happen to them if they stumble over the threshold of death without their sins forgiven. If you sense anger in me it is because I have to hack through thickets of falsehood and heresy every day, the hedges the enemy has placed about the unregenerated soul. If you sense loathing, it is for the heresy that permeates today's mainstream churches. It is everywhere. Including places like TBN and INSP.
"Dan has a grace-and-justice take on it and prefers that we spread the word likewise"
If Dan had a 'grace and justice' take why would he be so opposed to pointing to the justice that awaits all men for sin, unless they repent and accept the gift God offers them through the shed blood of His only begotten son Jesus?
Justice speaks of judgment, and the truth is, as I stated in my previous comment, "...it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" --Hebrews 9:27] Everyone is to be judged when this life is over; either for our works as believers for [eternal] reward, or for the deeds of our flesh as unbelievers for [eternal] punishment. What kind of Christian, knowing the bridge is out up ahead, doesn't seek to warn passing motorists? They are going to be judged! For their sins if they don't accept Christ.
Yet Dan, and you ER, have argued against "scaring" the sinner to Jesus. These people SHOULD be afraid! Life seems, and is, very long to one not mindful of his end, but talk to the man dying in his hospital bed full of fear for his coming death, and he'd wish for more time. Fear rules such a man's heart-- and well it should if he's not saved, because he'll have to account for every idle word and selfish and evil deed performed in his flesh, for "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." --Hebrews 10:31
It would appear from your comments that you assume I stand on street corners shouting REPENT!!! or berate passersby. The idea is not to attack them personally, but rather to engage their Conscience... not with accusations but with soft speech and genuine concern for their eternal destination! Not with a raised voice, but with soft speech. Not wearing a sandwich board making a public spectacle of yourself, but with soft, honest, heartfelt speech; engaging the conscience, not the intellect. The intellect will argue and seek to justify the flesh, but the Conscience has the law of God written upon it. Prick THAT via the needle of soft-speech AND the Ten Commandments, and you can demonstrate their need for forgiveness via the shed blood of a savior.
How do you win someone who's into Wicca? Satanism? Homosexual lifestyle? Drugs? Not by attacking their lifestyle and sin. No. Address their Conscience, for that is the same in all men. It is with the Conscience that we feel remorse for our actions, and it is because of our Conscience that we yearn for forgiveness.
Kindly explain to them that should they reject God's Grace and die in their sin, Judgment will come.
Re, "You assume incorrectly that I need salvation from fear, anger, and loathing."
I do not. I conclude, based on your own words, that fear is what gotcha saved in the first place. Fear had ZILCH to do with my own first tiptoe into God's grace, back in a Southern Baptist church, back in 1973. Fear had NOTHING to do with it, so I can't actually even comprehend where you're coming from.
We're talking past each other again. I so reject fear as a springboard to a relationship with God I can't even go on here. So, never mind. Peace be unto you.
I find it interesting that ER states, in almost the same breath, that he follows Jesus, (who said Love everyone) and then says he can't stand me.
In spite of all ER's heretical and apostate misinterpreted statements of tainted faith, I still think ER would be a fun guy to sit at the bar, drinking beer, and watching football with. If I drank.
I don't hate you, ER. Quite the contrary, I see it as part of my commission to point out the error of your ways. To save you from being one of those, who BOWING before God, hears the terrifying words, "Depart from me you cursed, I never knew you."
Those are indeed frightening words, ER but more frightening than the words is the very real possibility that you may someday actually hear them. I'll let you in on a secret:
I don't want to hear them, and the thought of that possiblity scares the Hell out of me. Literally.
EL, Who among your commenters wouldn't at least make some effort to rescue another person, regardless of whether you personally like him or not, from a burning house?
Would it be considered a loving, selfless act to warn someone in the path of a tidal wave that he may experience a little moisture?
By the same token, if you see a human being in danger of going to his Maker without Christ, are we supposed to ignore that fact, and justify his sin by twisting the Word of God to mean something completely opposite of what it is intended to mean, or try to do whatever you can to help him understand he is in danger?
What would be more loving? To tell sinners they are in danger of the judgement even when it angers and/or offends them to tell them or to pretend that they are resting safely in the bosom of Abraham in spite of their unrepentant sin?
Is giving fair warning to the sinner, in love, the same as scaring people into Heaven?
I don't think persuading an unbeliever that he is a Hell bound sinner is scaring him. It is simply informing him of Biblical truth, in hopes that he will understand and repent.
I'm quite sure those religious leaders in Christ's time didn't like being called a generation of vipers, nevertheless, that is exactly what he called them. Do you think he called them that just to anger them or make them think about how they were misrepresenting the teachings of the prophets?
That is all I am doing when I tell ER what I think. It sounds as if I make him uncomfortable. Maybe that means I make more sense than what he cares to admit.
Our mutual friend, Tim, has given up on you, ER. I am not so ready to give you up to Satan. So curse me if you will. I am only trying to shepherd you back into the fold.
Then stop, Mark. For I want no part of your fold, for it is a particularly fearful, ignorant and unregenerated part of the Church.
Are you so thick-headed, really, that you don't know the difference between agape and phileo? I struggle to conjure up phileo for you; I am helpless before the agape that God washes me in, and that I can't help but extend to you.
You don't make me uncomfortable, Mark. You make me sick; you make me grieve for the Gospel -- because you most certainly do not represent it -- you whore yourself and your ability to persuade out to the party that, I believe down to the bottom of my soul, will be judged by history to be the most hypocritical, false, pathetic and pitiful representation of Christianity that the United States has ever seen.
Tim has gone from one cult, Christian Science, to another, himself and his own understanding -- which is why, I suppose, Mark, that you see eye to eye with him: You both serve yourselves and think you are serving the Church, and Christ. Good that he's "given up" on me, for I want to go nowhere that that hyper-judgmental viper is leading people.
By the way, Mark. What fold do you actually belong to? Name the church you attend, and are you a member?
You, too, EL. Because unless both of you are actually active members of a local church, why, then you both are the worst kind of hypocrites.
Direct personal challange to you, especially, EL:
The last time I saw you mention attending an actual church, you were bitching about how it didn't suit your exacting standards.
My own church, which is full of sinners, is regularly linked on my blog. I am a member of the communications committee (although we've not met this year ...) Dan's church life is there for all the world to see.
Perhaps I've missed an update: Where *do* you go, EL? How do you serve?
Yes, I meant to taunt. And if you can shut me up with a name and place I will be glad!
"The last time I saw you mention attending an actual church, you were bitching about how it didn't suit your exacting standards."
I don't recall that, ER. Find it if you can, and if you've accurately represented that particular sentiment I'll own up and repent.
I am attending church. Beth Haven Community Church. Pastor's name is Dr. H.D. Shumake, who also founded and serves as chancellor for Bethany Divinity College and Seminary. Assuming I can get some troubling debt paid down, I intend to take classes there. Not because I feel led to preach, but because I have a thirst for deeper understanding. Where that will lead me, only God knows. I'm sure He'll let me in on that plan when the time is right. Bethany also runs a Southern Gospel radio station. But that's beside the point.
As to how I serve, I worship, I pray, I welcome visitors, and I pepper the town with tracts. Do I have a title? Yes. The only one that matters... "Brother".
For anyone reading (and not bothering to comment) Mark's criticism of some of ER's views is wholly justified. Especially ER's mention of Preterism several comments back.
Here's a short article explaining what Preterism is, and why it's more than merely implausible, but flat-out wrong.
Preterism! I Can't Believe It
--By Todd Strandberg
One of my key reasons for believing in the pre-tribulation rapture is the fact all other views are always trying to undermine pre-tribulationism. Up until now, the most vocal group of opponents has been the post-trib and pre-wrath folks. I'm amazed to find preterism now on the attack, gaining ground by mostly converting pre-tribbers.
What is preterism? This theory argues that all Bible prophecy has been fulfilled; it states that nothing remains on the prophetic calendar. According to preterism, events like the rise of the Antichrist, the tribulation, the rapture, and the Day of the Lord all took place around 70 AD, the year the Romans invaded Jerusalem and destroyed the second Temple.
I just cannot understand how anyone can follow a preterist line of thinking in light of current world events. As in many cases, pride is one of the most common reasons people begin following doctrinal error. They believe that they are part of a special group that has discovered a hidden truth. Never mind the fact that millions of people have joined them in supporting their folly.
Up until now, I've largely been ignoring preterism because it seemed equivalent to the Flat Earth Society. Well, I can't stand by and watch error run free, so it looks like I'm going to have to add preterism to the list of erroneous rapture views that I need to actively refute.
The heart of this error is based on Jesus' statement that "this generation shall not pass, till all things be fulfilled" (Mat 24:34). It seems easy enough to claim Jesus was speaking about a first-century generation; however, logic ends there when one contemplates the fulfillment of all Bible prophecy.
In order to make 70 AD the magic year, we would have to delete dozens of prophecies that were never fulfilled. When was the Gospel preached to all the nations? When was the Mark of the Beast implemented? What about China's 200-million-man army? When did 100-pound hailstones fall from the sky? And what date was it when the Euphrates River dried up?
The questions are endless. Why did we have the rebirth of Israel? If Jerusalem was forever removed from being the burdensome stone, why has it now returned to that status? When did all the Jews shout, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord," as Jesus said they would?
After being so strict in their interpretation of Matthew 24:34, preterists then run roughshod over many clear statements of Scripture. They say that although the "resurrection" happened in 70 AD, the bodies of Christians were left in the grave.
Preterists take the dangerous step of spiritualizing all passages of Scripture that relate to the nation of Israel, and claim that these refer to the church, the "New Israel." They teach that the "old earth," which Scripture says will pass away, is the Old Covenant. The new heaven and new earth, they say, is the New Covenant, and the "elements," which Scripture says will burn with fervent heat when this happens, are the "elements of the law."
Preterism produces some bizarre explanations for why the world is still experiencing suffering and calamity. One explanation I ran across cited God's need for population control as the reason for mankind's suffering. Here is what one preterist author wrote:
"I believe that people are born and people die. Kingdoms rise and kingdoms fall. God is the providential population controller. He brings famine, disease, natural catastrophes, wars and tumults. One-third of the population of Europe was destroyed by the Black Plague in the early part of this millennium. Eight hundred fifty thousand were killed in the 1556 earthquake in the Shanghai province of China. Two million were killed in World War II. Thirteen million were killed under Stalin and 6 million under Hitler. God is very equipped to control population."
----
Naturally, this is just one man's view, or at least that's what ER might say. But the fact remains that some serious questions need to be answered before Preterism can be taken even remotely serious. The greatest of these being, as I related in a previous comment, the fact that Revelation wasn't even written until circa A.D. 90, yet Titus burned Jerusalem in A.D. 70.... a full twenty [-ish] years BEFORE John's vision on the Isle of Patmos. Which means (for the Preterist view to be correct) the Book of Revelation must needs be a book of HISTORY, and not prophecy, despite the fact that the book calls itself a book of prophecy... [Rev 1:3, Rev 22:7,10,18-19, but especially from the lips of Jesus himself in Rev 1:19-- "Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter." As to Rev 1:3, if "the time [was] at hand" in A.D. 90, then it was unfulfilled in A.D. 70.]
I don't say all this to deliberately infuriate ER, but only to point out why Mark and I disagree so strenuously with the theologies of both ER AND Dan. To my mind at least, Preterism is a first-class Heresy. As is much of what is affectionately refered to as "Liberal Christianity".
The Bible can speak for itself. It's language is not difficult to understand. And yet countless 'experts' can't seem to agree on a unified, or "string" doctrine. there are more denominations than you can shake a stick at but there is only one truth and one faith. And that is Christ Jesus, God in human form, died for the redemption of mankind, His blood as payment for sin.
I don't worry about whether the rapture will happen before or after the tribulation. I only know that someday I will kneel before God and give an account for my life to my Creator.
My most prayerful desire is that I hear the words, "Well done, my good and faithful servant", and not the words, "Depart from me...."
I really can't put my finger on the problems I have with ER's theology, but when I see someone deny that America was ever concieved as a Christian nation, that Dr. James Dobson, and other Christian leaders in America are evil, that Americans United for Seperation of Church and State and the ACLU are good organizations, believes that homosexuality is not a sin, and seems to revere bloggers who hate anything remotely related to God and continually mocks God, Jesus, and Christians, I wonder about his concept of what Christianity really is.
The Bible says, "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" ~ Isaiah 5:20
This is what I believe ER has fallen into.
Again, the Bible warns against forsaking the gathering of believers together and not be unequally yoked with non-believers, and it appears ER has done exactly opposite what the Bible teaches in that regard.
Oh, and I forgot to add the biggest problem I have with ER's theology:
Although I haven't found conclusive proof of this, he appears to deny the Diety of Jesus Christ. I have repeatedly asked him if he believes Jesus is the Christ and he dodges the question. I submit he knows Jesus is God, as jesus Himself declared, but he doesn't want to admit it as it in direct juxtaposition to what he appears to want to believe.
That is the main theological point that defines a cult, according to the Bible answer man, Hank Hannigraff. (and I agree) We can all be brothers and sisters in Christ in spite of millions of dotrinal differences, but the denial of Christ's Diety separates the true believer from the unbeliever.
Sigh.
EL, in exasperation I mischaracterized comments you made quite awhile back. You were lamenting the fact that you couldn't find, in whatever church you were attending, what you had in the church of your youth. That is not "bitching" that the current one did not "meet your exacting standards." I apologize.
Mark, re: your list: I deny this one: "revere bloggers who hate anything remotely related to God and continually mocks God, Jesus, and Christians." I do not. The rest are pretty much on target, except I don't believe James Dobson is "evil" -- that's you, as usual, putting words in my mouth like you do everyone else. I believe he is a threat to liberty, I mean his political stuff.
My interpretation of The Revelation is not preterist. I just threw that out there, and I acknowledged as much in a later comment, calling it a "throw-away" remark. I have no interpretation of The Revelation, other than I think it is impossible to interpret outside the general understanding of it as one example, just one, of a bunch of apocalyptical writings that come from the time when Christians thought the world actually was going to end and Mr. Jesus Christ (courtesy title and "last name" included for Mark's benefit) was, in fact, on his way back.
Mark, I do not deny the deity of Jesus Christ. If that doesn't suit you, I'm sorry. Part of the mystery of the faith, to me, is the lifelong commitment to Jesus that is the blessing and burden of all Christians: Who was the man Jesus? Who is the Christ? It is so not as simple as you think it is.
Oh, and EL, the Bible speaks plainly about NOTHING. But if you've decided what it means beforehand, why, it's easy to find bits and pieces here and there to justify your positions.
Now, I'm off to my non-church, apostate near-Satanic "church" -- and it's those kinds of false accusations you will answer for when you stand before God, Mark -- dangerously close to blasphemy, for the place is awash in grace and the Holy Spirit of God Almighty, and the other personality, the gentler spirit of Mr. Jesus Christ (see note above). Myself, I will answer for my anger, and the urge -- I confess -- to drive to Virginia and beat you whenever you call me an apostate of the faith, when I am merely an apostate of fundamentalist, unthinking, prideful, cultural RELIGION that has lost sight of Jesus.
Wow! What a happy conversation!
Greetings. I came here via Mark's blog "God's Way My Way". I had to put in my five cents worth (inflation, ya know).
Dan asks what would happen if we "sponsored some sort of assistance to our Muslim brothers and sisters". I'm surprised he's unaware of the amount of money and a personnel we've donated to help out after the tsunami hit Muslim Indonesia a couple of years ago, the money we've sent to the Palestinians for such a long time until they put Hamas in control, the money, supplies and personnel to aid the Iraqi people in the current situation. These are just three instances of our largesse and it has bought us very little amongst those we fight against. I submit that if we had fewer naysayers and BDS sufferers in this country, we'd have fewer people around the world declaring us the bad guys. (The same goes for our Euoropean "friends") But despite all the ignoring of our philanthropy, we continue to give. What we need is more Muslim support and one needs to look hard, but it is out there, just not enough. So what Dan asks for is being given and has been given for some time. It is worthless to those we fight. It is their version of Islam that dictates their attitudes toward us, not our behavior. It has been the case for 1400 years.
As to the debate surrounding evangelistic styles, it seems to me that what is being debated is two sides of the same coin. To favor one side without ever turning over and showing the other side is an incomplete picture of Christianity. I must, however, fall in behind Elashley's methods as it is the most important part of the equation. Salvation. It is the love and compassion spoken of by Dan made manifest. Christ wasn't just slummin' with the sinners, He was preaching to them as well.
Speaking of love and compassion, Dan also tried to further his point by speaking of the love and compassion Jesus showed the common people of His time. Yet, he forgets His ministry focussed on that which our host speaks. When he saved the prostitute from stoning, He told her, "Go, and sin no more." He said the same to the woman at the well. Why would he say that except to stress the importance of repentance and the need for being born again in order to be saved from "the wrath to come". The whole of Judeo-Christian teaching boils down to the choice between God's way or our own way. There is a reward for one choice, and a price for the other.
Thank you for your input Marshall, and welcome. Very eloquently stated.
On this I agree, and have stated often: "The whole of Judeo-Christian teaching boils down to the choice between God's way or our own way."
But, I must add, no one can know what is my natural ungodly way but me. Ergo, no one can know any other's natural ungodly way but that other. Ergo, no one can judge any one's repentance but himself.
Act. 11: 1-18. Jesus SAVES all who will be saved. Who are the unclean among most of us today? Who are today's gentiles? We dare not confuse custom, heritage, religion or anything else for "sin" but the sin that keeps one from coming to God. We dare not say to an other -- any other -- who professes the touch of the Holy Ghost: Thou canst not be saved.
One more comment makes 100.
Here it is. Your 100th comment:
If ER believes in the Diety of Christ, there are only differences of opinion between us, not division.
As to fundamental religion. Fundamentalism has been the nut from which the tree has been growing since the coporal body of Jesus ascended back to His Father. I see no reason why modern theologians should start monkeying with it now. It has been multiplying the body of the church for thousands of years, but now seem to be dying out.
Just a coincidence?
Could it be that these new age concepts are destroying the church as God intended it to be? Well, not destroying it. That can never happen. God is more powerful than that. But there can be no doubt that these new age concepts of Christianity are hurting the mission of the church.
I will continue to defend the fundamentalist doctrine because I believe it to be what God has intended to guide mankind towards reconciliation with Himself.
Call me ignorant if you wish, but I cannot see how believing in the inerrancy of the Bible can in any way be destructive. I can, however, see how telling certain sinners that they are not sinners deludes them into believing they are safe from God's judgment, and that is definitely destructive to the church in my humble opinion.
Don't know, really, how ignorant you are. But if you can't see the violence, danger and, dare I say, sinfulness of insisting that the Bible is inerrant, or "complete" -- when Jesus himself claimed himself not even to be good, but only the Father, in heaven -- then you truly "can't see."
And that's 101, and I'm out of it. Whew!
Don't know, really, how ignorant you are. But if you can't see the violence, danger and, dare I say, sinfulness of insisting that the Bible is inerrant, or "complete" -- when Jesus himself claimed himself not even to be good, but only the Father, in heaven -- then you truly "can't see.">
That statement REALLY puzzles me. I am left wondering where ER would have us go (what book or teacher) as we search for God, Jesus, the Truth and wisdom. It seems to me that when we decide that we need other sources, then we are unwilling to confirm the omnipotent supremacy of God.
Post a Comment
<< Home