posted by:
Fairmoon (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (7:30 am)
i doubt that God is on anyones side. I think she/he has washed his/her hands of the whole thing and just sitting back to watch how the human race experiment works out. Looks to me like both sides are losing.
Personally, if i had created this petri dish expereiment i would have chucked in the garbage a long time ago. But then i'm no Goddess and don't claim to be. Perhaps she/he has a little hope left.
FM
posted by:
Bhere4me (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (8:38 am)
why does it have to be "maybe he is not on either side"? maybe, just maybe he is on both. i dont think that he necessarily prefers one side to win, but he wants what is best for us all.......
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (9:03 am)
Well, What Lincoln is saying is that men are fighting the war, and let's not blame God for it.
I'm sure the other side says that "only Satan would allow his army to travel across the world to fight with such mighty weapons." We say "only Satan would allow people to make bombs of themselves to kill innocents." We're both wrong. Equally.
9-11 and the other attacks wouldn't have taken place if our involvement with that part of the world was simply as tourists, you know. We have a few logs in our eyes around here too.
I still maintain that any country (especially a country as blessed as the U.S.) that considers the natural assets of another country (or countries) as essential to their own national security, is at least short-sighted and at worse, dumb as a post.
One thing we can be sure of is that God doesn't decide which wins wars any more than he decides which team wins a football game.
posted by:
Sillygrrl3 (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (1:00 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
Surrogate, I don't agree with this 'One thing we can be sure of is that God doesn't decide which wins wars any more than he decides which team wins a football game." I don't believe that God cares about a football game outcome, but I do believe He has and does use wars to change the course of history. There are interventions shown in the OT where God was actively involved in the outcome of war. Kara
posted by:
sos (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (4:26 pm)
Does any good father ever take "sides" when his children quarrel?
But perhaps there is something else to consider. It isn't simply an issue of "us vrs them". It isn't simply an issue of two children squabbiling over the same possession.
It's an issue where one of the children is actually harming and killing other children. Now, as one of the biggest kids in the family, isn't it our responsibility to put a stop to it?
Would our father expect anything less of us?
Just a thought.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (4:28 pm)
Reply to: Fairmoon
I do appreciate your respect for the patience and love of God. Surely you and I would have given up long ago, but God's love is amazing.
Far from washing His hands of this mess called humanity, I believe as did Lincoln that God is intricately involved in what is happening in our world. Lincoln was a fatalist. I believe the will of God is tied to the will of man. We effect the outcome by our participation. I have to believe God is up to something, even through this hideous war.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (4:33 pm)
Reply to: Bhere4me
Good question, deserving of a thoughtful reply.
I find it hard to believe God would be behind or supportive of the evil being perpetrated in the name of God by the Muslim culture of our time. At least a rational and honest American would not presume to be fighting for God, to be serving God's will by killing others- though I know there are crazed exceptions, it is not the rule. These guys kill people, and then proclaim, "Allah be praised." Wow, how presumptious, how evil, how insulting to God. But God can still use such people for His purpose. It is a clearly biblical concept. And I know America is far from faultless in this confrontation, even considering 911.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (4:45 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
You have a habit of passing along thoughtful responses that I have not considered, so thanks again. I agree with most of what you share. sillygirl will tackle one area of difference. And, I have difficulty believing we are equally to blame for this conflict. 911 was a broadside. Truly there are inequities in our world. I think such agression is a response to our culture, seen as degrading, bankrupt, and offensive to God. Hollywood and television and lifestyle, all from America, are seen as culturally and religiously destructive to devout Muslims. So the Taliban, al quaida, and Hamas come to the forefront. They preach hatred and violence. The World Trade Center is destroyed, and so we fight back. Do you kill thousands of innocent people because they promote decadence with their entertainment media? Seems rather extreme.
NOw, I ask myself why we are in Iraq? If this was just about doing what was right, we would be in Ethiopia or Somalia just as quickly. Not so. Don't you think oil has something to do with this? And huge political egos? And someone looking for a fight? I think the war with Iraq is a statement to militant Muslims, "Watch out. Don't pick another fight with America. You're gonna get hurt!" And I don't believe God likes such.
We're not equally to blame. But we both share blame. And God is up to something here, but it most likely is not choosing sides.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (4:48 pm)
Reply to: Sillygrrl3
Thanks, silly. And I do believe the Old Testament scriptures, being the inspired Word of God, can teach us much about the ways of God. He often claimed to use nations and rulers for His greater purpose. Same here, I believe. We humans just think we are in charge.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (4:53 pm)
Reply to: sos
Recently I was reading about Hernando DeSoto and his travels through the southeast of what is now the USA in his search for gold and the fountain of youth. He was a devout Catholic, intent upon promoting his religion as he claimed his fortune. As he explored America, he would sometimes take native Americans captive. If they cooperated, he would let them go and even donate to their villages a Christian cross. If they did not cooperate, he would many times have the burned alive. Burned alive- in the name and cause of Christ, of course! Barbaric, I would say. That was about five centuries ago. I think our Christian culture is about five centuries ahead of the current Muslim culture.
God has a big job working with us frail, crazy humans. Whatever our chosen labels!
posted by:
ruined (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (5:30 pm)
Imagine the fallout that would occur if a current-day president uttered those words. We would have all different groups crawling out of the murky depths to claim their rights were violated by such religous speak. Isn't it mind blowing how different we are today as we were, back then? We are more willing to tolerate hate crimes, homosexuality, etc. than we are to tolerate this kind of thinking.
Sorry... I know it's a bit off topic, but your post just sparked that though...
posted by:
ruined (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (5:30 pm)
*thought... not though.
posted by:
TaBooTenente (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (6:18 pm)
yeah, on this one, lincoln was politikin' plain and simple. we're all guilty, if such things mean anything--the blood on our hands and the comfort of our homes provide proof aplenty.
taboo
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (6:22 pm)
Reply to: TaBooTenente
You think so?
This is a bold statement to come from the leader of one's country, in the midst of a very dark time of war when the outcome is very uncertain. I would think safe politicking, in this instance, would be to side with those who proclaim God to be on their side. Lincoln was known to be a man of depe thought, meloncholy, and to have an ornery spiritual side. I think this came from his heart.
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (6:27 pm)
Or, maybe God leaves these things up to us to figure out on our own? Maybe people have to decide on their own what kind of world they will live in and how they will live in the world with each other? Maybe the real problem is anyone believing that because God is on their side that they have some special blessing which exempts them from having to make decisions based on an interdependent reality rather than on an independent "manifest destiny"? Maybe logic and reason and mutual respect are far more important issues for mankind to address then homosexual marriage, prayer in public schools and the 10 commandments hanging on the walls of our court houses and state offices? Maybe, just maybe, we all collectively live in the type of world we build with the collective causal effects of our individual actions and beliefs?
Finally, maybe the very concept that God might be on anyone's side is the root cause of the fundamental conflict between the Christian dominated politics of the western world and the Muslim dominated politics sweeping nations across many continents?
Put more simply, maybe exclusive ideas about God are part of the problem instead of part of the solution?
posted by:
guerillafunk (
reply)
post date:
02.10.06 (7:13 pm)
God doesn't take sides. How just is a God who doesn't love everyone that He created, whether they love him or not? Most likely, the manifestation of the Alpha-and-Omega is in things such as our soldiers sharing candy with small Iraqi children, or other things of that nature.
But God, I'm sure, has withdrawn his presence from anybody and everybody who has shirked it (which, by the way, means that they have to have known it in the first place).
God doesn't take countries' sides in war, God takes the sides of every single loving human being, no matter which side of the no-man's-land they lie on.
posted by:
Darksaber (
reply)
post date:
02.11.06 (7:40 am)
I think God is on "our side" in the way that He finds the death of His saints precious and those saints are on our side. But I doubt He has a stake in our winning and if we do lose, that does not reflect on Him. On the other hand, Islamic extremism may need to be perpetuated to accomplish other things along the line.
-Revan
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
02.11.06 (2:42 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Well I'm not trying to spilt hairs here.
Of course WE don't think we're equally to blame, but that's not the point.
Let me ask you this... (Pretend we're not the most powerful nation on earth for a minute.) If a bunch of middle eastern countries were occupying the U.S. continually for 40 years, and we've said we don't want them here but we're powerless to get them out, and we finally started striking back by creatively awful and unconventional means, because we don't have an military like them... sure they might be surprised, but that's THEIR problem.
That's how we'd look at it Dave, and understandably so.
Like it or not, the attacks would NOT have happened if we minded our own business better. (And please, I'm not an apologist for the attack(s). I just don't want them to happen again, and the way we're going about things virtually guarantees future attacks for at least another generation. That's a no-brainer.)
(do you get what I'm trying to say?... I'm not sure I'm saying it right.)
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
02.11.06 (2:50 pm)
And, by the way, what if they're 90 percent to blame and our end is only 10 percent? (Since you don't like the equal blame idea.)
What have we done about our 10 percent, which is supposed to come FIRST, isn't it?
posted by:
imahk (
reply)
post date:
02.12.06 (9:52 pm)
God knows that everyone of us have his/her ((choices))own understanding of any sensitive issues as such; is war the answer or just sit comfortably in your comfort zones..?and just watch *Injustice takes it's tolls.
Freedom to choose your destiny, i'ts all OK in some countries but not so in some places 'cause the price of freedom is to conform or defy what's hip or politically correct or suffer the conscequences...thus, most of the moderates or quite conformists will be very unvocal in terms of standing for what's the right thing to do... for fear of inhumane carnage...lots of blames and playin' political plots/any ideological practice, so helps on person's God-like righteous guidance. PERHAPS, "FEAR" WOULD KILL US ALL." YEAH. GOD IS WATCHING BUT HOW WE CARRY ON WHILE lIVING IS A FACT OR A RESULT OF BEING REWARDED FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR HERE ON EARTH, THEN AFTER LIFE IS IN FORMED LIFE OF BLISS, TOTALLY A PERFECT IMMORTALITY WITH GOD ON OUR SIDE~*~
posted by:
sos (
reply)
post date:
02.12.06 (11:42 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
But of course the problem with the Hernando DeSoto analogy is that at the time there was no one there with a more evolved moral sensibility to try and stop him. If their had been a nation or group of people who did recognize the immoral nature of his actions wouldn't it have been their duty to try and stop him from doing such horrible things? And if so, how far should they go in performing that duty?
So, as a moral nation what is our obligation to our own citizens, and the people of the rest of the world?
Should we sit idly by while our own citizens are murdered? Do we do nothing while a maniacal dictator slaughters thousands if not millions of people? Can we really turn a blind eye to this and consider ourselve moral?
And if taking action against such evil, if it is necessary to take up arms to defeat it, is that really wrong? Immoral in and of itself?
What is the more moral thing? Killing a man like say Adolf Hitler and preventing the death of over 6 million innocents? Or do you let him live and try "peaceful" solutions that historically have been proven to fail time and time again?
The problem here pastor is that you just can't compromise with evil. So, what is the truly moral response?
Armed with the knowledge that I have now, if I was given the opporuntity to assasinate Adolf Hitler prior to World War II, would I? Could I kill him in cold blood to prevent the destruction, death and evil he would unleash on the world? You bet I could. In a heartbeat. No hesitation.
Could such an action cost me my immortal soul? Quite possibly. But then I've never been a Saint like Maximillian Kolbe. I'm just an ordinary guy trying to live my life the best way I know how.
So yes Pastor, I'd kill Hitler. Even at the cost of my own soul, if necessary. To prevent the millions dead and the countless suffering of that many innocents I'd have too, or I couldn't really call myself a moral man. Does that make me a good Christian? Well maybe not, I'd be violating the most sacred of God's commandments in doing so. But I'd like to think that God would consider my motivations more heavily than that of my actions.
posted by:
graceshaker (
reply)
post date:
02.13.06 (8:27 am)
for though we walk in the flesh we are not waging war according to the flesh. for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds. we destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God and take every thought captive to obey Christ (2 cor 10:3-5)
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.13.06 (4:55 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
Interesting analogy, and fair I think. These people resent us because of our power and our hubris.
But, if resentment for our power is parcel to their attacks, than less presence/involvement in their homelands would probably not have prevented 911.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.13.06 (5:01 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
So, we are 10% at fault.
Don't we buy their oil? Aren't we the source of most all their technology? These people hate us, even as they try to emulate us.
Still, the 90/10 argument is valid. Probably a big part of their spite for us is our propping up of the state of Israel. We have chosen sides in the Middle East, no matter what our diplomats may say. Israel continues to exist because of the support of America. And it does not llok like we will alter that. So, these people will continue to hate us.
I am not a Zionist. I do not believe the modern state of Israel equates with the Israel of the Bible. I just don't buy such as a proper interpretation of the scriptures. So I do not believe we are biblically bound to support Israel no matter what. Of course, we have far more Jews living in the US than do live in Israel. Wealthy and powerful Jews, too. So our political support will remain.
The prospects for peace with the Muslim peoples of the world appear quite dim. But I'll pray for it, and will seek it as I can.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.13.06 (5:07 pm)
Reply to: imahk
I must believe war is to be the last answer, the last alternative. And nation building is not justification for war. It appears these Muslim nations do not want democracy as we define it. Look at the results of democratic elections in Iran. Given the free choice, the same and worse will happen in Egypt and Saudia Arabia. these religious zealots have a stranglehold on the midset of the peoples. The solutions is centuries away, I fear.
Probably we need to finish making our statement to those most barbaric Muslim murderers- that they had best leave us alone- and then we need to get out, and as possible stay out. And probably we need to ween ourselves off their oil. Then let them have what they say they want- isolation. Then let freedom ferment.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.13.06 (5:08 pm)
Reply to: graceshaker
So we need to do battle on our knees, and not with guns. That's the ideal. I wish it could be the exclusive way of warfare.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
02.13.06 (5:16 pm)
Reply to: sos
We can look at our involvement in this war through moral terms, and probably we should. There is right, and there is wrong. You have properly described some of the wrongs committed by the other side. But we must be careful. A next easy and logical step would be to say, "Therefore God is for us and against them." And then we go about justifying such. I don't think we can do that. Yes, we press the war and yes, we pray for God's protection and guidance. But we also pray for the other guy, and we pray for peace. Alway pray for peace. And when we come to hate the other guy, then we have gone too far. Surely God is not on our side when we hate another.
And, by the way, I could put a bullet in the head of Asama bin laden and then sleep well, without a twinge of conscience. And if I died before awakening, I believe with all my heart I would go to heaven.
posted by:
sos (
reply)
post date:
02.13.06 (8:44 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
I would tend to disagree. Actually if you check the history books our "involvement" hasn't been anywhere near the level of European involvement in the region. In fact most of the middle east were under Turkish (Ottoman) control until shortly after WWI.
After WWI the French and British began diving up their spheres of influence in the Middle East starting with the Sykes-Picot Agreement.
But it was really the Balfour Declaration by the British Government that kicked over the hornets nest by stating, in part, "His Majesty's Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object."
The League of Nations got on board in 1922 and gave Britian a mandate towards the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.
Arabs were dead set against this of course, and not just the palestinians. But after WWII the with so many Jews having been displaced by the war and so many of them being smuggled into Palestine the Brits appointed a royal commision to study the problem.
They looked at the problem and decided to turn it over to the United Nations. The United Nations passed a resolution for the creation of two states in Palestine, one Arab and one Jewish. The Jewish community accepted the UN resolution, the Arabs stringently denied it.
When the British mandate from the old League of Nations expired on May 14th, 1948 they washed their hands of the situation and let the Jewish and Arab communities in Palestine try and settle it.
The US had little to nothing to do with this. The US did decide to recognize the state of Isreal and to offer it support since it was a democracy, something none of the other Arab nations in that part of the world could claim at the time.
That is the true source of our problems with the radical islamofacists. All of the rest of the nonsense about how we've "interfered" with events in the region is just silly. The islamofacists hate us because as a nation we supported and continue to support a free and independent Isreal, something they simply cannot and will not accept.
But we weren't the ones who started this mess, we were simply trying to do the right thing by recognizing a burgeoning democracy that had formed not from our policies but from the policies of other nations such as France, England and even to a great extent Russia.
"Therefore God is for us and against them"
No, I think the next logical step would be to say that God does not support evil. And like it or not to intentionally target and kill innocent civilians is an act of pure, unadulterated evil no matter how worthy you deem your cause to be.
Yes, in war sometimes innocent civilians are injured or killed, it is often an unavoidable consequence. But to specifically target them is an act of heinous and undeniable evil. I can't believe that God could possibly support such a thing.
I don't think He "hates" His children, even when they do evil things. As a father myself I understand how it is that you can have a child do something so awful that it breaks your heart and still not hate them. Because no matter what your children do you can never really hate them.
However if your children do such evil things you certainly can't support them either. Oh, and one other thing I can tell you, all soldiers and even ex-soldiers always pray for peace.
But I think they also understand that you can't have true peace without freedom, and that no matter how much you'd like to you just can't compromise with evil.
posted by:
graceshaker (
reply)
post date:
02.14.06 (7:29 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
someday bro - it wont even be necessary.
