Happy Birthday Paul!!! You are now as old as me!
I was listening to an interview with the author of Power, Faith and Fantasy, Michael Oren. For those unfamiliar, we are now at war with Islamic terrorists for 231 years. It started when we declared independence because we lost British protection for our trade. The Barbary Wars were the first battle in this struggle with Islam. Thomas Jefferson tried to form a coalition and the Europeans turned him down, especially the French. The Europeans just paid off the Barbary Pirates. In Jefferson's report to Congress, he retells his meeting with the leader of what is now Libya. He was told that the Islamic states wanted war with the US because the Koran tells them that they must destroy all infidel states. If they die in the process, they go to heaven. This is why Jefferson had a Koran. In 1734, it was translated by George Sails and it he gave is to Jefferson so "good Christians will know their Muslim enemies and can better defeat them." This is the same Koran Kieth Ellison swore on earlier this year. The US Navy was formed for this first foreign American conflict. In 1805, Jefferson sent the Marines to Tripoli and finally, in 1815 we forced them to surrender at cannonponint.
Now, for some, this means we will never defeat Islamic terror. Since we can't win, we shouldn't try. For the rest of us, this means that we can never stop fighting Islamic terror because it can be defeated but it has to be defeated again and again in every generation. We had our eye on Communism for so long that after we defeated it in so many places, we took our eye off Islamic terror and we find ourselves where we are today. I don't believe that we will ever see at time with no enemies. After the fall of Russia, we should have already been looking for our next enemy rather than them looking to strike us. We need to learn the lessons of our forgotten American history.
-Jeremy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
So, do we simply kill them before they kill us?
"Good Christians will know their Muslim enemies and can better defeat them."
If people follow this premise then aren't the enemies of Christians also God's enemies, therefore I can come to the logical conclusion that God is on my side, right?
Isn't that a little dangerous, to think that God supports what I do, but not people that live outside of the U.S.?
If I kill to defend the U.S., but someone else kills to defend Islam or their country of Islam, who is justified, according to God?
Just wondering??
"Whoa, Nellie"!!!! Our aims, goals and interests as Americans, or Christians are not the same as the Islamo-fascists that want to COERCIVELY take over the world. What Jeremy is saying is not ethno-centric at all, it's simply survival through self-defense. With your argument there should be no difference between any attacker and the victim who decides to fight back. As a former Police Officer, I'm sure you don't believe that.
To quote one of the few good things our President has said, "God is not indifferent between Freedom and Tyranny". It's not that God is on our side, we're on His side. Our actions in Iraq clearly are not to take over the country for ourselves (evidence: the price of gas is still super high) we ended a dangerous regime, and we are in the process of helping their people take back over their country (evidence: tens of millions of purple thumbs). The brave Iraqi people risked their lives and turned out with unanimity to vote. Democracy is not incompatible with any religion per se. Freedom is deep within the heart of every human and is purchased with the blood of patriots.
Hey, I read the post today and I have to honestly say I am stunned. I actually have no words, I am dumbfounded, that you would say "killing them" is the only way. There is no redemption for evil, REALLY???
Paul, we sometimes can not be "Good Americans" and Christians, because they don't go hand in hand.
Where does forgiveness fit in? Where does grace fit in? I know what evil looks like first hand, and the way I dealt with it was through force, but violence remade me into a "Violent person". This has no bearing on being a police officer, which is a good job, but
this is my whole point about NOT spiritualizing Jesus, because that makes Jesus completely useless in relation to politics, then I can do whatever I want as long as it fits my worldview, kill for democracy, or kill for Allah, makes no difference, as long as I believe I am killing for God.
You said that Their God is not my God. Well, the "American God" is also not my God. If we want to see God, we have to look at Jesus. I am not preaching at you, simply expressing my opinion. Thanks, I still hope I am invited on this blog.
First of all, you are always welcomed on this blog. Your opinions are always thoughtful, and I love the process of listening to opposing opinions and then articulating why I believe what I believe.
With that being said, I am stunned that you're stunned at my comments. It seems self-evident that a person or country has a right and duty to defend itself. You must realize that if you take the position of pacifism you delegitimize our involvement in WWII for example. Should the Nazi's have gone unchecked? I truly believe that it was God's will to fight militarily against one of the greatest forces of darkness the world has ever known.
I do agree that there are Christian responses that aren't violent, and divinely powerful spiritual weapons that Christians can wield to change the course of history, and we can definitely talk about those. But that doesn't negate government's legitimate God-given role. What I want to explore is what the Bible says about the role of Government, and how it legitimizes situations like U.S. involvement in WWII.
Romans 13:1-7 makes several important points about God in relation to civil government.
Verses 3 and 4 establish that earthly authorities are God's servant to commend those who do good, and punish those who do evil. "They do not bear the sword for nothing. They are God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer."
So point #1 would be that it is government's God-ordained role to promote the good and punish the bad.
This begs the question, well what about the Nazi regime, they were an earthly authority, were they established by God?
No way, Jose Cuervo!!! The Bible also teaches throughout that there are demonic principalities, powers, and systems of the fallen world that the enemy inhabits to promote the bad, and punish the good.
So then, what was America when it entered into WWII was it an agent of Satan or of God? The answer is that the U.S. was an agent of God to bring punishment on the evil Axis Powers.
And I believe that our military defense against radical Islamic terrorism is the agent of God punishing evil, and trying to promote freedom which is of God.
That doesn't mean that everything we do in war is right. It doesn't absolve us from the responsibility of restraint, and it doesn't minimize the unfortunate tragedy of innocent collateral damage. But if you look historically, there has never been a nation with so much power, that has shown so much restraint and prudence as the United States. There are many nations that if they had our military capabilities would do some of the greatest evil the world has ever known.
The reality is that until the Lord comes back to establish His Government there will be need of swords. I look forward to the day when they can be "made into plowshares", and the Prince of Peace comes, but we're not in that dispensation yet.
Hey Paul, there is a friend of mine here at Fuller who has a friend who has written about the context of Torture in relation to our following of Jesus. It is a long blog post, but interesting.
It is: thomerica.com/reformanda/2007/06/
torture-eucharist.html
I know it is a long link, but I wasn't sure how to just send you the page. I know you will enjoy it though, it relates to War, as well as some of our presuppositions concerning Constantinian Christianity.
From my own perspective though, I think that we must think critically about WWII in general, because it seems to be the response concerning nations going to war. Such as the thought, if the U.S. did not enter WWII, we would all be speaking German. Which is false, and completely based upon the premise of fear that Germany would have taken over the world. The U.S. did not think Germany would have taken over the world, or we would have done something earlier than 1941.
War created Nazi Germany in the first place. Just like the depression created a Socialist United States.
Fear, fear, fear, fear...people will do horrendous evil when they live in fear. This is why Americans consume, to dull the pain of all that fear.
Americans can not simply stand by while innocent Middle Easterners die for the sake of 26 Al Queda members who committed a horrible crime. Al Queda is not a country, it is an idealogy, made stronger by force and violence. If we come at Al-Queda by force and violence, it will become stronger than we ever knew possible.
Also, there is good and evil that runs through the core of every nation, every civilized society, and every human being. To deny that will cause humans to always look at "The other" as the problem, or "the other nation" as the source of evil, such as Bush saying that Bin Laden is the "evil one", only a term for Satan, not a human.
The "blood of patriots" statement also needs to be examined, because the Roman Soldiers were in all actuality "Good patriots", doing their job extremely well, only problem is; they crucified God.
On a personal note, my thoughts and your thoughts mirrored each others, until I became a police officer and saw the evil which exists is in the system itself; in that there were hard core criminals with more compassion than some cops, including myself for a long time. Also, many of the issues are systemic, meaning they exist to keep people oppressed, and work against people knowing God. We as Christians walk beside the poor, physically, not meta-physically and walk with those who suffer, allowing humans to develop a language to communicate, confess, and rejoice.
Paul(Pace),
Does the scripture that tells the Israelites to "burn the evil from your midst" mean nothing to you? God said to destroy the Canaanites, Amalekites, Perzites, Jebusites, et. al. because they were evil. He burned Sodom to the ground so that no trace of it can be found. Destroying evil did not stop when God gave us his son to save our souls from destruction. the world still has a choice as to whether to do good or evil.
There is good violence and bad violence. If you beat up a carjacker or a rapist in the act are you a bad, violent person? No, you are a hero in my eyes.
-Jeremy
Hi Jeremy, I want you to know that I believe in evil, but I want to look at Scripture in light of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. I also believe that humans are good as well. The Sermon on the Mount details that Jesus said, "You know how it was said of old, but I say..." That would mean that Jesus is reconfiguring life around himself. Jesus is reinterpreting Scripture, because it was completely different from what people thought it meant. Also the Great Commission is "Go and make disciples..." That would mean into all the world, where evil resides, where evil dwells, that is in all actuality slightly different than the commands given to Israel. Not different because God is different, but because of Christ, we now are enabled to live in and among those who need God's love.
I don't know how you are interpreting, "Burn evil from you midst?" There is a "once and for all" idea about Israel's conquest, not a continuing way of life. I don't think it is intended to mean burning villages, or cities, or people. No matter who they are. I would love to know what you think. Thanks, I hope for further dialogue.
You don't understand what the Messiah is saying. When he says, you have heard it said, he is referring to what the Rabbis had been misinterpreting. He did not change the law, he fulfilled it. Burning the evil from your midst was not a one time request, God is always telling us to remove evil from our lives, and from the world.
-Jeremy
Hey Jeremy, I like your insight into 1st century Judaism, because that is where Jesus lived. I did say though, "The Sermon on the Mount details that Jesus said, "You know how it was said of old, but I say..." That would mean that Jesus is reconfiguring life around himself. Jesus is reinterpreting Scripture, because it was completely different from what people thought it meant." (The "people" whom I am referring to are Rabbi's, who were misinterpreting what they thought the Torah was saying, which is what you said exactly)
I simply think that we can not take "burning evil from your midst" as a literal command, which I know you don't believe. I believe it is O.T. imagery climaxing in the death of Jesus, who has finally and completely "burned evil from our midst". As followers of Jesus we embody the incarnation of the gospel into the world, participating in God's renewal of all creation. You and I would probably disagree on how we do that though.
There was a "change" in the interpretation of the Torah around Jesus himself though. The Sermon on the Mount is Jesus showing his followers that Rome is not the enemy, but Satan is the enemy. Humans are created in the image of God. That is what I base everything upon. Thanks for the dialogue.
Paul,
I think you have to be careful how you interpret scripture. Be careful not to use "you have heard it was said" as a justification to re-interpret any scripture the way you want to. There were definitely some theological issues that remained intact from old testament to new testament. Honor your father and mother, thou shalt not steal, .................
I see a lot of liberal politicians approach the constitution with the same "it's all up for grabs" mentality, since the constitution is a "living, breathing document". The Bible, as with the Constitution must be interpreted in light of it's original intent at the time. With the Bible, that means taking the whole weight of scripture and balancing it out to arrive at a proper interpretation. There are parts of the bible that are seemingly contradictory, but when weighed out it becomes apparent that the seeming contradictions are simply insightful truths from different facets of the same issue. Take money for example. There are a ton of verses that warn us about it, and a ton of verses that say it's a blessing. When weighed out, the truth is that it's both depending on your heart condition.
Beware of Pet-Doctrines!!!
-Paul B.
Hey, it is funny how certain conversations on one post are about something, then another post we are addressing something else. This is like the "theology section". :)
My main premise behind what I say is that, I think that Jesus is the Climax of the Covenant, just like the Climax of the Genesis narrative was God resting.
The Exodus narrative climaxed with the Israelites settling in the land.
We as Christians interpret Scripture in light of the resurrection of Jesus, because if Jesus is alive, then his ministry is exactly the same today as it was in the 1st century. That is why I study the historical context of Jesus' ministry, so that I can understand how Jesus affected the socio-political-religious culture which he inhabited. Scripture absolutely contradicts itself, because it is saying so many different things to different cultural climates. We want scripture to harmonize, because we live in a post-Enlightenment, scientific worldview. God gave Israel a king, but then said in so many words, "Your kings have brought you into Exile". Why would God give Israel a king, knowing the end result???
Also, with the "You know how it was said of old, but I say..." You kind of made it seem as though I was interpreting what Jesus said, but I was simply re-stating what Jesus said. He re-interpreted it, not me.
This statement I found to be phenomenal is terms of what I believe about Scripture.
"The Torah was conceived within the context of salvation history, not salvation history conceived within the context of the Torah" (Oskar Skarsaune, In the Shadow of the Temple)
N.T. Wright has written volumes about the context of 1st century Judaism. (New Testament and the People of God) (Jesus and the Victory of God) (The Challenge of Jesus) (The Climax of the Covenant)
Talk soon.
Just for clarification, I said that you were using the phrase, "You have heard it was said of old, but I say" to justify the reinterpretation of anything you want, such as the government's God-given role as a sword of justice. I personally would only apply a new interpretation to the things that Jesus specifically mentioned. Then I likened it to the "up for grabs" interpretations of Constitution we now see all the time. Original intent will always lead to the best interpretations, and help us avoid "pet doctrines".
-Paul
Post a Comment