Showing posts with label War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 9, 2024

6 months since October 7, there are no winners here: A response to the essay by Frida Ghitis (CNN, 4/5/24)

 

{“In war, whichever side may call itself the victor, there are no winners, but all are losers.” - Neville Chamberlain     That quote would probably be better remembered if it wasn’t from Neville Chamberlain.  The former British Prime Ministers is best remembered for appeasing the maniac Adolf Hitler before WWII started.  But Chamberlain wasn’t wrong.  He was about Hitler in particular, there was no bargaining with that evil man, but he was right about war.  Even when it is necessary, even when it could be deemed a righteous act of defending the weak against the strong, one doesn’t “win” a war, one survives it, and hopefully limits the damage.  That’s the situation that Israel has been facing since October 7th of 2023: it can’t win, the only question is how costly will survival be both to the Israelites themselves and to the Palestinians.  The essay below is attempting to reason through to that conclusion.}

Almost exactly six months ago, Israelis awoke to a nightmare. Civilians in the southern part of the country, areas near the border with Gaza, were under a brutal, ongoing attack. It would become the deadliest day for the Jewish people since the Holocaust and a prelude to unspeakable suffering on both sides of the border.

{To think and talk about the costs of the war against Hamas that followed after October 7th is not to minimize the horror of that day.  The same is true for the tragedies of 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.  In each case an act of sudden evil caught a people off-guard and led to a forceful and far greater response.  In each case, moral questions were raised by how the aggrieved party responded and by the unintended consequences of those responses.  The original moral evil in all four instances has no excuse, no justification, no sympathy.}

Six months after Hamas launched that deadly rampage, knowing that Israel’s response would be ferocious, there are only losers in this terrible war.

It’s hard now to find many winners with the death toll mounting among Gazans and hunger growing in the strip. And with Israeli hostages still held captive, perhaps in dank Hamas tunnels.

{As it was with WWI, WWII, and the War on Terror, so it has been in Israel and Gaza.  War takes on a life of its own, one action leads to another, one cost justifies another.  WWI left an entire generation decimated and cynical, it weakened institutions that were necessary for civilization leaving them unable to stop the march toward WWII.  WWII gave us not only the firebombing of entire cities, but the atomic bomb and the Holocaust as well.  The scale of the War on Terror was much smaller than WWI and WWII, but it still left us with the Patriot Act, drone strikes across the globe, seemingly endless war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the shame of Abu Ghraib.  Looking back upon history, each response appears solidly unavoidable, each war a product of choices made at the time that felt reasonable, but if that is indeed true and such death and destruction was the inevitable result of what had preceded it, we still must count the cost to both the innocent who suffered alongside the perpetrators and how fighting those wars changed us as well.  It is in this vein that All Quiet on the Western Front and Slaughterhouse Five were written, among many others.  And so, it is entirely reasonable to look at the Israel/Hamas War after six months and count the cost, to remind ourselves that history teaches us that we should not expect to find any winners.}

For Hamas, the fact that war continues may count as a victory, but thousands of Hamas’ fighters — the exact number is disputed — have been killed. Hamas may be decimated, perhaps unable to hold on to power, but that’s no victory for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is under growing global pressure and besieged by protesters at home, and whose legacy will be forever darkened.

Even US President Joe Biden has paid a price, caught in an election-year political vise between those who think he is too supportive of Israel and those who think he has been too critical.

The strife has also detonated a worldwide explosion of antisemitism, reviving a hatred that had lain lightly dormant. It’s causing anxiety across Europe, and leading some American Jews to conclude that one country where they had felt safe is no longer a haven, as they face antisemitism from the left and the right. Anti-Muslim bigotry has also increased.

This awful chapter started on October 7 last year, when Hamas terrorists breached what was supposed to be a secure border and slaughtered Israelis in their beds, in their living rooms, in their cars, at an outdoor music festival and bus shelters and parks.

They raped countless women with horrifying brutality.

Israeli security forces were nowhere to be found for hours. Hamas — the Iran-allied group that rules Gaza — killed more than 1,200 Israelis and dragged back hundreds more as hostages. The area lay in ruins. Israelis’ sense of security had been shattered.

Today, it is Gaza that lies in ruins, tens of thousands of Palestinians killed by Israel in its quest to uproot and destroy Hamas. As Israel crushes Gaza, its global reputation is getting shattered. But still the IDF believes around 100 Israeli hostages remain captive of Hamas and other militants in conditions that one shudders to imagine.

This week’s Israeli strike on a World Central Kitchen (WCK) convoy, killing seven aid workers, adds to the calamity of this convulsion in the perennially unstable crossroads of the Middle East. Amid the outrage and heartbreak, WCK’s founder, celebrity chef José Andrés, accuses Israel of targeting his staff. Israel has apologized, saying the convoy was misidentified. Israel has fired two officers and reprimanded senior commanders after an inquiry into the strike.

{The cost has been high.  Evil like that unleashed on October 7th against innocent men, women, and children always leads to a ripple effect of costs, nearly always spirals out of control.  Inevitable?  Perhaps, but still horrific, still worthy of lament.}

There was never any question that Israel would respond to October 7. It had been attacked by a group that promised it would repeat the massacre of Israelis and is backed by Iran, a country whose leaders have vowed to destroy Israel. The attack led some there to conclude that whatever price Israel should pay for absolute victory — including in global public opinion — it is worth paying. Besides, the attackers kidnapped hundreds of its citizens, including women, children and the elderly. Israel needed to save them.

{I remember the days after 9/11.  There was never any doubt that wherever these terrorists were hiding, American bombs and bullets would find them.  That day’s shock and horror gave rise quickly to songs and slogans about stomping on terrorists, and to a sudden rise in anti-Islamic sentiment among a people who previously had spent little time thinking about Islam.  Likewise, Israel was going to respond, and with much greater force than Hamas had employed (because of the limits of Hamas’ resources, not a limit on its hatred, they’ve stated many times their desire to kill all Jews).

This is not the response envisioned by Jesus when he commanded us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us.  Even if a government needs to respond with war to protect its citizens, the hatred that war gives birth to in the hearts of the people who were attacked is a tragedy.  Few times in Church history has the response to evil been forgiveness and mercy.  Individuals have responded to their own suffering, even martyrdom, with Christ-like forgiveness, but rarely has this translated to a whole people.  Sadly, when our nation experienced tragedy similar to what Israel has just lived through, the Church in America wasn’t able (much of it wasn't willing) to be a voice of reconciliation after 9/11, myself included.  The desire for justice, even messy justice that says, “Kill them all, let God sort them out” is a powerful enticement.  The path of peace after injustice is brutally hard, for this reason we are in awe of those like Nelson Mandela who choose it instead of vengeance.}

In the immediate aftermath, world leaders expressed support for Israel. But when the death toll in Gaza starting climbing, as Hamas knew it would, international support for Israel turned to withering criticism. In the most painful irony of all, Israel — the country that became home to Holocaust survivors, under attack by a group whose original charter outlined a genocidal ideology and a vow to destroy Israel — was itself perversely accused of genocide.

{Entirely predictable.  The initial support followed by eventual criticism as the death and destruction continued is the exact same pattern that America experienced after 9/11.  The primary difference between the two stories is that the reality of global antisemitism gave Israel a shorter runway between sympathy and criticism, i.e. a much briefer window to respond to terrorism before criticism, justifiable or not, began to mount.}

As always, the greatest suffering, the biggest losers, have been civilians on both sides. Palestinians in Gaza are enduring a living nightmare. The Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza says more than 30,000 have been killed in the conflict. The figures don’t distinguish between combatants and civilians, but there’s little doubt that horrifyingly large numbers of them, including children, have been killed. The territory is a wasteland.

Gazans are caught between the cynicism of Hamas, the geopolitical concerns of their Arab neighbors and Israel’s determination to win at any cost. Hamas leaders, comfortable in exile, proclaimed early on that they are “proud to sacrifice martyrs.” Hamas fighters embedded themselves in Gaza’s population, including in hospitals, essentially daring Israel to kill civilians to get to them.

In most wars, civilians would have been allowed to flee the fighting, but the people of Gaza were not allowed to leave the territory whether they wanted to or not. Hamas urged them to stay. Egypt, worried about whether Israel would allow the people to return and concerned about instability on its soil, closed its border to all but a small number of Palestinian civilians.

The cruel fact is that the lives of Palestinians have not been the highest priority for anyone in this war.

{It has always been this way in human history, innocent civilians always pay the highest price in war.  It has also always been true that the evil men who sow the seeds of war rarely are the ones who pay the consequences, that’s one of the reasons why they’re willing to start down that path in the first place.}

Complicating the situation is the political crisis in Israel, which preceded the October 7 attack. Netanyahu — a political survivor who faces corruption charges — already presided over the most right-wing government in Israel’s history. Before the war, tens of thousands of Israelis took to the streets in nearly 10 months of weekly protests against a plan that would have severely weakened Israeli democracy by stripping the Supreme Court of much of its power.

Netanyahu was, in my view and others’, already the worst prime minister in Israel’s history even before October 7.

Polls have found that most Israelis want him gone. Now Benny Gantz, a member of the war cabinet but also the leading opposition figure before the war, has called for new elections in September. Recent polling says say he’s Netanyahu’s most likely successor.

Devastation in Gaza as Israel wages war on Hamas

The fact that Netanyahu is heading the government during one of the most dangerous, most damaging times in Israel’s history only adds to the disturbing nature of this conflict. Israel is not in good hands.

Would another leader, a different government, have been able to conduct the war with fewer civilian deaths, with less damage to Israel’s global standing, without eroding the vital relationship between Israel and the United States? I suspect the answer is yes.

{Few leaders are up to the task of shepherding their people through a time of war and at the same time minimizing the cost that it exacts from both their own people and the civilians on the other side.  While it is true that Netanyahu has numerous critics both in Israel and beyond, I think the essay strays in this section away from the salient and necessary conversation about the cost of war itself.}

If there’s any glimmer of hope in this dispiriting landscape it is that the young Abraham Accords — which normalized relations between Israel and some of its Arab neighbors — have survived the toughest of stress tests. That augurs well for the long run, for more stability of the region, eventually.

{What lies on the other side of this war?  None know for certain.  If there is a path to a wider peace between Israel and its neighbors, it will feel like a miracle.  We can hope that the horrors of this war will make it harder to start the next one.}

It opens the door to the possibility that once this war is over, once the post-war phase — whatever that looks like — also comes to an end, there could be a new architecture that leads to peace. For that to happen, however, two of the many losing protagonists in this conflict, Hamas and Netanyahu, cannot remain in power.

{We have set aside time in our worship services each Sunday since October 7th to pray for Israel and Gaza, for the Jews and the Palestinians, for Christians, Muslims, and followers of Judaism in the Holy Land.  As I lead these prayers, my focus is primarily upon those suffering from the war, on both sides, pleading to God to protect them.  I also pray for a just and lasting peace, admitting in my prayers that I don’t know how we get from here to there.  Which leaders would it require and what choices would they need to make?  That answer is in God’s hands alone.  I don’t know if peace is possible with Netanyahu as the Prime Minister of Israel, because nobody really knows the answer to that question.  And so, rather than calling for specific steps, my prayers leave the “how” in the hands of God, and focus instead on the ordinary people whose lives have been forever changed by this violence, may they be protected, comforted, and healed, and may peace prevail even after the horrors of war.}

{Lastly, talking to my Bible Study group and leading FB Live prayers just after October 7th, I said, “There are no good choices left.”  I then explained that whatever the government of Israel did next, the choices would all be bad, and the cost high.  The same calculus existed for the Palestinians, they would only have bad choices left to them after what Hamas had done.  That wasn’t prophecy, simply an awareness of history because humanity has seen this cycle play out over and over again.  Unfortunately, this time hasn’t been an exception to the rule, this war has been like so many others that preceded it.  Whatever happens next, let us pray for those in need, let us hope for justice and peace.}

Tuesday, March 26, 2024

Sermon Video: Jesus weeps over Jerusalem - Luke 19:41-44

On the very day of his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, with his own Passion less than a week away, Jesus pauses on the road to weep over the coming fate of Jerusalem.  The irony of Jesus' tears is that it didn't have to be this way, the path of peace was available to God's covenant people, if only they had recognized him as their Messiah and heeded his message.  This then offers a lesson for the Church today, reminding us of our need to hear God's voice and humbly accept correction (as needed).

Friday, December 15, 2023

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #31 John 17:20-23


John 17:20-23 (NIV)

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."

"Oh, we're halfway there, O-oh, living on a prayer..."  That is of the chorus of "Living on a Prayer" by Bon Jovi, one of my favorite songs and one I invariably try to sing at Karaoke (that key change is brutal).  I started this series of 62 posts about "Christian" Nationalism, each with a specific verse of Scripture that speak against that corrupt idea, on August 9th of 2022.  I'll admit, after a steady stream of posts my focus wavered and for much of 2023 has been replaced with the need to combat the spread of Torah Clubs [The Dangers of the First Fruits of Zion and their Torah Clubs} in our area.  But, once you've taken up a task, it is hard to let it go.  This post, then, marks the halfway point, the rest will continue to be created as time and my need to focus on other things permits...

The passage from John's Gospel is Jesus' prayer for unity among his followers offered up to the Father on the eve of his Passion.  One of the remarkable things about this particular prayer at this particular time is how laser focused it is upon the need for unity among the body of believers who would soon be called Christians, drawn together as part of the Church that Jesus founded to continue his work after his return to Heaven.

OK, so Jesus wanted his followers to "be one," what does that have to do with "Christian" Nationalism?  A whole lot if you take a few minutes to think about it.  One example will illustrate why Nationalism, especially "Christian" Nationalism is antithetical to Jesus' prayer: During WWI, tens of millions of British, French, German, Italian, Austro-Hungarian, Russian, and American young men tried to kill each other.  That the vast majority of these young men claimed to be followers of Jesus Christ, who were being order to try to kill other followers of Jesus Christ, didn't matter at all to those in power because the enemy belonged to a different nation.  One's national allegiances superseded, nay even extinguished in this case since it condoned killing other followers of Jesus, one's faith.  This wasn't the first time, similar wars had raged since the break-up of the Roman Empire, pitting Christians against each other in order to further the claims of their feudal lords, kings, and eventually nation-states.  

There isn't an objective way to look at Church History without concluding that God would consider this bloodshed to be sinful.  One may be able to defend those who fought in defense of their family and community, but that rationale evaporates in every other scenario, not to mention the wanton rape and pillaging that walked hand-in-hand with these wars.  It is impossible to say that participation in this militant violent behavior made those who did so more Christ-like.  Perhaps the horrors of violence brought some few to repentance afterwards, but God is not in the business of using evil on the chance that some will be repelled enough by it that they turn and seek the light.

If, then, one accepts the premise of "Christian" Nationalism, that our allegiance to Jesus Christ must be in some fashion melded with, even subsumed to, our allegiance to our country, there is NO hope of unity within the Global Church.  What we will end up with is a host of church bodies split along political lines, and a never-ending sorry tale of rivalries and violence between them that mirror those of the nations to which they belong.

A current example: Why do you think that the Russian Orthodox Patriarch has dubbed Putin's illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine as a Holy Crusade?  [Moral Clarity: God help us if we can't see that Vladimir Putin and his war are Evil.]  The sad truth is, the leadership of the Russian Orthodox Church has chosen the kingdom of this world, and in so doing, has made a mockery of its claims that it is a defender of Christianity.

After supporting Ukraine invasion, Russia's Patriarch Kirill criticized worldwide - by JONATHAN LUXMOORE for National Catholic Reporter, March 15, 2022.

The Church cannot fulfill its mission if it allows lines drawn on a map to divide those whose first allegiance must be to Jesus Christ, yet another reason why "Christian" Nationalism is biblically untenable. 


Thursday, September 29, 2022

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #18: Matthew 25:34-40


Matthew 25:34-40     New International Version

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

The 1984 movie, Red Dawn, starring Patrick Swayze, C. Thomas Howell, Charlie Sheen, Lea Thompson, and Jennifer Grey came out when I was 10.  Although I didn't see it in the theater (it was PG-13), at some point I watched it on VHS tape (young people, ask your parents what those were), and it blew me away.  It became one of my favorite movies, watched over and over against despite the annoying use of "Wolverines!" as the rebel battle cry {being a Spartan fan, you can see how that rankles}.  As a kid, I loved the gutsy chest thumping bravado of its message, it fit nicely with the tough guy message that came to me through the movies of Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Van Damme, and the rest.

The thing is, 'Christian' Nationalism tends to treat the mission and methods of the Church like combat.  In war, the rules are often bent, if not ignored, victory is the only thing that matters, and the only real concern about the enemy is how to defeat them more quickly.  {See for example: the use of torture post 9/11 by American operatives} I can't count how many times those leading this movement have described what they are doing as a 'war' {For which they should apologize to every combat veteran and those whose nation has been invaded; real war is hell}.  In fact, we call it a Culture War, and those who fight it on both sides Culture Warriors.   And while whatever is happening in America is far short of warfare, thank God, this no-holds barred, anything goes, mentality is not only growing in how many claim it to be necessary, but even in how many champion such methodology is a good in their own right, all in the name of defending God, His Church, and/or Western Civilization.  

When we listen to Jesus, however, it becomes clear that they have things upside-down.  Far from being called into combat to smash and destroy God's enemies, the Church is called to serve in ways both diverse and humble.  The Church is commanded, this is no suggestion, and warned accordingly, that the true measure of its success will be how it responds to, "the least of these."

How about a real-world example involving one of the most contentious political issues of our day (yikes).

What do you see when the news shows a picture of would-be immigrants wading across the Rio Grande?  An invading army?  An infestation?  A threat?  Or do you see men, women, and children made in the image of God, desperate and in need, an opportunity to show the love of Christ (most of those coming here are indeed fellow Christians, an additional question of obligation)?

'Christian' Nationalism is telling you to see things on this issue, and many others, through the lens of warfare, Jesus Christ is ordering you to see them with grace and compassion.  Choose you this day whom you will serve.


Monday, September 26, 2022

Sermon Video: Peace with God, Romans 4:23-5:2

Having established both the forgiveness of our sins, removing God's wrath, and our justification, making Christ's righteousness our own, both through faith in Jesus Christ, now Paul turns to the implications of these profound changes of status by highlighting one of the most important: we have peace with God.

Gaining peace with God is far more valuable than we understand, in part because most of humanity does not recognize that it is currently at war with God, a hopeless path.  Also, peace with God is a cause worthy of profound celebration as it will create positive change throughout our lives, both present and future.

Tuesday, August 23, 2022

The Watchman Decree: 'Christian' Nationalism's 'name it and claim it' dangerous prayer

The following 'decree' was written by pastor Dutch Sheets, a member of the New Apostolic Reformation, a loosely affiliated group of Charismatic Christians who believe in Dominionism, which in a nutshell is the belief that God has given the Church the authority to take control of the Earth from Satan and we need only claim it.  The following prayer thus contains the expected 'name it and claim it' style of some of the Charismatic movement, combined with a stark American 'Christian' Nationalism that venerates the American Constitution to idolatrous levels.  My comments interspersed below will be in bold.  To view the decree as a pdf: The Watchman Decree

[What is Dominionism?  As explained by self-appointed apostle Peter Wagner, a founder of the NAR movement, before his death in 2016, “Dominion has to do with control. Dominion has to do with rulership. Dominion has to do with authority and subduing. And it relates to society. In other words, what the values are in Heaven need to be made manifest on earth. Dominion means being the head and not the tail. Dominion means ruling as kings.”]

WATCHMAN DECREE

As a Patriot of faith, I attest my allegiance first and foremost to the kingdom of God and the Great

Commission. Secondly, I agree to be a watchman over our nation concerning its people and their

rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness—

From the beginning the decree defines a "patriot of faith" as someone who puts allegiance to the Kingdom of God and the Great Commission first, but in the very next sentence that line is blurred beyond recognition.  The "Watchman" analogy is taken from Ezekiel 33 where the prophet is told that he must warm his countrymen of impending danger lest their fate be on his head if he keep silent.  While it would be an acceptable interpretation of the principle behind this text to say that Christians have a responsibility to warn the Church of impending danger, it is NOT in keeping with Ezekiel's prophecy to say that Christians bear this responsibility for America.  Why?  Israel was a covenant people, a theocracy, where God had a specific and detailed set of blessings and curses that were derived from the commands the people had agreed to obey.  Ezekiel's responsibility flows out of this context.  Israel knew what God required of them, their ancestors had committed themselves to obeying it.  In the Church Age, God has made no such relationship with ANY nation/country/people.  It is clear that the members of the NAR, as 'Christian' Nationalists, have assumed God has indeed made a promise to America akin to that which he made with Israel, unfortunately for them (and the Church, the Gospel, and our nation) scripture makes not such promise...A question that has no answer: When, where, how, and with whom did God make a covenant with America?  What are its stipulations, what is demanded of us and what is promised by God?  A covenant isn't implied, it has to be spelled out and agreed upon.

In addition, the responsibilities of the Watchman are linked in the decree to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness", things that Ezekiel was most certainly not focused upon nor would they have made any sense to him, for where in this list is righteousness or faith?  Already the Declaration of Independence has replaced the Bible as the guide by which we are called to act.

WHEREAS

• we, the Church, are God’s governing Body on the earth

This is the foundational assertion of the text, but it is in no way made in Scripture.  Jesus calls his disciples to be "salt and light", to sacrifice and to serve, in no way does he, or any other apostolic source, command the Church to govern the earth.  Search in vain for the source of this claim in scripture, it isn't there.  This is 'Christian' Nationalism's bold lust for power, power we are not commanded to seek, and power we are not capable of wielding morally.  {See: Tolkien's LOTR and what the Ring does to those who think they can wield it for good.  Tolkien was a Christian with an orthodox Christian worldview, and it shows.}

• we have been given legal power from heaven and now exercise our authority

Legal power?  This seems to be setting the groundwork to place 'Christian' Nationalism above the law in America, ironic given all of the veneration here about the Constitution.

• we are God’s ambassadors and spokespeople over the earth

Even a phrase at first glance like this that seems orthodox has a flaw.  The Church is Christ's steward/ambassador on the earth, not over it.  Subtle, but it fits the pattern of seeking dominion and power over others.

• through the power of God, we are the world influencers

World influencers?  Does God need extra social media likes and clicks?  What a strange phrase.  The Church is called to do justice and love mercy, what this has to do with being a 'world influencer' is a mystery.

• because of our covenant with God, we are equipped and delegated by Him to destroy every

attempted advance of the enemy,

Again we have a dangerous bit of bravado here.  Is the Church capable of overcoming the Gates of Hell, absolutely, Jesus promised that, but that ultimate victory and this bold claim are far apart.  The Church (and Christians) will also suffer defeat, persecution, and loss in this world.

Who is the "our" that has a covenant with God?  The Christians in America, or America itself?  As the text later in the declaration shows, they mean the latter.

WE MAKE OUR DECLARATIONS:

1. We decree that America’s executive branch of government will honor God and defend the

Constitution.

There is an assumption here that American 'Christian' Nationalism makes: God wrote the Constitution (to one degree or other), therefore whatever the Constitution claims {please ignore for the moment the 3/5th human beings part} is equal to the will of God.  This is, frankly, blasphemy.  {See: Mark Meadows, Ginni Thomas, and the blasphemy of thinking God is on your side. or The blasphemous "One Nation Under God" painting by Jon McNaughton}

2. We decree that our legislative branch (Congress) will write only laws that are righteous and

constitutional.

Again, righteous laws do NOT equal constitutional laws, although that link is implied strongly here.  One can write a constitutional law that falls far short of being righteous, believe me America history has plenty of examples, it can in fact be immoral in every way and pass constitutional muster.

3. We decree that our judicial system will issue rulings that are biblical and constitutional.

The not subtle linkage continues, now biblical and constitutional are together.

4. We declare that we stand against wokeness, the occult and every evil attempt against our

nation.

Thus this form of 'Christian' Nationalism is for one political party only, those connected to the pejorative 'woke' need not apply, God isn't interested (evidently) in your concerns.  {For a refutation see: Is God Woke? The answer should matter to you or Beware of the Political Church: John MacArthur declares, "any real true believer" can only vote one way.}

5. We declare and we now take back our God-given freedoms, according to our Constitution.

Which begs the question: Which God-given freedoms found in the Constitution do they not now have?  

6. We declare that we take back influence at the local level in our communities.

7. We decree that we take back and permanently control positions of influence and leadership in

each of the *Seven Mountains.

There is a vast difference in a pluralistic society between influence, which all individuals and groups have a right to aspire to, and control that precludes the rights of others.  'Christian' Nationalism isn't the only movement/philosophy seeking such domination over others, but it very clearly is on the list.

8. We decree that the blood of Jesus covers and protects our nation. It protects and separates us

for God.

Where in any orthodox and historic understanding of the work of Christ upon the Cross, of the efficacy of his shed blood, does the idea that Jesus' blood protects our nation, specifically, come from?  Are they claiming that Jesus shed his blood for America?  For a kingdom of this world?  Again, blasphemy is not too strong a term for this.  The shed blood of Jesus separates America for God's purposes?  Why this nation and not another?  Why only this nation?  There is a massive prideful exceptionalism at work here.

9. We declare that our nation is energy independent.

Ezekiel is scratching his head at this one.  What does being a Watchman on behalf of your people have to do with energy policy?  Nothing.  Best to move on than ponder why this made the cut.

10. We declare that America is strong spiritually, financially, militarily and technologically.

There are questions about all four of them being true, at times, but especially the first one.  America is spiritually strong?  By what metric?  Declining church attendance and membership?  The rampant sexual immorality and materialism among those who call themselves Christians?  The willingness of self-professed Christians to violate any and all of God's commands in order to gain the power to 'take back America for God'?... In addition, proclaiming that America's military is part of the equation harkens back to the worst parts of Church History: The Crusades and the Thirty Years War.

11. We decree that evil carries no power, authority or rights in our land nor over our people.

And yet it most clearly does.  America is a far more violent nation that fellow Western democracies, to name one way in which evil is more than comfortable in this land.  

12. We decree that we will operate in unity, going beyond denominational lines in order to

accomplish the purposes of God for our nation.

I can actually get behind this one.  I'm all for ecumenical efforts to do Kingdom work, if only they meant this about things other than 'winning' the Culture War and crushing their enemies.

13. And we decree that AMERICA SHALL BE SAVED!

Again, in what portion of scripture is this folly grounded?  America doesn't need to be saved because America is a nation not a person.  Millions of its people need to be saved because they are not in relationship with God through Christ, but that is not what they're talking about here at all.  If the preamble declaring loyalty to the Kingdom of God first meant anything at all, #13 would never have been written.  If you watch the video, this line is shrieked with fierce intensity.  This is the sad truth of 'Christian' Nationalism, the nation's success is the only thing that truly calls forth passion and sacrifice (or violence, the sacrifice is often asked of others). 

America, in fact, cannot be saved.  Not a single kingdom of this world will continue after the return of Christ.  When Jesus establishes his kingdom each and every nation on the planet will be obsolete.  In reality, we have no idea when that day will come, and the United States of America may be just as much a distant memory as the Byzantine Empire by that point.  It may sound like a broken record, but God's purpose in this world is NOT to elevate America, if the Kingdom of God advances while America teeters and falls, so be it.  The prayer is 'thy kingdom come, thy will be done,' not 'our kingdom win, no matter what it costs.'

We know this country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

We know the truth; therefore, we stand for truth and will NEVER be deceived!

The endless debate about how much of America's founding is connected to Judeo-Christian principles, as opposed to the also influential Enlightenment, for example, is a red herring that nevertheless invokes strong passions and anger.

We will NEVER stop fighting!

We will NEVER, EVER, EVER give up or give in!

And if this isn't God's will, what then?  Is the only path forward for the Kingdom to fight??  What if this never ending fight is ruining the witness of the Gospel (hint: it already is), must the fight continue no matter the cost?

We WILL take our country back.

Who has the country now?  How will we know when 'we' have it back?  If our team controls the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court, is the war over?  FYI, this happened between 2016-2018, and yet the Culture War continued to rage, the warning that 'they' were coming to get 'us' and destroy America didn't slack one bit.  'We' won elections, and yet the war continues unabated, how can this be when political power is the end to which immoral means are being excused?

We WILL honor the ONE TRUE GOD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob!

Good, please do.  While you're at it, read his book and see how he wants to be honored.

AMERICA SHALL BE SAVED!

Aside from the general overuse of caps in this decree, which matches up well with the way in which this prayer is shouted in the video, this once more underscores the way in which 'Christian' Nationalism is a diversion from what God actually told his people to do, the Great Commission, to what he never told them to do, seize geopolitical power for themselves.

“Working together with Him, we strongly urge you not to receive God’s grace in vain [by turning

away from sound doctrine and His merciful kindness]. For He says, ‘At the acceptable time (the

time of grace) I listened to you, and I helped you on the day of salvation.’ Behold, now is ‘the

acceptable time,’ behold, now is ‘the day of salvation.’” 2 Corinthians 6:1-2 (AMP)

*Seven Mountains of Influence include media, business/finance,

family, education, politics, arts/entertainment and religion

In the end, this decree, despite being a frightening display of non-biblical theology that ignores the warnings of Church History, serves as a clear example of what 'Christian' Nationalism is, what it aims for, and why Christians should not only have no part in it, but also oppose it.

We have seen a shift in the past several years, now members of Congress and their allies who claim to represent Christianity, are willing to call themselves Christian Nationalists.  They're willing to say, "what's so bad about wanting Judeo-Christian values to prevail?" without dealing with the reality that the prevailing in question is a matter of domination not persuasion, of coercion not repentance.  As a Baptist I shudder to see so many fellow Christians, people whose service to others over the years demonstrates that their faith is genuine, being deceived by this path, and I shudder to see that history's lessons are being ignored once again.  "Power tends to corrupt, absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely." - Lord Acton.  The Church is not an exception to this rule.

{Note: Many of the same people leading the NAR and the politicians they support are also deeply connected to QAnon, as a reminder: QAnon's kidnapping and “adrenochroming of children” is just repackaging the medieval antisemitic Blood Libel, the whole movement must be utterly rejected.

In addition, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is a favorite of NAR apostles: "Satan controlling the Church"? Marjorie Taylor Greene's dangerous view of Catholic Relief Services assistance to migrants

The NAR were also deeply involved in the blasphemous Jericho March on January 5th of 2020: The downward spiral of Bonhoeffer biographer Eric Metaxas

And, for further understanding of the NAR, Paula White Cain is the most famous person in this mold: Paula White:The Prosperity Gospel, Celebrity, and Politics - A trifecta of Gospel compromise or Paula White: Charlatan, Heretic, and White House employee - terrifying in any administration}

The following is a link to a deeply researched article on the NAR's connections to politicians, militias, and hucksters, while I do not vouch for the accuracy of each claim and connection, there are a host of evidentiary photos, links, and articles: Underreported And Massive Theocratic Movement Joins Forces With Michael Flynn And Roger Stone A tour featuring “Seven Mountains” Christian dominionists, Flynn, and Stone is coming to Pennsylvania. - by Jennifer Cohn}

Listen to the Word of God: 62 Scripture passages that refute 'Christian' Nationalism - #7: Zechariah 4:6

 


Zechariah 4:6     New International Version

So he said to me, “This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: ‘Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit,’ says the LORD Almighty.

Speaking to the generation that returned to Jerusalem from Exile, the prophet Zechariah rebukes the timidity of the people, encouraging them to finish the work on rebuilding the Temple.  From a practical standpoint, the Israelites were a shell of their former might and glory.  No longer an independent kingdom, no longer the possessors of a beautiful city with mighty walls and a magnificent temple.  And yet, and this is the key, the LORD Almighty sees no reason why the Temple cannot be rebuilt.  

God does NOT calculate possibilities based upon human power; period.  Why?  Because he's God!!

The advancement of the Kingdom of God is likewise NOT based upon the availability and use of human power.  Laws, armies, wealth, privilege, status, none of them are necessary for God to fulfill his purpose in this world.  Why?  Because his purpose is a spiritual purpose, first and foremost, the saving of the Lost by the effective sharing of the Gospel and the transformation of the redeemed into Christ-likeness.  In the end, human power is not only unnecessary to advance this agenda, history has demonstrated time and time again that it is often counter-productive.  In other words, a Church with power, by this world's way of defining it, is typically less effective at its spiritual mission than a Church without power in this world.  The classic example of this is the Early Church.  Prior to Constantine, the Church was a minority in its culture, without status, without wealth or coercive power.  And yet, growth was explosive, and importantly, when martyrs were made it was being done to the Church not by the Church

'Christian' Nationalism, in a sharp contrast that ought to be a massive warning sign, is focused primarily upon earthly power, as if this is a path toward achieving God's will.  To that end, a slogan like, "Take America Back for God" employed by politicians for political ends, is not only disingenuous {Are they actually planning on giving America to God should they win power?  Really??}, but also blasphemous.  The power they seek is not God's power but their own, the purpose to which they will put power when they achieve it are not God's purposes but their own, and an America wholly under their control would NOT be more honoring and pleasing to God simply because politicians who claim to represent God wield earthly authority.  As Han Solo frustrating says in The Force Awakens, "That's not how the Force works!"

Recognizing this dangerous contrast, between the power Christians are called by God to wield (spiritual: serving and sacrificing) and the power that 'Christian' Nationalism grasps after (earthly: dominating and self-advancing), Calvin College historian  Kristin Kobes Du Mez wrote, Jesus and John Wayne How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation.  Her premise in a nutshell is that Evangelical (and also Fundamentalist) Christians prefer John Wayne to Jesus.  Rather than a humble servant willing to forgive his enemies, they prefer a hard charging tough guy ready to destroy them.  Unfortunately, her analysis is all too accurate.  Just this past week the YouTube channel, When We Understand The Text, whose content is written and narrated by a pastor, fully embraced 'Christian' Nationalism, mocking the weakness of those who warn against its dangers (i.e. wimps like me).

In the end, "thy Kingdom come, thy will be done" is our daily prayer, and as the prophet Zechariah made clear to those willing to listen, it won't be by might or power, but by God's Spirit.


Thursday, March 3, 2022

Moral Clarity: God help us if we can't see that Vladimir Putin and his war are Evil.

Commenting on the social media feeds of others is "like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get."  I recently wrote in support of a post from a fellow minister (who lives outside PA) who had shared a story from The Gospel Coalition regarding a statement released by ten seminaries that were formerly behind the Iron Curtain against Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine. {10 Seminaries from Post-Soviet States Issue a Joint Statement - The Gospel Coalition}.  The response to that posting from an individual that I don't know anything about (other than we have one mutual FB friend) was shocking, to me.  This individual called the Gospel Coalition's story propaganda, "TGC has a tendency to push the accepted narrative, and in this case they're apparently declaring which side God and the Church is on and/or routing for. It reads like propaganda."  After further discussion, with myself and the clergy member who posted the link, he wrote, "I don't believe Putin is trying to harm civilians—he certainly has more important locations in mind. There's going to be wars and rumors of wars until the Lord returns, and I don't plan on falling for the cookie cutter narrative pushed by the mainstream media and big tech any time soon."  In the end, I walked away from the conversation (and that of another commenter on the post who shared Russian posts and claimed it was a 'civil war'), as there seemed to be no common understanding of the facts that allow a fruitful discussion to take place, if the video of residential buildings on fire and refugees fleeing don't make an impact, neither will my words.

As the war in Ukraine unfolds, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, displacing millions of refugees, wrecking cities, destroying the Ukrainian economy, and of course maiming and killing countless innocents, it seems clear to most, myself and every clergy person I know included, that this war and the person primarily responsible for starting it is Evil.  Yes, the capital 'E' is on purpose.  It pains me to think that there are Americans, hard to say how many, who could look at the actions of Vladimir Putin over the last two decades, the litany of murdered dissidents, journalists, and exiles killed in the countries they had fled to, plus the cities leveled in Chechnya, Syria, and now Ukraine without being able to call this evil.  It should disturb us all if some claiming to follow Christ can only view this war through their own American Culture War glasses {the dig at the 'mainstream media' being my clue as to that motivation, I don't know the writer of those words at all, but he claimed to be a follower of Jesus}  If this litany of bloodshed, if this repetition of violence isn't evil, what is?

Isaiah 5:20 (NIV)

Woe to those who call evil good

    and good evil,

who put darkness for light

    and light for darkness,

who put bitter for sweet

    and sweet for bitter.

This is indeed an ongoing danger to the Church, one that has reared its ugly head many times in Church history, when those who claim to follow Jesus at the same time embrace for themselves, or others, doing acts that are exceedingly immoral whether in service of 'the greater good' (The Crusades, Inquisition) or enslaved to their own sinful desires (such as Putin's dream of a new Russian Empire for which he is willing to kill many thousands).  

Should we pray for Vladimir Putin?  Certainly not for his success or the continuation of his autocratic rule, for his desires are evil, and actions causing suffering on an epic scale.  For the salvation of his soul?  Absolutely, the same as we pray for the Lost the world over, for by the fruit of his actions he has repeatedly declared himself to be in need of repentance.  God can forgive the vilest of sinners, but not until they turn from their wickedness, of that we have yet to see any sign.

The Holocaust was Evil, and so were the actions of everyone who aided it.  Anyone who cannot see that, who either denies that it took place, or attempts to minimize or justify it, is living in darkness of heart and mind.  There is no comparable action in human history to the Holocaust, it is the ultimate example of the depravity of humanity both singularly (Hitler) and collectively (his willing executioners).  I dislike both as a student of history and a minister, attempts to compare people to Hitler and events to the Holocaust.  To say that something is less egregious, or less evil, than the Holocaust is a given, but sadly there are still many others things that rightly deserve the label, they may not be the ultimate example of evil, but evil they are.  Unless Putin unleashes nuclear weaponry and threatens the existence of life on this planet, he will remain a notch below Hitler, but with every passing day that this war continues, he moves further down that path.

We may not always agree on what ought to be, on what the best path forward is (and that disagreement can be, to an extent, healthy for the Church), but God help us as a Church if we can't see evil for what it is and denounce it.  


Monday, September 30, 2019

The insanity of a pastor warning of Civil War to protect a politician

The American Civil War cost 600,000 lives.  It should surprise nobody who is paying attention that America in the 21st century is deeply divided along cultural, political, geographic lines.  Are we truly on the verge of a nation-wide conflagration, a tinder box akin to America in 1860 on the verge of the election of Abraham Lincoln?  The answer to that question, while truly horrifying if it were anywhere near 'yes' {and it is not}, ought to be one of deep concern to politicians, law enforcement, and the U.S. military.  In this case, the threat of a coming Civil War was instead the rationale of Pastor Robert Jeffress, the pastor of 14,000 member First Baptist Church of Dallas, in his effort to protect a politician from scandal.  In other words, a Christian pastor has decided that the fortunes of a particular politician, from a particular party, is important enough to him to stoke the fires of internecine violence.
{To watch Pastor Jeffress make this claim, watch the following clip from Fox and Friends, the quote is at the 2:31 mark.  As always, my point is not the larger political issue; my objection is to a pastor who represents the Church choosing to act in this manner.  Whether you agree with him or not on the political issue ought to be beside the point (that it isn't for many is a further symptom of the sickness)}
To those who study history, the danger of equating the Gospel of Jesus Christ with the realms of men, ought to be apparent.  This is not the first time that the very public profile of Pastor Jeffress has raised red flags {two of those previous episodes were written about here: Commercialism and Politics interrupt worship at a Baptist Church and Assassinations, Pastor Jeffress, and Romans 13 }  It doesn't matter which politician is being defended, nor which party is being supported, because the long-term entanglement of Church and State is always an unequal marriage.  Also, the role of a pastor, a sacred trust requiring the utmost integrity, cannot withstand being utilized as a prop to achieve ends outside of the Church. 
And now we have Pastor Jeffress, who is on TV regularly defending his chosen politician {just as other pastors who chose other politicians in the past, equally disastrously, and equally offensive to the Church}, choosing to up the ante by feeding into the fringe element in the country who would welcome a violent confrontation with their political enemies.  It is dangerous, it is reckless, and it is far beneath the dignity that ought to be connected with being a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thursday, October 25, 2018

A 16th Century Attempt at Toleration within Christendom

While the 17th century is rightly remembered for the epic bloodshed of the 30 Years War which saw atrocities committed by, and against, Catholics, Lutherans, and Reformed Christians in the name of God (partly, but also propelled by rivalries for power), it is worth noting a little-known attempt at religious toleration, within Christendom, that occurred about 50 years earlier in Transylvania.  In 1568, the Transylvanian Diet (legislature) issued the Edict of Torda, under the direction of their king John Sigismund.  And although their fledgling kingdom was menaced by potential invasion by both the Ottoman Empire and the Hapsburg Empire, they decreed that within the kingdom, the right of Catholic, Lutheran, Orthodox, and Unitarian (Anti-Trinitarian, and thus heretical acc. to the earliest Church ecumenical councils, and the overwhelmingly accepted interpretation of the Scriptures; thus a non-orthdox viewpoint) preachers to be free from governmental harassment or threats.  And while the vast majority within Christian history would consider non-trinitarian views to be heretical, and thus worthy of opposition (a judgment with which I concur), it is remarkable that the Transylvanian Diet refused to allow violence to be used to further theological debates.  This stance of toleration contrasts profoundly with the war that loomed over the divided European landscape, and I know that those who fear heresy consider it to be a menace (rightly) to the Church, but we have also learned that coercion and force are not effective means of spreading the Gospel.  Violence begets violence, hatred begets hatred.  The Gospel will prevail, not by force of arms, but by the power of the Holy Spirit working in the Church of Jesus Christ.  Should we oppose heresy and threats to the Church?  Absolutely, but we must do so with Truth, not lies, with Love, not hatred, and with Peace, not violence.  How the Church defends itself is of crucial importance, let us look to the example of those who would make peace, even with their enemies, even with those they profoundly disagree with, rather than those who shout for violence, especially in the name of Christ.

The text of the edict is below, for a decision made in the 16th century, it is indeed remarkable, and with little precedence.

 "His majesty, our Lord, in what manner he – together with his realm – legislated in the matter of religion at the previous Diets, in the same matter now, in this Diet, reaffirms that in every place the preachers shall preach and explain the Gospel each according to his understanding of it, and if the congregation like it, well. If not, no one shall compel them for their souls would not be satisfied, but they shall be permitted to keep a preacher whose teaching they approve. Therefore none of the superintendents or others shall abuse the preachers, no one shall be reviled for his religion by anyone, according to the previous statutes, and it is not permitted that anyone should threaten anyone else by imprisonment or by removal from his post for his teaching. For faith is the gift of God and this comes from hearing, which hearing is by the word of God." - The Edict of Torda, 1568

Thursday, August 10, 2017

Assassinations, Pastor Jeffress, and Romans 13

I've written often enough about the danger to the Church in America of an unequal marriage with politics and politicians, especially when that marriage envisions an American triumphalism and nationalism that seeks to equate being a good Christian with being a patriotic American.  The truth of the matter is that no nation has the right to claim God's special favor, apart from ancient Israel, and those who have claimed such a right have done so with disastrous results; one need only examine the WWI era rhetoric of nations comprised primarily of Christians fighting against each other to conclude that God was not in favor of the war aims of any of the combatants.  Can any Christian theologian really defend the notion that German territorial expansion or British colonial interests were the will of God and thus worthy of the countless lives shed in pursuit of them?
And yet, that same temptation to mix Christianity with political nationalism remains, and was given a boost recently by Pastor Robert Jeffress of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, a mega-church with 3,700 weekly attendees.  Pastor Jeffress is no stranger to politics, having been an outspoken advocate for one candidate during the last presidential election.  Now, given the tensions between the United States and North Korea, Pastor Jeffress felt it necessary to express that God has given the moral authority, according to Romans 13:1-5, for the President to "do whatever, whether it's assassination, capital punishment, or evil punishment to quell the actions of evildoers like Kim Jung Un."  So, if the President of the United States determines that a person is an evildoer, he has the moral right to assassinate him/her without due process, without a trial, and without the consent of Congress?  When Paul wrote Romans 13, was he really advocating that governmental leaders, most of whom in the years since have not been Christians, or have been nominal Christians at best, have God's blessing to take pre-emptive action, including starting wars, against those who do threaten evil?
What is the response of Jeffress to those who caution that advocating war, and assassinating the leader of North Korea would surely lead to war, maybe even nuclear war, is not the will of God?  "Some Christians, perhaps younger Christians, have to think this through.  It's antithetical to some of the mushy rhetoric you hear from some circles today.  Frankly, it's because they're not well taught in the scriptures."  Well, ignoring the insult that those who advocate for peace are just "mushy", it is certainly not the only interpretation of Romans 13 to encourage the government to utilize assassinations and pre-emptive wars, for such a stance doesn't even meet the level of the traditional Just War Theory of Thomas Aquinas.  (Primarily because it is far from the last resort, and would lead to far greater evil in terms of civilians deaths than it could possibly prevent.)

For an opposing view of the responsibility of the Christian and Church regarding war and peace, note the words of the martyr Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer who died at the hands of the Nazis:
There is no way to peace along the way of safety.  For peace must be dared.  It is the great venture.  It can never be safe.  Peace is the opposite of security.  To demand guarantees is to mistrust, and this mistrust in turns brings forth war.  To look for guarantees is to want to protect oneself.  Peace means to give oneself altogether to the law of God, wanting no security, but in faith and obedience laying the destiny of the nations in the hand of Almighty God, not trying to direct it for selfish purposes.  Battles are won, not with weapons, but with God.  They are won where the way leads to the cross.  Which of us can say he or she knows what it might mean for the world if one nation should meet the aggressor, not with weapons in hand, but praying, defenseless, and for that very reason protected by 'a bulwark never failing'? - The Church and the People of the World, from the Ecumenical Conference at Fano, 1934.

What is the purpose of a pastor of the Church of Jesus Christ?  If you answered: To encourage a governmental leader to start a war that will kills thousands, perhaps millions of innocents, you're evidently not alone, but just the same, I'm frightened of what that says about the priorities and perspective of some Christians.  As always, the marriage of Politics and Church is an abusive relationship, what may be gained by it is a paltry excuse for what is lost, that observation just got a lot more serious.

To read the Washington Post article which contains the quotes of Pastor Jeffress, click on the following link: ‘God has given Trump authority to take out Kim Jong Un,’ evangelical adviser says


Wednesday, April 12, 2017

Sermon Video: The Fall of Jerusalem - 2 Chronicles 36

As the Chronicle of the king of Judah comes to its close, the kingdom slides toward destruction under the leadership of four wicked kings in a row (sadly, 3 of which were sons of a righteous man, Josiah).  Politically, the rivalry between Egypt and Babylon pushes Judah into becoming the vassal of first one and then the other, but none of Judah's four kings takes the opportunity of the troubled times they are facing to repent and seek the face of the LORD.
In the end, the Chronicle makes it clear that the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple were the judgment of God against the people of Judah for their repeated violations of the covenant and mockery of the prophets sent by God to warn them to repent.

To watch the video, click on the link below:



Friday, April 7, 2017

In Flanders field the poppies blow...Nationalism and the lessons of WWI

One hundred years ago the United States of America reluctantly ended its isolationism and joined WWI against the Central Powers.  At that point, WWI had raged into its fourth year, with the dead and maimed growing each day, millions upon millions.  Nobody knew it at the time, but WWI only had a year and a half until German exhaustion brought it to an end.
WWI was not an example of Just War Theory in action, at least not for its principle protagonists, the Great Powers of Europe who went to war for nationalistic reasons, each hoping for a quick victory that would increase their relative power and prestige at the expense of the enemy.  Nationalism had helped turn the kingdoms of Europe into modern nation-states, but it also stoked hatred of the "other" (Germans of Russians and the French, the French of the Germans, etc.) and enabled leaders to whip up war enthusiasm by painting the enemy as evil.
I've written this before, but it bears repeating, nationalism is not compatible with Christianity.  Patriotism certainly is, if your city, state, or country is lovable, then by all means love it and be proud of it.  Nationalism is different.  Nationalism is the belief that your people are superior, and thus other peoples are inferior.  When it puts down roots and matures, nationalism views the people who are not like us as a sub-human or inhuman "other".  This false pride and denigration of other peoples is contrary to the clear teaching of the Gospel that all men are created by God and that in Christ there is no slave or free, no Jew or gentile, all are one in Christ.  The British, French, German, Austrian, and Russian soldiers who went to war in 1914 were largely Christians, and yet they fought against their fellow Christians, replacing brotherly love with gruesome killing, because they had been taught that their enemy was not their brother in Christ, but instead a fearsome "other".
WWII saw a reprisal of nationalism, brought to its ugly natural culmination in Nazi Germany, before it was discredited by the deaths of tens of millions in that war.  After WWII, nationalism lay dormant during the Cold War, as the battle between Communism and Capitalism took center stage, but following the collapse of the Soviet system, it began to grow once more.
Nationalism is on the rise, in America and Europe, moving us back toward an era of "us not them", of dangerous competition instead of cooperation.  Will the world forget the horrors of WWI and WWII?  Will the lessons paid for in so much blood and destruction be ignored?  A pessimist would see the return of nationalism as a natural counter-balance to the free-market and open-border policies of the recent past, and would resign himself to a return of the dark days of national rivalries.  An optimist might see that same return as an opportunity for the nations of the world to show that they are capable of learning from the past, only time will tell if optimism or pessimism is warranted here.
The Church and Christians in general were fooled by nationalism before, allowing the us vs. them mentality to replace what the Word of God declares about Christian brotherhood and the dangers of pride in oneself and hatred of one's enemies.  Let us pray that the Church and the Christians within her will be wise enough this time around to say "no" to the siren's call of nationalism, for all the world's people have but one Father, one Creator, nobody is an "other".

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

The Gospel or the Gun: Which do you trust?

In 1945, General George Patton wanted to invade the Soviet Union and wipe out the Communists with the help of the remnant of the shattered Nazi army.  In 1951, General Douglas MacArthur wanted to nuke China during the Korean War, forcing President Harry Truman to fire him.  There are always those who believe that the answer to a threat is the barrel of a gun.  It is indeed true that the strong must protect the weak, and a military solution may be the only moral option, but it is also true that militancy and nationalism can run amok with potentially peaceful solutions (or at least less violent ones) lost in the hysteria of fear and fear-mongering.

It is becoming increasingly clear that a number of American and European Christians, including some famous people in leadership positions, view a global war with Islam as inevitable, and perhaps even preferable.  One of the reasons for this militant stance is often a Pre-Tribulation Eschatology that sees a WWIII style conflict as a precursor to the Rapture, and something that cannot or should not be avoided, as it would usher in the return of Christ.  I've written before about the dangers of letting a particular view of Eschatology color your morality and attitude, so that's nothing new, but the issue of confronting Islam has another element that is also troubling.  It would appear that many of those in the pro-war camp are leaning that way because they envision Islam spreading globally and taking over the West through immigration and higher birth rates.  While such an argument might hold water with a statistician, how is it that those who believe in the power of faith, and the triumph of the Gospel, are terrified of the spread of Islam?  If this is simply a battle of ideas, like the Communism vs. Capitalism debate of the Cold War, then it truly would be a confrontation with an unknown outcome, but this is not what Christians believe, at least they shouldn't.  Christianity is based upon historical fact, and those who follow Jesus Christ believe in the triumph of the Gospel over the forces of darkness, whatever they may be.  In Philippians 2:5-11, the Apostle Paul speaks of the ultimate triumph of Jesus Christ, and foretells the day when "every knee should bow...and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father."  Do God's people really believe these words, or do they put more faith in the power of the gun?  How could a professing Christian's priorities be so eschew that he/she would prefer a war, and with it the tens if not hundreds of millions of civilian casualties that would result, to letting the Gospel contend, as it has since the founding of the Church 2,000 years ago, with whatever philosophies, ideologies, or religions which oppose it?

The triumph of the Gospel, foretold in Scripture, is found in the conversion of the Lost, the redeeming of those apart from God, not in the obliteration of those who disbelieve in the explosion of a bomb.  I believe in the power of the Gospel, it will triumph over Islam, and all other beliefs, no matter what they may be, in the end, I'm not looking to destroy those who oppose the will of God, it is my responsibility as a disciple of Jesus Christ to share the wonderful grace of Jesus with them, that they too might willingly and gladly bow their knee before the King of Kings.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

What justice do the families of terrorists deserve? Deuteronomy 24:16

Terrorism has been part and parcel of the political discourse of nations all over the world since 9/11.  The evil on display in terrorist acts has caused great anger, and rightly so, and some of that anger has been aimed not at those committing the terrorist acts themselves (or even supporting them) but at those associated with terrorists by either their ethnicity, country of origin, or religion.  It is easy for a people feeling threatened and afraid to lash out at whichever target they can get their hands upon, including the families of terrorists.  It has even been suggested by an American presidential candidate that we should kill the families of terrorists as a purposeful tactic in violation of the Geneva Convention.
What does God have to say about such guilt by association?  We needn't wonder as to the answer, because God included a denial of the concept of guilt by association in the Law of Moses.  Deuteronomy 24:16 states, "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin."  To kill the wife or child of a terrorist in retaliation for even a barbarous act of terrorism, is an affront to the justice of God, it is not the action of a people who live according to the ethics of the Word of God.
We've been down this road before, the same guilt by association was used during WWII to justify the leveling of cities from the air, a tactic which was as immoral as it was ineffective.  At the time, it was argued that the civilian population was supporting the war effort through their work in the factories and thus they were fair game, it was a Faustian bargain, and a losing one.
Terrorism seeks to change the attitudes and thought processes of those it is used against.  If we lower our belief in the value of life, justifying it in the name of protecting our own lives and way of life, we will have failed the test.  The Law of God was clear on this issue in the Covenant of Moses, right and wrong hasn't changed.

Wednesday, July 6, 2016

Sermon Video: The Wisdom that comes from Heaven - Part 2: James 4:1-6

Why do people in a church fight each other?  For that matter, why do churches or denominations quarrel among themselves?  We know that these things shouldn't happen, certainly not if the one and same Spirit of Christ is in both parties to a fight, so why does it happen?  James explains that fights and quarrels erupt among God's people because of unfulfilled desires, that is people not getting what they want.  What do people want that they don't have?  The primary desires are standard human failings: power, wealth, and sex.  Far too many church disputes, even violence, has revolved around the desire for these.  Churches have been split in two over fights for power or money or because of illicit sex between members.  We need to understand that these desires are a danger if we are to avoid their destructive influence.
In addition to these, misplaced zeal for a religious belief is also a cause of disputes and divisions.  Beyond the core beliefs of the Gospel (the Virgin Birth, Resurrection, salvation by grace through faith, the authority of the Scriptures, etc.) there are innumerable other things that well meaning and God honoring Christians will not always agree upon.  What do we do then?  Do we let a desire for uniformity close our hearts to others, or do we let grace abound and let God be the judge as he has told us that he is.
In the end, the Church doesn't need uniformity of opinion, we need to be one in Spirit and one in purpose.  Our task is monumental, we cannot afford to allow fighting and quarreling to disrupt God's work, whether that be locally or in the Church as a whole.

To watch the video, click on the link below:


Monday, March 21, 2016

Sermon Video: A Gentle King - Zechariah 9:9-10

What sort of leader do people want?  What personality and character best defines a leader?  Historically, famous leaders have been bold and decisive, often ruthless, in their pursuit of power, many of them men of war like Alexander the Great or Napoleon.  The empire they built were built by the sword, and as often as not crumbled soon after.  In contrast, how does Jesus choose to portray himself at his moment of triumph while he enters into Jerusalem?  Jesus follows the prophecy of the prophet Zechariah and enters the city as a gentle king, riding a young donkey.  Jesus rejected the role of the conquering hero, scoring the easy path of political revolution and religious reform, in order to accept the role that only he could play: savior of the world.
It was through an act of humble submission, to his Father's will, that Jesus went to the cross, and it was unprecedented courage and strength that held him there as he bore the weight of humanity's sins upon his shoulders.  The world may think it wants a leader who will fight for them, but our only hope is that we have a leader who was willing to die for us.
Our hope, as Christians, is never in political or military solutions, for those are only the surface, humanity's true problem is deeper, and beyond the power of any to solve but God alone.  Our hope is in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the gentle king and humble servant who alone can make men free.
Zechariah ends by talking about the future reign of the predicted king in peace.  Our world today is mired in conflict, violence is never absent, war is a permanent part of our experience.  Yet one day that will all change, the Son of God will return in glory, will put an end to the rebellion of Satan, and will rule in peace, a peace that will have no end.

To watch the video, click on the link below:


Monday, November 14, 2011

Some hurts can't be healed

"The realm of Sauron is ended!"  said Gandalf, "The Ring-bearer has fulfilled his Quest."  I just reread that portion of Tolkien's The Return of the King (For the 15th time?  Maybe, I know I've read the series at least that many times; it is, afterall, my favorite.) today.  In the book, a great evil is removed from the world with Frodo's victory over Sauron.  Sauron hopes to enslave the world in his lust for power but is done in by a humble hobbit who has no desire to lord anything over anybody.  That moral lesson is itself a profound one for Tolkien, but another emerges as you read the last few chapters of the book.  Over time, it becomes clear that all of the hurts caused by Sauron, and others, cannot be healed.  Some of the wounds are too deep, some must be lived with even when evil has been defeated.  Tolkien's brilliant novels are a work of homage to those who risk everything in service to a greater good and whose sacrifices he witnessed first-hand in life on the Western Front in WWI.  His service in war taught Tolkien that evil cannot be wholly removed from our world.  The "war to end all wars" only put a stop to war long enough for a new generation to grow in its shadow and start a new bloodier war.  For many veterans, Tolkien's words hit especially close to home.  They may have returned "whole", or nearly so, from war, but a part of them has been forever left behind with the brothers in arms they lost and the horrors they witnessed.
In the end, Tolkien's hero Frodo, and his trusty servant Sam are permitted to sail over the sea to the Undying Lands where they can find rest and peace at last.  In our world, we can offer comfort to those who mourn, honor to those who have sacrificed, and gratitude to those who have served, but we cannot heal all wounds.  It is beyond our power to do so. 
Is there hope, for healing in the end?  How can troubled souls find peace?
"Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them.  They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God.  He will wipe every tear from their eyes.  There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."  - Revelation 21:3-4
There is hope, there will be peace, and sorrow will be turned to joy when one day we all stand in the presence of our savior and feel the warmth of the embrace of God's own Son.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Sermon Video: "the peace of Christ" Colossians 3:15

Mankind has never known real peace.  We are always at war with each other, at war with our God, and at war within ourselves.  Jesus Christ offers a solution: Peace with God through his shed blood.  Peace within through the transforming power of the Holy Spirit, and peace among men through the shared purpose and calling of his Church.  The world seeks contentment through hedonism and immorality, but only finds despair.  Jesus offers to use peace, freely.

To watch the video, click on the link below:
Sermon Video