Who should we really be supporting in the latest Middle-East conflict?

[arunma]

Well, everyone probably knows by now that Israel and Lebanon have been in conflict for the past few days. Here's an interesting fact I just learned about Lebanon: according to the online CIA World Factbook, Christians form 39% of the Lebanese population! But in Israel, Christians form just over 2% of the population.

As you all know, I'm one of those Christians who believes that the church, and not the Jewish people, is the true Israel of God. Whenever someone disagrees, we end up discussing the issue as armchair Christians, since Jews and Christians tend to get along. But now we can see that the issue has become more important.

I wonder, according to the will of God, where should our loyalties really lie in this conflict? It turns out that Jews who do not believe in the Son of God are at war with our brothers in Christ. The Apostle Paul taught that Christians must have brotherly love for one another (Romans 12:10). And then there is this curious Scripture,
So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith. (Galatians 6:10)
It seems to me that while we are to love everyone, we are to love our Christian brothers and sisters more than unbelievers. I will be the first to say that politically speaking, Israel is right to defend itself. But given that so many Lebanese are Christians, is it right for American Christians to be rooting for Israel?

[DeaconDean]

arunma, I respect your opinions. War always has a bad side to it in that innocent bystanders will always be hurt. In WWII, during the Allied bombing of Hamburg, nearly a quarter of the citizens were killed or burnt during the bombing. We regreat that innocent people were killed when this happened, but the fact is, that was an important area that needed to be put out of use in order to stop the Nazi war machine. Likewise, the Hezbollah which is a terrorist organization, is hiding in populated areas. They do this on purpose knowing that innocent people being killed will draw irr upon Israel. Does that sound right? Why don't the Hezbollah have the courage to come out in the open and fight face to face rather than hiding among innocent people?

It is a sad fact that innocent people will be killed in war of any kind. Whether it is all out war or terrorist (guerrilla) attacks. I'm truely sorry that Christians are caught amongst this, but why can't they leave the city for the outlying areas, possibly north? Because Hezbollah would follow and set up amongst them again. And also, why isn't Lebanon doing something to drive out the Hezbollah?

I'm sorry but, the Bible says:

"And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee:" -Gen. 12:3

So even though we may disagree on this, I side with Israel. Having served time in the Marine Corps and been to the Middle East, I know how they fell towards Israel and there desire to see Israel wipped off the face of the earth, so I'm a little one-sidded on this.

But hey, I'll still say: God Bless you friend and Brother.

[Sword-In-Hand]

Disagreeing in a friendly manner, I do not hold to reformed theology concerning the church being the new Israel. I've got a list of reasons why I believe this as I'm sure reformists have their lists of why they believe what they believe. There's no need to get into the debate because no one's mind is going to be changed. Am I right, or am I right?;)

So, I side with Israel. I think it's tragic that the Lebonese Christians have to suffer because of the Hezbollah, or basically that any innocent has to suffer because of let's face it, cowards.

I'd rather just see the two make peace. And I go with what DD said.

[Margim]

I think we should be supporting the innocents and civilians, whatever 'side' they be on.

War is just an excuse for power hungy psychopaths of any religion, ethnicity or creed to get thier power kicks.

Both Hezbollah and the Israeli government should be ashamed.

[Andyman_1970]

[/INDENT]It seems to me that while we are to love everyone, we are to love our Christian brothers and sisters more than unbelievers.

Doesn’t Jesus’ little brother James say we are not to show favoritism?

1 John 4:20 that word adelphos for the English word brother can mean neighbor or countryman not necessarily someone of the Christian faith.

So even through this is tangential to the discussion, I’ll have to politely disagree with you………;)


Disagreeing in a friendly manner, I do not hold to reformed theology concerning the church being the new Israel. I've got a list of reasons why I believe this as I'm sure reformists have their lists of why they believe what they believe. There's no need to get into the debate because no one's mind is going to be changed. Am I right, or am I right?;)

:amen: :amen: :amen: :amen: :amen: :amen:

I think we should be supporting the innocents and civilians, whatever 'side' they be on.

:amen: :amen: :amen: :amen: :amen: :amen:

[HumbleMan]

I'm one who feels that Abraham's descendents are believers, not flesh and blood.

The country of Isreal has been given a blank check by dispy's since it's creation back in 1948. Yes, it has been attacked. But they have also been the aggressor many times. I will support them when I feel they are following God's will, and I will criticize them when I feel they are not.

As to the current situation, I feel that both sides are wrong. There should be a cease fire, an exchange of prisoners, and an international effort to rid Lebanon of Hezbollah. Hezbollah does not represent the Lebanese government or the majority of Lebanese.

[IisJustMe]

As you all know, I'm one of those Christians who believes that the church, and not the Jewish people, is the true Israel of God.First, while we are spiritual descendants of Abraham, in that our faith is reckoned to us as righteousness just as it was to Abraham, that does not make us "replacements" for Israel. God is not a liar, nor is He a reneger. His promises to Israel the nation stand, though to realize them they must come to Christ, and they will. Unfortunately for them, they must go through the Tribulation for the remenant to be realized.

It might serve you well to investigate the true miracles of God that were given to Israel during the many wars waged against it by the surrounding Muslim nations in 1948 (one day after Israel became a nation again), 1956, 1967, and 1973. Just google "miracles for Israel at war" and you will be confronted with numerous eyewitness accounts of the hand of God coming against Israel's enemies during those wars. It doesn't seem to me like God has removed His protection, and therefore His promises. Also, review Ezekiel 39:8-22, detailing an air and ground attack against Israel. Nothing like this has happened in ancient or modern history, therefore it is prophecy yet unfulfilled, and it appears to occur before the Tribulation. Again, it is difficult to claim we have completely replaced Israel as God's chosen -- moreso we now share that chosenness with Israel -- in light of this continuing protection and favor.
It turns out that Jews who do not believe in the Son of God are at war with our brothers in Christ.Also untrue. The Lebanese government is pro-Israel, or at least neutral towards it. It is the radical Islamic elements Hezbollah and Hamas who are at war with Israel, and who have taken refuge in Lebanon. The Lebanese Army is actively trying to root out the terrorists but they are undermanned and undertrained. Recall that Syria just last year finally obeyed the UN resolution of 1999 that demanded the withdrawal of all foreign military forces from Lebanon by 2000, an edict with which Israel complied. Syria defied international will and remained for five more years. Now it is Iran that appears to be in violation of the resolution, as it is strongly suspected that Revolutionary Guard elements are in Lebanon secretly training Hezbollah terrorists.
It seems to me that while we are to love everyone, we are to love our Christian brothers and sisters more than unbelievers.But only slightly less so, especially in the case of Israel, because their promises will be realized, and we cannot know who among them that now do not believe are still part of the remenant-to-be. Please understand the political issues, also, before you try to apply biblical principle, because it seems to me you did not really understand the situation in Lebanon prior to posting this thread. If I am wrong, please forgive me, but Israel is not fighting Lebanon as you implied, but Hezbollah and Hamas elements inside Lebanon.

[AJ]

I believe that Hezbollah is the cause of all this... Israel is defending it's citizens. It's easy to sit in the relative safety (at least currently) of our homes away from the relentless terror attacks, mortar attacks and missles that have become a way of life for those in Israel and say that they should "excercise restraint" or that they are to blame... I don't buy it. If a terror organization was established in a neighboring country and started shooting missles into an American city... or a German city...or a French city... They would all react the same way and probably a lot sooner than Israel did.

There is no diplomacy with a terror organization. All they want is to slaughter the Jews, the Christians and anyone who doesn't agree with their beliefs. They have had a presence in Beirut for years and the government hasn't lifted a finger to control them... So Israel is doing the only thing it can do... Eliminating the threat.

I support Israel completely... And pray that this comes to an end soon, but also realize that it probably won't. I hate that innocent civilians are having to suffer and that it has come to war... But there really isn't anyone to blame but the terrorists and the governments that support them.

[LazyGuy]

Palestinian Christians suffer too. It is really arguable whether the nation of Israel can be taken in the same like as the chosen people mentioned in the Bible.

I agree with Iisjustme, Israel is NOT attacking Lebanon.

[TheUltimateWarrior]

Israel, because they are going to win.

[ZiSunka]

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. But that doesn't mean that we have to support Israel in any war, it just means that we pray that Israel isn't involved in any war and that Israel doesn't act in war-loving ways.

War is just as evil if "God's Chosen" start as it is if anyone else starts it.

In any war, there really isn't a winner, except maybe satan who celebrates the loss of life.

[JPPT1974]

I don't like war at all
And that the loss of innocent life
Is indeed what the devil wants
Praying that the fighting and bloodshed
Will cease and that there will be some peaceful resolution to the problem is all that we can do!
:groupray: :groupray: :groupray: :groupray:

[arunma]

Thank you everyone for the friendly disagreements. If I may respond in like manner to Dean: God bless you all friends and brethren.

Now as to the issue at hand, I understand that Israel is at war primarily with Hezbollah, which is an Islamic terrorist group. And I understand that the Lebanese Christians are not specifically Israel's targets. Though I don't consider Jews to be a chosen people in any sense, I do support their right to defend their country. I too disagree with President Bush (or was it Rice?) that Israel ought to show restraint. I don't think any of us will shed any tears if Hezbollah is completely destroyed.

That said, there is the question of the Lebanese Christians. I suppose that to some extent, I am posing a hypothetical question to those who regard Jews as the chosen people. If Jews were to cause suffering to our Christian brethren (and they might be at this moment), then would you support God's chosen people, or God's church? For me the question isn't applicable, since I view God's chosen and God's church as precisely the same thing. But some of you view them as different entities, and that's precisely why I'm asking.

[DeaconDean]

That said, there is the question of the Lebanese Christians. I suppose that to some extent, I am posing a hypothetical question to those who regard Jews as the chosen people. If Jews were to cause suffering to our Christian brethren (and they might be at this moment), then would you support God's chosen people, or God's church? For me the question isn't applicable, since I view God's chosen and God's church as precisely the same thing. But some of you view them as different entities, and that's precisely why I'm asking.

In that case, lets just say that a group of Hezbollah terrorists (10-20) set up camp amongst a community of say 200 Lebanese Christians, and if Israel were to wipe out the whole community to get rid of the Hezbollah terrorists, (like cutting off a toe to get rid of a hang nail) then and only then would I be against Israel. But that isn't the case here. With the exception of Israel's western border (the Mediterranean Sea), she is surrounded by countires and factions which would like nothing better than to see Israel wipped off the face of the earth. No matter the cost to themselves or innocent civilains, Israel as a whole, wipped off the face of the earth. They will use every dirty tactic, every means necessary, to achieve their goal. Just like the Vietnamese who wrapped bombs around babies, the terrorist groups in and around the Mid-East, will not stop until Israel is eliminated from the face of the earth.

But hey, I'm old school, I still support Israel.

[IisJustMe]

Not for the same reason as you, but still invalid. From my perspective, God is preserving Israel for the day when He will keep His promises to them and establish them in the land, free from travail and harrassment from their enemies. That promise isn't for the church, because we are going to be established in heaven, not on earth. Israel will realize its promises in the Thousand year Reign. Now, as to your other point:
If Jews were to cause suffering to our Christian brethren (and they might be at this moment), then would you support God's chosen people, or God's church?I would mourn the loss of brothers and sisters in Christ, just as I mourn similar losses daily in Micronesia, where the indiscriminate slaying of faithful Christians continues daily with no outcry from the Church, or the western governments., just as I mourn the suffering of the Chinese church whose individual members suffer ostracism, imprisonment, and financial ruin simply because of their faith, just as I mourn the African church which is subject to annihilation at the hands of pagan tribes under Satan's direction on an every increasing basis. At least Israel, if they cause such deaths, will not be intending those deaths. In Micronesia, China and Africa, just to name a few, the church is under direct attack every single day, and we do nothing.
For me the question isn't applicable, since I view God's chosen and God's church as precisely the same thing. But some of you view them as different entities, and that's precisely why I'm asking.I felt the need to correct this, too. I don't seem them as 'different entities' but as in a different state of chosenness. Israel has been God's chosen people from the beginning. God made promises to Abraham that are as yet unfilled, and God (as I said yesterday here) is not a liar or one who reneges. In fact, when God sealed the covenant, He put Abraham into a deep sleep, thus making no requirement upon the man at all. God was saying, "No matter what, this I will do." He has not changed the focus of His promise, He has made new promises to the church, and for our faithfulness and our recognition of Who Christ is, we receive our reward ahead of Israel. Our kingdom, as Paul said, is in heaven. Israel's is on earth, partly because that is where God promised them He would reward them, and partially because they, as a people, never saw the implication of a kingdom beyond this earth. So we are both chosen, in the exact same way, because God wanted to bless us. Nothing we've done makes us "more worthy" than Israel. In fact, we are just as rebellious, just as headstrong, just as stiff-necked as Israel ever was. That didn't stop God from blessing Israel, and it never caused Him -- and enver will cause Him -- to withdraw His hand from them as a people.

I'd like your take on my examples in my OP here, regarding the miracles afforded Israel in the last 58 years, and the unfulfilled prophecy of Ezekiel 39:8-22. Why are those things, if Israel is not chosen?

[MrJim]

:scratch:

When you say "we" do you mean do mean "we" as:

Christians
Americans
American Christians
Christians in America

I support neither-only the relief agencies that will be out there picking up the broken pieces of people and stuff trying to put lives back together with God's help.

Rally to your favorite side like it's some kind of football game and root for your team to win. Devil laughs at us...literally.

[JPPT1974]

:scratch:

When you say "we" do you mean do mean "we" as:

Christians
Americans
American Christians
Christians in America

I support neither-only the relief agencies that will be out there picking up the broken pieces of people and stuff trying to put lives back together with God's help.

Rally to your favorite side like it's some kind of football game and root for your team to win. Devil laughs at us...literally.

The devil is trying to make us
Believe that we don't care about the Middle East
Though we need to as there has been lots of violence as well as loss of innocent life that has been going with it!

[Joykins]

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. But that doesn't mean that we have to support Israel in any war, it just means that we pray that Israel isn't involved in any war and that Israel doesn't act in war-loving ways.

War is just as evil if "God's Chosen" start as it is if anyone else starts it.

In any war, there really isn't a winner, except maybe satan who celebrates the loss of life.

:amen:

And I say this as a descendant of an early Zionist.

[TheUltimateWarrior]

Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. But that doesn't mean that we have to support Israel in any war, it just means that we pray that Israel isn't involved in any war and that Israel doesn't act in war-loving ways.

War is just as evil if "God's Chosen" start as it is if anyone else starts it.

In any war, there really isn't a winner, except maybe satan who celebrates the loss of life.

War isnt evil.

Reference most of the Old Testament. God commanded the Israelites to go to war, if war is evil and God commanded the Israelites to go to war, he would be commanding them to sin, questioning his character and we would be in alot of trouble.

NOTE: I am not saying this to say that Israel today is the same as Israel of the Bible, THEY ARE NOT.

I support Israel because they are going to Win, History proves it.

[Andyman_1970]

War isnt evil.


So people dying and suffering is not evil? Would war exist if there had not been the fall?

You realize that God commanded His people to do those things in the OT at specific times and places, they are not presciptive accounts for us today to follow..........can I introduce to the teachings of a Jewish rabbi named Jesus of Nazareth.......

[IisJustMe]

The lifting of partial quotes from another post, and attacking it without making reference to qualifying statements made in that same post. I see that a lot on here, and its intellectually dishonest. If you're going to disagree with someone, don't do them the disservice of lifting the "three-second-soundbite" quote from their post and making them look wrong, stupid, ungodly or carnal. Have the courage to deal with the entire post, or at least give mention to the qualifying points, please.

Having said that, I have to respond to those who label war as "evil." I come from a perspective as a 20-year US Army veteran, helicopter pilot, officer and unabashed patriot, with at least five combat assignments in conflicts from Vietnam to Desert Storm. What I say here is based on my experiences during those 20 years, and an ensuing 15 years of knowledgeable observation.

War is evil, but not the for the reasons you state. It is one of the unbreakable rules of war that young men die, and following very closely on the heels of that one is the rule stating officers and men can't change the first one. While the travesty of war is the death and dying, it is nonetheless often necessary. Those who see things in pure black and white threaten the ability of this nation to do what must at times be done. Certainly that was the case in Vietnam. Whether they will admit it or not, antiwar crusaders during Vietnam were puppets of communist influence, who used the movement to destroy the resolve and distort the purpose to make war. Vietnam was a peaceful democracy that became the target of not only the guns, but the propaganda, of Ho Chi Minh, who was nothing more than a slimy despot who saw the murder of thousands of local officials in the south who opposed an election that Ho thought would install him as leader of a united (and communistic) Vietnam as the key to realizing his dream. That is, until the US stepped in. Then the propaganda began, turning our own media and our own young people into shills for what amounted to early modern terrorism painted as "patriotism." That same movement survives today, using the same tactics and the same political philosophies in decrying our efforts to defeat global terrorism.

I see a lot of moral breast-beating, decrying the motives behind Israel's attacks and apologies for the Hezbollah terrorists who are so "downtrodden, deprived, and depressed." Please don't jump to the conclusion I'm talking about you, because most of that is not visible on this thread. Those who would decry any war all the time, need to realize something. Whether there is a biblical map for war is really irrelevant. We are faced with a worldwide enemy who lives everywhere, including next door. They are not the product, as the New York Times has painted them, of negative international policies that have denied them a voice in the political process. They are a product of abject hatred toward the people of God, be they Jew or Christian. They have only one desire: kill, burn, destroy. Sound familiar? That's Satan's agenda, too.

The immoral mullahs -- not acting in the interest of Allah but in the self-interest of hatred -- are recruiting young, impressionable, poverty-stricken men in order to fill their heads with lies about eternal reward at the hands of 72 virgins and an afterlife of sexual debauchery and immorality that no real god would endorse or offer as reward. They further promise a lifetime of luxury for the families these men leave behind, promising financial rewards beyond the dreams of a young man whose current earning potential (at the time he is recruited) of about $130 a month, which is peanuts even in the worst economies of the Mideast. With these promises firmly implanted in these eager but deluded minds, together with lies about the "great Satan" (i.e., the US, in case you forgot) the young man willingly straps on forty pounds of explosives with a depression detonator and goes off looking to blow himself up in a marketplace to kill innocent "enemies." Or, the more sophisticated dream of being Mohamed Atta and flying a jumbo jet into an American skyscraper, screaming "Allu-ah ak-bar!"

This is your enemy. He won't negotiate with you. He would sooner slice your throat and dance on your dying chest. This is Israel's enemy. He has demanded for years that Israel withdraw from the West Bank and halt its opposition to a Palestinian state. How does he repay the act? By moving immediately into that same West Bank and launching Iranian- and Syrian-supplied missles into cities and towns in Northern Israel. They don't want a Palestinian state as much as they want Israel destroyed. Why?

Believe me when I say it isn't because their land was stolen -- Palestine never existed as a wannabe nation prior to 1948, except in the ancient Roman vocabulary. No Palestinian lost his farm or his property without being justly compensated when Britain began allowing the Jews to move back into their homeland in the 1910's. There was no Palestinian government prior to Israel's inception, only a collection of thugs, thieves and murderers who had fled Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Egypt, and other Arab countries to avoid certain and swift punishment for their crimes. They have never had their own government, never shown an interest in government, but have always been subject to foreign rule, first by the Ottoman Empire, then by Great Britain, until Israel was recognized as a nation in 1948. That is the history of Palestine for the past 150 years.

No, the only reason for the Palestinian hatred of Israel is for the sake of the hatred itself. It goes back to Jacob and Esau, and is inspired by Satan. This truly will be the final conflict of man before Christ returns. I don't mean to say this specific conflict going on right now is the final one, but it is the ongoing struggle that will ultimately culminate in His Second Coming. Israel has the right to defend herself, and she is doing quite well at it. Don't view the European nations and Russia and China, who are calling for an "immediate ceasefire" as more noble and moral than the US and Britain. They have economic interests in Palestine -- the "government" there is a client of their war industries -- and if Israel succeeds in destroying its enemy, then they lose revenue. They don't have the "high and noble" motives the critics of Israel are attributing to them and villifying the US for failing to echo.

Those who see things in perfect shades of black and white don't understand the situation. Contrary to popular thought, the US and Israel don't go looking for war. The US is better equipped to respond to situations like Iraq and Afghanistan than any other nation on earth, and we have a moral responsibility to use that ability in favor of the oppressed. Don't give that nonsense song-and-dance about those people not wanting us there. It is obvious the Iraqi and Afghani people are better off now than under Saddam or the Taliban and are grateful for our intervention, despite the cost in violence and lives in the interim. Israel has the right to defend its borders from attack, and they do so swiftly and certainly. Anyone who would deny them that right has a different agenda than that of morality and righteousness. I think specifically of Kofi Annan, who called Israel the terrorist in this mix the other day!

In reality, those who see things in perfect shades of black and white don't understand the world. They certainly don't understand the Bible, because it quite plainly states that there is no peace on earth until Christ returns. Christians who think otherwise need to blow the dust off The Word and get familiar with it again.

[Andyman_1970]

Hopefully this isn’t a “3 second sound bite”………..
;)


Those who see things in perfect shades of black and white don't understand the situation. In reality, they don't understand the world. They certainly don't understand the Bible, because it quite plainly states that there is no peace on earth until Christ returns. Christians who think otherwise need to blow the dust of The Word and get familiar with it again.


While war is evil, I would argue Biblically it is, or should be from the point of view of a follower of Jesus, there are times unfortunately in this lost, broken, fragmented world we live in it becomes necessary for a sovereign nation to defend itself.

As far as your statement about “peace” remember the Hebrew term for peace means more than just “absence of conflict”…..not to mention I find it a bit odd and a bit of a defeatist mentality to suggest that just because there will not be world wide lasting peace on the earth until the second coming of the Messiah that His people, His hands and feet on earth should not pursue it every chance they get.

[Andyman_1970]

An interesting article I found on this subject:

The new war in the Middle East
by Jim Rice

What is the proper, appropriate response of a nation to violent attacks by terrorists or other radical extremists? We have seen one model illustrated in the response of the British government to last year's attacks on London's public transportation system, in which 52 people were killed and 700 injured. The British rightly understood the attacks as terrorist acts, but responded in a measured manner, dealing both with the investigation of the terrible crime and the need for enhanced security in its wake. Pointedly, the British did not opt for a military response to these acts of terror.


We have also, of course, seen an altogether different model of response, perhaps most clearly exemplified by the U.S. invasion of two countries - one of which was an actual source of the terror - following the horrors of Sept. 11, 2001.


Unfortunately, it seems to be in the latter spirit that Israel responded to terror attacks in the past fortnight. Provoked by the Hamas kidnapping of an Israeli soldier, Israel not only invaded the northern Gaza Strip but also destroyed a significant portion of Gaza's infrastructure, including airstrikes against Gaza's power grid.


Likewise, days later, when the Syrian-backed terror group Hezbollah seized the opportunity to raid northern Israel and capture two Israeli soldiers, Israel responded with a massive attack on Lebanon's civilian structures, from the Beirut airport to a dairy factory, civilian buses, bridges, power stations, and medical facilities, according to reports. Hezbollah responded by firing hundreds of rockets a day - more-modern, longer-range rockets than in the past - aimed intentionally at neighborhoods in Haifa and other Israeli cities. The result, not surprisingly, has been the death of many civilians on all sides.


The situation is clearly complicated by the role of Hezbollah as a part of the coalition government of Lebanon, which seems unable or unwilling (probably both) to disarm Hezbollah, which effectively controls the southern part of the country. The new warfare in the Middle East is also made worse by the sinister political manipulations of both Syria and Iran, who seek to increase their own power in the region no matter the human cost.


But Israel's use of military attacks in response to acts of terror raises many questions. The most important, perhaps, revolves around the issue of legitimate self defense vs. collective punishment. Israel is indeed surrounded by sworn enemies, including many who are demonstrably willing to violently destroy Israel. But does the real need for security justify the massively disproportionate response to an act of terror? Is the collective punishment of an entire population ever morally and ethically justified? As Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Vatican Secretary of State, put it in statement July 14, "The Holy See condemns both the terrorist attacks on the one side and the military reprisals on the other," stating that Israel's right to self-defense "does not exempt it from respecting the norms of international law, especially as regards the protection of civilian populations." The statement said further, "In particular, the Holy See deplores the attack on Lebanon, a free and sovereign nation."


Even apart from the ethical questions raised by Israel's massive retaliation, there are significant issues of efficacy: Does it work? Is Israel made more secure by a militarized approach? Israel has destroyed 42 bridges in Lebanon this week, along with 38 roads, communications equipment, factories, runways and fuel depots at the Beirut airport, and the main ports of Beirut and Tripoli. And along with the material devastation, the attacks constitute a terrible, possibly even fatal, threat to Lebanon's fragile and fledgling democracy.


Does the destruction of much of Lebanon's civilian infrastructure, so painstakingly rebuilt after years of civil war and occupation by both Israeli and Syrian forces, bode well for future peace between the neighboring states? In sum, will the Israeli attacks bring long-term security for Israel, or will they further ensure that the next generation of Lebanese and Palestinians - across the theological and political spectrum - grow up with an undying hatred in their hearts?


The violence of Hezbollah and Hamas should be unequivocally condemned and opposed. It cannot be ignored or underestimated that the two terrorist organizations have as their goal the eradication of Israel. However, much U.S. media coverage of this new Middle East war paints a misleading picture of a ***-for-tat equivalency between the two sides: Hezbollah explodes a bomb in Israel, Israel responds in kind. While their intentions are indeed malevolent, the two terrorist groups have nowhere near the military capability of Israel, which wields one of the most powerful military forces in the world (with the aid, of course, of more than $3 billion per year from the United States). The death toll in Lebanon in the first six days of the war has been tenfold that in Israel - according to The New York Times, 310 people, most of them civilians, have died in Lebanon while Israel has suffered 27 casualties, 15 of them civilians, since Israel began its attacks. (Similarly, 4,064 Palestinians and 1,084 Israelis have been killed since Sept. 29, 2000, according to the Palestine Red Crescent Society and the Israel Defense Forces, respectively.)



One of the most difficult aspects of trying to be a peacemaker in the Middle East context is the "separation wall" of understanding between the two peoples. The very definition of what is happening is understood in vastly different ways by the two sides. Supporters of Israel see the country attacked by its sworn enemies, and see in its response a necessary and justified act of national self-defense. Others see the region's most powerful military force (supported by the world's most powerful military force) illegally occupying Palestinian land and engaging in massive, disproportionate attacks on innocent civilians.


As Christians committed to the cause of peace, our role is not to "take sides" in the struggle, in the traditional sense, but rather to constantly stand for the "side" of a just and secure peace. We can ignore neither the horror of suicide bombings against Israeli civilians (including direct attacks on school children) nor the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories (with all its "collateral damage" to Palestinian children). We must have the vision and courage to stand against the acts of violence by terrorist organizations, as well as the massive state violence by the region's military superpower, while avoiding the trap of positing a false "equivalency" between actions that are not equal.


We cannot allow ourselves to be paralyzed by the political, strategic, and moral complexity of the situation to stand back and do nothing. A first step toward a more comprehensive resolution is an immediate operational cease-fire. But that must be followed by a new way of thinking because, as a U.N. official put it yesterday, "The Middle East is littered with the results of people believing there are military solutions to political problems in the region."

[IisJustMe]

An interesting article I found on this subject:He could have said that and saved a whole lot of space and made himself more clear. Tell me, you call this "interesting" -- how do you justify the expectation that Israel would sit back and do nothing but call for "international villification" of Hezbollah while the blood of her innocent citizens slowly soaks into the desert sands?

If you have a Goliath -- or even just a Philestinian army -- lobbing insults and arrows at you for forty days, what should you do? I think David made that clear.

[Andyman_1970]

He could have said that and saved a whole lot of space and made himself more clear. Tell me, you call this "interesting" -- how do you justify the expectation that Israel would sit back and do nothing but call for "international villification" of Hezbollah while the blood of her innocent citizens slowly soaks into the desert sands?

If you have a Goliath -- or even just a Philestinian army -- lobbing insults and arrows at you for forty days, what should you do? I think David made that clear.


I don't think I ever mentioned I agreed with the article, I merely posted it as it was interesting and relevant to the discussion.

I have never said Israel does not have a right to defend itself.

It seems making assumptions about my point of view in the last few days is becoming an epidemic.......LOL.........it must be the heat......:D

[IisJustMe]

It seems making assumptions about my point of view in the last few days is becoming an epidemic.......LOL.........it must be the heat......:DBeing an addictions counselor, I'm always looking for what someone is "really saying." :D ^_^ :P

My bad.

[IisJustMe]

As far as your statement about “peace” remember the Hebrew term for peace means more than just “absence of conflict”…..not to mention I find it a bit odd and a bit of a defeatist mentality to suggest that just because there will not be world wide lasting peace on the earth until the second coming of the Messiah that His people, His hands and feet on earth should not pursue it every chance they get.Where did I say we shouldn't pursue peace? Of course we should, but Satan doesn't often let us rest.

[Robinsegg]

We should always stand against terrorists and terrorist groups (just as we should stand against those who attempt to use the Bible to browbeat people). Terrorists prey on civilians to produce fear in the populace. They are without honor.

Oh, and my information says that the Lebanese military helped Hezbollah aim the weapons, making Lebanese military targets legitimate.

Rachel

[Andyman_1970]

Where did I say we shouldn't pursue peace? Of course we should, but Satan doesn't often let us rest.

I guess the making assumtions I was commenting on earlier is contagious.............LOL

My apologies brother............:wave:

[ZiSunka]

We should always stand against terrorists and terrorist groups (just as we should stand against those who attempt to use the Bible to browbeat people). Terrorists prey on civilians to produce fear in the populace. They are without honor.

Oh, and my information says that the Lebanese military helped Hezbollah aim the weapons, making Lebanese military targets legitimate.

Rachel

How do we stand against them?

Does violence always have to be answered with violence, or is there another way?

[IisJustMe]

I guess the making assumtions I was commenting on earlier is contagious.............LOL ... My apologies brother............:wave:Jump ball, my end. :D

[IisJustMe]

How do we stand against them? ... Does violence always have to be answered with violence, or is there another way?But even in their prejudice, the white establishment targeted by non-violent protest in the 60's was rational. Especially in the harsh glare of the TV camera lens, they were not willing to appear foolish, fanatical, or especially murderous. At least, not more than a couple times, before they got the message that their fellow Americans didn't approve. The fanatics of Islam, on the other hand, welcome the opportunity to prove they are all of those things, and more. We are not dealing with rational people. We are dealing with a people driven by savage hatred engendered by a blind prejudice planted in them from birth. Compared to what radical Islam feels for Jews and Christians, the feeling of mid-20th century bigots toward American blacks was mild annoyance.

Peace is wonderful and can easily be maintained when two rational parties sit down together in brotherhood and seek to resolve their issues. Our problem is that the other guy is nuts and doesn't have any desire to do anything but kill, burn and destroy. As I mentioned in another post on this thread today, it just so happens that's Satan's agenda too. No one should be surprised.

[IisJustMe]

my information says that the Lebanese military helped Hezbollah aim the weapons, making Lebanese military targets legitimate.Maybe some isolated units perhaps sympathetic to radical Islam were involved. I hadn't heard that. I do know, however, that the Lebanese military has been begging for outside assistance, sans foreign troops on the ground, in identifying Hezbollah operations jump-off points inside Lebanon so they could interdict them and put a halt to their activities. I'd be surprised if this alleged aiming assistance was an overall policy of the Lebanese military. In fact, I can say with near-certainty that if it happened at all, it was against government and military policy.

[Robinsegg]

Maybe some isolated units perhaps sympathetic to radical Islam were involved. I hadn't heard that. I do know, however, that the Lebanese military has been begging for outside assistance, sans foreign troops on the ground, in identifying Hezbollah operations jump-off points inside Lebanon so they could interdict them and put a halt to their activities. I'd be surprised if it was a overall policy of the Lebanese military. In fact, I can say with near-certainty that if it happened at all, it was against government and military policy.That may well be. But the information I read (I think it may have been earlier this thread) is that the particular weapons used could only be aimed either by line-of-site point-and-shoot means or by equipment the terrorists don't have on their own (some kind of lazer thing, I think?)

Rachel

[Joykins]

How do we stand against them?

Does violence always have to be answered with violence, or is there another way?
I read a book by an Anabaptist author not too long ago that basically stated that war is essentially state-authorized terrorism, and terrorism is essentially free-lance war.

I'll see if I can find the title.

[IisJustMe]

That may well be. But the information I read (I think it may have been earlier this thread) is that the particular weapons used could only be aimed either by line-of-site point-and-shoot means or by equipment the terrorists don't have on their own (some kind of lazer thing, I think?) ... RachelI haven't read the whole thread, so I missed that one. These things seem to grow exponentially at times when good, clean-living, sensible people (read that: "me") are in bed asleep! :D :D

The problem with that post is that all the Iranian and Syrian rockets Hezbollah is using are radar guided, and don't need any special siting from the ground. The rockets are equipped with GPS, and the launch site can fold up and drive away with the rocket in flight, keeping an eye on its progress on a laptop. A radar signal bounced to the rocket keeps it in flight, and when the GPS reading indicates it is approximately where the launch crew wants it, they cut off the radar signal. The rocket then dips to earth. All the material needed could be bought at a Beirut Radio Shack.

[Robinsegg]

Sorry, it's not this thread. I'll try to find it.

Rachel

[Robinsegg]

Here's the right thread: http://www.christianforums.com/t3174920
Near the bottom of the first page (or top of the second) the weaponry is described, as well as the targeting system.

Rachel

[IisJustMe]

I read through the whole thread and found they were talking about the same kind of radar-guided missles I referenced. But the post was begun to discuss Wednesday's bombing of a Lebanese Army barracks, speculating that the Lebanese had helped target the missles, which isn't true.

In fact, the Israeli and Lebanese public information offices both stated the barracks was struck in error, not in response to rocket launches but in response to a suspected staging area near the barracks. The attack was a mistake, and was curtailed when unmanned drones indicated the wrong building had been hit. The barracks is outside of Beirut, which is too far north for launches into Israel, and too public for the launch that severely damaged the Israeli warship Saar 5 earlier in the week, so the thought that any rocket launches had anything to do with the attack (as the forum participants are actively engaged in debating) is incorrect.

[Robinsegg]

I read through the whole thread and found they were talking about the same kind of radar-guided missles I referenced. But the post was begun to discuss Wednesday's bombing of a Lebanese Army barracks, speculating that the Lebanese had helped target the missles, which isn't true.

In fact, the Israeli and Lebanese public information offices both stated the barracks was struck in error, not in response to rocket launches but in response to a suspected staging area near the barracks. The attack was a mistake, and was curtailed when unmanned drones indicated the wrong building had been hit. The barracks is outside of Beirut, which is too far north for launches into Israel, and too public for the launch that severely damaged the Israeli warship Saar 5 earlier in the week, so the thought that any rocket launches had anything to do with the attack (as the forum participants are actively engaged in debating) is incorrect.Thanks for the information! Apparently I was working on a misguided assumption.

I've always said go after the terrorists, and I'll still stand by that statement. Good for Lebanon for trying to get rid of them!
Rachel

[AJ]

Am I mistaken or was it being reported yesterday that the government of Lebanon was planing on reinforcing Hezbollah if Israel started a ground war? If they are reinforcing and forming an impromptu alliance with the terrorists... then they military of Lebanon becomes the enemy as well.

Also most of the rockets being fired by Hezbollah are not GPS guided or radar guided. They are very old technology and are not percision weapons at all. At 3-4 miles range they can confidently say they will hit somehwere in a targeted city... But above 6-7 miles they would be doing good to hit a target as large as a city consistently. They are a classic terror weapon... Built to inflict heavy casualties with the ball bearings packed in the warhead like a shotgun shell.

They do have some guided weapons... they attacked that ship with one... but the vast majority of their rockets are unguided.

Israel on the other hand is using laser guided and GPS guided bombs to effect percision strikes. It's unfortunate the Hezbollah use citizens as a human shield by maintaining their strongholds in residential neighborhoods.

[PastorJim]

Well, everyone probably knows by now that Israel and Lebanon have been in conflict for the past few days. Here's an interesting fact I just learned about Lebanon: according to the online CIA World Factbook, Christians form 39% of the Lebanese population! But in Israel, Christians form just over 2% of the population.

As you all know, I'm one of those Christians who believes that the church, and not the Jewish people, is the true Israel of God. Whenever someone disagrees, we end up discussing the issue as armchair Christians, since Jews and Christians tend to get along. But now we can see that the issue has become more important.


I wonder, according to the will of God, where should our loyalties really lie in this conflict? It turns out that Jews who do not believe in the Son of God are at war with our brothers in Christ. The Apostle Paul taught that Christians must have brotherly love for one another (Romans 12:10). And then there is this curious Scripture,So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith. (Galatians 6:10)

It seems to me that while we are to love everyone, we are to love our Christian brothers and sisters more than unbelievers. I will be the first to say that politically speaking, Israel is right to defend itself. But given that so many Lebanese are Christians, is it right for American Christians to be rooting for Israel?

Having Christians in the country does not excuse Lebanon for their behavior in hosting and supporting Hezbollah. Let's take a moment to remember that no fewer than 28 of the 120 some seats in the Lebanon parliment are taken up by Hezbollah members.

As long as this is the case, as long as Israel is threatened by Lebanon and their association with this terrorist group, it is our responsibility to defend or, at least, offer moral support to Israel.

[Flynmonkie]

The lifting of partial quotes from another post, and attacking it without making reference to qualifying statements made in that same post. I see that a lot on here, and its intellectually dishonest. If you're going to disagree with someone, don't do them the disservice of lifting the "three-second-soundbite" quote from their post and making them look wrong, stupid, ungodly or carnal. Have the courage to deal with the entire post, or at least give mention to the qualifying points, please.


:thumbsup::amen:

Those who see things in perfect shades of black and white don't understand the situation. Contrary to popular thought, the US and Israel don't go looking for war. The US is better equipped to respond to situations like Iraq and Afghanistan than any other nation on earth, and we have a moral responsibility to use that ability in favor of the oppressed.


This is where I am not so sure I agree with you. Although I am learning a great deal from your posts, I do not "get" where the US has a need to police the world. From my understanding, and please forgive because I am learning now after remaining unplugged for many years. War seems to defy my every sense including a sense of understanding. But if historically this has never changed, will never change -- why should we become involved?

In addition, why take the stance with Israel when situations such as in Africa (Rwanda) happen and we remain silent. How is this different?

[IisJustMe]

This is where I am not so sure I agree with you. Although I am learning a great deal from your posts, I do not "get" where the US has a need to police the world.Jesus said, "Love your neighbor as yourself," and called it the second of the two great commandments. Nations are the dominant entities in the world community. Nations have the same onus to behave in a godly manner upon them, as we have upon ourselves as individuals. If we see someone getting mugged, we can take two godly actions. We can call the police, or if we feel confident in our ability to deal with the situation and fear waiting for the police could have negative consequences, we can intervene directly.

Applying this to international relationships, we used this reasoning to foil Hitler's and Hirohito's dreams of world dominion. Our alternate choice was to stand by and watch all of Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Europe fall under the rule of evil men. Our intervention in Korea was a response to a call for help, issued by the South Koreans who were clinging tentatively to a democracy. Similarly in Vietnam, the democratic forces sought our help as early as 1959, when Ho Chi Minh was sending assassin squads into the south to murder opponents to an election that would undoubtedly have been fixed in favor of Ho and the communists. Thousands died before 1962 at the direction of this slimy despot from Hanoi. But you don't hear about those facts much. We have people in the media and in academia who "rewrite" history to conform to their political viewpoints.

By the same token, we responded in Desert Storm to a military invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation, Kuwait. Our mistake in Iraq in 1991 was in not taking that scumbag when we had the opportunity. The price we paid was watching him gas another 5,000 Kurds just one year later. The current double battlefront in Afghanistan and Iraq is both a response to terrorist attacks on our own soil, and to terrorist sympathizers who used a friendly dictator (the same one we should have eliminated 10 years before the attacks) to train terrorists and insurgents -- the same ones we are eliminating on a painful, day-to-day basis in Iraq today.
From my understanding, and please forgive because I am learning now after remaining unplugged for many years. War seems to defy my every sense including a sense of understanding. But if historically this has never changed, will never change -- why should we become involved?Two points here. As a combat veteran, I agree wholeheartedly that war defies the sensibilities. When peace is the objective, why does the enemy insist on us inflicting war and death upon him before he'll either capitulate or come to the negotiation table. I'm not proud of what I've done as a soldier for this nation, but I also realize that there were no alternatives at the time. I regret it was necessary, but as it was, I'm grateful it was me, the reluctant warrior, in command of many of those missions as opposed to some others that I knew. The fact is, in most if not all of those situations, had we not done as we did, more lives, more horror, more pain, suffering and obscenities would have resulted than actually occurred. That may be difficult to understand, but putting it simply, I'd rather -- given that deaths were necessary -- 10 die than 100, or 1,000 die that a million. Its a strange economy, but nonetheless an economy. That's the first point.

My second point is that the Islamic fanatics are insane. I have no doubt of that fact whatsoever. It is glorious for them to inflict death as they themselves die, thinking this "martyrdom" will result in their being served for eternity by 72 virgins, and their families will live in the glory and benefaction of Allah. There is no "end" with them. They will kill, burn and destroy -- which is also Satan's agenda -- until they are either all dead themselves, or their enemies are dead. If they were to destroy Israel, their attention would be turned to the US. We have to intervene, because it goes back to the economy of death I outlined above. It isn't pretty, its damned stupid (pardon my French) but its absolutely necessary.

Hope that answers your questions, and God bless.

[AJ]

Jesus said, "Love your neighbor as yourself," and called it the second of the two great commandments. Nations are the dominant entities in the world community. Nations have the same onus to behave in a godly manner upon them, as we have upon ourselves as individuals. If we see someone getting mugged, we can take two godly actions. We can call the police, or if we feel confident in our ability to deal with the situation and fear waiting for the police could have negative consequences, we can intervene directly.

Applying this to international relationships, we used this reasoning to foil Hitler's and Hirohito's dreams of world dominion. Our alternate choice was to stand by and watch all of Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Europe fall under the rule of evil men. Our intervention in Korea was a response to a call for help, issued by the South Koreans who were clinging tentatively to a democracy. Similarly in Vietnam, the democratic forces sought our help as early as 1959, when Ho Chi Minh was sending assassin squads into the south to murder opponents to an election that would undoubtedly have been fixed in favor of Ho and the communists. Thousands died before 1962 at the direction of this slimy despot from Hanoi. But you don't hear about those facts much. We have people in the media and in academia who "rewrite" history to conform to their political viewpoints.

By the same token, we responded in Desert Storm to a military invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation, Kuwait. Our mistake in Iraq in 1991 was in not taking that scumbag when we had the opportunity. The price we paid was watching him gas another 5,000 Kurds just one year later. The current double battlefront in Afghanistan and Iraq is both a response to terrorist attacks on our own soil, and to terrorist sympathizers who used a friendly dictator (the same one we should have eliminated 10 years before the attacks) to train terrorists and insurgents -- the same ones we are eliminating on a painful, day-to-day basis in Iraq today.
Two points here. As a combat veteran, I agree wholeheartedly that war defies the sensibilities. When peace is the objective, why does the enemy insist on us inflicting war and death upon him before he'll either capitulate or come to the negotiation table. I'm not proud of what I've done as a soldier for this nation, but I also realize that there were no alternatives at the time. I regret it was necessary, but as it was, I'm grateful it was me, the reluctant warrior, in command of many of those missions as opposed to some others that I knew. The fact is, in most if not all of those situations, had we not done as we did, more lives, more horror, more pain, suffering and obscenities would have resulted than actually occurred. That may be difficult to understand, but putting it simply, I'd rather -- given that deaths were necessary -- 10 die than 100, or 1,000 die that a million. Its a strange economy, but nonetheless an economy. That's the first point.

My second point is that the Islamic fanatics are insane. I have no doubt of that fact whatsoever. It is glorious for them to inflict death as they themselves die, thinking this "martyrdom" will result in their being served for eternity by 72 virgins, and their families will live in the glory and benefaction of Allah. There is no "end" with them. They will kill, burn and destroy -- which is also Satan's agenda -- until they are either all dead themselves, or their enemies are dead. If they were to destroy Israel, their attention would be turned to the US. We have to intervene, because it goes back to the economy of death I outlined above. It isn't pretty, its damned stupid (pardon my French) but its absolutely necessary.

Hope that answers your questions, and God bless.I couldn't agree more! Nicely stated.

[Flynmonkie]

Thank you for engaging in this discussion with me. Although I am naive, and still ill informed (embarrassed to speak it but speaking in truth) I have never questioned once the soldiers of our nation in response to protection of the American people or in submission to our government. I also believe that God convicts a heart in decision-making such as tough decisions as these. I understand protection, I believe I am beginning to understand that sometimes “adults” need parenting hence an orderly government, but I think I have a long ways to go to understand the complete philosophy behind it all. Might be that God is bringing me to it slowly; that there were other truths I needed to grasp beforehand I am not sure. Many people have noticed a decrease in “gen-x” voters; I tend to believe it is because we became tired of the twisting of American law. Tired of the lies, the hidden agendas etc.. There is just no way it seems to know what to believe, or there hasn’t been. We came from an era that really didn’t see war until Desert Storm, and with all the rhetoric about Vietnam, questions remained about true intentions there.

This generation, my sons’ generation has seen nothing but chaos and destruction. I think this will be the generation that puts their foot down, maybe even going back to constitutional belief. The law is the law. But I guess that would be another thread. It is funny you mention the thought of seeing 10 rather than 10,000 die.. I have been working on a project for my PoliSci class in which we are to apply MacNamaras 11 life lessons from “The Fog of War” to a real world issue today. One of his lessons is, “in order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.” I found that thought profound, which led me on a path of understanding the concept of evil. Intent is where I landed. If the intent is truly to protect, I see no evil in this. I think this might be what he is referring to.

But still I question, is this truly best for the American people? I don’t see the connection other than commodity. Sure with this new era, we are now dealing with terrorism on our soil, but inconsistency is all I see. Immigration leaves the doors open, yet at the same time we are engaging in war in other countries to “attempt to annihilate” these same terrorists for evil. Shouldn’t we take care of matters here (get our home in order) before we go out traipsing all over the world fighting others wars, not to mention wars that have and will historically never change?

[IisJustMe]

You offer some incredible insights and exhibit rational thinking that unfortunately is absent from a lot of personal opinion these days. Too many people accept what is spoonfed them by their favorite media without asking intelligent questions. I'd like to compliment you particularly on these statements:
I have never questioned once the soldiers of our nation in response to protection of the American people or in submission to our government.Thank you, dear lady, for being able to separate the rhetoric about war from the men who are charged to wage it. Someone who has never warn this nation's uniform cannot grasp that we believe in what we are doing, and on the rare occassion we are asked to do something with which we may not agree, we trust our superiors to know what must be done. That's not blind obedience. That's chain of command, and without it, no military organization will be effective, or survive.
I also believe that God convicts a heart in decision-making such as tough decisions as these.Amen! There comes a time when an officer has to trust what some of us call a "gut instinct" and what many of us came to realize was a power greater than ourselves.
I understand protection, I believe I am beginning to understand that sometimes “adults” need parenting hence an orderly government, but I think I have a long ways to go to understand the complete philosophy behind it all.Another amen! When people won't take personal responsibility for themselves to the detriment of society as a whole, distasteful as it is to a free society such as ourselves, someone has to step in and say, "Its going to be this way. Period. End of discussion. Sorry about that." And if you ever do understand the complete philosophy, please run for president. You'll have my vote, because you will be the only one like you. :D
Many people have noticed a decrease in “gen-x” voters; I tend to believe it is because we became tired of the twisting of American law. Tired of the lies, the hidden agendas etc.. There is just no way it seems to know what to believe, or there hasn’t been. We came from an era that really didn’t see war until Desert Storm, and with all the rhetoric about Vietnam, questions remained about true intentions there.I have to say that it is our government that is at fault for this. I also have to say there has not been as much lying and hidden agendas as there appear to have been. What we see is a government that outthinks itself. "Spin doctors" tell politicians what will be palatable to the public, which results in the overemphasis of minor and secondary points because some head counter somewhere told the "spin doctor" who ordered the poll that it will go over better than the primary truth of the matter. Somewhere in the last 25 years these poll-taking idiots who run political campaigns have decided that the American people can't be upset or dire things will happen. I happen to think that's hogwash.

I compare it the intelligence officer that was briefing us for a rescue mission across the DMZ to bring home a downed A-6 pilot. He said the mission had a "negative impact potential on the continued functioning capabilities of those personnel involved." I interrupted him and asked, "Did you just tell us there's a strong possibility we're gonna die?" He stuttered and stammered and finally said, "Yeah, something like that." I told him next time to just spit it out. If somebody tells me I'm likely to die, I'm gonna be more careful. If he tells me there's a "negative impact potential" etc. etc. etc. I'm gonna spend the first two hours of the mission trying to figure out what the heck he said! I think he probably trained all the idiots running congressmen's offices these days, because what they say -- as opposed to plainly speaking the truth -- sounds a lot like he did.
It is funny you mention the thought of seeing 10 rather than 10,000 die.. I have been working on a project for my PoliSci class in which we are to apply MacNamaras 11 life lessons from “The Fog of War” to a real world issue today. One of his lessons is, “in order to do good, you may have to engage in evil.” I found that thought profound, which led me on a path of understanding the concept of evil. Intent is where I landed. If the intent is truly to protect, I see no evil in this. I think this might be what he is referring to.Excellent point. Too many people see the life of one US soldier as too high a price to pay for freedom. Thank the good Lord the men of Lexington, Concord, and Boston didn't feel that way in 1775. We are faced with enemies today who have no use for such an economy, and will take advantage of every Cindy Sheehan and John Kerry they can dupe into shilling for them while they plot death and destruction of this country.
But still I question, is this truly best for the American people? I don’t see the connection other than commodity. Sure with this new era, we are now dealing with terrorism on our soil, but inconsistency is all I see. Immigration leaves the doors open, yet at the same time we are engaging in war in other countries to “attempt to annihilate” these same terrorists for evil.You're absolutely right. I like President Bush, but I think he's wrong on immigration, for the obvious reason that both our northern and southern borders are so wide open, an army could pour through there one soldier at a time in a single 24-hour period and we wouldn't have a clue until they changed into their uniforms and started shooting.
Shouldn’t we take care of matters here (get our home in order) before we go out traipsing all over the world fighting others wars, not to mention wars that have and will historically never change?Unfortunately, we can't do first one and then the other, or we lose everywhere. What we're doing abroad is absolutely necessary. We have 300 million people in this country. We can take care of immigration at home while the soldiers do their job abroad.

Excellent post! Thanks for being vulnerable, because it showed you aren't so much so as you think. :D :cool: ^_^

[JPPT1974]

God tells us that it is easy to
Pray for those that are lovely
But also He tells us through Jesus
That we are to pray for our enemies
Regardless because that is what Jesus
Did on the cross over 2,000 years ago!

[HypoTypoSis]

the Hezbollah which is a terrorist organization

This, while it is the common assumption, leaves much to speculation.

Since we know Hezbollah is Iranian and Syrian financed, supplied and trained who is to unequivocally state Hezbollah is, in fact, a terrorist organization per se and not simply a cloak for Iran's and Syria's (not all that) ulterior motives for not just the ultimate annihilation of the state of Israel but, more importantly, the utter extermination of the Jewish race?

That being the case, a closer look behind the cloak is demanded and a more honest assessment as well as a more affirmative redirection of our efforts toward just who our true enemies really are.

The 20th Century's original terrorist was, in all likelihood, Yassir Arrafat and his PLO the original terrorist organization that for all intents and purposes formed the policies and procedures by which all successive terrorist organizations (Al Quaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc). "Yes sir" Arrafat would be more to the point in that just continually say 'yes' to peace but never meaning it thereby buying more time as politics, people and money are accumulated in the terrorists favor. And that is exactly what we see all terrorist "organizations" doing.

Though I still feel it is a misnomer to call them organizations when they are so obviously controlled and run by actual countries. And it is those countries we should be going after.

HypoTypoSis

[MrJim]

Just can't disconnect AMERICAN with CHURCH, can we? The cross is so wrapped with the flag that one can't be seen for the other.

The two kingdoms are separate. Until the CHURCH sees this and quits playing with worldly toys (like POWER and VIOLENCE and BLOODSHED) it will continue to forsake its calling and be ineffective.

I want no part of it and toss my AMERICAN citizenship into a pile of other things I've forsaken...sorta like when Paul says:

Phi 3:4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
Phi 3:5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
Phi 3:6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.
Phi 3:7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
Phi 3:8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

So I could build something like that, taking pride in being an AMERICAN and a US Marine and a Missourian etc etc, but it is all DUNG.

[DeaconDean]

Though I still feel it is a misnomer to call them organizations when they are so obviously controlled and run by actual countries. And it is those countries we should be going after.

HypoTypoSis

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a "terrorist" as:

" the systematic use of terror (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/terror) especially as a means of coercion"

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/terrorist


What is the Hezbollah's ultimate goal in the area? To cause as much damage and to draw Israel's troops away from more esscential areas. The Vietnamese (Viet Cong) used this tactic very well in 1968. The whole world learned that a country the size of North Carolina could stand up and beat a major super power. That is exactly the same tactics they are using in Lebanon. Hide among the civilian population. Attack without warning, causing as much confusion and damage as possible. I have no simpathy for this or any group who has to hide among civilians and cause their deaths as well as those who serve there own cause. I have no problem with the tactics Israel is using. Being a former Marine, I was trained to fight for whatever cause I was called to do. If this same group hid across the border in Canada and lobbed rockets into New York City, or Detroit, MI, I would have no problem going into whatever city they were in and wipping them out. Hezbollah may be acting for someone else, but until they have 100% proof positive that is the case, Israel has no choice but to go after them. It's like fighting cockroaches. You may see one, and for sure there has to be more, so you kill the one. Sooner or later another one shows up. Then it's time to call in an exterminator. That will take care of it for a while, but sooner or later they will be back. The same case in the Middle East, you whip out the Hezbollah, sooner or later another takes it's place. I have no problem with Israel using whatever means is necessary to protect its boarders. And the fact is, Hezbollah, PLO, Whatever the name is, they are plain and simple a terrorist organization. And they deserve what they have coming to them.

Sorry, but thats just how I feel.

[HypoTypoSis]

Until the CHURCH sees this and quits playing with worldly toys (like POWER and VIOLENCE and BLOODSHED) it will continue to forsake its calling and be ineffective.

You are describing the intermingling of the church and the world's system. Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is that it is not going to change; indeed, it cannot.

Mixing politics and religion is an historic no no and this is something that Jesus avoided.

HypoTypoSis

[HypoTypoSis]

Iran sends money, arms, know-how, 'advisors' (sounds like the US advisors in early 60's Viet Nam!); Syria is used as a staging area, both send people to the US crossing our Northern and Southern borders. They in turn set up phoney religious and social organizations that US citizens, both Christian and Moslem, donate to. The money is then sent back to Iran and the process begins all over again.

Whether its the PLO, Al Quaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Viet Cong or the US Special Forces the object is to win by attrition, hopefully, never having been seen. All war is terror, all war is coercion be it tanks on the battlefield, spies hidden in the cities, suicide bombers, thousands of bombs being dropped or one hydrogen bomb dropped on an entire city.

The politics of war are changing and so must the Geneva Convention, the role of the press as well as the humanistic United Nations.

HypoTypoSis

[HypoTypoSis]

the church, and not the Jewish people, is the true Israel of God

Replacement Theology grew out of the belief that God abandoned the Jews because "they" killed Jesus and, later, Constantine, around 300AD, made Christianity the state religion which later became the Catholic Church; in the process he also made it law that essentially anathemitized the Jews; they had to wear the Star of David on their clothes (Hitler ordered the same) so as to identify them, they had to live in the ghettoes, and the ghettoes had to be locked every night. Later, Augustine, Chrysostam, Luther and others who so vociferously preached against the Jews also saw this was a bit lopsided, not for the Jews but for the Christians for without the Jews there would be no Old Tesament, no Jewish records, no history and no Jesus; thus in time it was alright to disperse but not despise the Jews. Still, the despising continued until the early 1800's when Napoleon took over Rome (and, essentially, the Vatican) and made the Jews equal to everyone else. Unfortunately, this only lasted about 5 or 6 years until Napolean was defeated and the Vatican came back into play and reinstituted the laws against the Jews and the Pope reaffirmed Replacement Theology. A couple few decades later Darby (think, Darby version of the bible) came on the scene and realized there was much more to all this, that, even though it was necessary for the Jews of the time to reject Jesus (thus fulfilling prophecy) He was not going to forget them for God had made many promises and covenants with them specifically, and that they would, in the fullness of time, become God's earthly people to rule the nations from (New) Jerusalem with the Messiah as their King. These were promises and covenants that could not be transferred to the ingrafted Christians who had never believed for they had never seen as had the Jews of the power and majesty of God but, instead, theirs was the greater reward because they, the Christians, believed, instead, by faith for they had believed without having ever seen all the displayed powers of God from burning bushes to the dead being raised and, thus, their greater reward being that they would become, instead, God's heavenly people. In any event, Replacement Theology began to fall out of favor for the latter part of the 1800's and on into the 1900's until, finally, in the 1950's most all the major Christian denominations repudiated Replacement Theology and, finally, in the 1960's the Catholic Pope, too, renounced it.

- - - -

fwiw, It is imperative that we be specific as possible in the usage of biblical terms when discussing scripture; it is not something where all things can mean all things to all people for that is the relativist thinking of the humanist. It is not what we think but, instead, what, specifically, God means in any particular passage for all usages of a word do not always mean the same thing. And this, I surmise, is the difficulty and subsequent plethora of posts, opinions and definitions regarding the usage of various terms such as universal church, Universal church, catholic, Catholic, church, Church, body of Christ, etc. Changing a single jot or tittle or, for that matter by today's standards, removing a single comma from a sentence will alter the entire meaning of a sentence.

- - - -

itmt, aside from those within the Judeo-Christian "pocket" all religions, faiths and beliefs throughout history and up through and including today find commonality and agreement in Nimrod's (first and humanist) religion originally mentioned in the 10th chapter of Genesis and which takes its heart and fuel from Satan's Original Lie in two parts contained in the 4th and 5th verses of the third chapter in Genesis.

HypoTypoSis

[DeaconDean]

HTS, it is admirable that you take such a stance against war, and any form of violence. But I on the other hand, am a practical person. As Gene Hackman said In "The Hunt for Red October" War is the continuation of politics through other means. Charles Swindol in his book "1001 Sermon Illustrations" brings out the point that in the entire history of the world, there have only been 276 years where there was no war of any kind. And in most likelyhood, that was the time before Cain killed Abel. War is a fact of life. War will be with us until Christ returns and the world is at peace. The last war will be one where Christ and His army defeats Satan and his army. (Rev. 19:11-20) While we do pray for peace, it will never happen until Jesus returns and is Crowned King!

[HypoTypoSis]

DD, In war there can be no proportionate response, Sean Connery, in The Untouchables, made the remark about bringing a knife to a gunfight; well, if it ain't worth going for the throat it ain't worth the hassle, in which case, the only alternative is to walk away.

You raise an oft overlooked issue with respect to the last war; that being the battle between The Lord's army and that of Satan. It would not take the Lord's Army to put down just another human war. That said, I think it would have to go considerably beyond just an "as above so below" basic metaphysical principle. Mankind is evil from the heart and, since the Fall, has needed no help from the demonic spirit realm (nor can we self-righteously shift blame to "demons on our shoulders" with pridefully quaint little, "the devil made me do its").

Scripture tells us mankind will amass an army totalling 200 million (Rev 9); it does not say these are opposing forces, rather, it sounds as though this is an allied force ("And the number of the army...") which, regardless of number, would stand no chance against the army of darkness; nor would the army of Light need any help from a puny finite powered human army. Thus the question arises just what is it that instills such deep and widespread fear for mankind's entire worldwide existence thereby causing them to assemble such massive numbers despite the obviously apparent futile odds?

I missed the first part of a Fox news bite about a half hour ago, something to effect that Germany, France, Italy and Indian armies being placed at the Israeli-Lebanon border to maintain order. I wonder how far this is from the Megiddo Valley which, interestingly enough, over the past some odd thousand years has shown to be a repeadtedly strategic battle location.

HypoTypoSis

[MrJim]

HTS, it is admirable that you take such a stance against war, and any form of violence. But I on the other hand, am a practical person.

I'm hearing the zealot disciple say this to Jesus when Christ said to turn the other cheek and walk the extra mile and love your enemies..."but Lord, I'm a practical person. We just can't let those Romans get away with this."

As Gene Hackman said In "The Hunt for Red October" War is the continuation of politics through other means.

All the more reason to let the world have their worldly power.

Charles Swindol in his book "1001 Sermon Illustrations" brings out the point that in the entire history of the world, there have only been 276 years where there was no war of any kind. And in most likelyhood, that was the time before Cain killed Abel. War is a fact of life. War will be with us until Christ returns and the world is at peace. The last war will be one where Christ and His army defeats Satan and his army. (Rev. 19:11-20) While we do pray for peace, it will never happen until Jesus returns and is Crowned King!

This is EXACTLY why the church MUST be different from the world and not choose sides in these conflicts and be about the work of the KINGDOM. Otherwise nationalistic Christians will end up on both sides of a war defending their own "interests" which are not Christian interests at all. We kill each other for our stuff:doh:

The idea that there are going to be wars so we need to choose our sides is not what Christ taught us. Ours is a mission beyond political borders and raging nations. To seek and save the lost (that die in greater numbers during conflict); to care for the poor and widowed and orphaned (that are created in greater numbers during conflict); to bring a message of peace in dire times--and not a message of heavenly peace with a nationalistic banner on it; to worship the Almighty God in spirit and in truth.

This challenge is to all nations of Christians, not just Americans. Regardless of your national background, the gospel is message that is above these petty borders. Canucks, Indians, Israelis, Brits, Germans, Nigerians, all that just is really nothing--unless you picture heaven divided up into neighborhoods...

This church obsession with POWER and FORCE and VIOLENCE as a means to an end smacks of Dominion & Liberation Theology. To say the Christ wants to use worldly power-guns, bombs, chariots & horses-to expand the kingdom-is not taught anywhere in the NT. But that is what it comes down to when using the "continuation of politics through other means".

Founding Fathers used Liberation Theology (of a sort) when justifying tossing out Romans 13 to rebel against King George. In a manner of speaking they are saying "God Almighty through our Lord Jesus Christ wants us to be FREE and that is worth KILLING OTHER PEOPLE for, because FREEDOM is worth the BLOODSHED."

<<on a side note DD, don't get excited, I'm not attacking you, just the common mindset of the church represented in your post>>

[HypoTypoSis]

Founding Fathers used Liberation Theology (of a sort) when justifying tossing out Romans 13 to rebel against King George.

By the same token conscientious objectors also violate Romans 13 (as well as Jesus', "render unto Caeser" dictate); so does the Catholic heirarchy in placing themselves above the law when they refuse to provide all legally requested material and guilty perpetrators related to the dirt (homosexual and pedophile priests) they sweep under their carpets sending to another parish; as do the illegal Mexican aliens that violate our laws invading the country attempting to take back "their old" country; as do those same illegal aliens and the substandard slave wage paying employers that support those illegal aliens, both of whom damage the economy and, thus, the safety, security, financial and well-being of the legal residents.

So also do those that refuse to pay their rightfully due taxes violate Romans 13; and, of course, those that do not work preferring, instead, to live off of welfare, deal drugs, commit crimes for personal gain and generally seek the easy way out; then there are those that prefer to excessively gouge those that have to work for a living such as bankers with their usurous interest and lawyers who charge outrageous and excessive fees just because they know how to legally do it; then there are the court appointed lawyers that abuse their position by going through the bare basic minimum necessary to dispose of minimally state paid cases rendering simple rote form filling advising their broke clients to plead out instead of fighting to prove their innocence in which case poorly "due process" service is provided their clients because they don't have the millions of dollars to spend on a dream team that only purchases the "best defense possible" to be able to get off scott free for the most heinous of crimes.

And then there are those women who want to play and not pay making a mockery of the concept of parents willing to sacrifice their lives for the sake of aborting their children for they have abused Romans 13, too, by misusing the Supreme Court for their own pleasurable gain; as do the parents that mock God, country and civilized society by trading their partner for the next year's newest model that strikes their momentary fantasy even if that means one of the same sex; and those that seek their children's future education and financial well-being by investing in Microsoft and Google because they more rapidly advance the prophetic scriptures that speak of a great increase in knowledge in the end times and because they invest in Motorola and Detroit and others because they make military equipment; and politicians that vote for issues their constituents want even though those issues are in opposition to Christian morals and ethics; and for those that object to what our country is doing by going after murderous terrorists that believe they are hurrying up the end times and who believe it all boils down to a religious war between good and evil that we, Christians, know is true but ignore it like Ostriches with our heads stuck in the humanist sand.

Let's not forget how those those that have no alternative but to use Mid-East oil to drive their cars to and from work, schools, doctors appointments and that we might be able to house and feed and clothe and care for our children all the time thereby contributing, each parent, thousands upon thousands of tons of pollutants into the air, the earth and the water every year furthering the poisonous levels of acid rain, destroying the oceans, destroying the atmosphere, altering the weather patterns negatively effecting everyone's health and safety; and then there are those that invest in food companies and work for food companies so they might feed and care for their familes knowing those companies put poisonous transfatty acids and other poisons in those foods for flavor enhancement and preservative purposes all the while knowing it is killing them and their familes as well as their neighbors and anyone else that eats those cancerous foods.

The list is endless, the fight is not against Christians that pluralistically support a military action that seeks to protect those YOUR taxes are used to protect and safeguard; the fight is against a world system, a beast, the one and only real prophetic Beast that seeks to develop the world as a unified one for that is the only way the human race, outside of the saving grace of Jesus Christ, can possibly hope to survive trapped in a downward spiraling degenerative cycle ending in death, the only possible ultimate result.

It is this very fear that turns unsaved mankind to see even a glimmer of hope in Satan's Original Lie that life might be perpetuated and death thereby avoided. It is the mirror reflected image of the sacrificial promise offered by Jesus Christ. But, then, it is not the real thing, it is just a lifeless image akin to looking in a mirror or upon a photograph for it is not real.

Human nature cannot be changed, man is evil from the heart and it is humanism and its "scientific" arm, evolution, that affirms that man is basically good and that one day he can do it on his own, that one day he will be able live forever, that one day mankind will be as gods and that all this can be done by denying there really is a God and the sacrifice of Jesus that makes it all possible. But then there never really was any difference between humanism, evolutionism, universalism, catholicism, reincarnation and the entire gambit of all other religions and beliefs for, after all, they all believe they'll live forever beyond the doorway of death just like Christians only they don't believe they need Jesus for they believe they can do it on their own with their own reasoning, knowledge and understanding; that is the sad fake, false surrealistic image they see in the mirror.

We alter the facts of history to become politically correct and in a generation few still exist who recall what really happened and, as the information explosion mushrooms over the earth, fact is mingled with science fiction and man's attempt to recreate man in man's (cloned) image and all the science fiction movies that show how easy it is to use computers to transfer memories into cloned bodies and all the Rosemary Baby types of movies that prepare mankind so that they are not only not surprised at the antichrist's ultimate appearance but actually welcome him as though he were the long sought after X-Files alien friend that has finally come home to show them a better way.

And in the end those that are still alive and remain on planet earth, after the Lord has called those that hear His voice Home, shall be left to, by the grace of God and as humanly momentarilly possible, experience a cataclysmic fiery lake just seconds before all the heavenly lights go out and everything finally turns to nothingness when "...the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up."

After creating Adam and Eve God retired from the creating business telling man, instead, to be fruitful and multiply thereby passing His Breath of Life down through the line of man calling It home to Him Who originally gave It as each man dies and his body returns to dust and the sentience of his memories, as the scriptures affirm, are forever lost; sometime after those lights go out it will then be time for God to come out of retirement keeping absolutely nothing (save those in Christ) from the old and making all things new. Until then we are assured by God time and time again that of at least one thing we can be certain, aside from his technological advancements, mankind throughout his entire existence on earth advanced and changed of his own accord not one iota for the better.

[MrJim]

By the same token conscientious objectors also violate Romans 13 (as well as Jesus', "render unto Caeser" dictate);

Wrong. Submission and obedience are not the same thing. We are called to submit to the gov't until it violates what God calls us to do. Even then we are to present ourselves to the gov't and say "here I am-I cannot do your bidding". The gov't then can decide if it wants to provide alternative service or just put me up against a wall and shoot me.

It's just not that complicated.

[HypoTypoSis]

Well, whether a C.O. is given a red cross arm band or a rifle is a moot point because either way they're sent to the front. Either way, they owe their country and when their country says their time is due they do.

[HypoTypoSis]

Seriously, though, a couple days ago a fighter jet shot a missile from over Vandenburg AFB and correctly hit its target in the water off the Marshall Islands 4200 miles away. Who needs foot soldiers when we can accomplish the same thing sitting at home and playing video games?

[MrJim]

Well, whether a C.O. is given a red cross arm band or a rifle is a moot point because either way they're sent to the front. Either way, they owe their country and when their country says their time is due they do.

You need to check into CO a little more. The mennonite folks that served worked in hospitals, mental institutions, and I even heard of some fellows that were parachute trained for fire jumping. They are not sent into the military. That's why it's called alternative duty.

[DeaconDean]

Seriously, though, a couple days ago a fighter jet shot a missile from over Vandenburg AFB and correctly hit its target in the water off the Marshall Islands 4200 miles away. Who needs foot soldiers when we can accomplish the same thing sitting at home and playing video games?

Yep your right. And in 1983, a Russian pilot shot down KAL flight 007. If we can sit at home and shoot down aircraft with missles, what is to eliminate human error as the Russian pilot did? That missle has no brains, it just goes after whatever it's radar locks on to. Who says the missle can't mistake a passenger airliner for a military airplane? In 1952 the USAF had a shoot-down ratio of 12-1 during the Korean War (Conflict). In 1968, the USAF had a shoot-down ratio of 3-1. Why is that? Dependance on air-to-air missles. What happened in Operation Desert Storm? U.S. reliance on Patriot Missles caused the deaths of 35 Israel citizens. Put your trust in technology, I'll put my trust on the soldier in the field that has a brain and can tell the difference between right and wrong.

[TheUltimateWarrior]

I said it before and I'll say it again.

We should support Israel.

Why? Becuase they are our allies, and they are going to win.

Besides at this rate they might take out syria and Iran as well.

[IisJustMe]

You need to check into CO a little more. The mennonite folks that served worked in hospitals, mental institutions, and I even heard of some fellows that were parachute trained for fire jumping. They are not sent into the military. That's why it's called alternative duty.Your statement that "they are not sent into the military" is not applicable across the board. To be granted C/O status, one must declare his objections at the time of Selective Service Registration, or, if claiming to be morally opposed to war in general (the Supreme Court has ruled that opposition to a particular war is not valid for C/O status) after registration, must produce documentation, including letters from priests, pastors or spiritual advisors explaining in detail that the subject seeking such status has a legitimate reason of faith for being classified C/O.

Even then, there are two separate classifications. Those willing to serve in non-combatant roles are classified 1-A-O. It might surprise you to know that many Quakers, Friends, and Mennonite C/O's choose this status, which could still place them on the front lines as corpsmen, or in rear-echelon areas such as MASH or MARS units. Only those who declare themselves absolutely opposed to military service of any kind are classifed 1-O, and therefore are subject to alternative service, for example as fire jumpers.

One of the corpsmen attached to the Ranger unit I flew in and out of LZs during Vietnam was a C/O. Ben was a Quaker from western Pennsylvania. He loved this country, and he wanted to serve, but he made it clear that he would not put himself in a position to do harm or inflict death on others. In the liberation of Quang Tri, 72 June, we flew for 107 hours straight, minus the 15-minute catnaps on the ground for refueling and rearming. During several of our sortees into and around Quang Tri, Ben brought wounded out on his back, was twice wounded himself but remained on the line.

At about the 90th hour of the mission to liberate the city, the NVA mounted a fierce counterattack and were about to overrun his unit. Ben grabbed the wounded radio operator's headset and screaming over the command net for "dust off" -- my bird responded. We were only 30 second out. But by the time we got there, we weren't needed. Ben had grabbed an M-16 and five grenades. He held off the attack and forced the NVA to retreat, and yes -- he killed three of them. We found him clutching the rifle and shaking like a leaf. My chief leaped off our bird and ran to him to see if he was OK. Ben looked at him with wide eyes, and said, "They were gonna kill us all. I couldn't let them kill my friends, could I?" Ben died in a car wreck in 1983.

You see, Ben figured out that "there is a time for war, and a time for peace." I don't like war. Neither did my first right seat in 'Nam. He was the son of a Baptist preacher from Tupolo, Mississippi. He was the first black man I called my friend. I lost him 4 Feb 72 to heavy small arms in a hot LZ. We cannot live a completely separated life as you have espoused throughout this thread. These men knew that. I was not a Christian at the time of my service, though I came very close at the life and witness of my friend and right seat. In fact, it was the memory of what kind of man he was that kept me from ever straying too far from what is right and decent in this life, though it was 21 years after I lost him that I came to know his Savior as my own. Somehow, I know he smiled that day.

If not for good men like Ben, and my friend, men who were willing to put their lives on the line for their country, I wouldn't be here today, the inheritor of their message, and the man willing to spread it because they were willing as well.

[Flynmonkie]

I always remind people to watch Sergeant York. It is an old but yet great film with one of my favorites, Gary Cooper. This is where I finally understood there is a time for protection, even if it means that you have to take a life in the process. I also realized that sometimes people are placed in situations that hard choices have to be made. The glorious thing I believe is that in that hard choice, even if we make a mistake, we are already justified; if that makes sense?:)

[HypoTypoSis]

You see, Ben figured out that "there is a time for war, and a time for peace." I don't like war.

We cannot live a completely separated life as you have espoused throughout this thread. These men knew that. I was not a Christian at the time of my service, though I came very close at the life and witness of my friend and right seat. In fact, it was the memory of what kind of man he was that kept me from ever straying too far from what is right and decent in this life, though it was 21 years after I lost him that I came to know his Savior as my own. Somehow, I know he smiled that day.

If not for good men like Ben, and my friend, men who were willing to put their lives on the line for their country, I wouldn't be here today, the inheritor of their message, and the man willing to spread it because they were willing as well.


Thank you, very much, IisJustMe, for that insightful and illuminating piece of your life and of your friends. It was, indeed, most touching. Indeed, there is a time for everything, even for those things we find most distasteful and reprehensible. When that time comes, I suppose the question at that point is, are we mature enough to not only recognize the impending necessity but, more so, are we willing to step up to the plate, take the responsibility and make the difference? There really is no difference between your friend's question and subsequent action than there is between a parent finding no other way out but to kill a deranged home intruder whose intent is to murder their spouse and children. Certainly no one, regardless of beliefs, would object to such. By the same token, the statement that one loves their country extends in the same fashion to not just that country's system and way of life but, more importantly, to it's people as well.

HypoTypoSis

[MrJim]

We cannot live a completely separated life as you have espoused throughout this thread.


That is quite an experience you had-thank you for sharing it.

We can live separated-beyond that we are called to do it.

Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Col 3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.
Col 3:2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.


Whether in Vietnam or Iraq allowing ones self to be used by the gov't to do its bidding when that bidding is contrary to what Christ has called us to do presents an issue that each has to deal with.

It is not my goal to diminish the work of the military. They are a empowered by God via Romans 13 to do a job. The gov't is empowered by God to do a job. But our teaching is that the Church is separate from the world and therefore separate from the gov't. I don't view Christian military folks as unsaved at all, but rather, something along the lines of maybe "not taught correctly", much as calvinists view us non-calvinists:)

Now when your Quaker friend picked up that rifle what was on his mind was probably not UN/Nixon foreign policy, but simply protecting his friends. Honestly, and I've stated this before, I keep a loaded Beretta not 3' from this computer because I haven't completely laid down my defense mechanism. Now that I will defend my children & wife can be expanded into war service, but at this point that's where I'm at. Maybe that makes me a hypocrite, but it's just where I'm at in the journey. I doubt that a prior service guy like me would be called up but if they wanted to toss me into jail or worse then so be it.

Yes, lots of mennonites didn't go Alternative service, though that was a sign of the times and not an "OK" from the church. The historical anabaptist church generally represented today by the conservative mennonites (among others) takes the NT teachings of Christ at face value. Loving enemies is not an easy thing to do but we are called to do it anyhow. And loving them generally doesn't involve violence.

It's a tough topic for many, especially during a wartime. Many folks bleed red/white/blue, hey I used to. But I've been transformed, the politics of some temporal nation really mean little compared to the eternity of the Kingdom that we are called to serve. And that don't just mean going to church and sitting at a computer typing pious platitudes (mea culpa) but involves all that we've been called by Christ to do-and that's plenty.

[ZiSunka]

Who should we really be supporting in the latest Middle-East conflict?

No one.

Why do we have to choose one bad choice or another?

Why do we have to choose to support either of the two organizations that act as terrorists?

Why wouldn't we just stand up and speak out against terrorism across the board?

Who dod you support in the Sri Lankan civil war?

[IisJustMe]

Why do we have to choose to support either of the two organizations that act as terrorists?Fact: The Palestinian/Arab population of Israel enjoy all the freedoms of the democracy in Israel, including the right to vote and the right to hold public office. In fact a number of Arab men and women serve in the Knesset, the Israeli Parliment. What rights do Jews living among the Palestinian/Arab populations of the Mideast enjoy?

Fact: Israel does not send suicide bombers or launch US- or British-supplied missles into Gaza or Lebanon to kill innocent civilians with whom they have no legitimate complaint, the sole reason being they are Palestinian/Arab. On the other hand, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Fatah send both suicide bombers and launch Iranian- and Syrian supplied missles into Israel for the sole purpose of killing innocent civilians with whome the have no legitimate complaint, the sole reason being they are Jewish and Israeli.

Fact: When Great Britain began allowing Jewish settlers back into what we then called Palestine (a place that never existed as a nation, or in any other form except in the vocabulary of ancient Rome) compensation was paid, not only to anyone displaced by Jewish settlers, but also to anyone who wanted to avoid living among Jews. In contrast, Jews are not allowed to own lands in Palestinian/Arab territories or countries.

Fact: When Israel began retaliating against Hezbollah for the concentrated rocket attacks against their sovereign territory, suddenly the news media is in the midst of reporting "Day 13 of the Mideast Crisis!" What happened to reporting on "Day 10,412 of the Terrorist Attacks on Israel"???

Just in case you don't get my point, the terrorists have been attacking Israel with suicide bombers, suitcase bombs, assassination squads, rockets, artillery and every other form of military action for over 30 years, and Israel's only response since 1973 has been to send attack helicopters or precision fighter-bombers across the border to deal with the cell responsible for the attacks. When it became obvious Hezbollah was escalating the severity of attacks with the help of foreign powers acting in direct violation of UN Resolution 1559 (major points: all foreign troops out of Lebanon, allow Lebanon to function as a democracy, disarm the militias -- i.e., Hezbollah, Hamas, and Fatah), Israel responded in the only way it could, by acting to eliminate the threat.

The foremost victim of senseless terroristic acts in the last 30 eyars, Israel has shown tremendous restraint. Now that they have chosen to stop being patient, you, that moron Kofi Annan and the rest of the UN, along with the liberal idiots of the media lump them together with the terrorists. There is no possible way for you to justify that remark. It shows a complete lack of knowledge of the situation.

[ZiSunka]

So you think there is only one way to be, and that is supportive of a government that closes 1/2 of it's population out of participating in government, and that bombs residential neighborhoods killing innocent people including children, trying to make it's own cities safe from being bombed in their own residential neighborhoods?

You have strange logic.

[IisJustMe]

How do you justify these statements ... But our teaching is that the Church is separate from the world and therefore separate from the gov't. ... and ...
But I've been transformed, the politics of some temporal nation really mean little compared to the eternity of the Kingdom that we are called to serve. ... in light of this:

Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor. (Romans 13:7)

The church cannot be separate from the world if its members are not only to subject themselves to the government, but to serve the government. Without the witness of obedience to the government, we have no witness of Christ. He never denied Rome's power, He never challenged Rome's power, but He worked within the framework of society that the Roman government oversaw.

[arunma]

The church cannot be separate from the world if its members are not only to subject themselves to the government, but to serve the government. Without the witness of obedience to the government, we have no witness of Christ. He never denied Rome's power, He never challenged Rome's power, but He worked within the framework of society that the Roman government oversaw.


Well...I agree with most of what you've said, but it doesn't seem as if Christ worked within the framework of Roman society. After all, he commanded his Apostles to practice a ministry that was contrary to Roman law, which only permitted the practice of certain religions (it so happened that Judaism was a legal religion at the time, which is why the nation of Israel did not worship Roman deities). I think it may be more accurate to say that while Christ did not seek to actively subvert any government, nor did he alter his teachings so as to conform with any government.

[Flynmonkie]

So you think there is only one way to be, and that is supportive of a government that closes 1/2 of it's population out of participating in government, and that bombs residential neighborhoods killing innocent people including children, trying to make it's own cities safe from being bombed in their own residential neighborhoods?

You have strange logic.
AH, Just war theory... sometimes you have to engage in evil to do good........gone awry!:doh:

Such decisions should be made with heaviness of heart...

In a nutshell.......
As it has been explained to me that the reason the Christians have an interest in this situation is that if Israel is destroyed, or all the Jews are destroyed, there will be no proof of Christianity, of Christ (Jewish, direct decendants of Abraham). (I believe I have that correctly) The Hezbollah will not stop killing until all are dead. Where as if Israel wins, this will stop. The Hezbollah will continue to go on killing until target America is next. So what do we do as Christians in support or non support of Isreal for protection?

I do also have to say, I find the term innocent interesting here. If someone is around, living etc with a group such as this, how innocent could they be, except children. But when it boils down to it, it is your child or this situation (at least this is what I grasp a this point)

So effectively it would be like your loaded gun on the computer, just a grander scale? My concern is that "can we trust those that engage in this thought are doing so with a heaviness of heart"?

[IisJustMe]

it doesn't seem as if Christ worked within the framework of Roman society. After all, he commanded his Apostles to practice a ministry that was contrary to Roman law, which only permitted the practice of certain religions (it so happened that Judaism was a legal religion at the time, which is why the nation of Israel did not worship Roman deities).Under Augustus and Tiberius, local religions were left to the local priests of those religions. Judaism was, in fact, known in Rome and Asia at the time of Christ. It wasn't until Nero when "dangerous religions" came under the scrutiny of the government. Before that nut became emperor, the accepted reasoning was not to upset local custom or religion for fear of fomenting uprising. Also, the Romans could not differentiate between Judaism and Jesus' ministry. To them it was the same, so even if your statement was correct, what Jesus was preaching would not have appeared outside the boundaries of Judaism to the average Roman.

[IisJustMe]

So you think there is only one way to be, and that is supportive of a government that closes 1/2 of it's population out of participating in governmentYou say that despite my statement that Palestinians and Arabs living in Israel have the right to vote and the right to hold office. Did you read the post? Or are you just calling me a liar? Either way, you're way off base.
and that bombs residential neighborhoods killing innocent people including childrenYou must get your news from the Hezbollah Times, or whatever they call their propaganda organ. Yes, a few residential neighborhoods have been hit in Gaza and Lebanon, both in the current conflict and over the years of terrorist acts perpetrated on Israel by the terrorist militias Hezbollah, Hamas, and Fatah. The number of Palestinian or Arab civilians hurt or killed by Israeli rockets and bombs absolutely pales in comparison to the death and destruction wrought on innocent Israeli civilians at the hands of the suicide bombers and rocket attacks, and if you don't believe that, its because you don't want to believe that.

Israel does not have a planned and executed program of terror against Gaza and Lebanon, nor do the governments of Gaza and Lebanon against Israel. But the terrorists who continue to defy the UN resolution to disarm do have such a program against Israel, and it appears to me you would have Israel stand down and allow themselves to be destroyed. How do you justify that?
You have strange logic.One of us does, and I'm certain it isn't me.

[53Isaiah]

I support God's wisdom and pray that he use the situation for his glory and purpose of the kingdom.

[Hisbygrace]

I support God's wisdom and pray that he use the situation for his glory and purpose of the kingdom.

I agree with you 53Isaiah....:thumbsup:

[TheUltimateWarrior]

Israel, Because they are going to win.

Heres a little scenerio to think about...

WHat if Mexico or Canada had been launching missiles and bombs randomly into America for the last 20 years, killing americans for no reason, and than two weeks ago, cam