John Hagee has got to be retired before harming Christianity further!

[marke]

Well now. That's provocative.

1Ti 6:3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness,
1Ti 6:4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions,
1Ti 6:5 useless wranglings of men of corrupt mind and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself.

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge--
1Ti 6:21 by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith.

John Hagee has called for a nuclear first strike against Iran. I saw the video myself. He need to be removed from influencing more wrong thinking.

Where is the Christian community standing up for the teachings of Jesus? MATT 5 comes to mind. This man is leading Christians astray and is giving a face to modern Christianity that is not what Christianity is about.

It's time that the whole Christian community stand up and denounce these wrong teachings before the whole world thinks Christianity has been possessed by evil.

Make no doubt about it. These are wrong teachings and they need to be stopped before more are turned away from Christ.

Let's make some noise so that the world will understand this is one misguided man and flock that follows their own teachings and NOT the teachings of Jesus.

God bless

[spiritfilledjm]

He says one thing and he has to be retired? Oh yes, forget the thousands of souls he has led to Christ...

[bill16652]

Well now. That's provocative.

1Ti 6:3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness,
1Ti 6:4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions,
1Ti 6:5 useless wranglings of men of corrupt mind and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself.

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge--
1Ti 6:21 by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith.

John Hagee has called for a nuclear first strike against Iran. I saw the video myself. He need to be removed from influencing more wrong thinking.

Where is the Christian community standing up for the teachings of Jesus? MATT 5 comes to mind. This man is leading Christians astray and is giving a face to modern Christianity that is not what Christianity is about.

It's time that the whole Christian community stand up and denounce these wrong teachings before the whole world thinks Christianity has been possessed by evil.

Make no doubt about it. These are wrong teachings and they need to be stopped before more are turned away from Christ.

Let's make some noise so that the world will understand this is one misguided man and flock that follows their own teachings and NOT the teachings of Jesus.

God blessWhich is more dangerous, his words, or the jihad against the world to convert all to Islam by any means? Words or an Iranian leader that believes he will usher in the end of the world?

[IamRedeemed]

That's right. Besides that, the Iranian Pres. wants to annihilate Jews.
He is a modern day HAMAN! If we do not make a stand for Israel, deliverance
will come from some place else for the Jews, but we will be destroyed.
God has NOT abandoned Israel and has no plan to now or ever.
They are part of God's complete redemption plan right to the finish.
Jesus will be reigning the World from Jerusalem for 1000 years!
A remnant of them will be saved for ALL 12 Tribes!
The First (the Jews) shall be Last, and the Last (the Gentiles) shall be first.
We were grafted in, and just as a branch was torn off so that we might
be grafted in, He, the Lord is able to graft those who were cut off back in.
And He fully intends to, and promises that He shall. The Israelites have suffered
and continue to suffer for their spiritual adultery, but God the Father is still their
husband, He has NOT forsaken them for eternity and He will be bringing
Peace to Jerusalem and they will know that Jesus IS their Messiah, and they
will bow their knee to Him and call Him Lord and King.

Which is more dangerous, his words, or the jihad against the world to convert all to Islam by any means? Words or an Iranian leader that believes he will usher in the end of the world?

[Imana]

Which is more dangerous, his words, or the jihad against the world to convert all to Islam by any means? Words or an Iranian leader that believes he will usher in the end of the world?

I agree with this and what IAR said. :thumbsup:

[Nadiine]

I can't say that I'm completely against it -- I see it as a matter of protecting innocent people.

My only issue would be 2 things:

America has already done so many things that the world is berating us for... we get blamed for everything we do; even the good stuff!
So part of me thinks: "if you guys don't like anything we do, then YOU handle all the world problems & stick up for the persecuted" (THEY WON'T).

Also, I don't think using a nuke is the right way to go when there's evidence that the Iranian people aren't fully behind their kooky leader.
That to me, is killing a mass of people when Iran hasn't done anything yet.

I'm not against wars that go in and work to surgically remove the tyrants... (the problem is they fight dirty; they dress like civilians & fight from behind the innocent).

I understand Hagee's message - it has merit. However, I don't think that will solve anything... it would probly make us hated by more in the world.

[Cabal]

Which is more dangerous, his words, or the jihad against the world to convert all to Islam by any means? Words or an Iranian leader that believes he will usher in the end of the world?

That doesn't detract from the fact that he said an incredibly unhelpful thing.

That, and it's yet one more influential religious leader promoting the idea that America knows exactly what's best for the world, up to and including slaughtering thousands of people.

Even Pat Robertson suggested assassinating Hugo Chavez, as opposed to nuking Caracas....could handle that a little more....

But seriously, what happened to love your enemy? Why are people believing more in the US government, who solves all its problems with war and violence, than in God's power to turn a man's heart?

[bill16652]

That doesn't detract from the fact that he said an incredibly unhelpful thing.

That, and it's yet one more influential religious leader promoting the idea that America knows exactly what's best for the world, up to and including slaughtering thousands of people.

Even Pat Robertson suggested assassinating Hugo Chavez, as opposed to nuking Caracas....could handle that a little more....

But seriously, what happened to love your enemy? Why are people believing more in the US government, who solves all its problems with war and violence, than in God's power to turn a man's heart?I believe in love and Gods power, I also believe prophecy. Nowhere that I see does it say not to defend yourself. Each person will be led according to the spirit on these issues and while I dont agree at this point with what was advocated I still find Islam a real threat not onl;y to the US but also to the rest of the world. While many are peaceful the extremeists are not and their goal is to annihilate Israel and in the process the great satan which is the USA. Why do you think that Bush recieved that letter to convert the country to Islam? It is part of what they must do, they gave us a chance and now we become fair game. Iran with a nuclear weapon is not only dangerous to us but to everyone else as well.

[Nadiine]

That doesn't detract from the fact that he said an incredibly unhelpful thing.

That, and it's yet one more influential religious leader promoting the idea that America knows exactly what's best for the world, up to and including slaughtering thousands of people.

Even Pat Robertson suggested assassinating Hugo Chavez, as opposed to nuking Caracas....could handle that a little more....

But seriously, what happened to love your enemy? Why are people believing more in the US government, who solves all its problems with war and violence, than in God's power to turn a man's heart?
Unfortunately, this is the way people focus on it...
the LOVE IS TO ISRAEL who is innocently living within her borders and being threatened on every side when they've done nothing but give up more land to make peace w/ people who continually break every pact...
Same old hatred.

The focus should be on the Christian LOVE for the innocent who are being attacked and threatened. Who stands for them?
That goes unnoticed to biasely seek the negative view against Christians that would seek to protect the innocent. That is NOT unjust war.

War isn't evil until it's for an unjust cause. At this stage, it's too early to go into war w/ Iran. Frankly, I don't think any war is going to solve anything at this point in time becuz bible prophecy looks like nothing will stop the inevitable hatred & attack against Israel that's promised.

[Nadiine]

exactly Bill.

I'd only HOPE someone would look out for another countrie's safety & innocent lives there.

Look at the genocide in the Sudan WHERE IS EVERYBODY??? Where's the UN?
Will they go in to save the people? Nope. To me, that's the sin! Ignoring threats and ignoring persecutors.

[Cabal]

I believe in love and Gods power, I also believe prophecy. Nowhere that I see does it say not to defend yourself. Each person will be led according to the spirit on these issues and while I dont agree at this point with what was advocated I still find Islam a real threat not onl;y to the US but also to the rest of the world. While many are peaceful the extremeists are not and their goal is to annihilate Israel and in the process the great satan which is the USA. Why do you think that Bush recieved that letter to convert the country to Islam? It is part of what they must do, they gave us a chance and now we become fair game. Iran with a nuclear weapon is not only dangerous to us but to everyone else as well.

My apologies, I didn't mean that last part directly at you, more towards Hagee and followers...

"Islam" is not a threat - fundamentalist Islam is. Also, the latest report says that Iran does not have nuclear weapons.

Also, there are extremists on both sides of the debate - and I believe the statement from Hagee just proves my point. Do we really want to go down that line as well?

(General question)

How much of this is really about nuclear weaponry? Is it more of an issue that this is a Muslim country? Would Hagee or someone of a similar mindset make similar remarks about North Korea? (And they've hardly been pulling headlines anymore recently.)

[Nadiine]

It's much easier to be apathetic to other people's abuses & fears...

All we want to do is enjoy a comfy life in material happiness & stick our heads in the sand & HOPE nothing threatens our own houses & families - does anyone care about others suffering outside their borders?

[IamRedeemed]

Although I agree with you that "Nuke" might not be the right method, as I don't even know if we (humans) know the impact that the nukes will have on the entire world, even if they are only used in one area, but from Bible Prophecy I believe Nukes will be inevitably used before all is said and done.

I also do not believe that an attack on Iran would have to take place on civilians though either. Civilians unfortunately do get hurt sometimes in war, but that is never the goal. The military power is. The goal is to make them impotent.
So the bases, artillery and machinery and the wicked kings are the actual target.

As far as the whole world hating us and not wanting to do anything to make them hate us more, it is inevitable they are going to hate us. We are a powerful country that helps people out who others want to destroy and we foil it for them who look to do wicked things. I believe that is why God has spared this nation. I believe if we stop doing that and begin to become very self-oriented and absorbed with self and do not continue to do what is right, especially if we ignore the needs of Israel, God will no longer protect us. Sad to say but I think the nation as a whole is already headed in that direction.:sigh:


I can't say that I'm completely against it -- I see it as a matter of protecting innocent people.

My only issue would be 2 things:

America has already done so many things that the world is berating us for... we get blamed for everything we do; even the good stuff!
So part of me thinks: "if you guys don't like anything we do, then YOU handle all the world problems & stick up for the persecuted" (THEY WON'T).

Also, I don't think using a nuke is the right way to go when there's evidence that the Iranian people aren't fully behind their kooky leader.
That to me, is killing a mass of people when Iran hasn't done anything yet.

I'm not against wars that go in and work to surgically remove the tyrants... (the problem is they fight dirty; they dress like civilians & fight from behind the innocent).

I understand Hagee's message - it has merit. However, I don't think that will solve anything... it would probly make us hated by more in the world.

[IamRedeemed]

Love your enemy is on a personal level though. If we understand that the law was an eye for an eye and Jesus was referring to heart issues, then we would understand that has nothing to do with how to proceed against modern day Hamans. That does not mean that we wouldn't pray for them. But it also doesn't mean that we lay by idle as they destroy nations and commit holocausts and genocide when or if we have the power to stop them. That would make us wicked servants.


That doesn't detract from the fact that he said an incredibly unhelpful thing.

That, and it's yet one more influential religious leader promoting the idea that America knows exactly what's best for the world, up to and including slaughtering thousands of people.

Hell, even Pat Robertson suggested assassinating Hugo Chavez, as opposed to nuking Caracas....could handle that a little more....

But seriously, what happened to love your enemy? Why are people believing more in the US government, who solves all its problems with war and violence, than in God's power to turn a man's heart?

[IamRedeemed]

http://pichostonline.com/u/071217/0dd34a8d05.png (http://pichostonline.com/)


It's much easier to be apathetic to other people's abuses & fears...

All we want to do is enjoy a comfy life in material happiness & stick our heads in the sand & HOPE nothing threatens our own houses & families - does anyone care about others suffering outside their borders?

[Cabal]

I also do not believe that an attack on Iran would have to take place on civilians though either. Civilians unfortunately do get hurt sometimes in war, but that is never the goal. The military power is. The goal is to make them impotent.
So the bases, artillery and machinery and the wicked kings are the actual target.

An admirable sentiment, similar to that espoused in Aquinas' Just War idea - however, you do realise that not getting civilians involved in a war is next to impossible....

As far as the whole world hating us and not wanting to do anything to make them hate us more, it is inevitable they are going to hate us. We are a powerful country that helps people out who others want to destroy and we foil it for them who look to do wicked things. I believe that is why God has spared this nation. I believe if we stop doing that and begin to become very self-oriented and absorbed with self and do not continue to do what is right, especially if we ignore the needs of Israel, God will no longer protect us. Sad to say but I think the nation as a whole is already headed in that direction.:sigh:

:sigh: I'm going to restrain myself in the face of comments such as these. I'll just say that not everyone feels that way about the US's involvement in world events. Getting yourself involved in any country's problems, especially through military action is not as simple as people here make it out to be. Just look at Iraq.

[Nadiine]

An admirable sentiment, similar to that espoused in Aquinas' Just War idea - however, you do realise that not getting civilians involved in a war is next to impossible....
Actually the Muslim terrorists turned this into an art by not wearing uniforms and fighting from Mosque's & people's homes as "civilians". They're used as human shields.
So am I to assume that becuz they do this, no one should attempt to fight against them? Innocent people get hurt by evil people every day in different ways; namely when they've been able to build up nuclear weapons to kill masses. This is their agenda and they aren't going to stop until someone stops them.


:sigh: I'm going to restrain myself in the face of comments such as these. I'll just say that not everyone feels that way about the US's involvement in world events. Getting yourself involved in any country's problems, especially through military action is not as simple as people here make it out to be. Just look at Iraq.
What about Iraq? It isn't perfect now, and it certainly wasn't prior to war. We had many proofs of Hussein's genocides and torture camps of so many innocent civilians.
The truth is, innocent people were tortured, killed or lived under tyranny either way. AT LEAST THEY HAVE A SHOT AT FREEDOM TODAY - which they never had prior.

You enjoy your freedom - they had NONE. Again, sitting behind the white picket fences to judge others who seek to liberate.
And it took alot of bloodshed on our own soil to attain the freedoms we have! Freedom is NOT free; many died so you could sit at your desk and freely type your opinions.

Also, today you live with Hindsight - the hindsight people didn't have a few yrs ago when we had the information we had back then (incl. info that came from other Countries about their threat).

The other problem is, NO COUNTRIES DO ANYTHING to help others in trouble... I already gave 1 example: The Sudanese genocide. And that's not the only genocide in recent history - how about Ruwanda. WHERE WAS ANYBODY?

America sometimes steps in becuz it seems no one else gives a poop to lift a finger to help others - not even the UN who's duty it is to guard & protect people from this. It takes them AGES just to get a consensus on sanctioning... it's a pitiful joke, ESPECIALLY if you're one of the unfortunate ones being persecuted!

Turning a blind eye to evil is just as wicked as pointing the finger at others who step in to try to help.

[Cabal]

Actually the Muslim terrorists turned this into an art by not wearing uniforms and fighting from Mosque's & people's homes as "civilians". They're used as human shields.
So am I to assume that becuz they do this, no one should attempt to fight against them? Innocent people get hurt by evil people every day in different ways; namely when they've been able to build up nuclear weapons to kill masses. This is their agenda and they aren't going to stop until someone stops them.

As I said previously, the US government recently admitted that Iran does not have nuclear weapons. People here have already discussed the fact that most of Iran doesn't like Ahmedinejad. And yet I find it staggering that people here are still espousing the nuclear option. And I wasn't saying that conflict should be avoided because of civilians getting hurt, although it should certainly cause people to think twice - I was merely pointing out that suggesting a military option that leaves civilians unharmed is an incredibly naive thing to suggest.

What about Iraq? It isn't perfect now, and it certainly wasn't prior to war. We had many proofs of Hussein's genocides and torture camps of so many innocent civilians.
The truth is, innocent people were tortured, killed or lived under tyranny either way. AT LEAST THEY HAVE A SHOT AT FREEDOM TODAY - which they never had prior.

Interesting, considering that the militias roaming the streets unhindered are doing about as good a job at cracking down on people's independence as the Ba'ath party was.

Nowhere did I say Iraq was perfect before the war. What I have a problem with is going into war under questionable circumstances.

You enjoy your freedom - they had NONE. Again, sitting behind the white picket fences to judge others who seek to liberate.
And it took alot of bloodshed on our own soil to attain the freedoms we have! Freedom is NOT free; many died so you could sit at your desk and freely type your opinions.

While I recognise the sacrifice of others prior to me, that does not place a moratorium on questioning the validity of any future wars.

Also, just because people died in a previous war doesn't mean I should be rooting for another one - that's more than a little insulting to their memory.

America sometimes steps in becuz it seems no one else gives a poop to lift a finger to help others - not even the UN who's duty it is to guard & protect people from this. It takes them AGES just to get a consensus on sanctioning... it's a pitiful joke, ESPECIALLY if you're one of the unfortunate ones being persecuted!

Glad you mentioned the UN - have you ever tried getting nearly 200 people to reach a consensus? Now imagine the same with 200 countries. Not the mention the fact that America's recent gungho attitude to foreign policy means that they usually slow down the UN by making situations more complicated by the day - never mind having an ambassador who's about as much use as a catflap in an elephant house.

Turning a blind eye to evil is just as wicked as pointing the finger at others who step in to try to help.
General question - some of the people posting here posted on the topic complaining about how the "PC agenda" and the "liberal agenda" are insidiously sending America towards ruin. Given that this conspiracy has clearly infected the government on the domestic front, why do you so believe so unyieldingly in its foreign policy?

[IamRedeemed]

LOL, that first sentence made me laugh (re: Aquinas). Yes, I do realise that it is next to impossible.
As I said or I think I did, sometimes civilians do get harmed in the process, but that is not the goal nor the target. If civilians would overthrow their own governments, we wouldn't have to get involved at all.

It's a give and take, one way or the other.
It can't be win win for everyone.
THAT we know IS impossible.

Iraq was already a problem, we did not make them one. Remember Desert Storm? hello?

Suddam Hussein was one of the world's and his own country's major terrorists. We did not want to go to war unnecessarily. Hussein would not allow us to inspect. The President gave him ample opportunities to change his stance and let us in to inspect. The President even extended Saddam one more opportunity past his last opportunity before war would ensue and Saddam STILL said NO. What were we supposed to do at that point? Just say oh okay, no problem, we were just punking you to see if you would bow to our power and you didn't, so we'll just go and sit down?
Saddam forced us to take action. We had no choice at that point, because not allowing us to check was equivalent to posing a threat in light of what had just happened to us.


An admirable sentiment, similar to that espoused in Aquinas' Just War idea - however, you do realise that not getting civilians involved in a war is next to impossible....



:sigh: I'm going to restrain myself in the face of comments such as these. I'll just say that not everyone feels that way about the US's involvement in world events. Getting yourself involved in any country's problems, especially through military action is not as simple as people here make it out to be. Just look at Iraq.

[Cabal]

Iraq was already a problem, we did not make them one. Remember Desert Storm? hello?

Remember arming him in the first place?

[Nadiine]

[/font]

Remember arming him in the first place? [/color][/size][/font]
Remember the CIRCUMSTANCE surrounding that arming?:idea: :idea:
As if we had no reason but just on a whim decided to go in and arm him becuz we were bored?

It doesn't make doing Ebil ok after the fact - and it doesn't make it wrong for us to go back and deal with him due to his actions of defiance.

[Nadiine]

Suddam Hussein was one of the world's and his own country's major terrorists. We did not want to go to war unnecessarily. Hussein would not allow us to inspect. The President gave him ample opportunities to change his stance and let us in to inspect. The President even extended Saddam one more opportunity past his last opportunity before war would ensue and Saddam STILL said NO. What were we supposed to do at that point? Just say oh okay, no problem, we were just punking you to see if you would bow to our power and you didn't, so we'll just go and sit down?
Saddam forced us to take action. We had no choice at that point, because not allowing us to check was equivalent to posing a threat in light of what had just happened to us.

Yes and lets not forget the other violations he was involved with - they were firing on our planes and violated the treaty they made with us.

Nobody likes war, but it takes war to provide freedom - we're all enjoying the benefits of that right now on the lives of many others who died for it.

[Waddell]

I probably disagree with 90% of what John Hagee teaches, but I don't think we should nuke him for making one opinionated statement! ;) :D

[IamRedeemed]

"ebil" hahahaha

and :amen::amen::amen: on the rest!


Remember the CIRCUMSTANCE surrounding that arming?:idea: :idea:
As if we had no reason but just on a whim decided to go in and arm him becuz we were bored?

It doesn't make doing Ebil ok after the fact - and it doesn't make it wrong for us to go back and deal with him due to his actions of defiance.

Yes and lets not forget the other violations he was involved with - they were firing on our planes and violated the treaty they made with us.

Nobody likes war, but it takes war to provide freedom - we're all enjoying the benefits of that right now on the lives of many others who died for it.

[IamRedeemed]

^_^ lol

Despite the fact that I have a good sense of humor and found your joke funny,
I think I might disagree with 10% or less of what he says.
I have found his doctrine to be pretty sound from everything
I have ever heard him teach.

I probably disagree with 90% of what John Hagee teaches, but I don't think we should nuke him for making one opinionated statement! ;) :D

[IamRedeemed]

"and followers"? ^_^^_^^_^

And yes we would if North Korea were making statements that they
wanted to annihilate all Jews and Christians.

While North Korea poses a threat with their developments of nuclear
weapons, so far no one has come out saying anything like that.....yet.



My apologies, I didn't mean that last part directly at you, more towards Hagee and followers...

"Islam" is not a threat - fundamentalist Islam is. Also, the latest report says that Iran does not have nuclear weapons.

Also, there are extremists on both sides of the debate - and I believe the statement from Hagee just proves my point. Do we really want to go down that line as well?

(General question)

How much of this is really about nuclear weaponry? Is it more of an issue that this is a Muslim country? Would Hagee or someone of a similar mindset make similar remarks about North Korea? (And they've hardly been pulling headlines anymore recently.)

[Waddell]

"and followers"? ^_^^_^

He must have been referring to you! (But only 90% of you! ;) :D )

Be blessed. :)

[Waddell]

And yes we would if North Korea were making statements that they
wanted to annihilate all Jews and Christians.

While North Korea poses a threat with their developments of nuclear
weapons, so far no one has come out saying anything like that.....yet.


Sometimes people forget the vitrolic, hatefilled statements that the "Iranian Midget" said. :)

[IamRedeemed]

He must have been referring to you! (But only 90% of you! ;) :D )

Be blessed. :)


Cute! Well, now I know that the air over there must not be of high quality!! :D
'Cause you aren't talking about me! lol I am no follower of any man.
I follow the Good Shepherd Jesus Christ and incline my ears
and heart to His written Word.

I reject any man's statements that do not align with the whole counsel of God,
and I don't care who they are.


Sometimes people forget the vitrolic, hatefilled statements that the "Iranian Midget" said. :)

Why don't you remind us? I am open to hear it.
And if it is true, whatever you say, I will shoot my mouth off and you'll feel
better knowing that I am even and consistent across the board. I can tell you right now,
I have no earthly idea why China is named by the US (through Billy boy) "most favored nation"
That is LUDICROUS!

[IisJustMe]

John Hagee has called for a nuclear first strike against Iran. I saw the video myself. He need to be removed from influencing more wrong thinking. ...What "wrong thinking" are we talking about here? Maybe a "nuclear first strike" against Iran is a bit drastic at the moment, but unless Russia and central Europe stop sending him technology and nuclear materials, I'm certain Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has every intent of building a nuclear weapon and using it, either against Israel or the US. Frankly, I'd rather blow up Iran then let them blow us up, but we've got a long way to go before we get to that point. That doesn't make Hagee dangerous, it makes him a bit of an overanxious pragmatist. Where is the Christian community standing up for the teachings of Jesus? MATT 5 comes to mind.I don't think there is sufficient understanding of Matthew chapter five, if this is the basis for your condemnation of Hagee. Matthew chapter five doesn't teach milquetoast diplomacy. Matthew chapter five teaches, rather, that we be sure of the intent of our antagonist before we justifiably counterstrike in our own defense. This man is leading Christians astray and is giving a face to modern Christianity that is not what Christianity is about.Again, I'd like to you be more specific about how, exactly, he does so.It's time that the whole Christian community stand up and denounce these wrong teachings before the whole world thinks Christianity has been possessed by evil.If you think Christianity condemns war, you need to study more deeply. War is a ugly, and not something anyone wants to see occur. No soldier likes war, but every soldier knows it is necessary. I know. I was an officer and a helicopter pilot for 20 years.Make no doubt about it. These are wrong teachings and they need to be stopped before more are turned away from Christ.Again, you are being so vague that I'm not sure which teachings you think are wrong. Please clarify.Let's make some noise so that the world will understand this is one misguided man and flock that follows their own teachings and NOT the teachings of Jesus.Jesus didn't teach us not to defend ourselves or our allies. If these are the "teachings" you believe are wrong, again, study more.quote=Cabal;41642655]Also, the latest report says that Iran does not have nuclear weapons.[/quote]That's not what the report said. The report said (and is in question by a majority of the US and allied intelligence agencies) Iran stopped trying to build nuclear weapons and stopped trying to acquire fissionable material four years ago. If the latter is true, in particular, why do we have a report this very day that Russia has "resolved its differences" with the revolutionary government in Iran and is ready to send them nuclear fuel for their reactors? Anyone knows, only slight variations can be achieved within any nuclear powerplant that will render fuel rods to weapons-quality material. To me, that doesn't sound like they have stopped, and apparently most of the intelligence community is wondering why the report out of the NDI's office made such a rash statement.Also, there are extremists on both sides of the debate - and I believe the statement from Hagee just proves my point. Do we really want to go down that line as well?Again, I'm not willing to say Hagee's "demand" is not eventually going to have to be US policy. We may have to go down that line as a matter of international security.
How much of this is really about nuclear weaponry?All of it. No one cares what the extremists want to do in their own country as long as it is not a threat to international peace and security. But virtually everything they do is exactly that kind of threat. Is it more of an issue that this is a Muslim country?As IAR has pointed out, North Korea isn't a Muslim country, and we are actively engaged in preventing them from becoming a nuclear power, as well.Would Hagee or someone of a similar mindset make similar remarks about North Korea? (And they've hardly been pulling headlines anymore recently.)That's because North Korea never really wanted to become a nuclear power, but knew that if they made the threat, they'd get the attention of the US. Its unfortunate that is what was required, but once we came to the bargaining table, they were happy to remove the "nuclear chip" from the talks. They just wanted humanitarian aid, and they are likely now to get it. They were never the threat that Ahmadinejad is, who is the most dangerous kind of terrorist: An extremist with the resources of a whole nation at his disposal to make his unholy war a reality.

[Schroeder]

That doesn't detract from the fact that he said an incredibly unhelpful thing.

That, and it's yet one more influential religious leader promoting the idea that America knows exactly what's best for the world, up to and including slaughtering thousands of people.

Hell, even Pat Robertson suggested assassinating Hugo Chavez, as opposed to nuking Caracas....could handle that a little more....

But seriously, what happened to love your enemy? Why are people believing more in the US government, who solves all its problems with war and violence, than in God's power to turn a man's heart? for one i think Christ came to take away our sins. not teach a new belief. GOd deals with the nations not christ. christ came to bring us to God to live in us, he deals with us as individuals and the Church. did God ask Christ if he should destroy a whole tribe of people before he told some of the old testement leaders to do it. I am not saying its the right choice BUT it may be. I doubt he has much say in it anyways. I doubt any for that matter.

[Cabal]

Remember the CIRCUMSTANCE surrounding that arming?:idea: :idea:
As if we had no reason but just on a whim decided to go in and arm him becuz we were bored?

It doesn't make doing Ebil ok after the fact - and it doesn't make it wrong for us to go back and deal with him due to his actions of defiance.

And didn't he then go and massacre thousands of civilians in Iran?

Oh wait, they were Iranian!

I see wat u did thar

Could this whole powder keg have been averted now by exercising just a modicum of caution back then?

You'd think the US would have learned after the Castro -> Cuban Missile Crisis nearly ended the planet.

[Cabal]

I can tell you right now,
I have no earthly idea why China is named by the US (through Billy boy) "most favored nation"
That is LUDICROUS!


I don't know, maybe because they focus more on industrialising rather than invading countries? War ain't great for the ol' economy ya know.

What has China to do with this debate anyway?

[IamRedeemed]

What???? :scratch::confused::scratch::confused::scratch:


for one i think Christ came to take away our sins. not teach a new belief. GOd deals with the nations not christ. christ came to bring us to God to live in us, he deals with us as individuals and the Church. did God ask Christ if he should destroy a whole tribe of people before he told some of the old testement leaders to do it. I am not saying its the right choice BUT it may be. I doubt he has much say in it anyways. I doubt any for that matter.

[IamRedeemed]

China persecutes and kills Christians every
single day. Citizens of their own country.

Um.....It has as much to do with the debate as North Korea does hahahaha! :D


I don't know, maybe because they focus more on industrialising rather than invading countries? War ain't great for the ol' economy ya know.

What has China to do with this debate anyway?

[IisJustMe]

You'd think the US would have learned after the Castro -> Cuban Missile Crisis nearly ended the planet.Excuse me??? Seems to me we were the ones who stopped the proliferation of weapons back then, which is what we want to do now as well. Surely you don't blame the US for the Cuban Missile Crisis??? Or think it would have been "OK" to just let the Soviets set missiles within 90 miles of US territory?? It really would be nice to see an explanation for your post here.

[Cabal]

Excuse me??? Seems to me we were the ones who stopped the proliferation of weapons back then, which is what we want to do now as well. Surely you don't blame the US for the Cuban Missile Crisis??? Or think it would have been "OK" to just let the Soviets set missiles within 90 miles of US territory?? It really would be nice to see an explanation for your post here.

Perhaps if you hadn't tried to invade Cuba then a confrontation with the Soviets could have been avoided.

Cuba vs USA = tiny bit unbalanced

Who's as powerful as the US? USSR! Let's side with them otherwise we're going to get our asses handed to us.

Nevermind the fact that given the location of Iron Curtain, it's not like the US DIDN'T have their own nukes within a similar striking distance.

You can't just pick an arbitrary point in history and say "We made things better after this, aren't we amazing" a la Gulf War II. You have to follow the thread of history back.

[Cabal]

China persecutes and kills Christians every
single day. Citizens of their own country.

Um.....It has as much to do with the debate as North Korea does hahahaha! :D

Really? Didn't seem to recall China threatening to blow up the West with nuclear weapons recently.

[marke]

He says one thing and he has to be retired? Oh yes, forget the thousands of souls he has led to Christ...
Did he lead them to THE Christ or something else?

That's the question. Wrong teachings is wrong teaching. If he made this little error advocating killing millions of innocent people against the teachings of Jesus, what other errors is he teaching.

The NT tells us to test everything and that many will come in the name of Jesus, but not all will be OF Jesus. How do you tell?

The NT tells us... BY THEIR ACTIONS.

Don't be deceived or you'll take your place with the unbelievers according to the NT.

Think about it before you defend WRONG actions.

God Bless

[IisJustMe]

Perhaps if you hadn't tried to invade Cuba then a confrontation with the Soviets could have been avoided.Sorry, but the Soviets had designs on putting missiles in Cuba long before the Bay of Pigs. Perhaps you should read the history of the events a bit closer before leaping to conclusions. This is a prime example:Cuba vs USA = tiny bit unbalanced ... Who's as powerful as the US? USSR! Let's side with them otherwise we're going to get our asses handed to us.Even then, the Soviet Union was bankrupt fiscally, morally, and intellectuatlly. Castro was a dyed-in-the-wool Communist. He had Che Guevara murdered because Che wanted a democracy instead of the dictatorship that Batista had ruled through, with tacit though not implicit approval of the US. Castro never wanted to have the US as an ally because he wouldn't have been able to keep power that way. Che wasn't about power, he was about righteousness of governance.Nevermind the fact that given the location of Iron Curtain, it's not like the US DIDN'T have their own nukes within a similar striking distance.We abjectly refused US military requests to deploy any closer than 2,500 miles with land-based missiles. The Soviets didn't need Cuba anyway. They, like us, had nuclear-armed submarines that could launch from within 500 miles, which was plenty close enough to be assured a counterattack couldn't be launched before the silos containing the missiles intended for such an attack were destroyed. No one wanted nuclear war, because deep in their heart of hearts, everyone knew it meant the end of the world. FYI, the closest we ever came was due to adventurism by the Soviets in the Mideast. At the time of the Six-Day War, they had gone to our equivilent of DefCon II, meaning the world was about one hour from an all-out nuclear exchange. The US has never triggered a situation that came anywhere near that close to starting a holocaust.You can't just pick an arbitrary point in history and say "We made things better after this, aren't we amazing" a la Gulf War II. You have to follow the thread of history back.You also have interpret that history correctly, and unfortunately the people many let interpret history for them have an agenda to mislead them. I prefer pragmatism to liberal lies and false hopes for peace. I prefer seeing that negotiation with the radicals is not only impossible, but often a subterfuge on their part in order to get closer in for the kill.

[Cabal]

Sorry, but the Soviets had designs on putting missiles in Cuba long before the Bay of Pigs. Perhaps you should read the history of the events a bit closer before leaping to conclusions.

I never said they didn't, however, Bay of Pigs accelerated if not helped cause the missile crisis.

This is a prime example:Even then, the Soviet Union was bankrupt fiscally, morally, and intellectuatlly. Castro was a dyed-in-the-wool Communist. He had Che Guevara murdered because Che wanted a democracy instead of the dictatorship that Batista had ruled through, with tacit though not implicit approval of the US. Castro never wanted to have the US as an ally because he wouldn't have been able to keep power that way. Che wasn't about power, he was about righteousness of governance.

Neither is the US, who all the way through admitted they'd rather have someone equally as corrupt in power, just someone who liked them and protected their interests (Batista)

You also have interpret that history correctly, and unfortunately the people many let interpret history for them have an agenda to mislead them. I prefer pragmatism to liberal lies and false hopes for peace. I prefer seeing that negotiation with the radicals is not only impossible, but often a subterfuge on their part in order to get closer in for the kill.

Well, forgive me for noticing a common thread of "US intervenes, usually by meddling in the leadership of a country for reasons of self-interest; improvement does not ensue." (Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Cuba and others).

The main problem I have is the US policing the globe under the pretence of religiosity and "righteousness of governance"-type ideas, when really, it is not about that at all. Someone earlier mentioned Rwanda, and also Sudan. If the US apparently cares so much about them, why isn't there the same presence there as there is in Iraq and Afghanistan? Because the US is seeking only to protect itself, and to obtain more resources for itself.

It is this attitude which encourages people like Hagee to think that America can do whatever it wants, including nuclear attacks that will kill more innocents than criminals.

[IamRedeemed]

BINGO!!!!


Sorry, but the Soviets had designs on putting missiles in Cuba long before the Bay of Pigs. Perhaps you should read the history of the events a bit closer before leaping to conclusions. This is a prime example:Even then, the Soviet Union was bankrupt fiscally, morally, and intellectuatlly. Castro was a dyed-in-the-wool Communist. He had Che Guevara murdered because Che wanted a democracy instead of the dictatorship that Batista had ruled through, with tacit though not implicit approval of the US. Castro never wanted to have the US as an ally because he wouldn't have been able to keep power that way. Che wasn't about power, he was about righteousness of governance.We abjectly refused US military requests to deploy any closer than 2,500 miles with land-based missiles. The Soviets didn't need Cuba anyway. They, like us, had nuclear-armed submarines that could launch from within 500 miles, which was plenty close enough to be assured a counterattack couldn't be launched before the silos containing the missiles intended for such an attack were destroyed. No one wanted nuclear war, because deep in their heart of hearts, everyone knew it meant the end of the world. FYI, the closest we ever came was due to adventurism by the Soviets in the Mideast. At the time of the Six-Day War, they had gone to our equivilent of DefCon II, meaning the war world about one hour from an all-out nuclear exchange. The US has never triggered a situation that came anywhere near that close to starting a holocaust.You also have interpret that history correctly, and unfortunately the people many let interpret history for them have an agenda to mislead them. I prefer pragmatism to liberal lies and false hopes for peace. I prefer seeing that negotiation with the radicals is not only impossible, but often a subterfuge on their part in order to get closer in for the kill.

[IisJustMe]

I never said they didn't, however, Bay of Pigs accelerated if not helped cause the missile crisis.Again, read the history closer. Your assumption doesn't hold up to historical scrutiny.Neither is the US, who all the way through admitted they'd rather have someone equally as corrupt in power, just someone who liked them and protected their interests (Batista)We propped up Batista for a time, yes, because there was no one with the organization or the power to overthrow him and govern better. Never assume the US wants dictatorship, because it doesn't. I'd rather have a Batista in power than a Castro any day. I don't suppose your righteous anger at us extends to the absolute denial of human rights and the poverty conditions which have been the hallmark of Castro's rule, does it?Well, forgive me for noticing a common thread of "US intervenes, usually by meddling in the leadership of a country for reasons of self-interest; improvement does not ensue." (Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Cuba and others).For you to compare Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan in this list indicates you really don't understand the situation in any of those countries. Thanks to our military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, you don't have terrorists blowing up your country, because they can get into yours, whereas they can't get into ours easily. You might thank us, but I don't suppose that's occurred to you, either.The main problem I have is the US policing the globe under the pretence of religiosity and "righteousness of governance"-type ideas, when really, it is not about that at all. Someone earlier mentioned Rwanda, and also Sudan. If the US apparently cares so much about them, why isn't there the same presence there as there is in Iraq and Afghanistan? Because the US is seeking only to protect itself, and to obtain more resources for itself.First of all, the "righteous of governance" comment I made was in regards to Che, though it truly is --regardless of your cynical attitude to the contrary -- a valued political philosophy in the US. As to why we didn't go to Rwanda and the Sudan, I don't suppose it could be that our "peace benefit" president, Clinton, retired three-quarters of our military personnel and armament, could it? He made the same mistake the administrations in the late 19th and early 20th century made -- thinking the defeat of our enemies meant there would be world peace. Clinton is a knothead, and the man to thank for 9/11.It is this attitude which encourages people like Hagee to think that America can do whatever it wants, including nuclear attacks that will kill more innocents than criminals.You have it wrong.

We don't think we can do whatever we want.

We reluctantly undertake the mission that no one else wants to do, the mission necessary to continued freedom in all aspects of life

Where would Europe be if we had decided to stay home during World War II? Or, for that matter, World War I? Where would the world be if not for our aggressive Cold War strategy that broke the back and the will of a corrupt and dessicated sociopolitical philiosophy? Where would Europe and Asia be if we had not traced 9/11 to the Afghani government and intervened to collapse a morally bankrupt "holy war"?

You of the younger generations, even those in our own country, have no clue what the world owes the US in gratitude, and we don't ask for thanks or compensation or spoils. We do the job. We go home. Until the next time. And as long as we are here, we always will. God help you when we don't.

[Cabal]

Again, read the history closer. Your assumption doesn't hold up to historical scrutiny.

To say that the bay of pigs in no way contributed to the course of events is fallacious.

We propped up Batista for a time, yes, because there was no one with the organization or the power to overthrow him and govern better. Never assume the US wants dictatorship, because it doesn't.

So you support them....why?

I'd rather have a Batista in power than a Castro any day. I don't suppose your righteous anger at us extends to the absolute denial of human rights and the poverty conditions which have been the hallmark of Castro's rule, does it?

And as with Sudan and Rwanda, why aren't the US taking care of it, if they're so good at it?

For you to compare Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan in this list indicates you really don't understand the situation in any of those countries. Thanks to our military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, you don't have terrorists blowing up your country, because they can get into yours, whereas they can't get into ours easily. You might thank us, but I don't
suppose that's occurred to you, either.

Guess you haven't heard much international news recently, London was attacked two summers ago and Glasgow one summer ago. Thanks! (I'm sure that was entirely our fault though)

First of all, the "righteous of governance" comment I made was in regards to Che, though it truly is --regardless of your cynical attitude to the contrary -- a valued political philosophy in the US. As to why we didn't go to Rwanda and the Sudan, I don't suppose it could be that our "peace benefit" president, Clinton, retired three-quarters of our military personnel and armament, could it? He made the same mistake the administrations in the late 19th and early 20th century made -- thinking the defeat of our enemies meant there would be world peace. Clinton is a knothead, and the man to thank for 9/11.You have it wrong.

Really? Last time I checked, Clinton was all for going after Bin Laden, and the Republicans shot him down and told him he was obsessed with him.

Where would Europe be if we had decided to stay home during World War II? Or, for that matter, World War I?

As I said before, past wars do NOT AND NEVER WILL prohibit the questioning of future wars.

And while we're on the topic of the world wars, the US only joined once it was attacked, and maybe if it'd joined the league of nations between the wars it could have helped avert it. As I said before, gotta retrace the thread of history and take the good with the bad.

Where would the world be if not for our aggressive Cold War strategy that broke the back and the will of a corrupt and dessicated sociopolitical philiosophy?

Hi, have you met Vladimir Putin? And once again, with that, it's EUROPE that will bear the brunt just for being closer.

Where would Europe and Asia be if we had not traced 9/11 to the Afghani government and intervened to collapse a morally bankrupt "holy war"?

Collapse? I believe it's still ongoing. And to make the jump from Afghanistan to Iraq is tenuous at best.

You of the younger generations, even those in our own country, have no clue what the world owes the US in gratitude, and we don't ask for thanks or compensation or spoils. We do the job. We go home. Until the next time. And as long as we are here, we always will. God help you when we don't.

Maybe it's because we're tired of war? You need to realise that not everyone feels the same way as you about US foreign policy and that the US is FAR from being God's chosen country. America has become involved in lots of conflicts, yes - usually ones that they helped precipitate in the first place. I'm all for pride in one's country, but be pragmatic about it.....

[mont974x4]

Well now. That's provocative.

1Ti 6:3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness,
1Ti 6:4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions,
1Ti 6:5 useless wranglings of men of corrupt mind and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself.

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge--
1Ti 6:21 by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith.

John Hagee has called for a nuclear first strike against Iran. I saw the video myself. He need to be removed from influencing more wrong thinking.

Where is the Christian community standing up for the teachings of Jesus? MATT 5 comes to mind. This man is leading Christians astray and is giving a face to modern Christianity that is not what Christianity is about.

It's time that the whole Christian community stand up and denounce these wrong teachings before the whole world thinks Christianity has been possessed by evil.

Make no doubt about it. These are wrong teachings and they need to be stopped before more are turned away from Christ.

Let's make some noise so that the world will understand this is one misguided man and flock that follows their own teachings and NOT the teachings of Jesus.

God bless
link or other reference?

[IisJustMe]

I have but one thing to say to this post:You need to realise that not everyone feels the same way as you about US foreign policy and that the US is FAR from being God's chosen country.You don't know what you're talking about. You aren't an American, and you have no say in our foreign policy. I am being pragmatic about it.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke

Who will cry the loudest the first time the US does not respond to an international emergency? The ones who have previously decried our responses of the past. I pity you when you cry and no one hears.

[bill16652]

Really? Didn't seem to recall China threatening to blow up the West with nuclear weapons recently.No, they are buying up our country and bankrupting us at any time they choose, take a look at how much of our debt they hold and if they cash in all the things that people dont complain about that this country is good for will no longer be.

[Cabal]

No, they are buying up our country and bankrupting us at any time they choose, take a look at how much of our debt they hold and if they cash in all the things that people dont complain about that this country is good for will no longer be.

Well, as I said before, maybe your economy would be stronger if you didn't keep waging war.

Why is their expansion (still within their own borders mind) viewed with suspicion and the US's expansion isn't? And before anyone screams human rights violations, might wanna consider the US's habit of renditions.

[Waddell]

Well, as I said before, maybe your economy would be stronger if you didn't keep waging war.

Why is their expansion (still within their own borders mind) viewed with suspicion and the US's expansion isn't? And before anyone screams human rights violations, might wanna consider the US's habit of renditions.

Could this be a case of not having your own country and being unable to do anything about it, therefore; lashing out at the "evil" America? Just a thought. ;) :)

[Cabal]

Could this be a case of not having your own country and being unable to do anything about it, therefore; lashing out at the "evil" America? Just a thought. ;) :)

http://www.lolwut.com/layout/lolwut.jpg

Ireland - independent. Has been for nearly a century now. Check the history books.

And trust me, not jealous in the slightest. Irish people are actually liked by the rest of the world! ;)

[marke]

It's much easier to be apathetic to other people's abuses & fears...

All we want to do is enjoy a comfy life in material happiness & stick our heads in the sand & HOPE nothing threatens our own houses & families - does anyone care about others suffering outside their borders?
Excuse me Nadiine, but where do you come up with this stuff.

Don't you recall the part in the NT that tells us that we should concern ourselves with issues WITHIN the church and leave those outside the church to God?

I DO care about what happens to other people, but it is NOT my problem. God is in control outside the walls of the church. Period. You know, the part about "not a sparrow falls without the Fathers leave".

You seem to think that we (Christianity) have an obligation to any in this world and that is simply not so. We have an obligation to those WITHIN the body, unbelievers are God's problem. We have a further obligation and that obligation is to follow the teachings instead of making up our own.

If "Christians" act in a way that is inconsistent (or opposite) with the teachings of Jesus, then can they really be considered Christians or are they those who we are warned about in the NT who will come in His name to lead others astray? This advocation by John Hagee is not Christian in any way, shape or form.

"You will know my followers by their actions" says Jesus and killing or advocating killing innocent people are not the actions of Christians. What part of "DO NOT KILL" don't you understand? Or if you want, what part of "DO NOT MURDER" don't you understand? Nuking people who have nothing to do with the politics of their country is MURDER. Plain and simple.

Really, time and time again I read your postings and have to shake my head in disbelief. Where do you come up with this stuff? THEN on the other hand, you seem rational on other posts. I don't know what to make of it.

CHRISTIANS DO NOT KILL. It's not what I would like to happen to me so if that is the case, why would I kill or advocate killing innocent people if the teaching is "Do on to others as you would like them to do on to you or DO NOT RETURN EVIL FOR EVIL or turn the other cheek"?

That's right up there with the wackos who support torture. Their fear outweighs their faith and they will take their place with the unbelievers according to the NT.

You know, "He that lives by the sword dies by the sword". I didn't write the scripture, but I can at least read it and I DO know you read it too, but you are like a leaf blowing in the wind. One day you make sense and others you sound like someone who hasn't read a word of the NT like most of the people on these forums.

I do have apathy which is why I support those who help those in need, but my apathy does not extend to violating everything I have read and been taught in the NT.

Jesus nor any of the Apostles gave permission for Christians to harm another person let alone kill millions of innocent people. The Muslims on the other hand DO have permission to defend themselves. Where is it that you read that Christians have permission to defend themselves?

List the NT scripture Nadiine. LIST IT!!!! Time and time again you advocate war and killing and justify it and not a SINGLE LINE OF SCRIPTURE SUPPORTS YOUR POSITION. It's time you conform yourself to the teachings of Jesus instead of making up your own teachings and leading others astray.

SO LIST THE SCRIPTURE NADIINE. Where does Jesus or any of the Apostles give permission to defend yourself.

I'll be watching for your answer.

[marke]

Love your enemy is on a personal level though. If we understand that the law was an eye for an eye and Jesus was referring to heart issues, then we would understand that has nothing to do with how to proceed against modern day Hamans. That does not mean that we wouldn't pray for them. But it also doesn't mean that we lay by idle as they destroy nations and commit holocausts and genocide when or if we have the power to stop them. That would make us wicked servants.

Garbage, absolute garbage.

We can see that there is NO UNDERSTANDING because the OT was replaced by the NT and NOWHERE IN THE NT does it say we are to defend anything except the teachings of Jesus. These are YOUR words, not the words of Jesus or anyone else in the NT.

Further to that, Jesus says do NOT RETURN EVIL FOR EVIL, but instead turn the other cheek. Your opinion is opposite the teaching.

I will give you also the opportunity to provide the NT scripture supporting your position. DO SO!

[marke]

[/FONT]

Remember arming him in the first place? [/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]
WAY TO GO!

Great point. It was the United States who gave IRAQ the poison gas in the first place.

But what is surprising and appalling is all these people defending non-Christian actions? John Hagee is in the wrong and so many people here defend it when the error is so plain for those who bother themselves to connect the dots in the scripture.

I see all these people with tons of reputation and clearly they bought the reputation instead of earned it because they are in error according to the teachings of Jesus and NT scripture.

When I made the post I kind of expected some support and instead I read many supporting the wrong teaching. No wonder many are turning to other faiths! Those calling themselves "Christians" prove by their actions and opinions they are confused as to what the teachings mean.

Sad, sad and really sad, but God controls everything and will enlighten those whom He will and blind those whom He will.

Indeed, God works in mysterious ways.

[marke]

LOL, that first sentence made me laugh (re: Aquinas). Yes, I do realise that it is next to impossible.
As I said or I think I did, sometimes civilians do get harmed in the process, but that is not the goal nor the target. If civilians would overthrow their own governments, we wouldn't have to get involved at all.

It's a give and take, one way or the other.
It can't be win win for everyone.
THAT we know IS impossible.

Iraq was already a problem, we did not make them one. Remember Desert Storm? hello?

Suddam Hussein was one of the world's and his own country's major terrorists. We did not want to go to war unnecessarily. Hussein would not allow us to inspect. The President gave him ample opportunities to change his stance and let us in to inspect. The President even extended Saddam one more opportunity past his last opportunity before war would ensue and Saddam STILL said NO. What were we supposed to do at that point? Just say oh okay, no problem, we were just punking you to see if you would bow to our power and you didn't, so we'll just go and sit down?
Saddam forced us to take action. We had no choice at that point, because not allowing us to check was equivalent to posing a threat in light of what had just happened to us.

And so you justify attacking an innocent country who was NOT involved.

Killing innocent people and lying is an abomination to God.

I just don't understand your position. God HATES THESE THINGS and you support them. It's pretty confusing to someone who has actually read the NT let alone those who are new to the faith.

[marke]

Remember the CIRCUMSTANCE surrounding that arming?:idea: :idea:
As if we had no reason but just on a whim decided to go in and arm him becuz we were bored?

It doesn't make doing Ebil ok after the fact - and it doesn't make it wrong for us to go back and deal with him due to his actions of defiance.

We sold them the stuff so that the merchants of death could profit, not because we were bored.

AND YES IT DOES MAKE IT WRONG, Nadiine.

Jesus never gave permission to kill OR to defend ourselves. These are your own misguided teachings.

[IamRedeemed]

Way to enter a congregational forum to have a discussion! :thumbsup:

I would ordinarily respond to those who disagree with me however,
having never spoken to me before, and if you have
certainly not like that, I suggest that you dial it back a
couple of notches if you expect any replies, because if you keep going
down this path, I project there will be an FSB in your near future.

Good day!

Funny I show you on my buddy list by the little buddy icon
you have next your name. I imagine I have one next to mine
if you look up. I wonder how that happened? :scratch: lol



Garbage, absolute garbage.

We can see that there is NO UNDERSTANDING because the OT was replaced by the NT and NOWHERE IN THE NT does it say we are to defend anything except the teachings of Jesus. These are YOUR words, not the words of Jesus or anyone else in the NT.

Further to that, Jesus says do NOT RETURN EVIL FOR EVIL, but instead turn the other cheek. Your opinion is opposite the teaching.

I will give you also the opportunity to provide the NT scripture supporting your position. DO SO!

[IamRedeemed]

Is that so? Perhaps you missed Luke 22:35-38

And He said to them, "When I sent you out without money belt and
bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?" They said, "No, nothing."
And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along,
likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."
"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me,
AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which
refers to Me has its fulfillment."
They said, "Lord, look, here are two swords."
And He said to them,
"It is enough."





We sold them the stuff so that the merchants of death could profit, not because we were bored.

AND YES IT DOES MAKE IT WRONG, Nadiine.

Jesus never gave permission to kill OR to defend ourselves. These are your own misguided teachings.

[marke]

Is that so? Perhaps you missed Luke 22:35-38

And He said to them, "When I sent you out without money belt and
bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?" They said, "No, nothing."
And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along,
likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."
"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me,
AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which
refers to Me has its fulfillment."
They said, "Lord, look, here are two swords."
And He said to them,
"It is enough."




This is the basis of your position???? A little out of context wouldn't you say?

Why did he need a sword? You answered it yourself.

"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me,
AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which
refers to Me has its fulfillment."

And no I don't want to back off a little. Wrong opinions are wrong opinions and you have plenty of them in this thread according to my Bible.

Jesus nor any Apostle gave permission to kill another human or even to defend yourself. As far as I read, these are YOUR opinions and NOT Scripture.

Give me a little more scripture to support your position please. All you've given me is enough to support my position of a lack of understanding of the scriptures.


God bless

[IamRedeemed]

No it is directly in answer to your rather nasty sounding post to Nadiine,
whose defense I am coming to in responding, in which you boldly proclaimed this:

<<< Jesus never gave permission to kill OR to defend ourselves. These are your own misguided teachings.>>>


I am not answering ANY more of your posts that you direct to me
until you dial it back. I don't owe you anything. And you are going to
sit here with a load of vitriol on your tongue and tell us about turning the other cheek?

Talk to the hand. pppfffft


This is the basis of your position???? A little out of context wouldn't you say?

Why did he need a sword? You answered it yourself.

"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me,
AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which
refers to Me has its fulfillment."

And no I don't want to back off a little. Wrong opinions are wrong opinions and you have plenty of them in this thread according to my Bible.

Jesus nor any Apostle gave permission to kill another human or even to defend yourself. As far as I read, these are YOUR opinions and NOT Scripture.

Give me a little more scripture to support your position please. All you've given me is enough to support my position of a lack of understanding of the scriptures.


God bless

[marke]

link or other reference?
Saw it on "God's Warriors" a program from CNN. They did one on the Jews, Muslims and "Christians".

Excellent programs. You can see the problem with terrorism right away. The Jews are stealing land from the palestinians and the world court and everybody else says it's wrong and yet the U.S. still supports Israel. That's why they hate us. The Jews are in the wrong and the U.S. supports them instead of adhering to the law.

Desperate people do desperate things. Put yourself in their place. A man comes into your home and forces you out at gun point. The law is supposed to protect you so you go to the government and tell them this person has taken your property which is against the law and instead of protecting you, the government says to go away, we will not help you. How would you feel and what would you do at that point?

Most would be angry and many posting on this board would take up arms (against the teachings of Jesus) and seek to kill the person who forced them off their property (again against the teachings of Jesus).

The documentary makes this clear in the Jewish segment.

Then we have the so called "Christian" segment. Wow. Wrong teaching all over the place which is plain to see for anyone who bothers themselves to read the NT.

Where does Jesus tell people to take up arms to protect others? NOWHERE.

Where does Jesus tell people to involve themselves in issues of the world? NOWHERE. In fact, Jesus tells us involvement in issues of the world are the very thing that might cost us our salvation?

All three documentaries were interesting and well presented. I encourage you to view them at cnn.com/godswarriors

Thank you for asking for a link. Check it out.

One last thing. All this is in God's plan. Israel is meant to do these things and the other players are meant to do their things and those who don't corrupt themselves in the world and hold to the teachings of Jesus will win the prize. No one else. The wheat is being sifted and the wheat is us. No one will be wronged on the day of Judgement. We will all get what we give, but in an added measure. Those who support torture will be tortured themselves, but even worse. Those who are kind and compassionate will get the same, but even more.

Which will you chose? May Jesus have mercy on us all.

God Bless.

[marke]

I have but one thing to say to this post:You don't know what you're talking about. You aren't an American, and you have no say in our foreign policy. I am being pragmatic about it.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is that good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke

Who will cry the loudest the first time the US does not respond to an international emergency? The ones who have previously decried our responses of the past. I pity you when you cry and no one hears.
And herein lies the problem. "You aren't an American, and you have no say in our foreign policy."

We say American bases our actions on Christian teachings, but the whole world can see our actions are opposite the teachings of the Christ. Lies, deceit, killing innocent people, torture have nothing to do with Christianity other than to prove who is a follower of Jesus and who is not. Our government is not.

I used to wonder why God allowed "W" be be re-elected since the actions of this administration are anything but Christian, but I came to the realization that it was perhaps to separate the wheat from the chaff in the body of Christ.

Many are called, but few are chosen. There is a reason anti-depressants are the #1 prescription in America. We all know in our soul wrong from right and yet there are those who would rather make up new scripture than follow NT scripture and you see it in their actions and in the things they support. I'd be depressed too if my soul knew I was going to take my place with the unbelievers.

Repent. The kingdom of Heaven is at hand the NT says, but America and many on these forums don't want to. It's pretty depressing I'd say.

God bless

[marke]

No it is directly in answer to your rather nasty sounding post to Nadiine,
whose defense I am coming to in responding, in which you boldly proclaimed this:

<<< Jesus never gave permission to kill OR to defend ourselves. These are your own misguided teachings.>>>


I am not answering ANY more of your posts that you direct to me
until you dial it back. I don't owe you anything. And you are going to
sit here with a load of vitriol on your tongue and tell us about turning the other cheek?

Talk to the hand. pppfffft

But wait!!!!!

You too can provide the scripture to refute my statement: "<<< Jesus never gave permission to kill OR to defend ourselves. >>>"

Come on IamRedeemed, Please, provide the scripture to refute this statement. Put the scripture where your mouth is. I don't think you can, in fact I know you can't, but you can try anyway.

Is your position nonsense or is mine. The NT scripture is there for all to read and so will be your reply.

God bless

[IamRedeemed]

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41683994&postcount=57

[marke]

What "wrong thinking" are we talking about here? Frankly, I'd rather blow up Iran then let them blow us up


The purpose of Jesus coming was to free us from death and to kill another human is to go against His teachings. The Ten Commandments include: "thou shall not kill (or murder)" .



I don't think there is sufficient understanding of Matthew chapter five, if this is the basis for your condemnation of Hagee. Matthew chapter five doesn't teach milquetoast diplomacy. Matthew chapter five teaches, rather, that we be sure of the intent of our antagonist before we justifiably counterstrike in our own defense.


Where is the scripture that says that?

If you think Christianity condemns war, you need to study more deeply. War is a ugly, and not something anyone wants to see occur. No soldier likes war, but every soldier knows it is necessary. I know. I was an officer and a helicopter pilot for 20 years.

Ya know, I've studied enough. Please help me out. Provide the NT scripture you think I need to see. Where is the scripture allowing you to harm another person or even to defend yourself or anyone else? I think these are your own misguided delusions that misguide others.

I've seen this rationalzation from other soldiers and NONE have been able to answer this question with NT scripture so you sir, have a go at it. Enlighten me.


Jesus didn't teach us not to defend ourselves or our allies. If these are the "teachings" you believe are wrong, again, study more.

Again, I've studies enough. Please quote the NT scripture where Jesus or anyone else gives you permission to defend yourself or your allies. I asked this question a Long time ago and 4,000 views later not a SINGLE PERSON was able to provide scripture to support their position a Christian can harm another person. Your turn to try.

Again, I'm not willing to say Hagee's "demand" is not eventually going to have to be US policy. We may have to go down that line as a matter of international security.

The only security is trusting in Jesus. Perhaps you should review the parable of the seeds on the path. What happens to people in the middle of the parable? They lose the prize because they get caught up in the world instead of the spirit.

I'm really waiting for you to supply the scripture you think will ease that concern.

God bless.

[Nadiine]

But wait!!!!!

You too can provide the scripture to refute my statement: "<<< Jesus never gave permission to kill OR to defend ourselves. >>>"

Come on IamRedeemed, Please, provide the scripture to refute this statement. Put the scripture where your mouth is. I don't think you can, in fact I know you can't, but you can try anyway.

Is your position nonsense or is mine. The NT scripture is there for all to read and so will be your reply.

God bless
The OT God is the NT God. God hasn't changed! God didn't turn into some weak, limp wristed pacifist all of a sudden just becuz He ushered in a grace covenant.

He's the same now as He was then. I'll tell you why. The whole purpose of the law (under law) was to LOVE.
Love fulfills the OT law becuz it was the mechanics of HOW to show love/respect to others & their property so you didn't sin against them, AND love of God first.
Romans 13:9 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=52&chapter=13&verse=9&version=50&context=verse)
For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
10 Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

Even in that harsh law, the entire point was LOVE - God didn't send Christ yet to TEACH "love", just OBEY THE COMMANDS THAT ENCOMPASSED LOVE.
They missed the whole point of the law: LOVE.
Yet in that harshness, it was still love - even in the judgments & death penalties. THAT IS ALSO LOVE. (there is no love without justice).

To turn love into something where you can't even defend your own life or others is perversion of the meaning to it's furthest extent.

You may find John Hagee obnoxious, but you dont' even recognize how drastically polar your belief is to refuse to defend the innocent. That isn't true love either, is it?

All we have here are 2 opposite extremes - Hagee and you and frankly, you should be just as alarmed at your own warped view which is unbiblical.

(copied from IAR's post):
And He said to them, "When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?"
They said, "No, nothing." And He said to them,
"But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."
"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment."
They said, "Lord, look, here are two swords."
And He said to them,
"It is enough."

[Cris413]

Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
Gal 5:23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Gal 5:26 Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.


marke...I'm not seeing anger, hostility and antagonism as a fruit of the Spirit in the above Scripture


I think this teaching of the NT is quite edifying:

Tit 3:2 to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men.

Jas 1:19 So then,my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath;
Jas 1:20 for the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God.


And of course we also have this teaching in the NT that would be very beneficial to write on a sticky and place it somewhere we can see it everyday....


Luk 6:41 And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the plank in your own eye?
Luk 6:42 Or how can you say to your brother, "Brother, let me remove the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the plank that is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck that is in your brother's eye.

We are, however, called to use the discernment of the Holy Spirit and judge the "fruit"

Peace...

[IamRedeemed]

You are entitled to believe someone is wrong. After all, I believe you are and
I am sure I am not alone. However, IF you want me to converse with you,
you will dial back the way you speak to me, or I will not converse with you.

You basically came into this forum and conducted yourself in a very .....well
let's just say that you did not present yourself as a man of God would who
had the heart to teach anyone anything.

You are not in a forum that is loaded with apostates and flagrant rebels,
and enemies of God who wear sheep masks.

The people here love the Lord and are pure of heart. IF and that is a very big IF,
IF you had a valid point, I don't believe there is one person on the face of the
earth who would be interested in hearing it, much less anyone here as long as
you come in like a member of the Taliban with a machine gun randomly shooting
at everyone in the forum rather than attempting to engage in any discussion.
As I said, we all love the Lord here, you are not dealing with apostates or
seared consciences here. Get some manners and restate your questions to
me, as a man of God or simply forget any possible discussion with me.



This is the basis of your position???? A little out of context wouldn't you say?

Why did he need a sword? You answered it yourself.

"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me,
AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which
refers to Me has its fulfillment."

And no I don't want to back off a little. Wrong opinions are wrong opinions and you have plenty of them in this thread according to my Bible.

Jesus nor any Apostle gave permission to kill another human or even to defend yourself. As far as I read, these are YOUR opinions and NOT Scripture.

Give me a little more scripture to support your position please. All you've given me is enough to support my position of a lack of understanding of the scriptures.


God bless

[IamRedeemed]

:amen::thumbsup:

The OT God is the NT God. God hasn't changed! God didn't turn into some weak, limp wristed pacifist all of a sudden just becuz He ushered in a grace covenant.

He's the same now as He was then. I'll tell you why. The whole purpose of the law (under law) was to LOVE.
Love fulfills the OT law becuz it was the mechanics of HOW to show love/respect to others & their property so you didn't sin against them, AND love of God first.
Romans 13:9 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=52&chapter=13&verse=9&version=50&context=verse)
For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
10 Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

Even in that harsh law, the entire point was LOVE - God didn't send Christ yet to TEACH "love", just OBEY THE COMMANDS THAT ENCOMPASSED LOVE.
They missed the whole point of the law: LOVE.
Yet in that harshness, it was still love - even in the judgments & death penalties. THAT IS ALSO LOVE. (there is no love without justice).

To turn love into something where you can't even defend your own life or others is perversion of the meaning to it's furthest extent.

You may find John Hagee obnoxious, but you dont' even recognize how drastically polar your belief is to refuse to defend the innocent. That isn't true love either, is it?

All we have here are 2 opposite extremes - Hagee and you and frankly, you should be just as alarmed at your own warped view which is unbiblical.

(copied from IAR's post):
And He said to them, "When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?"
They said, "No, nothing." And He said to them,
"But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one."
"For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS'; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment."
They said, "Lord, look, here are two swords."
And He said to them,
"It is enough."

[IamRedeemed]

:amen::thumbsup:

Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
Gal 5:23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Gal 5:26 Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.


marke...I'm not seeing anger, hostility and antagonism as a fruit of the Spirit in the above Scripture


I think this teaching of the NT is quite edifying:

Tit 3:2 to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men.

Jas 1:19 So then,my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath;
Jas 1:20 for the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God.


And of course we also have this teaching in the NT that would be very beneficial to write on a sticky and place it somewhere we can see it everyday....


Luk 6:41 And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the plank in your own eye?
Luk 6:42 Or how can you say to your brother, "Brother, let me remove the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the plank that is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck that is in your brother's eye.

We are, however, called to use the discernment of the Holy Spirit and judge the "fruit"

Peace...

[FreeinChrist]

This thread is closed for a 24 hour cool-off.

Edit to add that this thread will stay closed a bit longer til more staff comment in the report(s) generated from this thread.

[FreeinChrist]

Ok, I am reopening this thread. Please be careful in how you state your view. There is a site wide rule regarind flaming and in when the topic is heated, it is easy to cross the line.

[Waddell]

Ok, I am reopening this thread. Please be careful in how you state your view. There is a site wide rule regarind flaming and in when the topic is heated, it is easy to cross the line.


I had made an obvious (and I thought humorous!) social commentary in this post. Apparently some people are so thin skinned that I have now come back to modify the post.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!! ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!

[Nadiine]

:eek:

:doh:



:swoon:

Is this where I quote a verse of having love for fellow believers?
:pink:

[bill16652]

:eek:

:doh:



:swoon:

Is this where I quote a verse of having love for fellow believers?
:pink:Perhaps one about humility?

[IisJustMe]

Is this where I quote a verse of having love for fellow elievers?Perhaps one about humility?Something else is going on here, guys. Best leave it alone. Speaking professionally. Thanks.

[bill16652]

Something else is going on here, guys. Best leave it alone. Speaking professionally. Thanks.Ok, although I am aware that when people strike out like this there is an underlying cause, reflection and self honesty sets people free from these things.

[IisJustMe]

Ok, although I am aware that when people strike out like this there is an underlying cause, reflection and self honesty sets people free from these things.:amen:

Unless there is something much deeper seated going on. Can't tell online, of course.

[Nadiine]

Something else is going on here, guys. Best leave it alone. Speaking professionally. Thanks.
Most likely - but in a public place for Christians, I think we need to be aware of visitors who read this & make judgments about God based on our conduct.
That's my only concern.

[IisJustMe]

Most likely - but in a public place for Christians, I think we need to be aware of visitors who read this & make judgments about God based on our conduct.
That's my only concern. Hey, Nades (like that?) ... clear some PM space, please. I tried to send you one, and you're overloaded.

[Nadiine]

Hey, Nades (like that?) ... clear some PM space, please. I tried to send you one, and you're overloaded.
Ya, sorry about that! I've been busy w/ Christmas stuff back & forth - I'll try to clean up today. (my pm box mite be an indication of the condition of my house right now lol).

clutter much?? :help:

[IisJustMe]

Ya, sorry about that! I've been busy w/ Christmas stuff back & forth - I'll try to clean up today. (my pm box mite be an indication of the condition of my house right now lol). clutter much?? :help:I'm ex-military, single dad who raised two teenagers by himself, and a neat freak. So no, I don't. But I'd be happy to help you. Just don't know how I can online. LOL. Don't feel badly about it. Having a messy house isn't a sign of anything other than having kids!

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_11_60.gif

[Nadiine]

I'm ex-military, single dad who raised two teenagers by himself, and a neat freak. So no, I don't. But I'd be happy to help you. Just don't know how I can online. LOL. Don't feel badly about it. Having a messy house isn't a sign of anything other than having kids!

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_11_60.gif
LOL, well, I have no kids, so how about it's a sign of having alot of pets? :sigh: :help:
I always wished I was a neat freak - I wonder if that's genetic or just learned behaviour?:scratch: . I really don't like a mess, but sometimes I do get lazy & let things go till I get sick of it.

My pm's are cleared now too - if you still need to send something go ahead, if not no problem =)

[IisJustMe]

LOL, well, I have no kids, so how about it's a sign of having alot of pets? :sigh: :help: Sure, pets are "kids" too.I always wished I was a neat freak - I wonder if that's genetic or just learned behaviour?:scratch: .Learned, I'm sure. Or rebelliousness. I'm amazed at how many people raised by sloppy parents become obsessed with "clean" and how many people raised by neat freaks turn out to be adult slobs. LOLI really don't like a mess, but sometimes I do get lazy & let things go till I get sick of it.Sometimes we've just go too much to do and only so much energy to do it, so we let go of the things we are least excited about. That's OK, too. If you're aware of it, it won't become a problem.My pm's are cleared now too - if you still need to send something go ahead, if not no problem =)Sending ....