Response thread to Elmer’s Brother – on nationalism, abortion, and pre-emptive war

Hi EB,

So as not to be off-topic in your current posts I reposted here. I take it that you’re:

  1. a practicing Christian
  2. Pro Israel
  3. Pro America (a nationalist)
  4. by 2 and 3, neoconservative

I don’t believe that Christians act primarily for the benefit of the state nor Israel (hence the “I disagree with the nationalism and “Politely knocking on Taquiyya’s door” bit). Instead I am convinced that we act out of God’s interests, derived from a heart of worship to God, which in turn may or may not be in the mutual benefit of the state.

I also believe Christians don’t have the moral obligation to protect the state of Israel. Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus give this commandment.

Regarding my allergy to nationalism, I believe this was one of the root causes for the spiritual wandering of the Israelites found in the OT.

These are some of my reasons.

Advertisements

re: Comment Commandments revisited/soccermomunplugged open thread

This is in reference to Comment Commandments revisited and the previous Pope to Muslim Fanatics: Why bother? posts in soccermomunplugged.

Cate implicates my comments in the “Pope…” post are inflammatory and purely malicious in nature.

– are inflammatory without addressing the issue of the blog

– are purely malicious in nature

Going by this definition of malicious, I fail to see where I am acting out of pure malice. Also, if the first few posts are any indication, I am sure that my characterization of your (Cate’s) generalized opinion of ME Arabs is on the mark.

I believe you (Cate) and I reached some sort of commonality of spirit at the “end” of our discussion, but judging by your last comment of the night, I believe it was built on false pretenses or a false unity, hence your post and following ban.

Allow me to illustrate:

No I didn’t forget that Jesus would know. But I am making the point that we all generalize. How aboutwe concede that we both reacted adversely to our triggers.

We are both probably on the same side of the issue anyway. You and I both want Muslims to be seen in a better light. Only I want the fanatics to stop doing everything in their power to reinforce negative stereotypes and you want President Bush and I not to generalize and create a hostile environment for innocent Muslims. Got it. I’ll make sure my Palestinian friend and her family feel welcome when they come for dinner on Tuesday evening.

Good night, Albert. (#97)

Continue reading

Pope Benedict Apologizes in Person for Muslim Offense

It seems a lot more has happened in the past two weeks than I originally thought. Also, apologies on missing the chance to post on 9/11.. no doubt much of what is written here could be arguably centered around.

9/11 post will come in time. But this article should have been renamed “Catholic Church Figurehead Issues Muslim Apology” with the subheading “Religious politics play out in Europe between Pope and Muslim world”.

It’s foolish and frankly speaking, heretical, to claim you represent God AND speak on behalf of the entire earthly kingdom/church politically (or, having representative power). God doesn’t play politics… at least this much should be ascertained from the Old Testament. This is part of the reason why I believe Catholicism in practice (orthopraxis) is far from the truth of knowing who God is and true Christianity in general.

It also speaks of the extent to which ecumenism (or, in this context, false unity) is taking over every facet of the modern world. Pantheism anyone?

Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Matthew 7 :14-15

http://tinyurl.com/nygq5

By Andrew Frye and Jackie Andrews

Sept. 17 (Bloomberg) — Pope Benedict XVI apologized in person today for causing offense to Muslims with a university lecture last week implicitly linking Islam to violence.

Continue reading