God or Country?

Guess Who?

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/05/13/audio-sch...

And I'd like to interject a note of balance here. There are times when we all get in high dudgeon. We ought to be reasonable about this. I think there are probably very few people in this room or in America who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if thousands of lives are at stake.

Take the hypothetical: If we knew that there was a nuclear bomb hidden in an American city and we believed that some kind of torture, fairly severe maybe, would give us a chance of finding that bomb before it went off, my guess is most Americans and most senators, maybe all, would say, Do what you have to do.

So it's easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can never be used. But when you're in the foxhole, it's a very different deal.

Abortion isn't directly addressed in the Scripture. Period. (That said, I am "pro-life.")

Really, so thou shalt no murder is not addressing the killing of unborn children.

Now some would then reply that they don't see abortion as the killing of an unborn children.

My reply would be Are you saying that society's view of something can then change the way God sees something.

O God, abortion isn't murder because we don't think it is killing a human life.

I am not sure that will play come Judgement Day but those who believe that are more than welcome to try that argument with God.

And for the record before I get labeled, I am a voting Democrat that is sickened by the Democrat position on abortion.

Really, so thou shalt no murder is not addressing the killing of unborn children.

Now some would then reply that they don't see abortion as the killing of an unborn children.

My reply would be Are you saying that society's view of something can then change the way God sees something.

O God, abortion isn't murder because we don't think it is killing a human life.

I am not sure that will play come Judgement Day but those who believe that are more than welcome to try that argument with God.

And for the record before I get labeled, I am a voting Democrat that is sickened by the Democrat position on abortion.

Well, if you end up killing that person or he/she gives you bad information that doesn't help the cause. I'm sure some of these terrorists have extremely tough minds that don't break. (That's why they're terrorists.)

What I care about is how is God going to view it on Judgment Day. Will judge view abortion as killing on Judgment Day? That is what Christians should be worried about.

A version of this very same question was posed to me by a staff person with Keith Green's Last Days Ministries, to which I had written in the 1980s because of its obsession with abortion issue (which was common then). This person wrote that God would ask me in the judgment, "'How could you let those babies die?'" I responded, "I'd rather hear that question than 'Why did you not reflect Me?'" That ended the argument -- because God is not so much interested in political posturing (which, for the most part, the "pro-life" movement is about) as developing character among His people.

And as for David, I realized something a few years ago. Every major character in the Scripture with the exception of Jesus had at one point fallen into gross sin -- and paid for it. The thing is, they recognized it and repented.

No, you missed my point. I've personally dealt with "pro-life" activists who were (and in some cases still are) willing to misuse Scripture, distort facts and in some cases flat-out lie about their opponents for the cause -- and that certainly does not reflect Christ. That was why I wrote to that ministry, which was long on rhetoric but short on truth.

Well, if you end up killing that person or he/she gives you bad information that doesn't help the cause. I'm sure some of these terrorists have extremely tough minds that don't break. (That's why they're terrorists.)

I would submit that both sides fall under this category and not just one.

I don't agree in the least, primarily because few, if any, evangelical Christians are at all involved with the "pro-choice" side, let alone activists. And you don't need to be a Christian to be anti-abortion -- my stance preceded my conversion.

Or at least I see NO Scriptural evidence in the least that would indicate that Jesus would be supportive of a policy of abortion and the killing of unborn children.

You would then have to promote a comprehensive "pro-life" policy which includes, but doesn't focus exclusively on, the unborn. The trouble is that the conservative movement stole the abortion issue in the late 1970s as a way to get votes, which is one reason fighting legal abortion gets virtually nowhere today, especially now. (I say that because the right-wingers who run the Republican Party demand adherence to every one of their tenets. For that reason I said here recently, and still believe, that nothing will be done about abortion until the hard right is gone.)

What I care about is how is God going to view it on Judgment Day. Will judge view abortion as killing on Judgment Day? That is what Christians should be worried about.

A version of this very same question was posed to me by a staff person with Keith Green's Last Days Ministries, to which I had written in the 1980s because of its obsession with abortion issue (which was common then). This person wrote that God would ask me in the judgment, "'How could you let those babies die?'" I responded, "I'd rather hear that question than 'Why did you not reflect Me?'" That ended the argument -- because God is not so much interested in political posturing (which, for the most part, the "pro-life" movement is about) as developing character among His people.

And as for David, I realized something a few years ago. Every major character in the Scripture with the exception of Jesus had at one point fallen into gross sin -- and paid for it. The thing is, they recognized it and repented.

No, you missed my point. I've personally dealt with "pro-life" activists who were (and in some cases still are) willing to misuse Scripture, distort facts and in some cases flat-out lie about their opponents for the cause -- and that certainly does not reflect Christ. That was why I wrote to that ministry, which was long on rhetoric but short on truth.

I would submit that both sides fall under this category and not just one.

I don't agree in the least, primarily because few, if any, evangelical Christians are at all involved with the "pro-choice" side, let alone activists. And you don't need to be a Christian to be anti-abortion -- my stance preceded my conversion.

Or at least I see NO Scriptural evidence in the least that would indicate that Jesus would be supportive of a policy of abortion and the killing of unborn children.

You would then have to promote a comprehensive "pro-life" policy which includes, but doesn't focus exclusively on, the unborn. The trouble is that the conservative movement stole the abortion issue in the late 1970s as a way to get votes, which is one reason fighting legal abortion gets virtually nowhere today, especially now. (I say that because the right-wingers who run the Republican Party demand adherence to every one of their tenets. For that reason I said here recently, and still believe, that nothing will be done about abortion until the hard right is gone.)

I too wish you would review other lines of comments on this blog and respond in a more thorough fashion.

It seems that you want to find a connection between most evangelicals and support of torture; that you find something fundamentally wrong with the faith/lives of most evangelicals; and that you wish to correct that. Or maybe you don't even want to correct it. Maybe it is important that they be wrong; that their faith be problematic. What happens to our indentity as a 'counter-culture' if there is not a larger group to counter??

I will only raise that as a question to you.

In my heart, most of the time, there is a side that very much likes the rest of the world to be wrong and me be right. That is not the righteousness of God in me. It is the righteousness of me--quite a lot of filthy rags--actually.

I agree with Nancy Pelosi, we should do whatever it takes.

"As Emmanuel Katongole pointed out in The Pattern of This World in Sojourners earlier this year, it is a grave problem when political affiliations shape Christians' views more than religious affiliations do:"

Good thing that's not a problem for Sojourners. Wouldn't it be interesting to take a poll of Sojo followers and political affiliation?

Hey, Keith-how sickened are you by the deaths that are inflicted by our nation by on the LIVING???, For example, by the strict embargo and blockade of Iraq that resulted in the preventable deaths of an estimated 500,000 Iraqi children-not embryos-between 1991-2003? Your tax dollars and mine have been supporting an imperialistic government that couldn't give a Shiite about the death and suffering of innocents on their way to global dominance.Gee, d'ya think Muslim "extremists" are off base in their grudges against us? Don't you realize that the Church is just a little bit warped by concerning itself only witthe fate of embryos,zygotes, and the Terry Schiavos?

Torture is wrong, plain and simple. But this does not mean that I don't wrap my politics up with my faith any less than the evangelicals who approved of torture. We are all hypocrites and we are all sinners. In the midst of what might seem to be the demise of the power of the Religious Right, are we focused on building God's kingdom or dancing on the Right Wing's political grave? Thumbing our noses and saying "Nah, nah, I told you so.."gets us nowhere. I hope for earthly justice in this situation, but if I have to wait for God's, so be it. I am as guilty as Dick Cheney in the eyes of God's law, so I will praise him for salvation and grace.

And not only accused witches. They also burned other Christians (Anabaptists) at the stake and threw yet others into rivers.

I also am relieved that lacking a bald "Thou shalt not torture" verse completely excuses them.

"Just seems to me that torture is inconsistent with the prime directive -- love thy neighbor."

I never actually thought of it that way , but it makes sense . I always looked at it as you have someone in your custody . They are powerless to hurt anyone now . They can be tied up , and need you to even be fed . To hurt them with torture in that position is immoral . They can be a creep , innocent , guilty , it does not matter to me . I do find it strange that the secular left who at times hate even the concept of a need for a savior and Lord , feel the need to bring this up and rehash and pick the scabs to it . That the religious left feels the need to point out many conservatives agreed with the lesser of two evils concept that torturing a poor soul to get information that would save lives . Its almost now that we are spending trillions , have people loosing jobs in an economic crisis , instead of dealing with the present situation in the Middle East that the President Inherited , lets talk about those lousy conservatives and the past administratiopn . Strange .

President Obama did the right thing , Thank God .

As Gomer Pyle would say, "Surprise, surprise, surprise."

One could have arrived at the same conclusion by going back and reviewing the readers comments here at this web site. I consider myself an evangelical, but I do not support the use of torture. I'm glad that other media outlets are beginning to recognize that one's faith does not narrowly define their tolerance for this heinous practice.

Just joking around here Neuro . I am sure Nancy is a good person .

This cuts both ways, of course, opening up the possibility that opposition to torture is based entirely on partisan political allegiances. So we're still going around in circles.

Let's get back to square one, shall we? there was a time when a claim that something was an obvious moral wrong would be met by evangelicals with a simple challenge: "Chapter and Verse". So where's your Bible passage that says, point blank, "thou shalt not torture"? Do you have one?

I'm not saying that we can't go beyond the strict words of the Bible, and if someone can pull up a passage that's directly on point then that would mean a lot. But if you don't have such a thing, then a little more humility might be in order.

LV

I agree with Nancy Pelosi, we should do whatever it takes.

We get back into the problem of defining what exactly is an "evangelical?" It looks like some stereotyping is going on i.e. an "evangelical" is a "Republican" who "supports torture."

At least those who are White. Why are Whites included in this and not Blacks? We could get into other categories i.e. male;/female, Straight/Gay, and so forth. Though it seems in these articles that Straight, White male is the "default" or the "normative." Anyone else is "outside the normative" and somehow doesn't truly matter. Something is wrong here.

I'm rambling in all directions, probably making no sense at all.