Certain FReepers may need this
Click the Pic
Posted on 03/28/2004 6:22:19 AM PST by truthandlife
It seems like everyone I know wants to talk about his or her personal relationship with God. I was under the mistaken notion that faith was something private, not to be shown off. I thought we were supposed to live our faith, not talk about it. But we live in confessional times so we’re eager to confess our sins and declare our piety to anyone who will listen. If you doubt it, just watch Jerry Springer or Oprah Winfrey.
Maybe our open declaration of faith is caused by Mel Gibson’s film "The Passion of the Christ." Some claim they’re touched religiously by this film. Maybe those who have watched the flagellation, torture and gore in this film find the violence strangely moving. That wouldn’t surprise me — after all, violence is as American as tractor pulls and cowboys.
Maybe this god-talk is due to President Bush with his born-again certainties and all his references to good and evil. He convenes prayer breakfasts at the White House and is deeply religious. Let’s face it. Presidents are closer to God than the rest of us — that explains their willingness to expose us to wars again and again. We must smite our enemies.
In fact, the president’s terrible swift sword is cutting and slashing across Afghanistan, Iraq and Haiti right now.
For him the battle is simple. It’s always between the good guys and those who don’t believe in the Judeo-Christian God. It’s between straight and gay marriages. And yes we’ll fight to keep "under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance, thank you.
You can tell that I’m troubled by our national expressions of religious pride and piety. I certainly don’t want to offend your religious sensibilities but I think all this pious fervor and certainty works against tolerance and true, sober faith.
I hear that movie makers are rushing to make other films about early Christian leaders. There’s a film about Judas Iscariot already completed, I hear, so all your questions about him are about to be answered.
Advertisement
And I’ll bet there’s a small army of writers in Hollywood scouring the Bible right now for stories that might stir and move people as much as Mel Gibson’s flick. We’re facing years of "Passion" knock-offs.
But it seems to me the ground is shifting — we’re living in a new age. It’s an age when true believers and Christian fanatics rule. If you’re not one of them you’d better think long and hard about whether you want to stand up to guys like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and George W. Bush.
We are a proud and stiff-necked people (to use an Old Testament phrase.) To our credit, we have been a generous and caring people, but we’re also the first nation to use weapons of mass destruction, which makes our efforts to curb them suspect.
Unfortunately, we are also defenders of land mines whose main purpose is to maim and cripple.
The gore and suffering of "The Passion of the Christ" is nothing compared to what our weapons are designed to do.
Unfortunately, our president, a Moses figure from the Old Testament can turn his staff of righteousness into a poisonous serpent at any time. He remembers what our enemies tried to do to his father. His response is not turning the other cheek. It’s about smiting and smashing. It’s an "eye-for-an-eye" world.
This isn’t the time to bring up the silly doctrine of nonviolence of which Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Jesus spoke. No one believes in that doctrine anymore. Our nation believes in causing suffering, not accepting it like Jesus in "The Passion."
Since 9/11 we are frightened that terrorism will visit our shores again. We’re waiting for the lash to fall. We call it, "The Passion of America."
Some of us are sure the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq are being waged against the principalities of darkness and evil. Like all wars, this one makes us feel alive again, even as it kills many others and a few of us.
Let’s close this little sermon with a battle hymn to this righteous war we are fighting. Let’s not worry about the complexities and the ambivalences — or the contradictions. Let’s keep it simple.
I can hear the music moving from hill to hill, church to church. Take up your positions, believers. Let’s make them suffer. Let’s sing it together. "Onward Christian soldiers..."
And that would be faith in what?
These lines earn this article a BARF ALERT.
Always meant for evangelical Christians, this is a polite way of saying, "You should shut up now, thank you."
Land mines are purely defensive. You put down land mines on a border and if no one invades, no one gets hurt. Further, a land mine can and will definitely kill you. This author is a bozo.
They want faith "in the closet" while they want homosexuality out of the closet - truly perverted.
Yes, but it goes over big with the predominantly leftist SC crowd. This pap is typical of what appears in the local rags down there.
This SOB really has some nerve lumping Haiti in there. We've got maybe a couple of dozen troops in Haiti, and Bush never even wanted to get involved there in the first place, he's only doing it as a sop to creeps like the author of this column.
Click the Pic
Secular Hit Squads have been hard at it ever since The Passion debuted, trying to demean Mel Gibson, putting a chokehold on Christians and Christian beliefs.
Secular wrecking crews stooped to the lowest levels of condescension to bash Mel, the film, and Christian audiences. Clearly, there was a calculated, coordinated effort to demonize The Passion.
Secular shock troops came out in full battle regalia. The first foray had ADL Abe claiming the film was anti-Semitic. That didn't work. NYT's Frank Rich attacked next----said it was fascistic. Then his nYT colleague Maureen Dowd said it was crass. That didn't work. Andy Rooney bashed it on CBS and SNL evilly caricatured it on NBC. That didn't work either. Newsweek's Evan Thomas told Imus it was a snuff film. Even so-called conservative Krauthammer trashed it and Hitchens---in his usual drunken stupor--said it was homo-erotic.
Nothing worked. Chances are if the secular Hollywarped-media axis don't trash The Passion for their Masters, they stand to lose thir positions, their contacts, their invitations to A-list parties, and their corner table at Le Dome.
Now secularists are running scared. Could they really be losing their stranglehold on American culture? Are those Bible-believing Christians really gaining on the secularists. Will the ACLU's decades-long work to eradicate all vestiges of religion from America be in vain?
In a word, yes.
Unfortunately, our president, a Moses figure from the Old Testament can turn his staff of righteousness into a poisonous serpent at any time. He remembers what our enemies tried to do to his father. His response is not turning the other cheek. It's about smiting and smashing. It's an "eye-for-an-eye" world.
Funny how the author writes "Let’s not worry about the complexities and the ambivalences - or the contradictions. Let's keep it simple" yet, he's trying to simplify a complex matter by writing a contradictory and ambivalent article.
Uh huh. Sexual proclivities and practices are supposed to be discussed in class, shown on television, performed in public, and validated by the courts, but we're not supposed to talk about FAITH. That wouldn't be...what? Modest?
Reading the rest of the article, I see that mistaken notions are the story of this guy's life, even leaving religion as entirely out of the picture as he would prefer...
It seems like everyone I know wants to talk about his or her personal relationship with God. I was under the mistaken notion that faith was something private, not to be shown off. I thought we were supposed to live our faith, not talk about it. But we live in confessional times so we’re eager to confess our sins and declare our piety to anyone who will listen. If you doubt it, just watch Jerry Springer or Oprah Winfrey.
Hey Dan, if you want to be the great communicator on thing religious, it would help if you had some exposure to religion. Any exposure would help. One of the fundamental aspects of religion is witnessing. It's talking to others about your perceptions. Tell us Dan, how would others be won to Christ if humans were forbidden to discuss such matters, if leaders were forbidden to share their beliefs with their constituents? At least Harper got one thing correct, he was under a mistaken notion.
In the true role of the agnostic, Harper uses the ploy of comparing witnessing to those who go on Oprah and Springer. Nice try brain trust.
Maybe our open declaration of faith is caused by Mel Gibson’s film "The Passion of the Christ." Some claim they’re touched religiously by this film. Maybe those who have watched the flagellation, torture and gore in this film find the violence strangely moving. That wouldn’t surprise me — after all, violence is as American as tractor pulls and cowboys.
What do tractor pulls and cowboys have to do with the torture and death of Jesus Christ? If 'The Passion of the Christ" accurately portrays what happened to Jesus Christ, and I believe it basically does, comparing it to anything else in a demeaning way like Harper has, is not only pointless, it's sacrilegious.
Maybe this god-talk is due to President Bush with his born-again certainties and all his references to good and evil. He convenes prayer breakfasts at the White House and is deeply religious. Let’s face it. Presidents are closer to God than the rest of us — that explains their willingness to expose us to wars again and again. We must smite our enemies.
Being born again is something that happens to all Christians Mr. Harper. You knew this right? You knew that good and evil were the yin and yang of Christianity right? As for religious leaders being closer to God, you are mistaken. Jesus Christ died for every man's sins, hence we are all equals in His eyes. You knew this, right? As for this talk of wars and how shameful you must think it is, what would you have Christians do, raise their arms and helplessly allow their enemies to smite them? War is a necessary reaction to attack and the threat of attack? Even Christians, the lowly people you obviously despise, have a right to defend themselves. One could even say they have the duty to do so. To stand by and allow evil to take place and advance it's goals, is in itself a moral evil. Is the Christian to surrender the world to Moslem extremism?
In fact, the president’s terrible swift sword is cutting and slashing across Afghanistan, Iraq and Haiti right now.
Well, as long as that sword is directed at terrorists and their supporters, this is one Christian who finds that to be a good thing. And as long as that sword is wielded on foreign soil so it doesn't need to be wielded at home, I think it's a doubly good thing.
For him the battle is simple. It’s always between the good guys and those who don’t believe in the Judeo-Christian God. It’s between straight and gay marriages. And yes we’ll fight to keep "under God" in our Pledge of Allegiance, thank you.
What a limp-wristed brainless comments. Is President Bush attacking individuals and groups based on their religious preferences? No. This is therefore not an issue of those who do or don't believe in the Judeo-Christian God. Once again Harper is out of his element. This is an issue of those who wish to attack us and kill our citizens.
Ah, so our attacking Bin Laden is now about homosexuality and the Pledge. Don't ask me why, but I was pretty sure from the start Harper would be blossoming his beefs with the President.
You can tell that I’m troubled by our national expressions of religious pride and piety. I certainly don’t want to offend your religious sensibilities but I think all this pious fervor and certainty works against tolerance and true, sober faith.
Mr. Harper, what you and your ilk want is to wage open warfare on Christianity unimpeded. By your own writings it is obvious that you will even stoop to the aid of terrorists, in your quest to accomplish that goal. Damning Bush for responding to terrorism in a reasoned manner, is doing just that. Trashing him for speaking out against homosexual marriages confirms it. Trashing him for desiring a belief in a supreme being to remain a part of our culture, is just that.
Let's recap. Bush want's to wipe out terrorism. He does not believe in homosexual marriage. He does believe in instilling a belief in God in our children. You on the other hand don't want to stamp out terrorism. You do want homosexual marriage. You do not want a belief in God instilled in our children. Some people would hedge how I cast your views, but I'm just going to call it as I see it. Your irreverence for Christian beliefs leaves no doubt where your interest are driving you.
I hear that movie makers are rushing to make other films about early Christian leaders. There’s a film about Judas Iscariot already completed, I hear, so all your questions about him are about to be answered.
I don't know what this presentation will entail. I do find it amusing to read what angst the presentation has created in Harper. His bitter comments speak volumes.
Advertisement
And I’ll bet there’s a small army of writers in Hollywood scouring the Bible right now for stories that might stir and move people as much as Mel Gibson’s flick. We’re facing years of "Passion" knock-offs.
What Harper addresses here, is the 'ghastly' (by his point of view) prospect of religious stories being told through the medium of Hollywierd production. On some level, we both share some angst over this. I've seen Hollywierd's take on religion expressed for decades. I can only imagine what some of these productions will look like, rewritten to incorporate their current life-styles in the productions. However, my concerns are not Harper's by a long shot.
But it seems to me the ground is shifting — we’re living in a new age. It’s an age when true believers and Christian fanatics rule. If you’re not one of them you’d better think long and hard about whether you want to stand up to guys like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and George W. Bush.
Oh the ground is shifting alright. It's shifting to the point that people with minds as diseased as Harper's is can get their views published in mainstream newspapers. Harper continues to polish his revulsion with all things religious. Falwell and Robertson have made some outlandish comments over time, but I note Harper somehow forgot to list Reverend Al Sharpton or Reverend Jessie Jackson in the mix. They've made some whoppers as well. I guess Harper is convinced that they have little to due with true religion. I leave it to the reader to assess that issue.
The linkage of Falwell and Robertson with Bush is an open attempt to trash Bush for being a religious zealot, in the same manner that Falwell and Robertson have been successfully cast in that manner by the leftists/socialists in this nation.
We are a proud and stiff-necked people (to use an Old Testament phrase.) To our credit, we have been a generous and caring people, but we’re also the first nation to use weapons of mass destruction, which makes our efforts to curb them suspect.
I don't know where Harper gets this "we" Stuff. Those who are convinced that there is a right and wrong are generally 'stiff-necked' in that they do believe Christians must live by a certain code of principles. On the other hand, Harper's pals believe anything goes. There is no right or wrong for them. The mention of God is a capital crime. Homosexuality is charming. Terrorists are just expressing their view that the United States is evil, and in some instances Harper fully agrees. After all, we used 'da bomb'.
It doesn't matter if many allied and Japanese lives were saved by using 'da bomb', as devastating as it was. We were wrong to use it in Harper's view, because after all, there is no right or wrong. The Japanese leadership couldn't have been evil because evil doesn't exist in Harper's view. Mr. Harper, wouldn't you agree that the Japanese were a little stiff-necked themselves? They refused to surrender even after Hiroshima? Seeing it in that light, "they were stiff-necks" I'm sure you now agree that they deserved whatever happened to them, just like you think the U.S. does.
Unfortunately, we are also defenders of land mines whose main purpose is to maim and cripple.
What does the acronym A.N.S.W.E.R. suddenly flash across my mind? I guess it's because this article of Harpers touches on all their talking points.
Let's look at land mines in just one theater. In Korea thousands of land mines have helped keep the South free from Communist aggressors for fifty years. Ooooo, now there's a double whammy for Harper. Not only are the South Koreans free, Communism was stopped dead in it's tracks. Now there's a socialists nightmare.
The gore and suffering of "The Passion of the Christ" is nothing compared to what our weapons are designed to do.
Obviously Mr. Harper, you haven't the slightest idea what our weapons are designed to do. You live in a nation that allows you the freedom to print this utter filth, largely due to the weapons you trash. We have defeated our enemies and continue to do so with those weapons. The Japanese are our allies. The Germans are our allies. The Pakistanies are our allies. The Afghans are our allies. Today Iraq is also an ally. It's free people are thankful that we have rescued them, as much as the other nations are. We do not seek to take over nations and rule them. We set them up with stable governments and leave. Those who have been on the receiving end of our 'terrible weapons' don't. Still, they are whom you defend by your incessant demeaning of our nation and it's moral and military might.
Unfortunately, our president, a Moses figure from the Old Testament can turn his staff of righteousness into a poisonous serpent at any time. He remembers what our enemies tried to do to his father. His response is not turning the other cheek. It’s about smiting and smashing. It’s an "eye-for-an-eye" world.
Lordy! For ten years your fellow travelers damned the current President Bush's father for not taking out Saddam Hussein in 1992. After Hussein paying the families of Palestinian suicide bombers $25,000 a blast, you wonder why we took him out. Even after Hussein foretold of 09/11 level events in advance, and praised Osama Bin Laden afterwards, you still wonder. Now that we know he killed hundreds of thousands of his own people, he and his sons, you still wonder. Looking back on the Iraq/Iran, Iraq/Kuwait, Iraq/Israel and Iraq/U.S. relations, Saddam's attack on three sovereign states and direct action causing an estimated loss of around 1.5 million humans over the years, you still wonder.
You are a complete imbecile. This was about ending terrorism. It was not about an eye for an eye. It was about protecting the eyes that still exist, pure and simple.
This isn’t the time to bring up the silly doctrine of nonviolence of which Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Jesus spoke. No one believes in that doctrine anymore. Our nation believes in causing suffering, not accepting it like Jesus in "The Passion."
Listen to this argument. By this man's reasoning, we are to allow incidents like 09/11 and not respond. Note that Osama isn't taken to task for the incident, only the U.S. for responding.
Never are such arguments leveled at those who would do the United States and it's citizens harm. Do you see people like Harper come out of the woodwork to damn Laden for causing his own problems? Do you see these wretched writers of filth demanding he turn the other cheek? Do you see them blaming him for the world's ills? Where is the corresponding damnation of "Moslem" beliefs from this demented mind? No it's just Christian beliefs that are suspect and in need of destruction. I think it's rather clear who's legions this jerk marches with and it isn't on the side of good. Of course good vs evil doesn't exist, remember? Why is it that only those who trash Christianity say this?
Since 9/11 we are frightened that terrorism will visit our shores again. We’re waiting for the lash to fall. We call it, "The Passion of America."
One could almost see the glee in this writer's eyes as he wrote this passage. After reading this article up to this point, he certainly thinks the U.S. and it's citizens deserve it. Isn't it wonderful to have this type of individual in our midst.
Some of us are sure the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq are being waged against the principalities of darkness and evil. Like all wars, this one makes us feel alive again, even as it kills many others and a few of us.
Ah hello! Are there any vibrant cells left inside that head of yours. Are you saying there is even the faintest possibility that the war in Afghanistan and Iraq are NOT being fought against the principalities of darkness and evil? Well evidently so, and fella, that makes you a complete and utter fool.
The people we are at war against are armed, are fanatical and devoted to ending your life. You should fall on your knees and beg forgiveness for your sacrilegious tone, and tell President Bush that you appreciate his and our troops efforts on your behalf. Fat chance of that ever happening...
Let’s close this little sermon with a battle hymn to this righteous war we are fighting. Let’s not worry about the complexities and the ambivalences — or the contradictions. Let’s keep it simple. I can hear the music moving from hill to hill, church to church. Take up your positions, believers. Let’s make them suffer. Let’s sing it together. "Onward Christian soldiers..."
Harper, our nation is a nation of Christians. Polls state that over 80% of people in this nation consider themselves to believe in the Christian God. They may not attend church, but many of them consider themselves to be Christians. Are we to completely surrender to the radical sector of Moslem extremists on your word alone.
I will not stand by and advocate we surrender to those who wish to destroy our nation and kill it's citizens.
If you want a real eye opener, try passing off an article like this that is crtical of Moslem beliefs and Osama Bin Laden in the middle-eastern press.
What's truly amazing is that he's not in the least bit embarrassed about it. He must have had high marks in self-esteem in school.
Yes. It is always easier to confess someone else's sins. The left is good at directing Jeremiads -- only directed away from their own self-destructive lives and policies. They "confess" the sins of Bush, America, conservatives, but are oh so holy in their own minds. Rarely do they examine the results of their anything goes, morally relativist faith.
What a foolish notion! He must have learned that on some sitcom.
Wonder what faith he's talking about? It he's referring to Christianity, he's right; his notion is mistaken
"Tolerance" is code for intolerance for people who believe in rules.
That pretty much says it all.
My kindergartener is more logical than this bozo....
Can this fool name one other nation that feeds its enemies? How many tons food of food have we dropped to the Afghan people? How was Japan rebuilt after WWII? Our nation has relieved more suffering in this world than any other nation in history. No we are not perfect. Yes we have made mistakes. But only somone who hates this country could state that we believe in causing suffering.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.