|
|
|
Welcome to mistersite.net, home of... well, something unique, I hope. Be sure to check out all those lovely links to the left to see who I am, what I do, and what I like. Read my blog too... it's right under this paragraph. And leave a comment, so I know you've visited.
More "Love your enemies"
When I posted that bumper-sticker caption a few days ago, I thought, "hmmm, pithy statement. Should provoke discussion." But as I've thought about it more and more, I've been veering further and further down the total pacifist road. The complete phrase is: "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.' But I say unto you, love your enemies and pray for those that persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven." (Matt 5:43-45)
There is nothing ambiguous there. There are no loopholes. Jesus never says "love your enemy except..." he says "love your enemy." Pure and simple. And I'm of the opinion that to take the life of another person, except in a few circumstances*, cannot be an act of love.
So if we're commanded to love our enemies, and if loving them involves not killing them, then it's clear to me that Christ is calling His followers never to take another person's life. This is so utterly unambiguous that it's frightening; it's a clear command from God Incarnate. If every Christian in America were to take this teaching of Christ's seriously, the world would be a much different place.
* = Arguments could be made for pulling the plug on someone with terminal illnesses who isn't going to recover, but I'm not going to get into that here.
posted by jimmy at 12:21 -
Read comments here!
Seen on a bumper sticker at school today:
"When Jesus said 'love your enemies,' I'm pretty sure he meant don't kill them."
Discuss.
posted by jimmy at 20:47 -
Read comments here!
Cubbies win!
A big win in LA to salvage the series, followed by a sweep of the Padres, with Rusch starting for Kerry... this is looking like a really good Cubs team. With as many injuries as we've had, and as much trouble as we've had scoring runners, and as good as the Astros have looked, we're still tied for first in the Central. Once we get all our cards back in our hand, wow... with Prior, Remlinger, Gonzalez, and Grudzielanek back, we'll be really hard to beat come July.
posted by jimmy at 16:38 -
Read comments here!
A new friend and a contest!
This is my new cat... Damian and I went and picked him up today. After a few hours hiding under my bed and stressing out - getting stuffed in a cardboard cat carrier, driven across town, and dropped in a totally new home is, I'm sure, not the least traumatic thing to happen in this poor cat's life - he came out as I was pouring him some food and meowed and we spent some quality petting time together.
The thing is... he still doesn't have a name. I've thought of a few - Sammy, Spot, and Dusty have been at the top of my list thus far - but he doesn't really fit any of the names I think of. So I'm opening this up to you, my audience of three... help me name my cat. A few hints about his personality... he seems to like snuggling a lot, and he likes having the side of his head pet, and he loves attention. He doesn't seem all that energetic thus far, but that could be because he's getting used to his new environment. Oh, and if it matters, he's a year and three months old. That's all I know so far... the next few weeks should be a great "getting-to-know-you" time for the both of us.
Leave your name suggestions in the comment box.*
In other news, Alisa went home. That's always sad, but for some reason the last two visits have been really great. I could really get used to her living closer... hopefully that'll happen sometime this fall. We went to the third game of the Cubbies-Dodgers series yesterday... the Cubbies whupped 'em good, mostly because Nomo couldn't keep the ball under control in the second. Alas, their loss is our gain.
* = 50 points will be deducted from your score for suggesting any of the following names: Cheney, Ashcroft, Cher, Jar Jar, Steinbrenner, the name of any character from a Jane Austen novel, or the name of any Yankees player since 1983.
posted by jimmy at 20:16 -
Read comments here!
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes....
I agree with those of you who didn't like the new comment engine... I don't like it either. That's why I got rid of it. Fine. You win. And I win. Everybody wins.
We didn't get a cat yesterday. Or today. There were some communication issues with Damian yesterday where we didn't know if it was okay to go without him, and today we just plumb ran out of time. Tomorrow we're going to try again.
The Cubbies also lost last night. And tonight. I hope they win tomorrow... it would really suck if they got blanked in LA.
I'm really glad Alisa's here.
posted by jimmy at 00:54 -
Read comments here!
So it looks like Blogger has their own comments engine now... so from now on I'm going to use that one, because it means I don't have to futz around with scripts anymore. So if you're going to comment, use the new comments form, instead of the old one. After about five posts or so, I'm going to get rid of the old comments link entirely and replace it with a (...) sign, so you can still read them, but to encourage people to use the new comments.
That is all.
posted by jimmy at 13:46 -
Read comments here!
Back to the normal news.
First, a decision... I'm not going back to Huron this year. After the whole "$1200 to fix my car" thing, I've decided that it would be wiser of me to use my summer just working full-time here and storing up nuts and berries in my tree-trunk like a good little squirrel*. Besides, I'm getting a cat tomorrow, and I couldn't leave a cat all summer... especially when Damian's going to be gone for three or four weeks on a road trip.
* = Worst. Analogy. Ever.
See this? My car rolled over to 100,000 today, in Burbank. I wouldn't have noticed it if Alisa hadn't said something, and I would have gotten to 100,061 or something and then swore at myself for missing it, like I did with 90,000. As it was, Alisa and her friend Lauren were both there and we cheered as it rolled over... and then took this picture with her phone, for posterity's sake. So that's quite an event.
We (the three of us) also went to Santa Monica's Promenade and then to Venice Beach. It was a lot of fun, but most of the street vendors and performance artists had packed up by the time we got to Venice, so that was disappointing. We also walked a lot, which means that we're all quite sore and tired right now. But it was fun nonetheless, and we all went to the Olive Garden in Westwood to celebrate our day, so at least we're well-fed now. And we all got a little sun.
Tomorrow Alisa, Damian, and I are going to the Animal Shelter(tm) to get a cat. Then Alisa and I are going to see the Cubbies tomorrow night as they play the Dodgers. I'm excited for tomorrow, as is Alisa, mostly because she gets to play with kitties.
But it's late, and I'm tired and sore from walking all day, so I'm going to go to bed.
posted by jimmy at 22:57 -
Read comments here!
Is George W Bush the only Christian choice for President?
War and Peace (1)
"Is it lawful ... to do good or do harm? To save or to kill?" Jesus, Mark 3
Before going any further, I feel the need to answer a point many have commented on: why am I doing this? Many are resistant to what I’m saying; they wish I wouldn’t talk about this stuff. I’m inclined to ask those people: Honestly, would you feel the same way if my opinions agreed with yours? Would you be as indignant if this “drivel” was an anti-Clinton “rant”? Does my holding a professing Christian leader’s policies up to the standards and sayings of Christ trouble you? Good. It troubles me too, because it shows me just how far we as American Christians have to go, how much evil has been done that we have to start the work of undoing.
Now we come to perhaps the most damning section of this series: War. This is where in my opinion George W. Bush strays furthest from the teachings of Jesus and of the church. Bush's prosecution of several wars in the light of the sayings of Jesus, whom he claimed in 2000 was the most influential person in his life, is almost completely unjustifiable.
Several comments earlier alluded to the idea that George W. Bush has no control over the economy and therefore should not be held responsible for it. While I discard that notion, I think that we can all agree that the nation's going to war is something over which George W. Bush, as commander-in-chief, has complete control. Therefore, let us examine the current war in Iraq - something I hold George W. Bush completely and totally responsible for, as he is commander-in-chief - in light of the teachings of Jesus.
I think it's clear that neither Jesus, nor the New Testament, ever favored or even sanctioned violence as a solution to anything. In fact, the New Testament if taken by itself, is pretty openly pacifist. "If a man strikes you on the cheek, turn the other cheek ... if a man takes your cloak, give him your shirt also ... if a man forces you to walk a mile, walk with him another mile." In the scene at the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus repudiates Peter's taking up of the sword, and heals the ear of the soldier whom Peter had attacked... one of the men who has come to take him to his violent death. The New Testament solution to the problem of violence, therefore, is love and kindness. "Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you." In the accounts of the early church in Acts, not once are the disciples ever shown to use or sanction violence; indeed, every time violence is seen in the New Testament, with the exception of Revelation, it is a tool used by the powerful against Jesus or His followers. (And in Revelation, it should be noted, Jesus Himself leads the army – implying that only He is justified in making war. Unless George W. Bush is claiming to be Jesus – in which case he’s a blasphemer – he is in disagreement with the whole New Testament.)
Indeed, for the first two hundred years of its life, before its political legitimacy under Rome, the Church was very rabidly pacifist. One of the charges brought against Christians was that they would not take up the sword and join the Roman Army. Murder after baptism was seen as unforgivable by the Church for several hundred years.
How can a Christian leader, then, justify war? How can a Christian, one who professes to follow the Jesus Christ who said "blessed are the peacemakers" and who of all people had the right to retaliate violently against those who did Him injustice, ask people to go and kill other people in his or her name? This has been a continual problem for Christians, and one of the responses was something called "just war theory." This theory has undergone continual revision and reworking, but is accepted by just about all Christians as a guideline by which Christian leaders can decide whether war is justified or not. I will therefore examine the Iraq war in light of just war theory (2). Because it’s really long, the examination can be found here. Some may be tempted to skip this; I say that if you claim Christianity and claim to vote with your Christian values in mind, it is imperative that you evaluate the war in Iraq in light of the guidelines and standards that have been used by Christians for hundreds of years. Whether or not you come to the same conclusions as I do – that the war in Iraq is completely unjust and is a moral affront – it is important that you at least take into consideration the historical standards of Christianity when it comes to war.
On these grounds, the Iraq war was condemned by many church groups and denominations around the world – including Bush’s own Methodist church. Furthermore, the only church group anywhere in the world to pass a statement affirming the war was the Southern Baptist Convention (a group which, if you’ll recall, is proud of Jerry Falwell), which isn’t exactly company I would keep without the Biblical imperative of koinonia.
I don’t think we should pull out of Iraq. We broke it; we bought it. Both major candidates acknowledge this fact; both say we should stay the course. I would favor more international involvement and authority there, to give the new government legitimacy and regain some of our lost credibility.
But it isn’t to stop this Iraq war that I’m going to vote against Bush; it’s to stop the next Iraq war, to stop the next unjust and illegal military action taken against a country which finds itself on the bad side of our president. I have no doubt that if Bush is reelected, there will be another war. I also have no doubt that God will hold to account all who supported this president as he led these affronts to human dignity, these terrible and unjust wars, when they are waged. It is to stop the next unnecessary war, this war which will claim the lives of more thousands of innocent civilians and American soldiers, this war which will further make us the enemy of the Arab world and a target of terrorist attack, this war which will further damage our credibility as a force for justice and good throughout the world, that I proudly stand and say that I will not support George W. Bush, and that I will do everything I can within the law to ensure that he is no longer president come January 2005.
Coming up next: Inspiration from Scripture, and a long-awaited update on all the other important things happening in the world, including the Cubbies.
(1) Please note that the disclaimers from the previous two sections hold still in this section. I don't want to interrupt my narrative flow to say the same darn thing yet again.
(2) Source on just war theory: Stassen, Glen, Kingdom Ethics. Everything in italics is a direct quote.
posted by jimmy at 18:13 -
Read comments here!
Log
Archives:
After
2.9.2003
9.23.2002-2.6.2003
6.1.2002-8.21.2002
|
|
|
