A powder keg

Tensions in Israel are building over Iran’s nuclear weapons program.  The USA has been trying to get Israel to stand down.  Meanwhile, a big fleet comprised of American, British, and other allied naval forces is assembling in the Straits of Hormuz for war games and to be there just in case war breaks out and Iran tries to shut off a major oil route:

Battleships, aircraft carriers, minesweepers and submarines from 25 nations are converging on the strategically important Strait of Hormuz in an unprecedented show of force as Israel and Iran move towards the brink of war.

Western leaders are convinced that Iran will retaliate to any attack by attempting to mine or blockade the shipping lane through which passes around 18 million barrels of oil every day, approximately 35 per cent of the world’s petroleum traded by sea.

A blockade would have a catastrophic effect on the fragile economies of Britain, Europe the United States and Japan, all of which rely heavily on oil and gas supplies from the Gulf.

The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most congested international waterways. It is only 21 miles wide at its narrowest point and is bordered by the Iranian coast to the north and the United Arab Emirates to the south.

In preparation for any pre-emptive or retaliatory action by Iran, warships from more than 25 countries, including the United States, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, will today begin an annual 12-day exercise.

They will practise tactics in how to breach an Iranian blockade of the strait and the force will also undertake counter-mining drills.

The multi-national naval force in the Gulf includes three US Nimitz class carrier groups, each of which has more aircraft than the entire complement of the Iranian air force.

via Armada of British naval power massing in the Gulf as Israel prepares an Iran strike – Telegraph.

Should Israel strike at Iran’s nuclear sites?  If they do, won’t that spark a bigger war?  Should the United States try to prevent Israel from taking that step or just stay 0ut of it?  And, to consider another flashpoint, what should America do, if anything, while Syria’s government is slaughtering its citizens who are trying to over the Baathist regime?

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Craig

    Our inept President and his administration of “playground pals” only heighten issues by refusing to utilize our own energy resources. And the stupidity of the American people allow such irresponsibility. As for Iran: a good showering of our missiles might cool their jets. We’re asleep on that front as well. Israel will be attacked if we do nothing. They, however, will not lag behind like a weak US. Israel will not play games with a lunatic Iranian “leader”

  • Craig

    Our inept President and his administration of “playground pals” only heighten issues by refusing to utilize our own energy resources. And the stupidity of the American people allow such irresponsibility. As for Iran: a good showering of our missiles might cool their jets. We’re asleep on that front as well. Israel will be attacked if we do nothing. They, however, will not lag behind like a weak US. Israel will not play games with a lunatic Iranian “leader”

  • Cincinnatus

    I don’t care if Israel is attacked, and I don’t care if Israel attacks first. As long as they don’t convince us that we need to attack.

    Considering that there are people like Craig in the world, though, my hopes are probably in vain.

  • Cincinnatus

    I don’t care if Israel is attacked, and I don’t care if Israel attacks first. As long as they don’t convince us that we need to attack.

    Considering that there are people like Craig in the world, though, my hopes are probably in vain.

  • SKPeterson

    At this stage, Israel just needs to shut up. If Israel is attacked that is Israel’s problem, and they should have to deal with the consequences themselves. Netanyahu is sounding more and more like the Iraqi “democrats” who were shouting to the top of their lungs that Saddam was producing massive amounts of chemical weapons that weren’t really being produced. All to provoke U.S. intervention. So far, there is precious little evidence that the Iranians are suicidal or irrational in their behavior, but are rather acting defensively. We don’t need to be led by the nose by a hysterical Israeli leader into another ill-thought, over-long, and ultimately unnecessary intervention in another Middle East nation. Maybe Israel needs a Georgian lesson on presuming the use of the U.S. as a convenient shield for your foreign policy belligerence.

    Moreover, I actually think that the current chaos in Syria is to Israel’s benefit, at least in the near term with respect to Israels’ immediate hostile neighbors in Lebanon. It makes Iranian and Syrian support of Hezbollah on that front more difficult and constrained. The question regarding Syria is whether a change in regime will necessarily result in a change in geopolitical strategy. Long term, any regime is likely to be imminently hostile to Israel as a matter of convenience in focusing the ire of a restive public on a foreign nation, especially one that can offer both a religious and cultural antithesis as a causal base. Israel’s best interests may best be served by continued dislocation and civil war in Syria.

    Further deterioration in Syria, though, may provoke intervention by Iran to support the regime. However, Turkey might also intervene as it is getting the overwhelming majority of refugees and is already asking for a buffer zone along its border with Syria. That is the more dangerous eventuality – a dust-up in Syria between Turkey and Iran, along with the NATO commitments attendant. My guess (wish, hope) is that the two non-Israeli,non-Arab regional powers would come to terms quickly on settling the state of affairs in Syria.

  • SKPeterson

    At this stage, Israel just needs to shut up. If Israel is attacked that is Israel’s problem, and they should have to deal with the consequences themselves. Netanyahu is sounding more and more like the Iraqi “democrats” who were shouting to the top of their lungs that Saddam was producing massive amounts of chemical weapons that weren’t really being produced. All to provoke U.S. intervention. So far, there is precious little evidence that the Iranians are suicidal or irrational in their behavior, but are rather acting defensively. We don’t need to be led by the nose by a hysterical Israeli leader into another ill-thought, over-long, and ultimately unnecessary intervention in another Middle East nation. Maybe Israel needs a Georgian lesson on presuming the use of the U.S. as a convenient shield for your foreign policy belligerence.

    Moreover, I actually think that the current chaos in Syria is to Israel’s benefit, at least in the near term with respect to Israels’ immediate hostile neighbors in Lebanon. It makes Iranian and Syrian support of Hezbollah on that front more difficult and constrained. The question regarding Syria is whether a change in regime will necessarily result in a change in geopolitical strategy. Long term, any regime is likely to be imminently hostile to Israel as a matter of convenience in focusing the ire of a restive public on a foreign nation, especially one that can offer both a religious and cultural antithesis as a causal base. Israel’s best interests may best be served by continued dislocation and civil war in Syria.

    Further deterioration in Syria, though, may provoke intervention by Iran to support the regime. However, Turkey might also intervene as it is getting the overwhelming majority of refugees and is already asking for a buffer zone along its border with Syria. That is the more dangerous eventuality – a dust-up in Syria between Turkey and Iran, along with the NATO commitments attendant. My guess (wish, hope) is that the two non-Israeli,non-Arab regional powers would come to terms quickly on settling the state of affairs in Syria.

  • Other Gary

    I agree with you, Cin. But some folks are convinced the _state_ of Israel (or, alternatively, the _oil_ of the Middle East) is worth more than all the _humans_ whose lives would be lost.

    With everything else that’s going on, the U.S. should be very careful in this situation. Certainly hard-core Zionists talk as if we should be willing to defend Israel with every last drop of _American_ blood, but that is madness.

  • Other Gary

    I agree with you, Cin. But some folks are convinced the _state_ of Israel (or, alternatively, the _oil_ of the Middle East) is worth more than all the _humans_ whose lives would be lost.

    With everything else that’s going on, the U.S. should be very careful in this situation. Certainly hard-core Zionists talk as if we should be willing to defend Israel with every last drop of _American_ blood, but that is madness.

  • WebMonk

    I realize that Israel has a vested interest in the possibility of preemptive attacks. In the theoretical realm, I think preemptive attacks are valid forms of self-defense.

    But, there have been several instances in recent years in which the preemptive attacks were done on invalid grounds. And then there’s the question of how far in advance are preemptive attacks still valid? In this case, Iran isn’t building a bomb, and they aren’t even about to begin building a bomb – they’re building a plant that could eventually make SOME of the material necessary for a nuclear bomb.

    Put all that together, and I think Israel is in the wrong if they were to strike at Iran at this point. But, that’s armchair quarterbacking from a long ways away.

    What is much more easily evident is that the US should do everything it can to NOT get dragged into a resultant conflict should Israel do strikes against Iran. The only possible results of US involvement in such a fight would be very bad on any number of fronts.

  • WebMonk

    I realize that Israel has a vested interest in the possibility of preemptive attacks. In the theoretical realm, I think preemptive attacks are valid forms of self-defense.

    But, there have been several instances in recent years in which the preemptive attacks were done on invalid grounds. And then there’s the question of how far in advance are preemptive attacks still valid? In this case, Iran isn’t building a bomb, and they aren’t even about to begin building a bomb – they’re building a plant that could eventually make SOME of the material necessary for a nuclear bomb.

    Put all that together, and I think Israel is in the wrong if they were to strike at Iran at this point. But, that’s armchair quarterbacking from a long ways away.

    What is much more easily evident is that the US should do everything it can to NOT get dragged into a resultant conflict should Israel do strikes against Iran. The only possible results of US involvement in such a fight would be very bad on any number of fronts.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Should Israel strike at Iran’s nuclear sites?

    Maybe. That is their call.

    If they do, won’t that spark a bigger war?

    Unlikely. Although it could spark a civil war. That probably wouldn’t make Israel cry.

    Should the United States try to prevent Israel from taking that step or just stay 0ut of it?

    Stay out of it. Iran is not our friend, and we aren’t the boss of Istrael.

    And, to consider another flashpoint, what should America do, if anything, while Syria’s government is slaughtering its citizens who are trying to over the Baathist regime?

    Hmm.
    Syria is killing violent fanatics and their supporters who want to establish a government like Iran’s with some iteration of an Al queda or Muslim Brotherhood at its head.

    Another opportunity to mind our own business.

    How many more governments need to be toppled and replaced with terrorists? We already have Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Egypt and Libya. I guess if all of the semi functioning governments are replaced with terrorists, then conditions over in those countries will be so violent and disorganized that Israel will be able to justify any military action in the name of defending itself.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Should Israel strike at Iran’s nuclear sites?

    Maybe. That is their call.

    If they do, won’t that spark a bigger war?

    Unlikely. Although it could spark a civil war. That probably wouldn’t make Israel cry.

    Should the United States try to prevent Israel from taking that step or just stay 0ut of it?

    Stay out of it. Iran is not our friend, and we aren’t the boss of Istrael.

    And, to consider another flashpoint, what should America do, if anything, while Syria’s government is slaughtering its citizens who are trying to over the Baathist regime?

    Hmm.
    Syria is killing violent fanatics and their supporters who want to establish a government like Iran’s with some iteration of an Al queda or Muslim Brotherhood at its head.

    Another opportunity to mind our own business.

    How many more governments need to be toppled and replaced with terrorists? We already have Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Egypt and Libya. I guess if all of the semi functioning governments are replaced with terrorists, then conditions over in those countries will be so violent and disorganized that Israel will be able to justify any military action in the name of defending itself.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Not a Zionist, but I think it’s fair to say that Iran should be considered a potential threat, seeing as how Islam as a whole has no problem with conversion by the sword (even if its individual members are not terrorists).

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Not a Zionist, but I think it’s fair to say that Iran should be considered a potential threat, seeing as how Islam as a whole has no problem with conversion by the sword (even if its individual members are not terrorists).

  • SKPeterson

    The one good that may come from terrorists becoming a governing body is that they then become visible and liable for their actions at the state actor level. Perhaps the best way to contain al-Qaeda is to have it actually try to govern a state or two.

  • SKPeterson

    The one good that may come from terrorists becoming a governing body is that they then become visible and liable for their actions at the state actor level. Perhaps the best way to contain al-Qaeda is to have it actually try to govern a state or two.

  • Carl Vehse

    SLPeterson @3: “So far, there is precious little evidence that the Iranians are suicidal or irrational in their behavior, but are rather acting defensively.”

    Perhaps on some other planet in another dimension; but there’s plenty of evidence in this dimensional reality on this planet. Consider a few of the many statements over the years from Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

    “The existence of the Zionist regime is an insult to all humanity.”

    “Today, confronting the existence of the fabricated Zionist regime is in fact protecting the rights and dignity of all human beings.”

    “And God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism.

    “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury.”

    “Iran can recruit hundreds of suicide bombers a day. Suicide is an invincible weapon. Suicide bombers in this land showed us the way, and they enlighten our future.”

  • Carl Vehse

    SLPeterson @3: “So far, there is precious little evidence that the Iranians are suicidal or irrational in their behavior, but are rather acting defensively.”

    Perhaps on some other planet in another dimension; but there’s plenty of evidence in this dimensional reality on this planet. Consider a few of the many statements over the years from Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

    “The existence of the Zionist regime is an insult to all humanity.”

    “Today, confronting the existence of the fabricated Zionist regime is in fact protecting the rights and dignity of all human beings.”

    “And God willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world without the United States and Zionism.

    “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury.”

    “Iran can recruit hundreds of suicide bombers a day. Suicide is an invincible weapon. Suicide bombers in this land showed us the way, and they enlighten our future.”

  • Julian

    It’s a catch-22. If we took our subsidized safety-net from Israel, I’m sure its leadership would stand down and stop barking. However, if we removed our safety net, Israel would likely be obliterated in short order, and we’d be responsible.

    We’re the older brother holding the bully down while the younger brother does the trash-talking. Not a good look.

  • Julian

    It’s a catch-22. If we took our subsidized safety-net from Israel, I’m sure its leadership would stand down and stop barking. However, if we removed our safety net, Israel would likely be obliterated in short order, and we’d be responsible.

    We’re the older brother holding the bully down while the younger brother does the trash-talking. Not a good look.

  • Carl Vehse

    WebMonk @5: “Iran isn’t building a bomb, and they aren’t even about to begin building a bomb – they’re building a plant that could eventually make SOME of the material necessary for a nuclear bomb.”

    The Iranians are doing more at Natanz than building plants.

    Depending on what the meaning of the word “is” is, one might claim what Iran is building is not a bomb until the detonator is actually initiated over some Israeli city. That is probably not the definition that Israel is using. Without getting into specifics, the amount and production rate of enriched uranium (and not necessarily at a weapons-grade level) produced by Iran are important factors in any decision by Israel or others as to whether a bomb is being made.

    Recently Prime Minister Netanyahu warned the U.S. to establish a “red line” for Iran. What Netanyahu adroitly tapdanced around is (1) what Israel has established as their “red line” for Iran, and (2) whether, in Israel’s view, Iran has already crossed it.

    Professional tea leaf readers are busy trying to determine the answers to those questions.

  • Carl Vehse

    WebMonk @5: “Iran isn’t building a bomb, and they aren’t even about to begin building a bomb – they’re building a plant that could eventually make SOME of the material necessary for a nuclear bomb.”

    The Iranians are doing more at Natanz than building plants.

    Depending on what the meaning of the word “is” is, one might claim what Iran is building is not a bomb until the detonator is actually initiated over some Israeli city. That is probably not the definition that Israel is using. Without getting into specifics, the amount and production rate of enriched uranium (and not necessarily at a weapons-grade level) produced by Iran are important factors in any decision by Israel or others as to whether a bomb is being made.

    Recently Prime Minister Netanyahu warned the U.S. to establish a “red line” for Iran. What Netanyahu adroitly tapdanced around is (1) what Israel has established as their “red line” for Iran, and (2) whether, in Israel’s view, Iran has already crossed it.

    Professional tea leaf readers are busy trying to determine the answers to those questions.

  • Carl Vehse

    Julian @10, exactly what “trash-talking” are you talking about?

  • Carl Vehse

    Julian @10, exactly what “trash-talking” are you talking about?

  • SKPeterson

    Carl @ 9 – Invective is not equivalent to insanity, nor is it absent from very rational political calculus. Were the Japanese from 1935 to 1945 suicidal maniacs? They used kamikaze suicide bombers and were able to recruit hundreds upon hundreds, as well as thousands to go on banzai charges. Remember the hyperbole of the Soviets? Khrushchev’s “We will bury you!” remark? Is Hugo Chavez a nutter or just another suave demagogue with a convenient target in the U.S.? All apparently exist in an alternate reality. Rather, it is your remarks that are not substantive nor cognizant in the real here and now.

    You’ll find that the Iranian government has engaged in the same sorts of rhetoric since 1979, yet they haven’t invaded or attacked anyone*. Their one war in that period was fought against Iraq, and was defensive in nature.

    *Iran has engaged in subtle regional influence by proxy, notably with Hezbollah in Lebanon and with the Syrian regime. Lebanon provides an argument for the legitimacy of Iran as the upholder of “true” Islam, i.e. Shi’a, while support of Syria provides both a conduit to Lebanon and as a counter to Iraq. Both actions are quite plausible and rational from the Iranian geopolitical context.

  • SKPeterson

    Carl @ 9 – Invective is not equivalent to insanity, nor is it absent from very rational political calculus. Were the Japanese from 1935 to 1945 suicidal maniacs? They used kamikaze suicide bombers and were able to recruit hundreds upon hundreds, as well as thousands to go on banzai charges. Remember the hyperbole of the Soviets? Khrushchev’s “We will bury you!” remark? Is Hugo Chavez a nutter or just another suave demagogue with a convenient target in the U.S.? All apparently exist in an alternate reality. Rather, it is your remarks that are not substantive nor cognizant in the real here and now.

    You’ll find that the Iranian government has engaged in the same sorts of rhetoric since 1979, yet they haven’t invaded or attacked anyone*. Their one war in that period was fought against Iraq, and was defensive in nature.

    *Iran has engaged in subtle regional influence by proxy, notably with Hezbollah in Lebanon and with the Syrian regime. Lebanon provides an argument for the legitimacy of Iran as the upholder of “true” Islam, i.e. Shi’a, while support of Syria provides both a conduit to Lebanon and as a counter to Iraq. Both actions are quite plausible and rational from the Iranian geopolitical context.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com bike bubba

    Regarding the Iranians, they squandered the lives of about a million of their subjects in the war with Iraq, and have squandered their own economy for the past 30 years to keep the Ayatollahs in power. I don’t think it’s wise to underestimate the willingness of Iranians to suffer and die for what their leaders at least think is right. Those leaders are, as an earlier commenter noted, also claiming to be eager for a second Holocaust.

    I’m praying that this is resolved by repentance by Iranian leaders. If that can’t happen, hopefully the Mossad puts the kibosh on this.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com bike bubba

    Regarding the Iranians, they squandered the lives of about a million of their subjects in the war with Iraq, and have squandered their own economy for the past 30 years to keep the Ayatollahs in power. I don’t think it’s wise to underestimate the willingness of Iranians to suffer and die for what their leaders at least think is right. Those leaders are, as an earlier commenter noted, also claiming to be eager for a second Holocaust.

    I’m praying that this is resolved by repentance by Iranian leaders. If that can’t happen, hopefully the Mossad puts the kibosh on this.

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    Sadly, I think we are about to be pulled into WWIII because an influential block of people do not understand that modern Israel is not the Israel of prophecy. For some reason they want over look Matthew’s Hosea quote. I digress.

    I know this may sound heartless, but maybe we should let them duke it out and then go into help the survivors. We don’t need to be sucked into another war.

    That said, taking into account increased tension, economic factors, societal ills, and the formation of allegiances on polar sides of conflict; I think we are looking at the start of a world wide conflict with the US and Europe on one side and countries with a Muslim majority on the other.

  • Dr. Luther in the 21st Century

    Sadly, I think we are about to be pulled into WWIII because an influential block of people do not understand that modern Israel is not the Israel of prophecy. For some reason they want over look Matthew’s Hosea quote. I digress.

    I know this may sound heartless, but maybe we should let them duke it out and then go into help the survivors. We don’t need to be sucked into another war.

    That said, taking into account increased tension, economic factors, societal ills, and the formation of allegiances on polar sides of conflict; I think we are looking at the start of a world wide conflict with the US and Europe on one side and countries with a Muslim majority on the other.

  • Carl Vehse

    SKPeterson @13,

    Flinging Japanese red herrings into a Cranach discussion about the Iranian/Israeli “powder keg” is a waste of time and leaves a bad smell.

    It is you who first presented the notion of invectives and “shouting to the top of their lungs” analogies as evidence that Netanyahu was “hysterical,” and needed a “Georgian lesson” (talk about “insanity”!).

    “You’ll find that the Iranian government has engaged in the same sorts of rhetoric since 1979″

    This is a clear indication of the duration of insanity in Iran, since 1979 was the year of the Iranian Revolution and the seizing of US embassy personnel.

  • Carl Vehse

    SKPeterson @13,

    Flinging Japanese red herrings into a Cranach discussion about the Iranian/Israeli “powder keg” is a waste of time and leaves a bad smell.

    It is you who first presented the notion of invectives and “shouting to the top of their lungs” analogies as evidence that Netanyahu was “hysterical,” and needed a “Georgian lesson” (talk about “insanity”!).

    “You’ll find that the Iranian government has engaged in the same sorts of rhetoric since 1979″

    This is a clear indication of the duration of insanity in Iran, since 1979 was the year of the Iranian Revolution and the seizing of US embassy personnel.

  • Cincinnatus

    A couple of deeply necessary qualifications:

    1) Ahmadinejad has very little political power–even less than the Queen of England–and his bombastic views are not representative of either Iranian public opinion or official policy.

    2) WebMonk is a bit naive: there is little, if any, doubt that Iran is attempting to construct an atomic bomb. But they are being very rational in attempting to do so: they border nuclear-armed Pakistan, and they obviously exist in an adversarial relationship with nuclear-armed Israel. They are also literally surrounded by military bases staffed by nuclear-armed America. Demanding to know, with some moral opprobrium, why Iran wants to join the nuclear club is like demanding to know why a skinny kid wants to start lifting weights.

    The question is why America should care. Apparently, it was not a tremendous problem for us when Pakistan and China decided to acquire nukes–not to mention India–and we barely lifted a finger to stop North Korea. Perhaps because (with the exception of China) none of these countries actually have the capacity to harm America with their nukes? Yes, that might have something to do with it.

    There is no conceivable reason for us to be dragged into a war with Iran. And I highly doubt Iran wants that either.

  • Cincinnatus

    A couple of deeply necessary qualifications:

    1) Ahmadinejad has very little political power–even less than the Queen of England–and his bombastic views are not representative of either Iranian public opinion or official policy.

    2) WebMonk is a bit naive: there is little, if any, doubt that Iran is attempting to construct an atomic bomb. But they are being very rational in attempting to do so: they border nuclear-armed Pakistan, and they obviously exist in an adversarial relationship with nuclear-armed Israel. They are also literally surrounded by military bases staffed by nuclear-armed America. Demanding to know, with some moral opprobrium, why Iran wants to join the nuclear club is like demanding to know why a skinny kid wants to start lifting weights.

    The question is why America should care. Apparently, it was not a tremendous problem for us when Pakistan and China decided to acquire nukes–not to mention India–and we barely lifted a finger to stop North Korea. Perhaps because (with the exception of China) none of these countries actually have the capacity to harm America with their nukes? Yes, that might have something to do with it.

    There is no conceivable reason for us to be dragged into a war with Iran. And I highly doubt Iran wants that either.

  • Carl Vehse

    Dr. Luther in the 21st Century @15: “I think we are looking at the start of a world wide conflict with the US and Europe on one side and countries with a Muslim majority on the other.”

    The conflict started long, long ago. Dr. Luther in the 16th Century wrote about the conflict. The issue for discussion today is who will finish that conflict.

  • Carl Vehse

    Dr. Luther in the 21st Century @15: “I think we are looking at the start of a world wide conflict with the US and Europe on one side and countries with a Muslim majority on the other.”

    The conflict started long, long ago. Dr. Luther in the 16th Century wrote about the conflict. The issue for discussion today is who will finish that conflict.

  • http://theoldadam.com/ Steve Martin

    I really think that we should do nothing about the evil and dangerous regimes in the world. And let them get so strong that one day will act and then we can fight them when it’s almost too late at the cost of many more lives and dollars.

    That strategy worked with Hitler and Japan, didn’t it?

  • http://theoldadam.com/ Steve Martin

    I really think that we should do nothing about the evil and dangerous regimes in the world. And let them get so strong that one day will act and then we can fight them when it’s almost too late at the cost of many more lives and dollars.

    That strategy worked with Hitler and Japan, didn’t it?

  • Carl Vehse

    Cincinnatus @17: “Ahmadinejad has very little political power–even less than the Queen of England–and his bombastic views are not representative of either Iranian public opinion or official policy.”

    Queen of England?!?

    How about a more relevant comparison in the crazy department.

  • Carl Vehse

    Cincinnatus @17: “Ahmadinejad has very little political power–even less than the Queen of England–and his bombastic views are not representative of either Iranian public opinion or official policy.”

    Queen of England?!?

    How about a more relevant comparison in the crazy department.

  • Cincinnatus

    Absolutely, Steve Martin@19: Iran, with a significant moderate opposition to its Islamist regime and a realist bureaucracy, is totally a fitting analogy to Hitler’s Germany. Totally. Especially since it depends on America to consume its oil resources (i.e., keep it afloat).

    We should begin preparations for invasion now. In fact, any nation deemed “evil” should be put on notice: America will be invading you soon. We don’t need to define evil, by the way. Basically, any nation doing something we don’t like–even if it’s perfectly reasonable otherwise–will be invaded.

  • Cincinnatus

    Absolutely, Steve Martin@19: Iran, with a significant moderate opposition to its Islamist regime and a realist bureaucracy, is totally a fitting analogy to Hitler’s Germany. Totally. Especially since it depends on America to consume its oil resources (i.e., keep it afloat).

    We should begin preparations for invasion now. In fact, any nation deemed “evil” should be put on notice: America will be invading you soon. We don’t need to define evil, by the way. Basically, any nation doing something we don’t like–even if it’s perfectly reasonable otherwise–will be invaded.

  • Cincinnatus

    Yes Carl?!?! Do you care to elaborate your exclamation?!?!?!?!

    The Queen of England’s powers are mostly symbolic and ceremonial. The same goes for Ahmadinejad. His rhetoric means very little, and is, believe it or not, not indicative of Iranian policy. They have no interest in “wiping Israel from the map.”

  • Cincinnatus

    Yes Carl?!?! Do you care to elaborate your exclamation?!?!?!?!

    The Queen of England’s powers are mostly symbolic and ceremonial. The same goes for Ahmadinejad. His rhetoric means very little, and is, believe it or not, not indicative of Iranian policy. They have no interest in “wiping Israel from the map.”

  • JonathanH

    Can anyone explain to me the negative consequences of having any support for Israel? I keep getting the impression that one is either a flaming Zionist or one is willing to watch Israel burn to the ground. Why can’t anyone sit in the middle of that spectrum? I honestly want to know because I thought it was possible to support Israel and not be a Zionist.

  • JonathanH

    Can anyone explain to me the negative consequences of having any support for Israel? I keep getting the impression that one is either a flaming Zionist or one is willing to watch Israel burn to the ground. Why can’t anyone sit in the middle of that spectrum? I honestly want to know because I thought it was possible to support Israel and not be a Zionist.

  • reg

    An attack on Iran would be inappropriate and counterproductive at this time. It will result in much harm to Israel and would likely result in a regional conflict in which the US will be sucked in (and economically sucked dry). The 60 minutes interview with the former head of the Mosad was instructive in this regard. Our best bet is to simply let the Iranians know that if they attack Israel (let alone use a nuclear device) the consequences f would be extreme. Other than that we (and Israel) should stick to non-ballistic sanctions.

  • reg

    An attack on Iran would be inappropriate and counterproductive at this time. It will result in much harm to Israel and would likely result in a regional conflict in which the US will be sucked in (and economically sucked dry). The 60 minutes interview with the former head of the Mosad was instructive in this regard. Our best bet is to simply let the Iranians know that if they attack Israel (let alone use a nuclear device) the consequences f would be extreme. Other than that we (and Israel) should stick to non-ballistic sanctions.

  • helen

    Craig @ 1
    Our inept President and his administration of “playground pals” only heighten issues by refusing to utilize our own energy resources.
    Really?
    We’ve been “utilizing our own energy resources” to the detriment of our water supply in North Dakota, Pennsylvania, New York and Texas, to name a few. [I guess when we've polluted it all with chemicals and poured it underground, we'll learn to subsist on dust, which we still have plenty of in drought country.]

    Texas is also building wind farms in the west, and transmission lines to population centers in the central parts of the state.

    JonathanH: It’s taken me a few decades of Palestinian abuse by Israelis but I’ve concluded, “It’s not possible.” Neither side wants anything but unconditional support.

  • helen

    Craig @ 1
    Our inept President and his administration of “playground pals” only heighten issues by refusing to utilize our own energy resources.
    Really?
    We’ve been “utilizing our own energy resources” to the detriment of our water supply in North Dakota, Pennsylvania, New York and Texas, to name a few. [I guess when we've polluted it all with chemicals and poured it underground, we'll learn to subsist on dust, which we still have plenty of in drought country.]

    Texas is also building wind farms in the west, and transmission lines to population centers in the central parts of the state.

    JonathanH: It’s taken me a few decades of Palestinian abuse by Israelis but I’ve concluded, “It’s not possible.” Neither side wants anything but unconditional support.

  • fjsteve

    My gut says, if I may put a spin on a quote attributed to a former president, it’s better for the US to stay out of this one and be thought weak in our resolve than to get involved and remove all doubt.

    On the other hand, let me ask this of those here who want the US to stay out: what about protecting the shipping lanes in the straights of Hormuz with an international coalition should anything break out? Is that valid? If we do that, we’re well within striking distance of Iran–and they will strike. What do we do when our fleet is under attack? Is there any real way to stay out of it and still keep oil prices from clobbering a still very fragile economy?

  • fjsteve

    My gut says, if I may put a spin on a quote attributed to a former president, it’s better for the US to stay out of this one and be thought weak in our resolve than to get involved and remove all doubt.

    On the other hand, let me ask this of those here who want the US to stay out: what about protecting the shipping lanes in the straights of Hormuz with an international coalition should anything break out? Is that valid? If we do that, we’re well within striking distance of Iran–and they will strike. What do we do when our fleet is under attack? Is there any real way to stay out of it and still keep oil prices from clobbering a still very fragile economy?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Remember the hyperbole of the Soviets? Khrushchev’s “We will bury you!” remark?

    Perhaps it was on another site, but I read an analysis of that comment that asserted that it really means something more like, “Yeah, yeah, yeah, we will still be around when you guys are pushing up the daisies. We will outlast you. You are a flash in the pan.” And that we thought it meant, “We are going to overwhelm/kill/utterly destroy you. You will be like Troy.”

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Remember the hyperbole of the Soviets? Khrushchev’s “We will bury you!” remark?

    Perhaps it was on another site, but I read an analysis of that comment that asserted that it really means something more like, “Yeah, yeah, yeah, we will still be around when you guys are pushing up the daisies. We will outlast you. You are a flash in the pan.” And that we thought it meant, “We are going to overwhelm/kill/utterly destroy you. You will be like Troy.”

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Probably most Iranians want to wipe out Israel like the average obese American wants to lose weight. They would love to wake up one morning and find Israel gone or be 100 lbs. lighter, but the amount of actual energy they personally wish to invest in said outcome rapidly approaches zero.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Probably most Iranians want to wipe out Israel like the average obese American wants to lose weight. They would love to wake up one morning and find Israel gone or be 100 lbs. lighter, but the amount of actual energy they personally wish to invest in said outcome rapidly approaches zero.

  • fjsteve

    sg, you have it almost right. Allow me to rephrase your last sentence for more accuracy:

    They would love to wake up one morning and find Israel gone or be 100 lbs. lighter, but the amount of actual control they feel they have in said outcome rapidly approaches zero.

  • fjsteve

    sg, you have it almost right. Allow me to rephrase your last sentence for more accuracy:

    They would love to wake up one morning and find Israel gone or be 100 lbs. lighter, but the amount of actual control they feel they have in said outcome rapidly approaches zero.

  • Cincinnatus

    FJSteve,

    No, sg is correct. Do you really think Iran, in calculating its strategic interests, would find that attacking a nuclear-armed Israel is viable? And think about what would be necessary to launch such an attack: it would have, first, to equip a massive army with the latest technological gewgaws (since Israel is armed by America). It would first need to cross the deserts of Iraq, a hostile nation. And so forth. The inevitable costs in blood and treasure to Iran in attacking Israel are far too great.

  • Cincinnatus

    FJSteve,

    No, sg is correct. Do you really think Iran, in calculating its strategic interests, would find that attacking a nuclear-armed Israel is viable? And think about what would be necessary to launch such an attack: it would have, first, to equip a massive army with the latest technological gewgaws (since Israel is armed by America). It would first need to cross the deserts of Iraq, a hostile nation. And so forth. The inevitable costs in blood and treasure to Iran in attacking Israel are far too great.

  • Cincinnatus

    Also, I like that Iran has now been compared with a skinny kid that needs to go to the gym and a fat guy too lazy to go to the gym.

    Think of it in these terms: Most in America would like to wake up one day and see that China is no longer a factor in world politics. But is America willing to do anything to effect this outcome? Better yet, could American do anything viable to effect this outcome? No, in both cases.

  • Cincinnatus

    Also, I like that Iran has now been compared with a skinny kid that needs to go to the gym and a fat guy too lazy to go to the gym.

    Think of it in these terms: Most in America would like to wake up one day and see that China is no longer a factor in world politics. But is America willing to do anything to effect this outcome? Better yet, could American do anything viable to effect this outcome? No, in both cases.

  • fjsteve

    Cincinnatus, I don’t know, it sounds like you’re supporting what I just said.

  • fjsteve

    Cincinnatus, I don’t know, it sounds like you’re supporting what I just said.

  • Stone the Crows

    No, Israel should not, and won’t attack Iran’s nuclear sites, there are simply too many sites (at least a dozen so I’m told) to do so without causing a greater conflict in the region. Israel doesn’t want that, and the US state department doesn’t want it either. However Israel must take the rhetoric of some within the Iranian government seriously; that there is a ‘wish dream’ to obliterate Israel. Only a fool would not take that seriously, especially given the amount of weapons Iran has at its disposal. The smart move at this point is to rattle the sword a bit, and do everything that can be done so slow the Iranian nuclear programs down whilst encouraging a regime change. By regime change I do not mean another chapter in the so called “Arab Spring” but that they have a secular representative government rather than one run by Mullahs and their proxies.

  • Stone the Crows

    No, Israel should not, and won’t attack Iran’s nuclear sites, there are simply too many sites (at least a dozen so I’m told) to do so without causing a greater conflict in the region. Israel doesn’t want that, and the US state department doesn’t want it either. However Israel must take the rhetoric of some within the Iranian government seriously; that there is a ‘wish dream’ to obliterate Israel. Only a fool would not take that seriously, especially given the amount of weapons Iran has at its disposal. The smart move at this point is to rattle the sword a bit, and do everything that can be done so slow the Iranian nuclear programs down whilst encouraging a regime change. By regime change I do not mean another chapter in the so called “Arab Spring” but that they have a secular representative government rather than one run by Mullahs and their proxies.

  • Dan Kempin

    SK#8,

    “Perhaps the best way to contain al-Qaeda is to have it actually try to govern a state or two.”

    Wow. I mean, wow. Since when does Islam care about how well the beaureacracy is run? Have you already forgotten the Taliban?

    Stone, #33,

    ” . . . but that they have a secular representative government rather than one run by Mullahs and their proxies.”

    There is no “secular” in Islam. There is only Islam.

  • Dan Kempin

    SK#8,

    “Perhaps the best way to contain al-Qaeda is to have it actually try to govern a state or two.”

    Wow. I mean, wow. Since when does Islam care about how well the beaureacracy is run? Have you already forgotten the Taliban?

    Stone, #33,

    ” . . . but that they have a secular representative government rather than one run by Mullahs and their proxies.”

    There is no “secular” in Islam. There is only Islam.

  • DonS

    “Should Israel strike at Iran’s nuclear sites?” — None of us are really in a position to answer this question. It will be Israel’s call, based on its own assessment of the risk of not disrupting Iran’s nuclear activities. I’m sure Israel understands the risks of such an attack, and would hope that it would not undertake one lightly, or use a force greater than required to eliminate the threat.

    “If they do, won’t that spark a bigger war?” — They likely will. Just about everything in the Middle East sparks a bigger war.

    “Should the United States try to prevent Israel from taking that step or just stay 0ut of it?” — The U.S. has its own intelligence, which it should be sharing with Israel. But the U.S. cannot make Israel’s decision for it. We are not at risk in the same way Israel is. In the meantime, though, we should be actively hardening security of all of our Middle East interests — we will certainly be blamed if Israel attacks, and will face reprisals and counterattacks. We cannot be asleep again, as we were in Libya last week, foolishly permitting our ambassador to be in a lightly fortified consulate on 9/11.

    “And, to consider another flashpoint, what should America do, if anything, while Syria’s government is slaughtering its citizens who are trying to over the Baathist regime?” — what can we reasonably do? Hopefully, we learned our lesson about the so-called “Arab Spring” when we bungled into choosing sides and taking part in the revolutions in Egypt and Libya.

  • DonS

    “Should Israel strike at Iran’s nuclear sites?” — None of us are really in a position to answer this question. It will be Israel’s call, based on its own assessment of the risk of not disrupting Iran’s nuclear activities. I’m sure Israel understands the risks of such an attack, and would hope that it would not undertake one lightly, or use a force greater than required to eliminate the threat.

    “If they do, won’t that spark a bigger war?” — They likely will. Just about everything in the Middle East sparks a bigger war.

    “Should the United States try to prevent Israel from taking that step or just stay 0ut of it?” — The U.S. has its own intelligence, which it should be sharing with Israel. But the U.S. cannot make Israel’s decision for it. We are not at risk in the same way Israel is. In the meantime, though, we should be actively hardening security of all of our Middle East interests — we will certainly be blamed if Israel attacks, and will face reprisals and counterattacks. We cannot be asleep again, as we were in Libya last week, foolishly permitting our ambassador to be in a lightly fortified consulate on 9/11.

    “And, to consider another flashpoint, what should America do, if anything, while Syria’s government is slaughtering its citizens who are trying to over the Baathist regime?” — what can we reasonably do? Hopefully, we learned our lesson about the so-called “Arab Spring” when we bungled into choosing sides and taking part in the revolutions in Egypt and Libya.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus,

    You have a tendency to process and analyze this on a purely political basis, yet I believe the religious component is the most significant factor in the equation. (Especially when it comes to the possession and usage of nukes.) Blood and treasure, governments and posterity are secondary in the face of a holy cause. The destruction of Israel is a holy cause. And, ultimately, the destruction of all non-Muslim governments is a holy cause.

    That is a fact. It can be preempted by political factors, but it doesn’t go away.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus,

    You have a tendency to process and analyze this on a purely political basis, yet I believe the religious component is the most significant factor in the equation. (Especially when it comes to the possession and usage of nukes.) Blood and treasure, governments and posterity are secondary in the face of a holy cause. The destruction of Israel is a holy cause. And, ultimately, the destruction of all non-Muslim governments is a holy cause.

    That is a fact. It can be preempted by political factors, but it doesn’t go away.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    The destruction of Israel is a holy cause. And, ultimately, the destruction of all non-Muslim governments is a holy cause.

    That is a fact. It can be preempted by political factors, but it doesn’t go away.

    Okay, but for what % of the population is it a priority? I mean seriously? Getting a flat screen TV is higher on their list of priorities than flawless adherence to some religious tenet. Heck prostitution is legal in Iran.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    The destruction of Israel is a holy cause. And, ultimately, the destruction of all non-Muslim governments is a holy cause.

    That is a fact. It can be preempted by political factors, but it doesn’t go away.

    Okay, but for what % of the population is it a priority? I mean seriously? Getting a flat screen TV is higher on their list of priorities than flawless adherence to some religious tenet. Heck prostitution is legal in Iran.

  • Dan Kempin

    sg, #37,

    I don’t understand your point. Are you saying that they don’t really believe the teaching of Islam, or just that they probably won’t act on it today?

  • Dan Kempin

    sg, #37,

    I don’t understand your point. Are you saying that they don’t really believe the teaching of Islam, or just that they probably won’t act on it today?

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan Kempin,

    I’m with sg here. If a) Islam were some kind of monolithic religion whose believers are all the same on all points of doctrine and dogma and b) the destruction of Israel were truly and literally a “holy cause,” Israel would have been obliterated decades ago. There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, and they’ve had almost 60 years to accomplish their alleged mission.

    Do you even know anyone from the Middle East? Do you know any Muslims? I don’t mean this in the sense of “you’re not a Muslim, so you wouldn’t understand,” but the way you depict Islam and its adherents leads me to believe that you have no idea what you’re talking about.. Iran is a calculation country, not a roiling pot of fanatics. If “destroying” Israel would carry substantial risk for them, they won’t do it. It does, and thus they won’t.

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan Kempin,

    I’m with sg here. If a) Islam were some kind of monolithic religion whose believers are all the same on all points of doctrine and dogma and b) the destruction of Israel were truly and literally a “holy cause,” Israel would have been obliterated decades ago. There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, and they’ve had almost 60 years to accomplish their alleged mission.

    Do you even know anyone from the Middle East? Do you know any Muslims? I don’t mean this in the sense of “you’re not a Muslim, so you wouldn’t understand,” but the way you depict Islam and its adherents leads me to believe that you have no idea what you’re talking about.. Iran is a calculation country, not a roiling pot of fanatics. If “destroying” Israel would carry substantial risk for them, they won’t do it. It does, and thus they won’t.

  • Other Gary

    Cin, I agree with your assessment. One thing not widely known in the west is that Iran’s population is relatively well educated when compared with most of the Muslim world. Your use of the word “calculation” is therefore most apt. Frankly, while Sg is right about them wishing they could wake up and have Israel be magically disappeared, it’s not just that they don’t want to incur the cost to try to make it happen, it’s that even were the wish magically fulfilled, it would do nothing to improve the lives of Iranians. I suspect a sizable number of Iranians find Ahmadinejad to be something of an embarrassment.

  • Other Gary

    Cin, I agree with your assessment. One thing not widely known in the west is that Iran’s population is relatively well educated when compared with most of the Muslim world. Your use of the word “calculation” is therefore most apt. Frankly, while Sg is right about them wishing they could wake up and have Israel be magically disappeared, it’s not just that they don’t want to incur the cost to try to make it happen, it’s that even were the wish magically fulfilled, it would do nothing to improve the lives of Iranians. I suspect a sizable number of Iranians find Ahmadinejad to be something of an embarrassment.

  • Cincinnatus

    Other Gary,

    I suspect a sizable number of Iranians find Ahmadinejad to be something of an embarrassment.

    Given that Tehran has played host to multiple popular protests in favor of liberal and moderate democracy against the Islamist regime in the past couple of years, I suspect you’re right. Say what you want about North Korea, but the common image of Iran as a member of the “axis of evil,” as a crazed cauldron of rabid Islamists, is simply not at all accurate. Foreign policy analysts claim that the regime, moreover, is unstable and fraught with internal dissent by moderates. If the regime falls, there is no intrinsic reason why Iran couldn’t be a strong American ally.

  • Cincinnatus

    Other Gary,

    I suspect a sizable number of Iranians find Ahmadinejad to be something of an embarrassment.

    Given that Tehran has played host to multiple popular protests in favor of liberal and moderate democracy against the Islamist regime in the past couple of years, I suspect you’re right. Say what you want about North Korea, but the common image of Iran as a member of the “axis of evil,” as a crazed cauldron of rabid Islamists, is simply not at all accurate. Foreign policy analysts claim that the regime, moreover, is unstable and fraught with internal dissent by moderates. If the regime falls, there is no intrinsic reason why Iran couldn’t be a strong American ally.

  • SKPeterson

    Dan @ 34 – Completely serious. I’m not talking about the poor people who would be living under their rule – they’d probably be as enamored of their government as many Iranians seem to be of theirs – not so much. I am talking about the fact that right now, al-Qaeda is a stateless enterprise existing in the shadows and outside the passing normalcy of inter-state relations. IF, they were in charge of a state, they’d might gain “legitimacy”, but they’d also be saddled with things they aren’t: like responsibility. Essentially I’m saying that if I have to choose my al-Qaeda, I’d prefer him out in the open in a state, than lurking in the shadows.

  • SKPeterson

    Dan @ 34 – Completely serious. I’m not talking about the poor people who would be living under their rule – they’d probably be as enamored of their government as many Iranians seem to be of theirs – not so much. I am talking about the fact that right now, al-Qaeda is a stateless enterprise existing in the shadows and outside the passing normalcy of inter-state relations. IF, they were in charge of a state, they’d might gain “legitimacy”, but they’d also be saddled with things they aren’t: like responsibility. Essentially I’m saying that if I have to choose my al-Qaeda, I’d prefer him out in the open in a state, than lurking in the shadows.

  • SKPeterson

    Carl – When do you get to make up the rules of debate? Japan’s use of suicide bombers in WWII is a red herring? Not germane to the discussion? So you can put up a quote about the potential recruitment of suicide bombers by Iran as proof that they’re two tacos short of a combo plate, but any evidence of other states in the past using similar tactics or similar rhetoric is irrelevant to the discussion of rationality in methods and rhetoric. I get it. It’s different this time.

  • SKPeterson

    Carl – When do you get to make up the rules of debate? Japan’s use of suicide bombers in WWII is a red herring? Not germane to the discussion? So you can put up a quote about the potential recruitment of suicide bombers by Iran as proof that they’re two tacos short of a combo plate, but any evidence of other states in the past using similar tactics or similar rhetoric is irrelevant to the discussion of rationality in methods and rhetoric. I get it. It’s different this time.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus, #39,

    It is somewhat ironic to be told that I don’t know what I am talking about by someone who then proceeds to tell the future. About Iran, no less. I can only say that I hope you are right. But you are not. The problem is not a roiling pot of fanatics, it is Islam.

    You say, “If . . . the destruction of Israel were truly and literally a “holy cause,” Israel would have been obliterated decades ago.”

    It is not as though they haven’t tried. Three times so far, by my count. Three attacks in sixty years, all of them unprovoked. But you are probably right. It would never happen AGAIN.

    And yes, I DO know muslims, and I know many people who have lived in Muslim countries. Islam IS a monolithic religion with core doctrines that are held to as essential. One of those teachings is that they have the obligation from Allah to overthrow or overcome all non-Muslim governments. This isn’t something that needs to take place immediately, but it is definitely there. It is a part of the religion. I’m surprised that someone with your expertise does not know that.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus, #39,

    It is somewhat ironic to be told that I don’t know what I am talking about by someone who then proceeds to tell the future. About Iran, no less. I can only say that I hope you are right. But you are not. The problem is not a roiling pot of fanatics, it is Islam.

    You say, “If . . . the destruction of Israel were truly and literally a “holy cause,” Israel would have been obliterated decades ago.”

    It is not as though they haven’t tried. Three times so far, by my count. Three attacks in sixty years, all of them unprovoked. But you are probably right. It would never happen AGAIN.

    And yes, I DO know muslims, and I know many people who have lived in Muslim countries. Islam IS a monolithic religion with core doctrines that are held to as essential. One of those teachings is that they have the obligation from Allah to overthrow or overcome all non-Muslim governments. This isn’t something that needs to take place immediately, but it is definitely there. It is a part of the religion. I’m surprised that someone with your expertise does not know that.

  • Grace

    Bike @ 14 “Those leaders are, as an earlier commenter noted, also claiming to be eager for a second Holocaust.”

    You’re right!

    Question:

    How many of you own a Koran, or have read it.

    How many of you live among those from the middle east? Middle easterners refrain from mingling in any way with others, then their own? Where we live, there are multitudes of middle easterners, they don’t associate with us, in any way. YES, there are a few who put forth an effort, we know one on our street who is very different from all the rest.

    Dan @44
    And yes, I DO know muslims, and I know many people who have lived in Muslim countries. Islam IS a monolithic religion with core doctrines that are held to as essential. One of those teachings is that they have the obligation from Allah to overthrow or overcome all non-Muslim governments. This isn’t something that needs to take place immediately, but it is definitely there. It is a part of the religion. I’m surprised that someone with your expertise does not know that.

    The problem is; they don’t live in areas where Muslims live. Their knowledge of culture, behavior, etc., are nil, they speak only from what they read, or see on TV. Their experience is very limited.

  • Grace

    Bike @ 14 “Those leaders are, as an earlier commenter noted, also claiming to be eager for a second Holocaust.”

    You’re right!

    Question:

    How many of you own a Koran, or have read it.

    How many of you live among those from the middle east? Middle easterners refrain from mingling in any way with others, then their own? Where we live, there are multitudes of middle easterners, they don’t associate with us, in any way. YES, there are a few who put forth an effort, we know one on our street who is very different from all the rest.

    Dan @44
    And yes, I DO know muslims, and I know many people who have lived in Muslim countries. Islam IS a monolithic religion with core doctrines that are held to as essential. One of those teachings is that they have the obligation from Allah to overthrow or overcome all non-Muslim governments. This isn’t something that needs to take place immediately, but it is definitely there. It is a part of the religion. I’m surprised that someone with your expertise does not know that.

    The problem is; they don’t live in areas where Muslims live. Their knowledge of culture, behavior, etc., are nil, they speak only from what they read, or see on TV. Their experience is very limited.

  • Stone the Crows

    Dan @#34, yes quite, but I must point out that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the status quo in Iran. Just as surely as there would be Christians who would not want to be ruled by a religious hierarchy in Washington D.C., there are Iranians who want freedom, and liberty and are willing to fight for it. They’re not all Islamic facists. I don’t intend to paint a rosy picture, but I do know of this and I do have family who are from Iran and are not Muslims and want better for their nation than what they’ve had since the fall of the Shah.

  • Stone the Crows

    Dan @#34, yes quite, but I must point out that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the status quo in Iran. Just as surely as there would be Christians who would not want to be ruled by a religious hierarchy in Washington D.C., there are Iranians who want freedom, and liberty and are willing to fight for it. They’re not all Islamic facists. I don’t intend to paint a rosy picture, but I do know of this and I do have family who are from Iran and are not Muslims and want better for their nation than what they’ve had since the fall of the Shah.

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan Kempin,

    Come on.

    Islam IS a monolithic religion with core doctrines that are held to as essential.

    Do you really want to stand behind a claim that ten seconds of research can prove entirely and laughably wrong? Seriously, Dan. Right off the top of my head, I know there are Shia, Sunni, Wahhabi, Sufi, moderates, and merely nominal Muslims. There are “Ramadan and Eid” Muslims who match our Easter-and-Christmas Christians. There are cultural Muslims like our cultural Catholics who have probably never set foot in a mosque. The differences between these sects are as radical as the distinctions that divide Catholics from Lutherans from Baptists. Seriously, ask an average Muslim if he or she feels a personal obligation to “overthrow or overcome all non-Muslim governments.”

    I’m not denying that justification for these “goals” can be found in the Koran, and that some Muslims take them very seriously. But your notion that these obligations are at all definitive of or binding upon Iranian foreign policy–much less upon all practicing Muslims–is simply laughable. You’ve got to be kidding. This will get a laugh out of my Pakistani Muslim colleagues when we go to the bar to drink alcohol this weekend.

    I get it: Iran is not our ally. I have no interest in apologizing for them. But it’s regime is not blindly following some kind of religious impulse found in the Koran. I can assure you that Iran’s defense and foreign policy officials know just as much about their vital security interests as the most hard-bitten American realist (if only we had a few more of those!).

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan Kempin,

    Come on.

    Islam IS a monolithic religion with core doctrines that are held to as essential.

    Do you really want to stand behind a claim that ten seconds of research can prove entirely and laughably wrong? Seriously, Dan. Right off the top of my head, I know there are Shia, Sunni, Wahhabi, Sufi, moderates, and merely nominal Muslims. There are “Ramadan and Eid” Muslims who match our Easter-and-Christmas Christians. There are cultural Muslims like our cultural Catholics who have probably never set foot in a mosque. The differences between these sects are as radical as the distinctions that divide Catholics from Lutherans from Baptists. Seriously, ask an average Muslim if he or she feels a personal obligation to “overthrow or overcome all non-Muslim governments.”

    I’m not denying that justification for these “goals” can be found in the Koran, and that some Muslims take them very seriously. But your notion that these obligations are at all definitive of or binding upon Iranian foreign policy–much less upon all practicing Muslims–is simply laughable. You’ve got to be kidding. This will get a laugh out of my Pakistani Muslim colleagues when we go to the bar to drink alcohol this weekend.

    I get it: Iran is not our ally. I have no interest in apologizing for them. But it’s regime is not blindly following some kind of religious impulse found in the Koran. I can assure you that Iran’s defense and foreign policy officials know just as much about their vital security interests as the most hard-bitten American realist (if only we had a few more of those!).

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Cincinnatus, sg, SKP – excellent analysis.

    And yes, in SA I worked with Muslims. They form a very important sub-section of SA society, having been there since the 1600′s, with the first mosque only going up in 1799. They are a very diverse bunch – mainly Sunni, but also Shia, Sufi and eve “Qur’an alone “(?!). Now the people I worked with – the one fellow was nice, peace loving and somewhat conservative (Mosque every Friday, made the pilgrimage, did not drink alcohol). After I was shot (long story), with the exception of my General Manager, he was the ONLY colleague to come and see me more than once in hospital.

    Another one, a younger woman dressed like a Kardashian, and barely followed any rules. Yet she identified as Muslim.

    Viewing any large group as absolutely monolithic, and ascribing the actions of some to all, is at best naive and simpleton-like, and at worst a recipe for discrimination and persecution. One would do well not to do thus. Loving your neighbour would at least imply not imbuing them with all sorts of motives, and attributing all sorts of negative things to them, with no evidence except broad classification.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Cincinnatus, sg, SKP – excellent analysis.

    And yes, in SA I worked with Muslims. They form a very important sub-section of SA society, having been there since the 1600′s, with the first mosque only going up in 1799. They are a very diverse bunch – mainly Sunni, but also Shia, Sufi and eve “Qur’an alone “(?!). Now the people I worked with – the one fellow was nice, peace loving and somewhat conservative (Mosque every Friday, made the pilgrimage, did not drink alcohol). After I was shot (long story), with the exception of my General Manager, he was the ONLY colleague to come and see me more than once in hospital.

    Another one, a younger woman dressed like a Kardashian, and barely followed any rules. Yet she identified as Muslim.

    Viewing any large group as absolutely monolithic, and ascribing the actions of some to all, is at best naive and simpleton-like, and at worst a recipe for discrimination and persecution. One would do well not to do thus. Loving your neighbour would at least imply not imbuing them with all sorts of motives, and attributing all sorts of negative things to them, with no evidence except broad classification.

  • Grace

    KK @ 48” imbuing them with all sorts of motives, and attributing all sorts of negative things to them, with no evidence except broad classification.”

    It depends on ones experience, where they live, and how they have observed the situation on a daily basis, in a very wide area of our state.

  • Grace

    KK @ 48” imbuing them with all sorts of motives, and attributing all sorts of negative things to them, with no evidence except broad classification.”

    It depends on ones experience, where they live, and how they have observed the situation on a daily basis, in a very wide area of our state.

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@49:

    Ok. So how many Muslims do you associate with, and what does your experience reveal about their motives?

    Am I the only one around here that knows lots of Muslims? Again, I don’t care if you do or don’t–they’re a very small percentage of the American population–but, if you knew more than one, of if you’ve traveled around the Middle East, you’d know for a fact that, in general, Muslims are not religious fanatics who crave violence and the destruction of Israel.

    This is completely aside from any claims that the Koran mandates violence (it probably does) or the destruction of Israel (skeptical; Israel didn’t exist prior to 1948). Empirically speaking, most Muslims just don’t fit Dan’s stereotype. Meanwhile, Iran’s regime isn’t pursuing nukes so they can obliterate Israel as soon as possible. They’re doing it for the same reason Pakistan–another majority Muslim country–did: to protect themselves from tangible threats.

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@49:

    Ok. So how many Muslims do you associate with, and what does your experience reveal about their motives?

    Am I the only one around here that knows lots of Muslims? Again, I don’t care if you do or don’t–they’re a very small percentage of the American population–but, if you knew more than one, of if you’ve traveled around the Middle East, you’d know for a fact that, in general, Muslims are not religious fanatics who crave violence and the destruction of Israel.

    This is completely aside from any claims that the Koran mandates violence (it probably does) or the destruction of Israel (skeptical; Israel didn’t exist prior to 1948). Empirically speaking, most Muslims just don’t fit Dan’s stereotype. Meanwhile, Iran’s regime isn’t pursuing nukes so they can obliterate Israel as soon as possible. They’re doing it for the same reason Pakistan–another majority Muslim country–did: to protect themselves from tangible threats.

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus @50 “Am I the only one around here that knows lots of Muslims?”

    Apparently you’re not. I know many!

    My experience does not match up to yours.

    @50 “This is completely aside from any claims that the Koran mandates violence (it probably does) or the destruction of Israel (skeptical; Israel didn’t exist prior to 1948).”

    Israel isn’t just a country it’s a people, a people to whom God made a covenant with. The Jews are once again in their land, as they were promised

    O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you that turns to them for friendship is of them.” This friendship makes any Muslim a enemy of their own and deserving of the same fate as the unbeliever. This is because God does not guide an unjust people.
    Sura 5:51

    Do you believe the above to be a joke? The Qu’ran speaks vividly of their angst against Christians and Jews. It also may interest you to know that, Jerusalem is not even mentioned in the Quran .. something to think and ponder over.

    “And when the sacred months are passed, kill those who join other gods with God wherever ye shall find them; and seize them, besiege them, and lay wait for them with every kind of ambush: but if they shall convert, and observe prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their way, for God is Gracious, Merciful.”
    Sura 9:5

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus @50 “Am I the only one around here that knows lots of Muslims?”

    Apparently you’re not. I know many!

    My experience does not match up to yours.

    @50 “This is completely aside from any claims that the Koran mandates violence (it probably does) or the destruction of Israel (skeptical; Israel didn’t exist prior to 1948).”

    Israel isn’t just a country it’s a people, a people to whom God made a covenant with. The Jews are once again in their land, as they were promised

    O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you that turns to them for friendship is of them.” This friendship makes any Muslim a enemy of their own and deserving of the same fate as the unbeliever. This is because God does not guide an unjust people.
    Sura 5:51

    Do you believe the above to be a joke? The Qu’ran speaks vividly of their angst against Christians and Jews. It also may interest you to know that, Jerusalem is not even mentioned in the Quran .. something to think and ponder over.

    “And when the sacred months are passed, kill those who join other gods with God wherever ye shall find them; and seize them, besiege them, and lay wait for them with every kind of ambush: but if they shall convert, and observe prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their way, for God is Gracious, Merciful.”
    Sura 9:5

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus, #47,

    You keep responding to what I did not say. I did not say that all Muslims are all alike everywhere, responding blindly to some religious impulse. That is a stereotype that you created and then ascribed to me. Thanks for that, by the way.

    And I agree that (re:#39) “Iran is a calculating country.” I agree that they are rational. They are also Muslim. That is my point.

    I DID say that while Islam is quite diverse, there are certain core beliefs to which they all ascribe. The teachings of the Koran are the teachings of the Koran. (Just as there are Catholics and Lutherans and Baptists, to use your example, who all teach that Jesus is true God and true Man.)

    You may well conclude from your non-practicing friends that these teachings of Islam are not a threat–once again, I hope you are right–but (coming back to my original point) you seem unable to factor in to your calculations that fact that it IS the teaching of Islam.

    Just to clarify, I don’t disagree with your political analysis in general. It’s just that you tend to sweep aside Islam as a factor. I think that gives you a rather sizable blind spot.

    One last thing. You say:
    “Seriously, ask an average Muslim if he or she feels a personal obligation to “overthrow or overcome all non-Muslim governments.””

    HAVE you ever asked your Muslim friends this?
    Seriously.
    Have you asked them, or are you assuming the answer?

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus, #47,

    You keep responding to what I did not say. I did not say that all Muslims are all alike everywhere, responding blindly to some religious impulse. That is a stereotype that you created and then ascribed to me. Thanks for that, by the way.

    And I agree that (re:#39) “Iran is a calculating country.” I agree that they are rational. They are also Muslim. That is my point.

    I DID say that while Islam is quite diverse, there are certain core beliefs to which they all ascribe. The teachings of the Koran are the teachings of the Koran. (Just as there are Catholics and Lutherans and Baptists, to use your example, who all teach that Jesus is true God and true Man.)

    You may well conclude from your non-practicing friends that these teachings of Islam are not a threat–once again, I hope you are right–but (coming back to my original point) you seem unable to factor in to your calculations that fact that it IS the teaching of Islam.

    Just to clarify, I don’t disagree with your political analysis in general. It’s just that you tend to sweep aside Islam as a factor. I think that gives you a rather sizable blind spot.

    One last thing. You say:
    “Seriously, ask an average Muslim if he or she feels a personal obligation to “overthrow or overcome all non-Muslim governments.””

    HAVE you ever asked your Muslim friends this?
    Seriously.
    Have you asked them, or are you assuming the answer?

  • Jon

    Why not just continue the sucessful campaign of knocking off Iran’s nuclear scientists and engineers? Instead of full-scale attacks?

    I mean, whomever has been behind it (ahem) could simply start launching lots more spies whizzing around on motor scooters and planting car bombs?

  • Jon

    Why not just continue the sucessful campaign of knocking off Iran’s nuclear scientists and engineers? Instead of full-scale attacks?

    I mean, whomever has been behind it (ahem) could simply start launching lots more spies whizzing around on motor scooters and planting car bombs?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @38

    I don’t understand your point. Are you saying that they don’t really believe the teaching of Islam, or just that they probably won’t act on it today?

    Eh, they believe it in the sense that they are familiar with it and there isn’t another ideology competing with it in their immediate social cirlce. But it doesn’t much motivate many of them. Only some small % of any group are going to be fanatics willing to die for something. Most people just aren’t nuts. They want new drapes or a cool watch or to go out for pizza with their friends like everyone else. They don’t want to blow up far off foreigners. It is just not fun or interesting. Even when crazies like the pres of Iran harp on it, it is only going to get a few marginal takers.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @38

    I don’t understand your point. Are you saying that they don’t really believe the teaching of Islam, or just that they probably won’t act on it today?

    Eh, they believe it in the sense that they are familiar with it and there isn’t another ideology competing with it in their immediate social cirlce. But it doesn’t much motivate many of them. Only some small % of any group are going to be fanatics willing to die for something. Most people just aren’t nuts. They want new drapes or a cool watch or to go out for pizza with their friends like everyone else. They don’t want to blow up far off foreigners. It is just not fun or interesting. Even when crazies like the pres of Iran harp on it, it is only going to get a few marginal takers.

  • Dan Kempin

    sg, #54,

    I really, really, really want you to be right. Alas, I do not think you are.

  • Dan Kempin

    sg, #54,

    I really, really, really want you to be right. Alas, I do not think you are.

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan@55:

    Alas, I do not think you are.

    Yeah, well, this is fine to say, but it’s a meaningless statement. On what grounds do you deny–or at least suspect–the validity of sg’s remarks? Why do you think she’s wrong?

    So far, all the evidence is against you: the diversity of Islam, the moderate and democratic sympathies of a significant proportion of the Iranian public, and the documented realism of much of Iran’s leadership in the face of very real foreign threats speaks against your claim that Iran wants to destroy Israel by any means and against all odds imply because the Koran says so.

    By the way, no one is denying that religion contributes to the political culture of Iran, just as no one would deny that a particular brand of Christianity contributes to the mainstream political culture of the United States. In fact, religion is probably more important in Iran, given that the regime describes itself as a theocracy. But that probably doesn’t mean what you think it means. In any case, one thing it doesn’t mean is that Iran’s leaders are willing to risk committing their entire nation to the flames just to attack Israel or flout American hegemony.

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan@55:

    Alas, I do not think you are.

    Yeah, well, this is fine to say, but it’s a meaningless statement. On what grounds do you deny–or at least suspect–the validity of sg’s remarks? Why do you think she’s wrong?

    So far, all the evidence is against you: the diversity of Islam, the moderate and democratic sympathies of a significant proportion of the Iranian public, and the documented realism of much of Iran’s leadership in the face of very real foreign threats speaks against your claim that Iran wants to destroy Israel by any means and against all odds imply because the Koran says so.

    By the way, no one is denying that religion contributes to the political culture of Iran, just as no one would deny that a particular brand of Christianity contributes to the mainstream political culture of the United States. In fact, religion is probably more important in Iran, given that the regime describes itself as a theocracy. But that probably doesn’t mean what you think it means. In any case, one thing it doesn’t mean is that Iran’s leaders are willing to risk committing their entire nation to the flames just to attack Israel or flout American hegemony.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus, #56

    Again, with the political take. Again, the shrugging off of the importance of Islam. Dude, it’s a Theocracy! That just came out of your own words, and yet you treat it as incidental. How can you not see that you are making my point?

    Then again, perhaps we are talking past each other a bit. I am not commenting on Iran. I agree with your political take that an Iranian attack on Israel is not the clear and present danger, if that’s what you think I am saying. I am commenting on the fact that you minimize the significance of Islam in your analysis. You do. I don’t know why that is, but you do.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus, #56

    Again, with the political take. Again, the shrugging off of the importance of Islam. Dude, it’s a Theocracy! That just came out of your own words, and yet you treat it as incidental. How can you not see that you are making my point?

    Then again, perhaps we are talking past each other a bit. I am not commenting on Iran. I agree with your political take that an Iranian attack on Israel is not the clear and present danger, if that’s what you think I am saying. I am commenting on the fact that you minimize the significance of Islam in your analysis. You do. I don’t know why that is, but you do.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @55 If you think they have a very different worldview, in that you are correct. Check out the World Values Survey. Ooh wheee, do they have some different ideas!

    http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @55 If you think they have a very different worldview, in that you are correct. Check out the World Values Survey. Ooh wheee, do they have some different ideas!

    http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan@57:

    No, I’ve specifically denied that I’m “shrugging off the importance of Islam.” Before you can claim that I am, you probably should define what you mean by “Islam.” So far, all you’ve provided is a laughably reductionist definition whereby all Muslims are the same, and they are all hellbent on the destruction of Israel. Moreover, after you’ve defined what you mean by Islam (which involves defining what kind of Islam influences those who craft Iran’s foreign policy), you need to explain how, exactly, that Islam is dictating Iran’s policies.

    For now, remember this: Iran is a nation-state, and like all nation-states, it is fundamentally concerned with its own survival.

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan@57:

    No, I’ve specifically denied that I’m “shrugging off the importance of Islam.” Before you can claim that I am, you probably should define what you mean by “Islam.” So far, all you’ve provided is a laughably reductionist definition whereby all Muslims are the same, and they are all hellbent on the destruction of Israel. Moreover, after you’ve defined what you mean by Islam (which involves defining what kind of Islam influences those who craft Iran’s foreign policy), you need to explain how, exactly, that Islam is dictating Iran’s policies.

    For now, remember this: Iran is a nation-state, and like all nation-states, it is fundamentally concerned with its own survival.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus,

    Again, you reply to what I did not say. I clarified in my last post that I was not commenting on Iran and even said that I agreed with your political take, yet you accuse me of positing that Iran’s foreign policy is woodenly and exclusively, not to mention simplistically, the dictate of Islam.

    I never said that.

    You also said that I claim all Muslims are the same.

    I do not. I said that all Muslims have something in common. It is–guess what–the Koran.

    You set up the false stereotype that all muslims are suicidal radicals fixated on the destruction of Israel at all costs and then you place it in my mouth so that you can laugh at how ridiculous it is.

    Only I didn’t say that. Quite the contrary, I think Muslim theocracies are very clear and consistent in their thought. Their reasoning and policies are very understandable and outcomes rather predictable if you understand the world view with which they operate. That is where Islam comes in.

    I don’t believe that Islam dictates policy in the simplistic way you suggest. National policy is of course driven by a host of political factors. (I’m really not sure why you assume I think otherwise.) But Islam shapes thought, and its philosophical foundations direct the course of the political task. You cannot truly understand their political calculus if you do not truly understand Islam. That is my thesis.

    Ask your friends about Islam. Discuss it with them over drinks, and see if you don’t discover some fundamental differences in the way they think that you did not realize were there. I don’t say this to be hateful. I think a Muslim would back me up in this conversation. They know the teachings of their own religion and agree with them, even if they have their own interpretation about how those teachings are applied.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus,

    Again, you reply to what I did not say. I clarified in my last post that I was not commenting on Iran and even said that I agreed with your political take, yet you accuse me of positing that Iran’s foreign policy is woodenly and exclusively, not to mention simplistically, the dictate of Islam.

    I never said that.

    You also said that I claim all Muslims are the same.

    I do not. I said that all Muslims have something in common. It is–guess what–the Koran.

    You set up the false stereotype that all muslims are suicidal radicals fixated on the destruction of Israel at all costs and then you place it in my mouth so that you can laugh at how ridiculous it is.

    Only I didn’t say that. Quite the contrary, I think Muslim theocracies are very clear and consistent in their thought. Their reasoning and policies are very understandable and outcomes rather predictable if you understand the world view with which they operate. That is where Islam comes in.

    I don’t believe that Islam dictates policy in the simplistic way you suggest. National policy is of course driven by a host of political factors. (I’m really not sure why you assume I think otherwise.) But Islam shapes thought, and its philosophical foundations direct the course of the political task. You cannot truly understand their political calculus if you do not truly understand Islam. That is my thesis.

    Ask your friends about Islam. Discuss it with them over drinks, and see if you don’t discover some fundamental differences in the way they think that you did not realize were there. I don’t say this to be hateful. I think a Muslim would back me up in this conversation. They know the teachings of their own religion and agree with them, even if they have their own interpretation about how those teachings are applied.

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan,

    It appears that, by now, you’re not actually arguing anything at all. Every time I dispute a claim you make, you insist that you weren’t actually making it, and you agree with my refutation. So, um, what’s your point? If Iran doesn’t want to destroy Israel, and if Iranian national policy is dictated by “political factors” (whatever that means), then why are you arguing?

    On the other hand, you’re right: you probably can’t understand Iranian politics unless you understand something of Islam, just as you can’t understand American politics without understanding Protestantism and Lockean liberalism. Problem: You understand Islam about as much as I understand theoretical astrophysics–which is to say, you have some vague notion of a thing called “Islam,” but you have no inkling of how it works or how complex it is. It’s not enough to say “ISLAM IS DIFFERENT.” That means nothing unless you know how it’s different and how those decisions are relevant in a political decision to construct and launch nuclear weapons. So far, you’ve demonstrated that you know nothing of relevance to either of these questions.

    Muslims share the Koran about as much as Christians share the Bible: in other words, you’re not saying much when you say that. My comments to this point have been rooted in my understanding of Islam as it functions in Iran.

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan,

    It appears that, by now, you’re not actually arguing anything at all. Every time I dispute a claim you make, you insist that you weren’t actually making it, and you agree with my refutation. So, um, what’s your point? If Iran doesn’t want to destroy Israel, and if Iranian national policy is dictated by “political factors” (whatever that means), then why are you arguing?

    On the other hand, you’re right: you probably can’t understand Iranian politics unless you understand something of Islam, just as you can’t understand American politics without understanding Protestantism and Lockean liberalism. Problem: You understand Islam about as much as I understand theoretical astrophysics–which is to say, you have some vague notion of a thing called “Islam,” but you have no inkling of how it works or how complex it is. It’s not enough to say “ISLAM IS DIFFERENT.” That means nothing unless you know how it’s different and how those decisions are relevant in a political decision to construct and launch nuclear weapons. So far, you’ve demonstrated that you know nothing of relevance to either of these questions.

    Muslims share the Koran about as much as Christians share the Bible: in other words, you’re not saying much when you say that. My comments to this point have been rooted in my understanding of Islam as it functions in Iran.

  • brianh

    No. Israel should not strike first. It is not right to strike someone because you are afraid.

  • brianh

    No. Israel should not strike first. It is not right to strike someone because you are afraid.

  • Dan Kempin

    Sigh.

    “It appears that, by now, you’re not actually arguing anything at all.”

    Except for my original point, from #36, which I have been arguing all along.

    So here’s where we end up: Islam is to Iranian politics what Protestantism is to American politics.

    Uh huh. Clearly you have a firm grip on Islam.

  • Dan Kempin

    Sigh.

    “It appears that, by now, you’re not actually arguing anything at all.”

    Except for my original point, from #36, which I have been arguing all along.

    So here’s where we end up: Islam is to Iranian politics what Protestantism is to American politics.

    Uh huh. Clearly you have a firm grip on Islam.

  • Grace

    As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Romans 9:13

    Lets look at Malachi, in the Old Testament

    2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob,

    3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
    Malachi 1: 2-3

    This was not written until both of these brothers (Jacob and Esau – twins) lived their lives, TWO NATIONS came from these brothers, we must not forget that, this represents the;

    JEWISH NATION, and the ARAB NATION.

    This passage of Scripture is very hard to understand, but it is what GOD said. It’s simple to see why GOD rejected Esau. Esau rejected and gave up his heritage as first born for a lousy bowl of food. The nation which came from Esau did not want to follow GOD, of the Bible.

    GOD chose Jacob, and from Jacob came the twelve (12) tribes of Israel. Those tribes, those Jewish tribes are CHOSEN PEOPLE, they are JEWS. When we look at Jacob and Esau again we see two nations, we see a chosen people, and one that is not, and then we see the verses again:

    OLD TESTAMENT

    I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob,

    And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
    Malachi 1: 2-3

    NEW TESTAMENT

    As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Romans 9:13

    We still look at these verses, we must understand that it is GOD’S sovereign Will which we CANNOT QUESTION. We don’t understand everything, but one day, we will. – the LORD will reveal to us what we cannot understand and comprehend now.

    .

    Today we see two nations fighting to dominate. The Jewish nation, the twelve tribes of Israel will once again be shown to overshadow that which is evil. See Revelation 7 and 14.

  • Grace

    As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Romans 9:13

    Lets look at Malachi, in the Old Testament

    2 I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob,

    3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
    Malachi 1: 2-3

    This was not written until both of these brothers (Jacob and Esau – twins) lived their lives, TWO NATIONS came from these brothers, we must not forget that, this represents the;

    JEWISH NATION, and the ARAB NATION.

    This passage of Scripture is very hard to understand, but it is what GOD said. It’s simple to see why GOD rejected Esau. Esau rejected and gave up his heritage as first born for a lousy bowl of food. The nation which came from Esau did not want to follow GOD, of the Bible.

    GOD chose Jacob, and from Jacob came the twelve (12) tribes of Israel. Those tribes, those Jewish tribes are CHOSEN PEOPLE, they are JEWS. When we look at Jacob and Esau again we see two nations, we see a chosen people, and one that is not, and then we see the verses again:

    OLD TESTAMENT

    I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob,

    And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
    Malachi 1: 2-3

    NEW TESTAMENT

    As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Romans 9:13

    We still look at these verses, we must understand that it is GOD’S sovereign Will which we CANNOT QUESTION. We don’t understand everything, but one day, we will. – the LORD will reveal to us what we cannot understand and comprehend now.

    .

    Today we see two nations fighting to dominate. The Jewish nation, the twelve tribes of Israel will once again be shown to overshadow that which is evil. See Revelation 7 and 14.

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus

    You aren’t making much sense. Dan has tried in vain to explain his position, yet you continue to argue and twist his comments.

    You treat almost anyone who opposes you, as an ignorant individual when discussing Islam/Muslims, that doesn’t say much for your treatment of the subject, after reading your antangonistic complaints.

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus

    You aren’t making much sense. Dan has tried in vain to explain his position, yet you continue to argue and twist his comments.

    You treat almost anyone who opposes you, as an ignorant individual when discussing Islam/Muslims, that doesn’t say much for your treatment of the subject, after reading your antangonistic complaints.

  • Daniel Gorman

    Grace@64: “Today we see two nations fighting to dominate. The Jewish nation, the twelve tribes of Israel will once again be shown to overshadow that which is evil. See Revelation 7 and 14.”

    Does biblical prophecy explain how the Jewish nation will come to dominate Iran? Will it come to pass because of military action by the United States? If so, will God bless the United States for destroying Israel’s enemy?

  • Daniel Gorman

    Grace@64: “Today we see two nations fighting to dominate. The Jewish nation, the twelve tribes of Israel will once again be shown to overshadow that which is evil. See Revelation 7 and 14.”

    Does biblical prophecy explain how the Jewish nation will come to dominate Iran? Will it come to pass because of military action by the United States? If so, will God bless the United States for destroying Israel’s enemy?

  • Stone the Crows

    There are tensions around the world; anyone heard the story that some 1,000 fishing boats have set sail from mainland China towards the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands as a form of protest over Japan’s control over them?
    The Nikkei [sub] reports:
    “If a large number of Chinese vessels intrude into Japanese territorial waters around the Japanese-controlled islands in the East China Sea, it could trigger unexpected incidents such as clashes with Japan Coast Guard patrol ships, further escalating tensions between the two countries.”
    At the same time, Japanese carmakers operating in China announced closures of their factories.
    Nissan suspended production on Monday and Tuesday at two factories in Guangzhou and Zhengzhou, Reuters says.
    Honda will suspend production in China starting September 18. “We have decided to suspend production for two days” in the wake of the heightened tensions between China and Japan, Honda spokeswoman Natsuno Asanuma told Reuters. “Our dealers are not in a position to receive car allocations currently.”
    Mazda will temporarily halt production at its Nanjing factory. There has been violence against Japanese businesses, factories and dealers in China.

  • Stone the Crows

    There are tensions around the world; anyone heard the story that some 1,000 fishing boats have set sail from mainland China towards the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands as a form of protest over Japan’s control over them?
    The Nikkei [sub] reports:
    “If a large number of Chinese vessels intrude into Japanese territorial waters around the Japanese-controlled islands in the East China Sea, it could trigger unexpected incidents such as clashes with Japan Coast Guard patrol ships, further escalating tensions between the two countries.”
    At the same time, Japanese carmakers operating in China announced closures of their factories.
    Nissan suspended production on Monday and Tuesday at two factories in Guangzhou and Zhengzhou, Reuters says.
    Honda will suspend production in China starting September 18. “We have decided to suspend production for two days” in the wake of the heightened tensions between China and Japan, Honda spokeswoman Natsuno Asanuma told Reuters. “Our dealers are not in a position to receive car allocations currently.”
    Mazda will temporarily halt production at its Nanjing factory. There has been violence against Japanese businesses, factories and dealers in China.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @66

    LOL!!!!

    Beautiful!!!!

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @66

    LOL!!!!

    Beautiful!!!!

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace,

    Aside from the general silliness of your comments, I’d like to point out that the traditional narrative is that the Arabic peoples are descendents of Abraham’s illegitimate son Ishmael, not Esau.

    Not that the narrative is relevant, given the fact that not all Arabs are Muslims who hate Jews.

    You might want to find some more appropriate Bible verses.

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace,

    Aside from the general silliness of your comments, I’d like to point out that the traditional narrative is that the Arabic peoples are descendents of Abraham’s illegitimate son Ishmael, not Esau.

    Not that the narrative is relevant, given the fact that not all Arabs are Muslims who hate Jews.

    You might want to find some more appropriate Bible verses.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com bike bubba

    There is a lot of discussion about whether “most” Muslims in Iran would want to destroy Israel, but in my view, that’s the wrong way to view Persia. Rather, for the past I don’t know how many centuries, Persia/Iran has been ruled by a small minority–probably going back well before Islam was founded, really, into the time of Cyrus and centuries before.

    So it doesn’t matter, in my opinion, that most Persians are well educated and generally nice people–a view that I come by by experience, by the way. What matters is what the oligarchy is saying–if they can get just enough nuclear engineers and a few rocket scientists to go along with them, Achmadinejad can be roasting marshmallows over the ruins of Tel Aviv.

    Again, I’m hoping and praying for repentance on the part of the oligarchs, and maybe a good move in Iran away from dictatorship, but failing that, there are clear signs that someone will need to take some more concrete actions to make sure that the oligarchs don’t have this power.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com bike bubba

    There is a lot of discussion about whether “most” Muslims in Iran would want to destroy Israel, but in my view, that’s the wrong way to view Persia. Rather, for the past I don’t know how many centuries, Persia/Iran has been ruled by a small minority–probably going back well before Islam was founded, really, into the time of Cyrus and centuries before.

    So it doesn’t matter, in my opinion, that most Persians are well educated and generally nice people–a view that I come by by experience, by the way. What matters is what the oligarchy is saying–if they can get just enough nuclear engineers and a few rocket scientists to go along with them, Achmadinejad can be roasting marshmallows over the ruins of Tel Aviv.

    Again, I’m hoping and praying for repentance on the part of the oligarchs, and maybe a good move in Iran away from dictatorship, but failing that, there are clear signs that someone will need to take some more concrete actions to make sure that the oligarchs don’t have this power.

  • Stone the Crows

    #69; Not to mention that native Iranians are not Arabs.
    #70 Bike, your assesment of Iranians is the same as mine, and yes those who dislike the current regime tend to call themselves Persian.

  • Stone the Crows

    #69; Not to mention that native Iranians are not Arabs.
    #70 Bike, your assesment of Iranians is the same as mine, and yes those who dislike the current regime tend to call themselves Persian.

  • Cincinnatus

    bike bubba:

    You make a fair point, except for one thing: As I’ve noted several times, most (if not all?) of the crazy rhetoric is coming from Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad is a figureheard, and his statements are not normative for the rest of the Iranian regime. The “oligarchy” is not on an insane quest to acquire nukes so they can roast marshmallows over the smoldering embers of Tel Aviv. They’re trying to construct nuclear weapons so that Israel and America (and Pakistan) aren’t the only nuclear powers in their region. If your neighbors are nuclear powers, it’s difficult if not impossible to exert your own strategic interests, much less defend them.

    Now, I’m not at all suggesting that Iran should be allowed to procure nukes. But that’s not really America’s problem except insofar as we tend to perceive any instability anywhere in the world as our problem. When we imagine Iran to be as Dan Kempin imagines it–a monolithic culture of Muslims who believe that Israel should be destroyed–we’re falling victim to manipulative rhetoric that seeks to make us hate Iran for its irrationality, etc. In reality, Iran’s motives are quite rational–and none of our business.

    Meanwhile, who should take “some more concrete actions to make sure that the oligarchs don’t have this power”? Have you really not learned any lessons from America’s past 70 years of interventionism in Central Asia?

  • Cincinnatus

    bike bubba:

    You make a fair point, except for one thing: As I’ve noted several times, most (if not all?) of the crazy rhetoric is coming from Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad is a figureheard, and his statements are not normative for the rest of the Iranian regime. The “oligarchy” is not on an insane quest to acquire nukes so they can roast marshmallows over the smoldering embers of Tel Aviv. They’re trying to construct nuclear weapons so that Israel and America (and Pakistan) aren’t the only nuclear powers in their region. If your neighbors are nuclear powers, it’s difficult if not impossible to exert your own strategic interests, much less defend them.

    Now, I’m not at all suggesting that Iran should be allowed to procure nukes. But that’s not really America’s problem except insofar as we tend to perceive any instability anywhere in the world as our problem. When we imagine Iran to be as Dan Kempin imagines it–a monolithic culture of Muslims who believe that Israel should be destroyed–we’re falling victim to manipulative rhetoric that seeks to make us hate Iran for its irrationality, etc. In reality, Iran’s motives are quite rational–and none of our business.

    Meanwhile, who should take “some more concrete actions to make sure that the oligarchs don’t have this power”? Have you really not learned any lessons from America’s past 70 years of interventionism in Central Asia?

  • Cincinnatus

    Stone the Crows:

    Good catch. Not that Grace will allow facts to disrupt her narrative.

  • Cincinnatus

    Stone the Crows:

    Good catch. Not that Grace will allow facts to disrupt her narrative.

  • SKPeterson

    What is troubling is that we don’t seem to have a long-term plan for diplomacy with Iran, especially with a post-Khamenei government.

  • SKPeterson

    What is troubling is that we don’t seem to have a long-term plan for diplomacy with Iran, especially with a post-Khamenei government.

  • Grace

    Daniel @66 “Does biblical prophecy explain how the Jewish nation will come to dominate Iran? Will it come to pass because of military action by the United States? If so, will God bless the United States for destroying Israel’s enemy?”

    Prophecy tells us that the Jewish nation will not lose against all those who come to destroy them.

    1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

    2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.

    3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

    4
    In that day, saith the LORD, I will smite every horse with astonishment, and his rider with madness: and I will open mine eyes upon the house of Judah, and will smite every horse of the people with blindness.

    5 And the governors of Judah shall say in their heart, The inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the LORD of hosts their God.

    6
    In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem.

    7 The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.

    8 In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

    Zechariah 12

  • Grace

    Daniel @66 “Does biblical prophecy explain how the Jewish nation will come to dominate Iran? Will it come to pass because of military action by the United States? If so, will God bless the United States for destroying Israel’s enemy?”

    Prophecy tells us that the Jewish nation will not lose against all those who come to destroy them.

    1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

    2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.

    3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

    4
    In that day, saith the LORD, I will smite every horse with astonishment, and his rider with madness: and I will open mine eyes upon the house of Judah, and will smite every horse of the people with blindness.

    5 And the governors of Judah shall say in their heart, The inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the LORD of hosts their God.

    6
    In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem.

    7 The LORD also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.

    8 In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

    Zechariah 12

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Cincinnatus, Stone the Crows )@73 & 71): Yes, and what is more, they speak an Indo-European language as well.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    Cincinnatus, Stone the Crows )@73 & 71): Yes, and what is more, they speak an Indo-European language as well.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus,

    You seem to be enjoying an imaginary debate with me. (I suppose that is easier than actually engaging what I said.) Have fun and let me know how it turns out.

  • Dan Kempin

    Cincinnatus,

    You seem to be enjoying an imaginary debate with me. (I suppose that is easier than actually engaging what I said.) Have fun and let me know how it turns out.

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus @73

    There is no “catch” – the only way you might understand, IS, if you study Scripture.

    Revelation 7 and 14 are prophecy. The twelve tribes of Israel are stated very clearly, it’s not figurative, it’s LITERAL. Just one of the problems all too many people are unwilling to study.

    God is not through with Israel.

    1 I say then, Has God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the descendants of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

    2 God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Elijah? how he makes intercession to God against Israel, saying,

    3 Lord, they have killed your prophets, and dug down your altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

    4 But what says the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

    5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

    6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

    7 What then? Israel has not obtained that which it seeks for; but the election has obtained it, and the rest were blinded

    8 (According as it is written, God has given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.

    9 And David says, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompense unto them:

    10 Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back always.

    11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, to provoke them to jealousy.

    12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fullness?

    13 For I speak to you Gentiles, since I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify my office:

    14 If by any means I may provoke to envy them who are my flesh, and might save some of them.

    15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

    16 For if the firstfruit are holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root is holy, so are the branches.

    17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them partake of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

    18 Boast not against the branches. But if you boast, you bear not the root, but the root you.

    19 You will say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.

    20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Be not arrogant, but fear:

    21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also not spare you.

    22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in his goodness: otherwise you also shall be cut off.

    23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

    24 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, who are the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

    25 For I would not, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.

    26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

    27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

    28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but concerning the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes.
    29 For the gifts and calling of God are unchangeable.

    30 For as you in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:

    31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.

    32 For God has concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
    Romans 11

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus @73

    There is no “catch” – the only way you might understand, IS, if you study Scripture.

    Revelation 7 and 14 are prophecy. The twelve tribes of Israel are stated very clearly, it’s not figurative, it’s LITERAL. Just one of the problems all too many people are unwilling to study.

    God is not through with Israel.

    1 I say then, Has God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the descendants of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

    2 God has not cast away his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Elijah? how he makes intercession to God against Israel, saying,

    3 Lord, they have killed your prophets, and dug down your altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

    4 But what says the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

    5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

    6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

    7 What then? Israel has not obtained that which it seeks for; but the election has obtained it, and the rest were blinded

    8 (According as it is written, God has given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.

    9 And David says, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumbling block, and a recompense unto them:

    10 Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back always.

    11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, to provoke them to jealousy.

    12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fullness?

    13 For I speak to you Gentiles, since I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify my office:

    14 If by any means I may provoke to envy them who are my flesh, and might save some of them.

    15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

    16 For if the firstfruit are holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root is holy, so are the branches.

    17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them partake of the root and fatness of the olive tree;

    18 Boast not against the branches. But if you boast, you bear not the root, but the root you.

    19 You will say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.

    20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Be not arrogant, but fear:

    21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also not spare you.

    22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in his goodness: otherwise you also shall be cut off.

    23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

    24 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, who are the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

    25 For I would not, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.

    26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

    27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

    28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but concerning the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes.
    29 For the gifts and calling of God are unchangeable.

    30 For as you in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:

    31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.

    32 For God has concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
    Romans 11

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan Kempin@77:

    Listen up. You haven’t argued anything. At all.

    In your original comment, you suggest that I incorporate religion into my analysis of Iranian politics, which apparently means that, for (all) Muslims, the “destruction” of all non-Muslims and especially Israel is a “holy cause.” By implication, you suggested that this “holy cause” dictates Iranian foreign policy.

    I an others have pointed out several times how ridiculous this argument turns out to be. In other words, you’ve been thoroughly refuted.

    So what is your point? Since you’ve been refuted, you keep returning to lob meaningless potshots like “nuh-uh!” and “that’s not what I said!”–without actually clarifying what I got wrong, and what you said. To me, your claims are very clear, and very clearly wrong as I’ve demonstrated.

    Your move.

  • Cincinnatus

    Dan Kempin@77:

    Listen up. You haven’t argued anything. At all.

    In your original comment, you suggest that I incorporate religion into my analysis of Iranian politics, which apparently means that, for (all) Muslims, the “destruction” of all non-Muslims and especially Israel is a “holy cause.” By implication, you suggested that this “holy cause” dictates Iranian foreign policy.

    I an others have pointed out several times how ridiculous this argument turns out to be. In other words, you’ve been thoroughly refuted.

    So what is your point? Since you’ve been refuted, you keep returning to lob meaningless potshots like “nuh-uh!” and “that’s not what I said!”–without actually clarifying what I got wrong, and what you said. To me, your claims are very clear, and very clearly wrong as I’ve demonstrated.

    Your move.

  • Daniel Gorman

    Grace@75: “Prophecy tells us that the Jewish nation will not lose against all those who come to destroy them.”

    If Jewish nation will not lose because prophecy cannot be broken, why should the United States get involved at all? Won’t Israel dominate Iran with or without American assistance? Shouldn’t the U.S. end military operations in the Middle East and allow God to destroy Iran’s nuclear program because He loves Jacob and hates Esau?

    “I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob,
    And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. ”
    Malachi 1: 2-3

  • Daniel Gorman

    Grace@75: “Prophecy tells us that the Jewish nation will not lose against all those who come to destroy them.”

    If Jewish nation will not lose because prophecy cannot be broken, why should the United States get involved at all? Won’t Israel dominate Iran with or without American assistance? Shouldn’t the U.S. end military operations in the Middle East and allow God to destroy Iran’s nuclear program because He loves Jacob and hates Esau?

    “I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob,
    And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. ”
    Malachi 1: 2-3

  • Grace

    This from Newsweek Magazine is excellent:

    Muslim Rage & The Last Gasp of Islamic Hate

    Sep 17, 2012 Author – Ayaan Hirsi Ali
    “Once again the streets of the Arab world are burning with false outrage. But we must hold our heads up high. Ayaan Hirsi Ali on how she survived Muslim rage—and how we can end it.”

    ANOTHER EXCERPT

    “Until recently, it was completely justifiable to feel sorry for the masses in Libya because they suffered under the thumb of a cruel dictator. But now they are no longer subjects; they are citizens. They have the opportunity to elect a government and build a society of their choice. Will they follow the lead of the Egyptian people and elect a government that stands for ideals diametrically opposed to those upheld by the United States? They might. But if they do, we should not consider them stupid or infantile. We should recognize that they have made a free choice—a choice to reject freedom as the West understands it.

    ANOTHER EXCERPT:

    The Muslim men and women (and yes, there are plenty of women) who support—whether actively or passively—the idea that blasphemers deserve to suffer punishment are not a fringe group. On the contrary, they represent the mainstream of contemporary Islam. Of course, there are many Muslims and ex-Muslims, in Libya, Egypt, and elsewhere, who unambiguously condemn not only the murders and riots, as well as the idea that dissenters from this mainstream should be punished. But they are marginalized and all too often indirectly held responsible for the very provocation. In the age of globalization and mass immigration, such intolerance has crossed borders and become the defining characteristic of Islam.”
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/09/16/ayaan-hirsi-ali-on-the-islamists-final-stand.html

  • Grace

    This from Newsweek Magazine is excellent:

    Muslim Rage & The Last Gasp of Islamic Hate

    Sep 17, 2012 Author – Ayaan Hirsi Ali
    “Once again the streets of the Arab world are burning with false outrage. But we must hold our heads up high. Ayaan Hirsi Ali on how she survived Muslim rage—and how we can end it.”

    ANOTHER EXCERPT

    “Until recently, it was completely justifiable to feel sorry for the masses in Libya because they suffered under the thumb of a cruel dictator. But now they are no longer subjects; they are citizens. They have the opportunity to elect a government and build a society of their choice. Will they follow the lead of the Egyptian people and elect a government that stands for ideals diametrically opposed to those upheld by the United States? They might. But if they do, we should not consider them stupid or infantile. We should recognize that they have made a free choice—a choice to reject freedom as the West understands it.

    ANOTHER EXCERPT:

    The Muslim men and women (and yes, there are plenty of women) who support—whether actively or passively—the idea that blasphemers deserve to suffer punishment are not a fringe group. On the contrary, they represent the mainstream of contemporary Islam. Of course, there are many Muslims and ex-Muslims, in Libya, Egypt, and elsewhere, who unambiguously condemn not only the murders and riots, as well as the idea that dissenters from this mainstream should be punished. But they are marginalized and all too often indirectly held responsible for the very provocation. In the age of globalization and mass immigration, such intolerance has crossed borders and become the defining characteristic of Islam.”
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/09/16/ayaan-hirsi-ali-on-the-islamists-final-stand.html

  • Grace

    Daniel,

    God did not tell us, those who love HIM, to stand by and not lift a finger to help the Jewish nation. We stood by them in WW2, and so did others who did not cave in to the Nazi hatred. Again, most all Christian Believers I know, will stand with Israel.

  • Grace

    Daniel,

    God did not tell us, those who love HIM, to stand by and not lift a finger to help the Jewish nation. We stood by them in WW2, and so did others who did not cave in to the Nazi hatred. Again, most all Christian Believers I know, will stand with Israel.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    If Jewish nation will not lose because prophecy cannot be broken, why should the United States get involved at all?

    Wooo Hooo!!

    Yes!!!

    Let them do what they are going to do on their own. They can handle themselves quite well. They and their country are not our problem. We aren’t obligated to do this or that for them. The most hilarious part is that we call them an ally. LOL, like they could ever help us. It is just silly. Nothing against them, but what exactly could they do to help us defend ourselves? We are huge and very far away. I guess they could pass on some intelligence info, but that is about it. They don’t have anything but a near worthless piece of dirt. If the Brits hadn’t given it to them and we didn’t help them hold it, they wouldn’t even have that. Religious affection aside, there is no there there.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    If Jewish nation will not lose because prophecy cannot be broken, why should the United States get involved at all?

    Wooo Hooo!!

    Yes!!!

    Let them do what they are going to do on their own. They can handle themselves quite well. They and their country are not our problem. We aren’t obligated to do this or that for them. The most hilarious part is that we call them an ally. LOL, like they could ever help us. It is just silly. Nothing against them, but what exactly could they do to help us defend ourselves? We are huge and very far away. I guess they could pass on some intelligence info, but that is about it. They don’t have anything but a near worthless piece of dirt. If the Brits hadn’t given it to them and we didn’t help them hold it, they wouldn’t even have that. Religious affection aside, there is no there there.

  • SKPeterson

    But Grace, He also didn’t instruct us to intervene either, which was Daniel’s point. And we didn’t really stand by them in WW2. Concentration camps were liberated only if they were in an area of advance, and were not specific military targets. Moreover, many of the Western nations, the U.S. included, often refused to take in Jewish refugees, effectively sentencing them to the ghettos and concentration camps. The story of the S.S. St Louis is a prefect example.

    Oddly, one person responsible for getting many Jews passports out of Poland was the Japanese ambassador to Lithuania, who was a convert to Christianity.

  • SKPeterson

    But Grace, He also didn’t instruct us to intervene either, which was Daniel’s point. And we didn’t really stand by them in WW2. Concentration camps were liberated only if they were in an area of advance, and were not specific military targets. Moreover, many of the Western nations, the U.S. included, often refused to take in Jewish refugees, effectively sentencing them to the ghettos and concentration camps. The story of the S.S. St Louis is a prefect example.

    Oddly, one person responsible for getting many Jews passports out of Poland was the Japanese ambassador to Lithuania, who was a convert to Christianity.

  • Grace

    sg @83 “Let them do what they are going to do on their own. They can handle themselves quite well. They and their country are not our problem. We aren’t obligated to do this or that for them. The most hilarious part is that we call them an ally. LOL, like they could ever help us.”

    You may feel we aren’t “obligated” to do anything for the Jews, but there are many who disagree with you.

    The Jewish people have contributed much to the United States. Giving untold amounts of money to build some of the best hospitals in the country, the list is endless. Some of the best physicians and scientists are Jews. That is a lot of help, which has been given to the U.S. from those who are Jews.

    Yes sg, I can see where you would feel no responsibility for what the Jews have been made to suffer. One has only to look back over decades, and then WW2, that is a mark of great shame to those who tortured the Jewish people – of course with a list of excuses, even trying to include Scripture as a ‘CRUTCH to stand by and do nothing, or worse.

    “Hilarious” ? – NO! Mean spirited, YES!

    Jealousy and envy have followed the Jews for a very long time. It doesn’t say much for those who reveal in very obvious ways their hearts.

  • Grace

    sg @83 “Let them do what they are going to do on their own. They can handle themselves quite well. They and their country are not our problem. We aren’t obligated to do this or that for them. The most hilarious part is that we call them an ally. LOL, like they could ever help us.”

    You may feel we aren’t “obligated” to do anything for the Jews, but there are many who disagree with you.

    The Jewish people have contributed much to the United States. Giving untold amounts of money to build some of the best hospitals in the country, the list is endless. Some of the best physicians and scientists are Jews. That is a lot of help, which has been given to the U.S. from those who are Jews.

    Yes sg, I can see where you would feel no responsibility for what the Jews have been made to suffer. One has only to look back over decades, and then WW2, that is a mark of great shame to those who tortured the Jewish people – of course with a list of excuses, even trying to include Scripture as a ‘CRUTCH to stand by and do nothing, or worse.

    “Hilarious” ? – NO! Mean spirited, YES!

    Jealousy and envy have followed the Jews for a very long time. It doesn’t say much for those who reveal in very obvious ways their hearts.

  • Grace

    sg @83 “They don’t have anything but a near worthless piece of dirt. If the Brits hadn’t given it to them and we didn’t help them hold it, they wouldn’t even have that. Religious affection aside, there is no there there.”

    God gave the land to the Jews, no one else.

  • Grace

    sg @83 “They don’t have anything but a near worthless piece of dirt. If the Brits hadn’t given it to them and we didn’t help them hold it, they wouldn’t even have that. Religious affection aside, there is no there there.”

    God gave the land to the Jews, no one else.

  • Grace

    SKPeterson

    You are wrong, the United States did help the Jews. They fought the Germans, and all others who took part to destroy the Jewish people.

    My uncle a pilot was shot down over Germany. He was held in one of the most horrible places, until they were liberated. Don’t bother to tell me the United States didn’t defend the Jews, or fight so that they would not be exterminated.

  • Grace

    SKPeterson

    You are wrong, the United States did help the Jews. They fought the Germans, and all others who took part to destroy the Jewish people.

    My uncle a pilot was shot down over Germany. He was held in one of the most horrible places, until they were liberated. Don’t bother to tell me the United States didn’t defend the Jews, or fight so that they would not be exterminated.

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@87:

    Let’s count some of the ways you’re wrong:

    1) American involvement in WWII had nothing whatsoever to do with the Holocaust. Nothing. In fact, Eisenhower purposely avoided liberating concentration camps unless they just happened to be encountered on the way to Berlin. If Germany’s “only” crime had been it’s depredations against the Jews, we wouldn’t have been fighting in Europe at all. And most of my older relatives served in WWII, so God bless your uncle, but he’s irrelevant to this discussion.

    2) As you’ve reminded me, Israel does not = the Jews. So Jews have built lots of hospitals and such in America. That’s cool. Lots of Jews are doctors and scientists? Cool story. And why does that mean we need to support the separate nation-state of Israel again?

    3) Thanks for trotting out the old “Jews suffered so we owe them!” meme. Guess who also suffered genocide and oppression in recent history? The Irish, the Rwandans, the Armenians, etc. Why aren’t we unconditional allies of these countries, sending them billions of dollars in subsidies and arms every year? Why aren’t we endorsing their every militant decision? Why aren’t we compromising our own interests just so we can say “we support you, Armenia/Ireland/Rwanda!” Why?!

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@87:

    Let’s count some of the ways you’re wrong:

    1) American involvement in WWII had nothing whatsoever to do with the Holocaust. Nothing. In fact, Eisenhower purposely avoided liberating concentration camps unless they just happened to be encountered on the way to Berlin. If Germany’s “only” crime had been it’s depredations against the Jews, we wouldn’t have been fighting in Europe at all. And most of my older relatives served in WWII, so God bless your uncle, but he’s irrelevant to this discussion.

    2) As you’ve reminded me, Israel does not = the Jews. So Jews have built lots of hospitals and such in America. That’s cool. Lots of Jews are doctors and scientists? Cool story. And why does that mean we need to support the separate nation-state of Israel again?

    3) Thanks for trotting out the old “Jews suffered so we owe them!” meme. Guess who also suffered genocide and oppression in recent history? The Irish, the Rwandans, the Armenians, etc. Why aren’t we unconditional allies of these countries, sending them billions of dollars in subsidies and arms every year? Why aren’t we endorsing their every militant decision? Why aren’t we compromising our own interests just so we can say “we support you, Armenia/Ireland/Rwanda!” Why?!

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus

    You argue that which you don’t understand. You did the same thing with Dan. LOL

  • Grace

    Cincinnatus

    You argue that which you don’t understand. You did the same thing with Dan. LOL

  • SKPeterson

    Grace – The United States did not fight to defend Europe’s Jews, or fight so they would not be exterminated. That is a simple, but brutal, historical fact. Your uncle was not flying planes over Germany to save Jews; he was doing it to drop bombs or escort bombers dropping bombs on German factories and military installations. The actions that led to the liberation of the Jews were a secondary or tertiary result of Allied action against the Axis. The plight of the Jews was not ever a material consideration of Allied war aims or the conduct of the war. The aim was to defeat Germany, Italy and Japan. Liberation of the Jewish population came about as areas fell under Allied control or from German abandonment as they retreated.

    http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007094

    Further, we did not go to war against Nazi Germany because of what the Germans were doing to the Jews. We went to war with Germany because Germany declared war on us after Pearl Harbor. Also, the Soviets liberated many of the camps due to there being more in Poland than in western Germany. I don’t think Stalin cared too much for liberating Jews as a matter of Russian war aims; they were pretty much concerned with killing as many Germans as possible as quickly as possible.

    By the way, I had a great uncle who was shot down over Germany and spent a year or so in one of the Stalags. He never mentioned that he was dropping bombs to liberate Jews, he said he was dropping bombs because it was a war and that was what they were ordered to do.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace – The United States did not fight to defend Europe’s Jews, or fight so they would not be exterminated. That is a simple, but brutal, historical fact. Your uncle was not flying planes over Germany to save Jews; he was doing it to drop bombs or escort bombers dropping bombs on German factories and military installations. The actions that led to the liberation of the Jews were a secondary or tertiary result of Allied action against the Axis. The plight of the Jews was not ever a material consideration of Allied war aims or the conduct of the war. The aim was to defeat Germany, Italy and Japan. Liberation of the Jewish population came about as areas fell under Allied control or from German abandonment as they retreated.

    http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007094

    Further, we did not go to war against Nazi Germany because of what the Germans were doing to the Jews. We went to war with Germany because Germany declared war on us after Pearl Harbor. Also, the Soviets liberated many of the camps due to there being more in Poland than in western Germany. I don’t think Stalin cared too much for liberating Jews as a matter of Russian war aims; they were pretty much concerned with killing as many Germans as possible as quickly as possible.

    By the way, I had a great uncle who was shot down over Germany and spent a year or so in one of the Stalags. He never mentioned that he was dropping bombs to liberate Jews, he said he was dropping bombs because it was a war and that was what they were ordered to do.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace @ 89. I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace @ 89. I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @ 85

    What about the Ukrainians? They suffered, too. Oh, but they were mostly Christians, so who cares.

    The Holodomor (Ukrainian: Голодомор, ‘Морити голодом’, literal translation Killing by hunger) was a man-made famine in the Ukrainian SSR between 1932 and 1933. During the famine, which is also known as the “terror-famine in Ukraine” and “famine-genocide in Ukraine”, millions of Ukrainians died of starvation in a peacetime catastrophe unprecedented in the history of Ukraine.
    Early estimates of the death toll by scholars and government officials varied greatly; anywhere from 1.8 to 12 million ethnic Ukrainians were said to have been killed as a result of the famine. Recent research has since narrowed the estimates to between 2.4 and 7.5 million. The exact number of deaths is hard to determine, due to a lack of records, but the number increases significantly when the deaths inside heavily Ukrainian-populated Kuban are included. The demographic deficit caused by unborn or unrecorded births is said to be as high as 6 million. Older estimates are still often cited in political commentary.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @ 85

    What about the Ukrainians? They suffered, too. Oh, but they were mostly Christians, so who cares.

    The Holodomor (Ukrainian: Голодомор, ‘Морити голодом’, literal translation Killing by hunger) was a man-made famine in the Ukrainian SSR between 1932 and 1933. During the famine, which is also known as the “terror-famine in Ukraine” and “famine-genocide in Ukraine”, millions of Ukrainians died of starvation in a peacetime catastrophe unprecedented in the history of Ukraine.
    Early estimates of the death toll by scholars and government officials varied greatly; anywhere from 1.8 to 12 million ethnic Ukrainians were said to have been killed as a result of the famine. Recent research has since narrowed the estimates to between 2.4 and 7.5 million. The exact number of deaths is hard to determine, due to a lack of records, but the number increases significantly when the deaths inside heavily Ukrainian-populated Kuban are included. The demographic deficit caused by unborn or unrecorded births is said to be as high as 6 million. Older estimates are still often cited in political commentary.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @89

    No, you don’t understand.

    Repeat.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @89

    No, you don’t understand.

    Repeat.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    You may feel we aren’t “obligated” to do anything for the Jews, but there are many who disagree with you.

    So what? If a bunch of people disagree with me, then what? I must be wrong? That makes no sense.

    The Jewish people have contributed much to the United States.

    Uh, huh. They contributed a lot to Germany, too.

    Giving untold amounts of money to build some of the best hospitals in the country, the list is endless.

    Gee, where did they get that money and prosperity? Probably from the opportunity they enjoyed here in the US like a lot of other people.

    Some of the best physicians and scientists are Jews. That is a lot of help, which has been given to the U.S. from those who are Jews.

    God gave them the ability; the U.S. gave the opportunity, and they made good on it. Great. Right honorable. But how does that obligate the U.S. to prop up the country of Israel? By that reasoning, we should have helped Nazi Germany because of all the Germans who came here and worked hard and became doctors and built hospitals and invented stuff.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    You may feel we aren’t “obligated” to do anything for the Jews, but there are many who disagree with you.

    So what? If a bunch of people disagree with me, then what? I must be wrong? That makes no sense.

    The Jewish people have contributed much to the United States.

    Uh, huh. They contributed a lot to Germany, too.

    Giving untold amounts of money to build some of the best hospitals in the country, the list is endless.

    Gee, where did they get that money and prosperity? Probably from the opportunity they enjoyed here in the US like a lot of other people.

    Some of the best physicians and scientists are Jews. That is a lot of help, which has been given to the U.S. from those who are Jews.

    God gave them the ability; the U.S. gave the opportunity, and they made good on it. Great. Right honorable. But how does that obligate the U.S. to prop up the country of Israel? By that reasoning, we should have helped Nazi Germany because of all the Germans who came here and worked hard and became doctors and built hospitals and invented stuff.

  • Grace

    The dreadful acts of violence and hatred against the Jews was not a secret. To believe that it was a secret, is nonsense!

    Did the Allies and the people in the Free World know about the events going on in Europe?

    The various steps taken by the Nazis prior to the “Final Solution” (1941) were all taken publicly and were, therefore, reported in the press. Foreign correspondents commented on all the major anti-Jewish actions taken by the Nazis in Germany, Austria, and Czechoslovakia prior to 1939. Once the war began, obtaining information became more difficult, but reports, nonetheless, were published regarding the fate of the Jews. Thus, although the Nazis did not publicize the “Final Solution,” less than one year after the systematic murder of the Jews was initiated, details began to filter out to the West. The first report which spoke of a plan for the mass murder of Jews was smuggled out of Poland by the Bund (a Jewish socialist political organization) and reached England in the spring of 1942. The details of this report reached the Allies from Vatican sources as well as from informants in Switzerland and the Polish underground. (Jan Karski, an emissary of the Polish underground, personally met with Franklin Roosevelt and British Foreign Minister Anthony Eden). Eventually, in late November 1942, the American Government and the Allies officially confirmed the reports of mass murder to Jewish leaders. They were publicized immediately thereafter. While the details were neither complete nor wholly accurate, the Allies became aware of most of what the Germans were doing to the Jews and other victims.

    http://www.dallasholocaustmuseum.org/index.php/education/faqs/P15/

  • Grace

    The dreadful acts of violence and hatred against the Jews was not a secret. To believe that it was a secret, is nonsense!

    Did the Allies and the people in the Free World know about the events going on in Europe?

    The various steps taken by the Nazis prior to the “Final Solution” (1941) were all taken publicly and were, therefore, reported in the press. Foreign correspondents commented on all the major anti-Jewish actions taken by the Nazis in Germany, Austria, and Czechoslovakia prior to 1939. Once the war began, obtaining information became more difficult, but reports, nonetheless, were published regarding the fate of the Jews. Thus, although the Nazis did not publicize the “Final Solution,” less than one year after the systematic murder of the Jews was initiated, details began to filter out to the West. The first report which spoke of a plan for the mass murder of Jews was smuggled out of Poland by the Bund (a Jewish socialist political organization) and reached England in the spring of 1942. The details of this report reached the Allies from Vatican sources as well as from informants in Switzerland and the Polish underground. (Jan Karski, an emissary of the Polish underground, personally met with Franklin Roosevelt and British Foreign Minister Anthony Eden). Eventually, in late November 1942, the American Government and the Allies officially confirmed the reports of mass murder to Jewish leaders. They were publicized immediately thereafter. While the details were neither complete nor wholly accurate, the Allies became aware of most of what the Germans were doing to the Jews and other victims.

    http://www.dallasholocaustmuseum.org/index.php/education/faqs/P15/

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    God gave the land to the Jews, no one else.

    He let the Babylonians destroy them at one point. Later came the Romans 70 AD (amateur neo-mystic numerologists take note), who pulled the same thing. So…

    Anyway, isn’t there a new covenant? I seem to remember something about the law being fulfilled…

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    God gave the land to the Jews, no one else.

    He let the Babylonians destroy them at one point. Later came the Romans 70 AD (amateur neo-mystic numerologists take note), who pulled the same thing. So…

    Anyway, isn’t there a new covenant? I seem to remember something about the law being fulfilled…

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @95

    I must have missed the comment where someone claimed that Jews have not suffered. Can you point it out?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @95

    I must have missed the comment where someone claimed that Jews have not suffered. Can you point it out?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Oops,
    sorry about 96. I somehow accidentally quoted myself instead of what I was quoting.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Oops,
    sorry about 96. I somehow accidentally quoted myself instead of what I was quoting.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace @ 95 – They may have known about the atrocities. That they were not a secret does not equate to making liberation of the Jews in concentration camps a military priority. It wasn’t. Moreover, no one has said that the atrocities were a secret. We are saying that the existence of the camps was not a material consideration in the strategies and tactics adopted by the Allies in order to defeat Germany. Even though those events might have been known in some circles, it was not until well into 1944 that the U.S. government even began to take notice. Even then, it did not enter into the calculus of how to defeat Germany.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace @ 95 – They may have known about the atrocities. That they were not a secret does not equate to making liberation of the Jews in concentration camps a military priority. It wasn’t. Moreover, no one has said that the atrocities were a secret. We are saying that the existence of the camps was not a material consideration in the strategies and tactics adopted by the Allies in order to defeat Germany. Even though those events might have been known in some circles, it was not until well into 1944 that the U.S. government even began to take notice. Even then, it did not enter into the calculus of how to defeat Germany.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Hey, everyone but Grace,

    As one who has gone down this road many, many times, may I politely suggest that there is no value, whatsoever, in your continuing this conversation with Grace. At all.

    She won’t listen. She doesn’t really understand what you’re saying. Nor does she know what she’s talking about. You know it’s true.

    Yes, she’s wrong. Self-contradictorily wrong. Deeply, amusingly, bafflingly wrong. No, none of us know why she keeps posting here.

    Except that she seems to enjoy people responding to her as if she were making a cogent point. Please don’t give her reason to think that her comments are cogent. They’re not.

    Trust me, you’ll feel better after you ignore her. You know you’re not ever going to get her to learn anything, much less admit that she’s wrong. When has she ever admitted that before?

    She just wants to interrupt the conversation. She wants attention.

    Please, stop giving it to her.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Hey, everyone but Grace,

    As one who has gone down this road many, many times, may I politely suggest that there is no value, whatsoever, in your continuing this conversation with Grace. At all.

    She won’t listen. She doesn’t really understand what you’re saying. Nor does she know what she’s talking about. You know it’s true.

    Yes, she’s wrong. Self-contradictorily wrong. Deeply, amusingly, bafflingly wrong. No, none of us know why she keeps posting here.

    Except that she seems to enjoy people responding to her as if she were making a cogent point. Please don’t give her reason to think that her comments are cogent. They’re not.

    Trust me, you’ll feel better after you ignore her. You know you’re not ever going to get her to learn anything, much less admit that she’s wrong. When has she ever admitted that before?

    She just wants to interrupt the conversation. She wants attention.

    Please, stop giving it to her.

  • Grace

    SKPeterson – “Even though those events might have been known in some circles, it was not until well into 1944 that the U.S. government even began to take notice. Even then, it did not enter into the calculus of how to defeat Germany.”

    They did know, it wasn’t a secret, but used as a handy excuse not just by people who haven’t studied that era, but by the Germans themselves, who knew full well about the camps. Don’t forget, it took thousands upon thousands of people to work within all the camps. The smell alone was horrific, it told the story loud and clear from the ovens.

    We and the British in an attempt to end the atrocities within Germany, and stop Hitler, used firebombing. It worked. They evil acts had to be stopped, and that’s exactly what the U.S. and the British did. Germany finally fell about three months later. If the British Royal Air Force and the United States had not bombed Dresden, and Berlin, the war would have been longer. How many more Jews and innocents would have been gassed, and mutilated.

    The Nazi’s received what they deserved, and all those who worked in the factories, etc.

    You can believe whatever you like, just as I can. I don’t expect you to agree with me.

  • Grace

    SKPeterson – “Even though those events might have been known in some circles, it was not until well into 1944 that the U.S. government even began to take notice. Even then, it did not enter into the calculus of how to defeat Germany.”

    They did know, it wasn’t a secret, but used as a handy excuse not just by people who haven’t studied that era, but by the Germans themselves, who knew full well about the camps. Don’t forget, it took thousands upon thousands of people to work within all the camps. The smell alone was horrific, it told the story loud and clear from the ovens.

    We and the British in an attempt to end the atrocities within Germany, and stop Hitler, used firebombing. It worked. They evil acts had to be stopped, and that’s exactly what the U.S. and the British did. Germany finally fell about three months later. If the British Royal Air Force and the United States had not bombed Dresden, and Berlin, the war would have been longer. How many more Jews and innocents would have been gassed, and mutilated.

    The Nazi’s received what they deserved, and all those who worked in the factories, etc.

    You can believe whatever you like, just as I can. I don’t expect you to agree with me.

  • Grace

    I’ve seen that face before, that must be Mr. Kadiddlehopper
    wHO hOO

  • Grace

    I’ve seen that face before, that must be Mr. Kadiddlehopper
    wHO hOO

  • Grace

    Nope, he changed his name back, POOR tODD!

  • Grace

    Nope, he changed his name back, POOR tODD!

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    She won’t listen. She doesn’t really understand what you’re saying. Nor does she know what she’s talking about. You know it’s true.

    Yes, we know it is true. However, this bizarre understanding of the modern political state of Israel should be refuted whenever it shows up. Many more people read comments than make them. By not refuting false statements, some may think they are correct because people here are not unwilling to challenge false statements. Conveniently, here the case for this strange position is not being made well, so it is particularly easy to refute. But the level of Israel propaganda by Christians has gotten so huge that rather nice gullible folks are being taken in. A dear sweet older friend of mine said to me today that Israel is our only ally! I mean, seriously, what it the world? That is just nuts. But, there is this incessant pro Israel propaganda which people hear so often, they start to just get on the bandwagon. I bet Tibet would love to have us support their bid for independence and call them our only ally because they, uh, were willing to receive our assistance, but that ain’t happening.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    She won’t listen. She doesn’t really understand what you’re saying. Nor does she know what she’s talking about. You know it’s true.

    Yes, we know it is true. However, this bizarre understanding of the modern political state of Israel should be refuted whenever it shows up. Many more people read comments than make them. By not refuting false statements, some may think they are correct because people here are not unwilling to challenge false statements. Conveniently, here the case for this strange position is not being made well, so it is particularly easy to refute. But the level of Israel propaganda by Christians has gotten so huge that rather nice gullible folks are being taken in. A dear sweet older friend of mine said to me today that Israel is our only ally! I mean, seriously, what it the world? That is just nuts. But, there is this incessant pro Israel propaganda which people hear so often, they start to just get on the bandwagon. I bet Tibet would love to have us support their bid for independence and call them our only ally because they, uh, were willing to receive our assistance, but that ain’t happening.

  • Daniel Gorman

    Grace@82: “Daniel,

    God did not tell us, those who love HIM, to stand by and not lift a finger to help the Jewish nation. We stood by them in WW2, and so did others who did not cave in to the Nazi hatred. Again, most all Christian Believers I know, will stand with Israel.”

    Is the Holy Trinity the God of the Jewish nation? If not, why would Christian Believers stand with one non-Christian nation (Israel) in opposition to another non-Christian nation (Iran)?

    Karl Fessig@100: “Hey, everyone but Grace,

    As one who has gone down this road many, many times, may I politely suggest that there is no value, whatsoever, in your continuing this conversation with Grace. At all.”

    I disagree. A war with Iran could cost the lives of thousands of American lives, trillions of dollars, and ruin our economy for decades. Experts tell me bombing raids will not be sufficient to permanently end Iran’s nuclear program. A one million man invasion force may be required. The blow-back in the Islamic world may force an American invasion of Pakistan in order to secure its nuclear weapons.

    Grace represents millions of Christian Believers and voters. I’m trying to understand their theology. Aren’t you at all curious why an Iranian war may/will come about?

  • Daniel Gorman

    Grace@82: “Daniel,

    God did not tell us, those who love HIM, to stand by and not lift a finger to help the Jewish nation. We stood by them in WW2, and so did others who did not cave in to the Nazi hatred. Again, most all Christian Believers I know, will stand with Israel.”

    Is the Holy Trinity the God of the Jewish nation? If not, why would Christian Believers stand with one non-Christian nation (Israel) in opposition to another non-Christian nation (Iran)?

    Karl Fessig@100: “Hey, everyone but Grace,

    As one who has gone down this road many, many times, may I politely suggest that there is no value, whatsoever, in your continuing this conversation with Grace. At all.”

    I disagree. A war with Iran could cost the lives of thousands of American lives, trillions of dollars, and ruin our economy for decades. Experts tell me bombing raids will not be sufficient to permanently end Iran’s nuclear program. A one million man invasion force may be required. The blow-back in the Islamic world may force an American invasion of Pakistan in order to secure its nuclear weapons.

    Grace represents millions of Christian Believers and voters. I’m trying to understand their theology. Aren’t you at all curious why an Iranian war may/will come about?

  • Grace

    “But the level of Israel propaganda by Christians has gotten so huge that rather nice gullible folks are being taken in”

    You’re in the minority. I say this because you cannot refute Scripture. Romans 11 is very clear, and so is Zechariah 12 (posted above.) You won’t understand the state of Israel or the Jews, or the prophecy unless you study it.

    There are lots of people just like you, who believe they have replaced the Jewish people. Read Revelation 7 and 14 regarding the 144,000, it’s LITERAL, there is nothing figurtive in those passages. The names of the 12 are listed, each tribe will have 12,000 each.

  • Grace

    “But the level of Israel propaganda by Christians has gotten so huge that rather nice gullible folks are being taken in”

    You’re in the minority. I say this because you cannot refute Scripture. Romans 11 is very clear, and so is Zechariah 12 (posted above.) You won’t understand the state of Israel or the Jews, or the prophecy unless you study it.

    There are lots of people just like you, who believe they have replaced the Jewish people. Read Revelation 7 and 14 regarding the 144,000, it’s LITERAL, there is nothing figurtive in those passages. The names of the 12 are listed, each tribe will have 12,000 each.

  • Grace

    Daniel @105

    I have not advocated a war with Iran. I would, if Israel is attacked want our country to help them, that doesn’t mean that I believe we should attack Iran, or any other country.

    I don’t believe we should be in Afganistan, that view is not held by everyone, but it’s my belief.

  • Grace

    Daniel @105

    I have not advocated a war with Iran. I would, if Israel is attacked want our country to help them, that doesn’t mean that I believe we should attack Iran, or any other country.

    I don’t believe we should be in Afganistan, that view is not held by everyone, but it’s my belief.

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@107:

    I’m in the mood to engage you (for the purposes of my amusement) today, so I’ll ignore tODD’s prudent recommendation.

    Why would you want us to help Israel if Israel becomes engaged in a war with Iran? (At the moment, it’s more likely that Israel will attack Iran than the reverse.) What American interests would be served in such a war? What would justify the inevitable sacrifice of trillions in American dollars and thousands in American lives?

  • Cincinnatus

    Grace@107:

    I’m in the mood to engage you (for the purposes of my amusement) today, so I’ll ignore tODD’s prudent recommendation.

    Why would you want us to help Israel if Israel becomes engaged in a war with Iran? (At the moment, it’s more likely that Israel will attack Iran than the reverse.) What American interests would be served in such a war? What would justify the inevitable sacrifice of trillions in American dollars and thousands in American lives?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Stuff like 106 is case in point of this goofy crazy talk on the part of Christians.

    The point of the New Testament is the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ for the salvation of the world. It is not that Christians need to help Jews rebuild the temple in Jerusalem as though Christ never died and rose again. There is no point in rebuilding the temple or for Jews to live in Israel or any of the rest of it. That is not my religion. We should care about Jews like we care about any human beinga. We should treat Israel like any other nation based on its policies, not based on some strange new interpretation of some passage.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Stuff like 106 is case in point of this goofy crazy talk on the part of Christians.

    The point of the New Testament is the substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ for the salvation of the world. It is not that Christians need to help Jews rebuild the temple in Jerusalem as though Christ never died and rose again. There is no point in rebuilding the temple or for Jews to live in Israel or any of the rest of it. That is not my religion. We should care about Jews like we care about any human beinga. We should treat Israel like any other nation based on its policies, not based on some strange new interpretation of some passage.

  • DonS

    Just to clarify the point, I’m with sg @ 106.

    It is not our job to bring about whatever the end times may hold. Moreover, Scripture holds that we have no idea when the end times are near. Our job is to love all of our neighbors, and to redeem the time God has given us on this earth, however long that is, to serve Him by spreading the Gospel to as many of our neighbors as possible.

    Our foreign policy must always be conducted with the best interests of the United States at heart. That is the Constitutional duty of the President. That means standing with and honoring all of the obligations we have made to our allies, including Israel, but it does not necessarily mean supporting them in an offensive war that we consider ill advised, or not in the best interests of the U.S., especially if we have clearly relayed our concerns to them.

  • DonS

    Just to clarify the point, I’m with sg @ 106.

    It is not our job to bring about whatever the end times may hold. Moreover, Scripture holds that we have no idea when the end times are near. Our job is to love all of our neighbors, and to redeem the time God has given us on this earth, however long that is, to serve Him by spreading the Gospel to as many of our neighbors as possible.

    Our foreign policy must always be conducted with the best interests of the United States at heart. That is the Constitutional duty of the President. That means standing with and honoring all of the obligations we have made to our allies, including Israel, but it does not necessarily mean supporting them in an offensive war that we consider ill advised, or not in the best interests of the U.S., especially if we have clearly relayed our concerns to them.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    You’re in the minority. I say this because you cannot refute Scripture.

    Uh, what? Does that mean that the majority can refute scripture?

    Makes no sense.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    You’re in the minority. I say this because you cannot refute Scripture.

    Uh, what? Does that mean that the majority can refute scripture?

    Makes no sense.

  • Grace

    Who said anything about helping the Jews rebuild the temple?

    Paul wrote:

    1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

    2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

    3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

    4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
    2 Thessalonians 1:1-4

    Verse 4 is referring to the anti-christ.

  • Grace

    Who said anything about helping the Jews rebuild the temple?

    Paul wrote:

    1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

    2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

    3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

    4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
    2 Thessalonians 1:1-4

    Verse 4 is referring to the anti-christ.

  • Grace

    Don

    I agree with you @110. It is not our job to bring about whatever the end times may hold. Moreover, Scripture holds that we have no idea when the end times are near. Our job is to love all of our neighbors, and to redeem the time God has given us on this earth, however long that is, to serve Him by spreading the Gospel to as many of our neighbors as possible.”

    I have never advocated to do ‘whatever to “bring about whatever the end times may hold” it makes no sense, only the LORD knows these things, they will take place in HIS own time.

    As we are both affiliated with Calvary Church, I agree with them completely regarding spreading the truth of Jesus Christ to all who will listen -

  • Grace

    Don

    I agree with you @110. It is not our job to bring about whatever the end times may hold. Moreover, Scripture holds that we have no idea when the end times are near. Our job is to love all of our neighbors, and to redeem the time God has given us on this earth, however long that is, to serve Him by spreading the Gospel to as many of our neighbors as possible.”

    I have never advocated to do ‘whatever to “bring about whatever the end times may hold” it makes no sense, only the LORD knows these things, they will take place in HIS own time.

    As we are both affiliated with Calvary Church, I agree with them completely regarding spreading the truth of Jesus Christ to all who will listen -

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I looked up that passage in modern English:

    2 Thessalonians 1:1-4
    English Standard Version (ESV)

    1 Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:
    2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
    3 We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers,[a] as is right, because your faith is growing abundantly, and the love of every one of you for one another is increasing.
    4 Therefore we ourselves boast about you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions that you are enduring.

    ————————–

    There was an ad on that Bible Gateway page offering a prayer card for Israel!

    It is just crazy.

    I clicked on the ad:

    http://www.salemoffers.com/campaign/free-prayer-card/rc/bgbanners

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I looked up that passage in modern English:

    2 Thessalonians 1:1-4
    English Standard Version (ESV)

    1 Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:
    2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
    3 We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers,[a] as is right, because your faith is growing abundantly, and the love of every one of you for one another is increasing.
    4 Therefore we ourselves boast about you in the churches of God for your steadfastness and faith in all your persecutions and in the afflictions that you are enduring.

    ————————–

    There was an ad on that Bible Gateway page offering a prayer card for Israel!

    It is just crazy.

    I clicked on the ad:

    http://www.salemoffers.com/campaign/free-prayer-card/rc/bgbanners

  • Grace

    Don @110

    sg did not comment @106, I did.

    I don’t know whether you believe that the Church has replaced Israel, ie; REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY. Calvary Chapel Churches do not advocate that teaching.

    Courious as to what your stance is regarding that doctrine.

  • Grace

    Don @110

    sg did not comment @106, I did.

    I don’t know whether you believe that the Church has replaced Israel, ie; REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY. Calvary Chapel Churches do not advocate that teaching.

    Courious as to what your stance is regarding that doctrine.

  • Grace

    Sorry sg, the passage should have read:

    2 Thessalonians chapter 2

  • Grace

    Sorry sg, the passage should have read:

    2 Thessalonians chapter 2

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Neither Muslims or Jews share our faith in Christ for the forgiveness of sins, so I don’t see an inherent reason to favor Jews over Muslims. We should treat all people well.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Neither Muslims or Jews share our faith in Christ for the forgiveness of sins, so I don’t see an inherent reason to favor Jews over Muslims. We should treat all people well.

  • DonS

    @110, I meant I agreed with sg@109

  • DonS

    @110, I meant I agreed with sg@109

  • Grace

    DonS

    Thanks for clarifing.

    I would appreciate your answering my question regarding Replacement Theology. Which doctrine do you agree with? Most people are willing to answer that question, especially if one attends a Calvary Chapel Church.

  • Grace

    DonS

    Thanks for clarifing.

    I would appreciate your answering my question regarding Replacement Theology. Which doctrine do you agree with? Most people are willing to answer that question, especially if one attends a Calvary Chapel Church.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    SG (@104):

    This bizarre understanding of the modern political state of Israel should be refuted whenever it shows up.

    It’s your call, of course, but I maintain that your engaging with Grace here only makes it more likely that she and her “understanding” will continue to appear on this blog, not less. You’ve only lopped off one head of the hydra, as it were.

    It’s not that I think we shouldn’t refute incorrect (or outright ignorant) claims when they come our way. We should.
    But we should also be wise. You can’t fight all the ignorance on the Internet. And Grace has proven herself resistant to all forms of logic. You can lead a horse to water, etc., etc.

    In short, at some point, you have to assume that the lurkers aren’t complete idiots. That they can tell which commenters are respected by others on this blog, and which ones are just copying and pasting large swaths of text with extremely unnecessary amounts of bold, in the hopes that it constitutes some kind of argument or refutation.

    Yes, there are bad arguments made by reasonable people on this blog. Refute those. Reply to people who will listen — people who should be listened to.

    But let’s not pretend that Grace speaks for some vast swath of people. She often pretends that she does, but let’s not add to that delusion.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    SG (@104):

    This bizarre understanding of the modern political state of Israel should be refuted whenever it shows up.

    It’s your call, of course, but I maintain that your engaging with Grace here only makes it more likely that she and her “understanding” will continue to appear on this blog, not less. You’ve only lopped off one head of the hydra, as it were.

    It’s not that I think we shouldn’t refute incorrect (or outright ignorant) claims when they come our way. We should.
    But we should also be wise. You can’t fight all the ignorance on the Internet. And Grace has proven herself resistant to all forms of logic. You can lead a horse to water, etc., etc.

    In short, at some point, you have to assume that the lurkers aren’t complete idiots. That they can tell which commenters are respected by others on this blog, and which ones are just copying and pasting large swaths of text with extremely unnecessary amounts of bold, in the hopes that it constitutes some kind of argument or refutation.

    Yes, there are bad arguments made by reasonable people on this blog. Refute those. Reply to people who will listen — people who should be listened to.

    But let’s not pretend that Grace speaks for some vast swath of people. She often pretends that she does, but let’s not add to that delusion.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Daniel (@105), come on. Grace is not going to bring about “a war with Iran” by her comments here. Do you really find her to be so lucid that she would persuade people?

    She can’t even follow a logical argument. She just accuses people of not understanding and then pretends she speaks for some vast multitude, all from knowledge she gained from supposedly studying things for years upon years, and/or from talking to people she knows in her neighborhood, which is unsurpassed in its diversity of knowledge- and authority-granting acquaintances.

    Grace represents millions of Christian Believers and voters.

    Hardly. The one guy from her denomination here often disagrees with her. Don’t play into her delusion. Grace speaks for herself, and poorly at that.

    You want to “understand their theology”? Fine. Find someone with whom you can reasonably engage. Like DonS, maybe. But come on.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Daniel (@105), come on. Grace is not going to bring about “a war with Iran” by her comments here. Do you really find her to be so lucid that she would persuade people?

    She can’t even follow a logical argument. She just accuses people of not understanding and then pretends she speaks for some vast multitude, all from knowledge she gained from supposedly studying things for years upon years, and/or from talking to people she knows in her neighborhood, which is unsurpassed in its diversity of knowledge- and authority-granting acquaintances.

    Grace represents millions of Christian Believers and voters.

    Hardly. The one guy from her denomination here often disagrees with her. Don’t play into her delusion. Grace speaks for herself, and poorly at that.

    You want to “understand their theology”? Fine. Find someone with whom you can reasonably engage. Like DonS, maybe. But come on.

  • Grace

    tODD,

    It is so difficult for you to understand that there are many who do not agree totally with your doctrine, or that of the Roman Catholic Church, Emergent Church or that of Presbyterians on every doctrinal issue.

    Replacement Theology is a subject, concerning Israel/Jews that is not agreed upon in all Christian groups. Certainly you can accept that, instead of indulging in personal attacks.

  • Grace

    tODD,

    It is so difficult for you to understand that there are many who do not agree totally with your doctrine, or that of the Roman Catholic Church, Emergent Church or that of Presbyterians on every doctrinal issue.

    Replacement Theology is a subject, concerning Israel/Jews that is not agreed upon in all Christian groups. Certainly you can accept that, instead of indulging in personal attacks.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    You can’t fight all the ignorance on the Internet. And Grace has proven herself resistant to all forms of logic.

    I think of it as arguing with ideas, not the person. The fact that most here are essentially anonymous makes it more like a script of a discussion than anything personal. I don’t know the people here personally, and I am not trying to convince a given individual of these points. Rather, the discussion allows readers to see the arguments and ideas through the progression of the discussion. Since so many have been exposed to the weird infatuation that some have with Israel, it is worth discussing to show how baseless it actually is. People are more persuaded by the fact that they hear some false thing many times than they are because the case is made well. Sad but true, I have found.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    You can’t fight all the ignorance on the Internet. And Grace has proven herself resistant to all forms of logic.

    I think of it as arguing with ideas, not the person. The fact that most here are essentially anonymous makes it more like a script of a discussion than anything personal. I don’t know the people here personally, and I am not trying to convince a given individual of these points. Rather, the discussion allows readers to see the arguments and ideas through the progression of the discussion. Since so many have been exposed to the weird infatuation that some have with Israel, it is worth discussing to show how baseless it actually is. People are more persuaded by the fact that they hear some false thing many times than they are because the case is made well. Sad but true, I have found.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Replacement Theology. I hadn’t seen that term before. I looked it up and learned something new. Thanks.

    Anyway, it is also called supersessionism and was first opposed by our good buddy, John Calvin in his Institutes of Religion.

    Which made me wonder what other influences John Calvin might have on Calvary Chapel, so I looked those up to. That was an eye opener. So, CC also likes total depravity and that seems to be about all. I am open to correction on these points taken from wiki p, which also claims, “According to Calvary Chapel literature, the association strives to ‘strike a balance between extremes’ when it comes to controversial theological issues such as Calvinism’s and Arminianism’s conflicting views on salvation.”

    I also found this little gem, “Interest in one event during the Tribulation—the building of a Third Temple in Jerusalem—led in the early 1980s to associations between some in Calvary Chapel (including Chuck Smith) and Jewish groups interested in seeing the temple rebuilt.”

    Hmm.

    Of course I don’t know the story there. Maybe someone else does.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Replacement Theology. I hadn’t seen that term before. I looked it up and learned something new. Thanks.

    Anyway, it is also called supersessionism and was first opposed by our good buddy, John Calvin in his Institutes of Religion.

    Which made me wonder what other influences John Calvin might have on Calvary Chapel, so I looked those up to. That was an eye opener. So, CC also likes total depravity and that seems to be about all. I am open to correction on these points taken from wiki p, which also claims, “According to Calvary Chapel literature, the association strives to ‘strike a balance between extremes’ when it comes to controversial theological issues such as Calvinism’s and Arminianism’s conflicting views on salvation.”

    I also found this little gem, “Interest in one event during the Tribulation—the building of a Third Temple in Jerusalem—led in the early 1980s to associations between some in Calvary Chapel (including Chuck Smith) and Jewish groups interested in seeing the temple rebuilt.”

    Hmm.

    Of course I don’t know the story there. Maybe someone else does.

  • Daniel Gorman

    Grace@107: “I have not advocated a war with Iran. I would, if Israel is attacked want our country to help them, that doesn’t mean that I believe we should attack Iran, or any other country.”

    If the Jewish nation says that Iran represents an existential threat to its existence and asks the United States to coordinate in a secret, preemptive attack against Iranian nuclear facilities, should the President comply without first obtaining a declaration of war from congress?

    toDD@121: “Daniel (@105), come on. Grace is not going to bring about “a war with Iran” by her comments here. Do you really find her to be so lucid that she would persuade people?”

    The people who post and lurk here are not easily persuaded. I am simply trying to understand a heterodox Christian theology that could potentially involve the United States in another devastating, unjust war in the Middle East.

    toDD@121: “Don’t play into her delusion. Grace speaks for herself, and poorly at that.”

    I have no delusions regarding the almost infinite variety of dispensational opinion. However, I do consider Grace to be an articulate spokesperson for a huge chunk of the Neocon vote in America.

  • Daniel Gorman

    Grace@107: “I have not advocated a war with Iran. I would, if Israel is attacked want our country to help them, that doesn’t mean that I believe we should attack Iran, or any other country.”

    If the Jewish nation says that Iran represents an existential threat to its existence and asks the United States to coordinate in a secret, preemptive attack against Iranian nuclear facilities, should the President comply without first obtaining a declaration of war from congress?

    toDD@121: “Daniel (@105), come on. Grace is not going to bring about “a war with Iran” by her comments here. Do you really find her to be so lucid that she would persuade people?”

    The people who post and lurk here are not easily persuaded. I am simply trying to understand a heterodox Christian theology that could potentially involve the United States in another devastating, unjust war in the Middle East.

    toDD@121: “Don’t play into her delusion. Grace speaks for herself, and poorly at that.”

    I have no delusions regarding the almost infinite variety of dispensational opinion. However, I do consider Grace to be an articulate spokesperson for a huge chunk of the Neocon vote in America.

  • SKPeterson

    Denial of the Body of Christ as the New Israel is the extremely late theological innovation. What is amusing is that it often becomes a cardinal doctrine and central tenet of belief in denominations that don’t espouse creeds or believe in denominations.

  • SKPeterson

    Denial of the Body of Christ as the New Israel is the extremely late theological innovation. What is amusing is that it often becomes a cardinal doctrine and central tenet of belief in denominations that don’t espouse creeds or believe in denominations.

  • SKPeterson

    Here’s an interesting view: FDR and Churchill didn’t really care much about selling out anyone or ignoring their plight if it advanced the war effort.

    http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/09/11/the-forgotten-2/

  • SKPeterson

    Here’s an interesting view: FDR and Churchill didn’t really care much about selling out anyone or ignoring their plight if it advanced the war effort.

    http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2012/09/11/the-forgotten-2/

  • SKPeterson

    Finally, I think this effectively captures the essence of what I, Cincinnatus, trotk, sg, tODD and others have been arguing.

    http://fleming.dailymail.co.uk/2012/09/reaping-the-whirlwind.html

  • SKPeterson

    Finally, I think this effectively captures the essence of what I, Cincinnatus, trotk, sg, tODD and others have been arguing.

    http://fleming.dailymail.co.uk/2012/09/reaping-the-whirlwind.html

  • DonS

    Grace, I will answer your eschatological question for the sake of clarity.

    I think one of the worst things to happen to American Christianity was the prophecy focus ushered in by the likes of Hal Lindsey and his numerology, based on the restoration of Israel as a nation. It led to some terrible theology and a focus by many on all of the wrong things, especially the U.S.’s potential role in prophetic events and the likelihood of being raptured in our lifetime. Consequently, I have not studied “Replacement Theology” or much else of its kind since the 1970′s, and pay these kinds of things no heed. It is enough for me to know that Christ tarries at present, and the fields are white unto harvest, so we should be urgent about the Lord’s business. The pace and acceleration of world events, population, technology and the like over the past century or so gives me reason to believe that we are in the last days, but we may not be, as no one knows the day nor the hour of Christ’s return. It could be 1,000 years from now, or more. For all we know, Israel could be destroyed again in our lifetime — any scriptural prophecy related to Israel could be for people hundreds or thousands of years in the future.

    I did not choose to attend the church we attend because of its theology on eschatological matters, and, fortunately, no emphasis at all is paid to such things in our church.

    And, as Forrest Gump would say, that’s all I have to say about that.

  • DonS

    Grace, I will answer your eschatological question for the sake of clarity.

    I think one of the worst things to happen to American Christianity was the prophecy focus ushered in by the likes of Hal Lindsey and his numerology, based on the restoration of Israel as a nation. It led to some terrible theology and a focus by many on all of the wrong things, especially the U.S.’s potential role in prophetic events and the likelihood of being raptured in our lifetime. Consequently, I have not studied “Replacement Theology” or much else of its kind since the 1970′s, and pay these kinds of things no heed. It is enough for me to know that Christ tarries at present, and the fields are white unto harvest, so we should be urgent about the Lord’s business. The pace and acceleration of world events, population, technology and the like over the past century or so gives me reason to believe that we are in the last days, but we may not be, as no one knows the day nor the hour of Christ’s return. It could be 1,000 years from now, or more. For all we know, Israel could be destroyed again in our lifetime — any scriptural prophecy related to Israel could be for people hundreds or thousands of years in the future.

    I did not choose to attend the church we attend because of its theology on eschatological matters, and, fortunately, no emphasis at all is paid to such things in our church.

    And, as Forrest Gump would say, that’s all I have to say about that.

  • JunkerGeorg

    Dan Kempin, post #63 in reply to Cincinattus, writes,
    “So here’s where we end up: Islam is to Iranian politics what Protestantism is to American politics. Uh huh. Clearly you have a firm grip on Islam.”
    —-

    I write in haste due to time constraints. Wish I had more time to craft a better post, but here goes…

    Funny, but as much as we’d like to debate on who has the firmest grip on the theology of Islam in terms of its influence upon the Middle-Eastern policies/strategy of the Iranian leadership (primarily the supreme leader Khamenie who holds/pulls the strings, as distinct from Achmanijid, is merely a loudmouth puppet who doesn’t call the shots) I find it alarming that the very same people who think they’ve got the endgame of the Iranian leadership figured out are not concerned about the questionable theological tenets of many of our own politicians/leaders in the US and how that potentially influences our own US policies/strategy in the Middle-East in a very destructive way.

    Some think Islam originally sprung out of the Christian heresy of Arianism. Whatever the case, there are other heresies within Christianity that may equally be influencing the foreign policy of some of our politicians. While we have the Wilsonian Universalist “ Democratization of the World” doctrine by the Democrats and some Republicans, a doctrine which even Obama apparently embraces (see Libya), amongst many politicians and political pundits on the Republican side we have the influence of Christian Zionism with all the possible labels related to it, e.g., Chiliasm, pre/mid/post-millenial Dispensationalism, which has become prevalent in American evangelicalism and the “we’re just a bible bileeevin church’ type of sectarian spinoffs from mainline Protestantism (like Grace’s Calvary Chapel sect.)

    Take for example one of the darlings of the Neo-Conned Tea Party, Michelle Bachmann, who said the following at an event for the Republican Jewish Coalition back in 2010 (links:

    http://minnesotaindependent.com/55061/bachmann-america-cursed-by-god-if-we-reject-israel

    http://www.politicususa.com/michele-bachmann-manages-to-misquote-both-scripture-and-john-adams.html):

    Bachmann states,

    “I am convinced in my heart and in my mind that if the United States fails to stand with Israel, that is the end of the United States . . . [W]e have to show that we are inextricably entwined, that as a nation we have been blessed because of our relationship with Israel, and if we reject Israel, then there is a curse that comes into play. And my husband and I are both Christians, and we believe very strongly the verse from Genesis [Genesis 12:3], we believe very strongly that nations also receive blessings as they bless Israel. It is a strong and beautiful principle. . . So that is a very long way to answer your question, but I believe that an explicit statement from us about our support for Israel as tied to American security, we would do well to do that.”
    —-
    Some current influential promoters of a Christian Zionist foreign policy in the Middle East include such people as John Hagee (senior pastor of the charismatic mega-church “Cornerstone” in San Antonio) and the author/political columnist Joel Rosenberg. Hagee for example is a big opponent of Supersessionism (i.e., “replacement theology”, mentioned by poster Grace on this thread) which teaches that Christ the Head and His Body, the New Testament Christian church, are the ultimate object (the “you”) of the Divine Blessings pronounced by God in such passages as Genesis 12:3. Hagee would rather hold that Romans 9-11 teaches that the Jews are still in God’s favor due to their original election by God, and typical of such Christian Zionists in their faulty interpretation/application of passages like Genesis 12:3 identifying Israel with the modern state of Israel, Hagee holds that the Bible commands Christians to support the modern State of Israel given their special status as the true elect of God.

    Such dispensationalism can also to some extent be found amongst unwitting Roman Catholics like Sean Hannity, who, like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, have enthusiastically had the dispensationalist author Joel Rosenberg on their shows, whose books discussing how Biblical Prophecy—read from his dispensationalist point of view—can and should guide US foreign policy in the Middle East, have been enthusiastically received in Republican circles. Rosenberg’s most recent books, “The 12th Imam” and “The Tehran Initiative”, which discuss the threat of a nuclear Iran to Israel and the US in apocalyptic terms, are very popular. By the way, Rosenberg has served as as a political commentator for none other than World Magazine. (Would love to get Dr. Veith’s take on that one).

    If you think that Messianic Shia form of Islam with its endgame of bringing about the 12th Imam is the only enemy, then you are blind to the equal danger which this dispensationalist Christian heresy could potentially wreak if/when embraced by some of our own political leaders in the US. While I do believe that the current “Israel Firster” foreign policy of the US is mostly determined by Bilderberger interests in the almighty $$$, I do think another influence is precisely this dispensational Christian Zionism which politicians, particularly Republican politicians, have embraced.

  • JunkerGeorg

    Dan Kempin, post #63 in reply to Cincinattus, writes,
    “So here’s where we end up: Islam is to Iranian politics what Protestantism is to American politics. Uh huh. Clearly you have a firm grip on Islam.”
    —-

    I write in haste due to time constraints. Wish I had more time to craft a better post, but here goes…

    Funny, but as much as we’d like to debate on who has the firmest grip on the theology of Islam in terms of its influence upon the Middle-Eastern policies/strategy of the Iranian leadership (primarily the supreme leader Khamenie who holds/pulls the strings, as distinct from Achmanijid, is merely a loudmouth puppet who doesn’t call the shots) I find it alarming that the very same people who think they’ve got the endgame of the Iranian leadership figured out are not concerned about the questionable theological tenets of many of our own politicians/leaders in the US and how that potentially influences our own US policies/strategy in the Middle-East in a very destructive way.

    Some think Islam originally sprung out of the Christian heresy of Arianism. Whatever the case, there are other heresies within Christianity that may equally be influencing the foreign policy of some of our politicians. While we have the Wilsonian Universalist “ Democratization of the World” doctrine by the Democrats and some Republicans, a doctrine which even Obama apparently embraces (see Libya), amongst many politicians and political pundits on the Republican side we have the influence of Christian Zionism with all the possible labels related to it, e.g., Chiliasm, pre/mid/post-millenial Dispensationalism, which has become prevalent in American evangelicalism and the “we’re just a bible bileeevin church’ type of sectarian spinoffs from mainline Protestantism (like Grace’s Calvary Chapel sect.)

    Take for example one of the darlings of the Neo-Conned Tea Party, Michelle Bachmann, who said the following at an event for the Republican Jewish Coalition back in 2010 (links:

    http://minnesotaindependent.com/55061/bachmann-america-cursed-by-god-if-we-reject-israel

    http://www.politicususa.com/michele-bachmann-manages-to-misquote-both-scripture-and-john-adams.html):

    Bachmann states,

    “I am convinced in my heart and in my mind that if the United States fails to stand with Israel, that is the end of the United States . . . [W]e have to show that we are inextricably entwined, that as a nation we have been blessed because of our relationship with Israel, and if we reject Israel, then there is a curse that comes into play. And my husband and I are both Christians, and we believe very strongly the verse from Genesis [Genesis 12:3], we believe very strongly that nations also receive blessings as they bless Israel. It is a strong and beautiful principle. . . So that is a very long way to answer your question, but I believe that an explicit statement from us about our support for Israel as tied to American security, we would do well to do that.”
    —-
    Some current influential promoters of a Christian Zionist foreign policy in the Middle East include such people as John Hagee (senior pastor of the charismatic mega-church “Cornerstone” in San Antonio) and the author/political columnist Joel Rosenberg. Hagee for example is a big opponent of Supersessionism (i.e., “replacement theology”, mentioned by poster Grace on this thread) which teaches that Christ the Head and His Body, the New Testament Christian church, are the ultimate object (the “you”) of the Divine Blessings pronounced by God in such passages as Genesis 12:3. Hagee would rather hold that Romans 9-11 teaches that the Jews are still in God’s favor due to their original election by God, and typical of such Christian Zionists in their faulty interpretation/application of passages like Genesis 12:3 identifying Israel with the modern state of Israel, Hagee holds that the Bible commands Christians to support the modern State of Israel given their special status as the true elect of God.

    Such dispensationalism can also to some extent be found amongst unwitting Roman Catholics like Sean Hannity, who, like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, have enthusiastically had the dispensationalist author Joel Rosenberg on their shows, whose books discussing how Biblical Prophecy—read from his dispensationalist point of view—can and should guide US foreign policy in the Middle East, have been enthusiastically received in Republican circles. Rosenberg’s most recent books, “The 12th Imam” and “The Tehran Initiative”, which discuss the threat of a nuclear Iran to Israel and the US in apocalyptic terms, are very popular. By the way, Rosenberg has served as as a political commentator for none other than World Magazine. (Would love to get Dr. Veith’s take on that one).

    If you think that Messianic Shia form of Islam with its endgame of bringing about the 12th Imam is the only enemy, then you are blind to the equal danger which this dispensationalist Christian heresy could potentially wreak if/when embraced by some of our own political leaders in the US. While I do believe that the current “Israel Firster” foreign policy of the US is mostly determined by Bilderberger interests in the almighty $$$, I do think another influence is precisely this dispensational Christian Zionism which politicians, particularly Republican politicians, have embraced.

  • Grace

    DonS @ 129

    “I think one of the worst things to happen to American Christianity was the prophecy focus ushered in by the likes of Hal Lindsey and his numerology, based on the restoration of Israel as a nation. It led to some terrible theology and a focus by many on all of the wrong things, especially the U.S.’s potential role in prophetic events and the likelihood of being raptured in our lifetime. Consequently, I have not studied “Replacement Theology” or much else of its kind since the 1970′s, and pay these kinds of things no heed.”

    Don, I haven’t heard Hal Lindsey’s name in years. His approach is not relevant to “Replacement Theology” I’m surprised you would mention him in relation to the nation of Israel, the Jews and their position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches DO make clear the importance of Israel and the Jews. Israel has been a bone of contention from the beginning of their existence, to those who would discard the Jewish people and the “Everlasting Covenant” God made with them.

    Scripture is very clear in Israel’s/Jewish position within history, and that of the future. To ignore that which is relevant, as we see from the past, and now at this very time, cannot be ignored. The Jews have always been God’s chosen people.

    “I did not choose to attend the church we attend because of its theology on eschatological matters, and, fortunately, no emphasis at all is paid to such things in our church.

    If one discards the emphasis posited in Scripture of the Jewish people, ie; Ezekiel 36 and 37, Revelation 7 and 14, for starters, that would take a large portion, putting it on a shelf, either because it takes time to read, study and understand, or there is no interest in Revelation. The “Everlasting Covenant” which God made with Israel is just that, an “Everlasting Covenant” stated in Ezekiel 37.

    26Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
    27My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
    28And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.
    Ezekiel 37

    ⚬ “everlasting covenant”
    ⚬ “set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.”
    ⚬ “my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.”

    This is God’s Covenant with Israel for “evermore” and “everlasting”- They are His chosen people, God never breaks a “Covenant”

  • Grace

    DonS @ 129

    “I think one of the worst things to happen to American Christianity was the prophecy focus ushered in by the likes of Hal Lindsey and his numerology, based on the restoration of Israel as a nation. It led to some terrible theology and a focus by many on all of the wrong things, especially the U.S.’s potential role in prophetic events and the likelihood of being raptured in our lifetime. Consequently, I have not studied “Replacement Theology” or much else of its kind since the 1970′s, and pay these kinds of things no heed.”

    Don, I haven’t heard Hal Lindsey’s name in years. His approach is not relevant to “Replacement Theology” I’m surprised you would mention him in relation to the nation of Israel, the Jews and their position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches DO make clear the importance of Israel and the Jews. Israel has been a bone of contention from the beginning of their existence, to those who would discard the Jewish people and the “Everlasting Covenant” God made with them.

    Scripture is very clear in Israel’s/Jewish position within history, and that of the future. To ignore that which is relevant, as we see from the past, and now at this very time, cannot be ignored. The Jews have always been God’s chosen people.

    “I did not choose to attend the church we attend because of its theology on eschatological matters, and, fortunately, no emphasis at all is paid to such things in our church.

    If one discards the emphasis posited in Scripture of the Jewish people, ie; Ezekiel 36 and 37, Revelation 7 and 14, for starters, that would take a large portion, putting it on a shelf, either because it takes time to read, study and understand, or there is no interest in Revelation. The “Everlasting Covenant” which God made with Israel is just that, an “Everlasting Covenant” stated in Ezekiel 37.

    26Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
    27My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
    28And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.
    Ezekiel 37

    ⚬ “everlasting covenant”
    ⚬ “set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.”
    ⚬ “my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.”

    This is God’s Covenant with Israel for “evermore” and “everlasting”- They are His chosen people, God never breaks a “Covenant”

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    God never breaks a “Covenant”

    That’s right; He fulfills them.

    Operative word: He.

    http://esv.scripturetext.com/matthew/5-17.htm

    We don’t fulfill the law by bombing Iran to keep them from attacking Israel. All this novel interpretation of the modern state of Israel as instituted by the British is somehow part of some end times stuff is goofy. No one ever thought that, not even the clever rationalist innovator, John Calvin.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    God never breaks a “Covenant”

    That’s right; He fulfills them.

    Operative word: He.

    http://esv.scripturetext.com/matthew/5-17.htm

    We don’t fulfill the law by bombing Iran to keep them from attacking Israel. All this novel interpretation of the modern state of Israel as instituted by the British is somehow part of some end times stuff is goofy. No one ever thought that, not even the clever rationalist innovator, John Calvin.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Hagee would rather hold that Romans 9-11 teaches that the Jews are still in God’s favor due to their original election by God, and typical of such Christian Zionists in their faulty interpretation/application of passages like Genesis 12:3 identifying Israel with the modern state of Israel, Hagee holds that the Bible commands Christians to support the modern State of Israel given their special status as the true elect of God.

    Evidently Jesus didn’t think they were the true elect because he said, “For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” So, even the best of the best Jews were not elect unless they believe in Jesus, the only one who is righteous.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Hagee would rather hold that Romans 9-11 teaches that the Jews are still in God’s favor due to their original election by God, and typical of such Christian Zionists in their faulty interpretation/application of passages like Genesis 12:3 identifying Israel with the modern state of Israel, Hagee holds that the Bible commands Christians to support the modern State of Israel given their special status as the true elect of God.

    Evidently Jesus didn’t think they were the true elect because he said, “For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” So, even the best of the best Jews were not elect unless they believe in Jesus, the only one who is righteous.

  • Grace

    JunkerGeorg @ 130

    “Some current influential promoters of a Christian Zionist foreign policy in the Middle East include such people as John Hagee (senior pastor of the charismatic mega-church “Cornerstone” in San Antonio) and the author/political columnist Joel Rosenberg. Hagee for example is a big opponent of Supersessionism (i.e., “replacement theology”, mentioned by poster Grace on this thread

    Nonsense, pure slap stick orange crate drama, from the “Junker” –

    I have never mentioned “Hagee” on this thread, and to my knowledge have never mentioned him on this blog. You might be in a hurry, however, you’re confused, and deluded. Don’t tag me with Hagee.

    The entire post concocted in your ‘haste: ⚬ ⚬ “I write in haste due to time constraints. Wish I had more time to craft a better post, but here goes…” ⚬ ⚬ It appears, without anything to say, you made up a story, added my name to the mix. You should know better.

  • Grace

    JunkerGeorg @ 130

    “Some current influential promoters of a Christian Zionist foreign policy in the Middle East include such people as John Hagee (senior pastor of the charismatic mega-church “Cornerstone” in San Antonio) and the author/political columnist Joel Rosenberg. Hagee for example is a big opponent of Supersessionism (i.e., “replacement theology”, mentioned by poster Grace on this thread

    Nonsense, pure slap stick orange crate drama, from the “Junker” –

    I have never mentioned “Hagee” on this thread, and to my knowledge have never mentioned him on this blog. You might be in a hurry, however, you’re confused, and deluded. Don’t tag me with Hagee.

    The entire post concocted in your ‘haste: ⚬ ⚬ “I write in haste due to time constraints. Wish I had more time to craft a better post, but here goes…” ⚬ ⚬ It appears, without anything to say, you made up a story, added my name to the mix. You should know better.

  • Grace

    sg,

    You’re fixated on the masses, or some Christians wanting to bomb and attack Iran. Try getting past such a nutty idea.

  • Grace

    sg,

    You’re fixated on the masses, or some Christians wanting to bomb and attack Iran. Try getting past such a nutty idea.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @135

    What does that mean? What masses? Plenty of people would advocate joining in a war between Israel and Iran. It is nutty, but plenty of people would think it right and proper to support our “ally.” The bottom line is that the U.S. doesn’t owe Israel anything. Period. A better argument would be that they owe us, or Britain, but not that we owe them. Also, that goofy idea that there is something different or special about helping Israel. We should treat everyone well. We don’t get more special points/blessings from God for helping Israel.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @135

    What does that mean? What masses? Plenty of people would advocate joining in a war between Israel and Iran. It is nutty, but plenty of people would think it right and proper to support our “ally.” The bottom line is that the U.S. doesn’t owe Israel anything. Period. A better argument would be that they owe us, or Britain, but not that we owe them. Also, that goofy idea that there is something different or special about helping Israel. We should treat everyone well. We don’t get more special points/blessings from God for helping Israel.

  • Grace

    sg,

    I should have used another word, rather than “masses”

    Many on this blog don’t support Israel or the Jews, I do, and so do many other Born Again Christians. That is not going to change.

    The prejudice against the nation of Israel is UGLY, it gets even UGLIER, as time goes by. And YES, the hatred streaming from Hitler, and his ilk made history, a history that continues to smolder under the guise of anti-Semitism, with excuses.

    All the Scripture in the Bible will never convince those with such anti-Semitic hearts. Even to use it as in Romans 13 as an excuse to follow their leaders when called into duty to exterminate their neighbors.

    What are two verses that are most oft repeated?

    .

    36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

    37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

    38 This is the first and great commandment.

    39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

    40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
    Matthew 22

    Loving your neighbor isn’t taking their property, their business, and everything they own. Hauling them off to live in a ghetto, and then marching them down the road, to board a train for a concentration camp. That isn’t love. These people did nothing, but live their lives, and make sure their children were educated, even if it meant spending endless hours, and saving their money.

    For their success, the Jews were envied. They still are, nothings changed. Of course the excuses still linger.

    You can turn your back on all the passages in the Bible, but they cannot be erased.

    After what the Jews went through, after all the pain and suffering at the hands of ruthless leaders, they ARE owed. The U.S. will support them. And NO, once again I don’t agree with attacking Iran.

  • Grace

    sg,

    I should have used another word, rather than “masses”

    Many on this blog don’t support Israel or the Jews, I do, and so do many other Born Again Christians. That is not going to change.

    The prejudice against the nation of Israel is UGLY, it gets even UGLIER, as time goes by. And YES, the hatred streaming from Hitler, and his ilk made history, a history that continues to smolder under the guise of anti-Semitism, with excuses.

    All the Scripture in the Bible will never convince those with such anti-Semitic hearts. Even to use it as in Romans 13 as an excuse to follow their leaders when called into duty to exterminate their neighbors.

    What are two verses that are most oft repeated?

    .

    36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

    37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

    38 This is the first and great commandment.

    39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

    40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
    Matthew 22

    Loving your neighbor isn’t taking their property, their business, and everything they own. Hauling them off to live in a ghetto, and then marching them down the road, to board a train for a concentration camp. That isn’t love. These people did nothing, but live their lives, and make sure their children were educated, even if it meant spending endless hours, and saving their money.

    For their success, the Jews were envied. They still are, nothings changed. Of course the excuses still linger.

    You can turn your back on all the passages in the Bible, but they cannot be erased.

    After what the Jews went through, after all the pain and suffering at the hands of ruthless leaders, they ARE owed. The U.S. will support them. And NO, once again I don’t agree with attacking Iran.

  • Grace

    They are reaping great harvests with their hands.

    Agriculture in Israel
    “Agriculture in Israel is a highly developed industry: Israel is a major exporter of fresh produce and a world-leader in agricultural technologies despite the fact that the geography of Israel is not naturally conducive to agriculture. More than half of the land area is desert, and the climate and lack of water resources do not favor farming. Only 20% of the land area is naturally arable. Today agriculture represents 2.5% of total GDP and 3.6% of exports. While agricultural workers make up only 3.7% of the work force, Israel produces 95% of its own food requirements, supplementing this with imports of grain, oilseeds, meat, coffee, cocoa and sugar.

    Israel is home to two unique types of agricultural communities, the kibbutz and moshav, which developed as Jews from all over the world immigrated to the country and embarked on a pioneering enterprise.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Israel

    The Prophecy:

    7 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Behold, I will save my people from the east country, and from the west country;

    8 And I will bring them, and they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in truth and in righteousness.

    9 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Let your hands be strong, ye that hear in these days these words by the mouth of the prophets, which were in the day that the foundation of the house of the LORD of hosts was laid, that the temple might be built.

    10
    For before these days there was no hire for man, nor any hire for beast; neither was there any peace to him that went out or came in because of the affliction: for I set all men every one against his neighbour.

    11 But now I will not be unto the residue of this people as in the former days, saith the LORD of hosts.

    12 For the seed shall be prosperous; the vine shall give her fruit, and the ground shall give her increase, and the heavens shall give their dew; and I will cause the remnant of this people to possess all these things.

    13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O house of Judah, and house of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

    14 For thus saith the LORD of hosts; As I thought to punish you, when your fathers provoked me to wrath, saith the LORD of hosts, and I repented not:
    Zechariah 8

  • Grace

    They are reaping great harvests with their hands.

    Agriculture in Israel
    “Agriculture in Israel is a highly developed industry: Israel is a major exporter of fresh produce and a world-leader in agricultural technologies despite the fact that the geography of Israel is not naturally conducive to agriculture. More than half of the land area is desert, and the climate and lack of water resources do not favor farming. Only 20% of the land area is naturally arable. Today agriculture represents 2.5% of total GDP and 3.6% of exports. While agricultural workers make up only 3.7% of the work force, Israel produces 95% of its own food requirements, supplementing this with imports of grain, oilseeds, meat, coffee, cocoa and sugar.

    Israel is home to two unique types of agricultural communities, the kibbutz and moshav, which developed as Jews from all over the world immigrated to the country and embarked on a pioneering enterprise.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Israel

    The Prophecy:

    7 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Behold, I will save my people from the east country, and from the west country;

    8 And I will bring them, and they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in truth and in righteousness.

    9 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Let your hands be strong, ye that hear in these days these words by the mouth of the prophets, which were in the day that the foundation of the house of the LORD of hosts was laid, that the temple might be built.

    10
    For before these days there was no hire for man, nor any hire for beast; neither was there any peace to him that went out or came in because of the affliction: for I set all men every one against his neighbour.

    11 But now I will not be unto the residue of this people as in the former days, saith the LORD of hosts.

    12 For the seed shall be prosperous; the vine shall give her fruit, and the ground shall give her increase, and the heavens shall give their dew; and I will cause the remnant of this people to possess all these things.

    13 And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O house of Judah, and house of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

    14 For thus saith the LORD of hosts; As I thought to punish you, when your fathers provoked me to wrath, saith the LORD of hosts, and I repented not:
    Zechariah 8

  • JunkerGeorg

    Grace @ post 134 writes,

    I have never mentioned “Hagee” on this thread, and to my knowledge have never mentioned him on this blog. You might be in a hurry, however, you’re confused, and deluded. Don’t tag me with Hagee. The entire post concocted in your ‘haste: ⚬ ⚬ “I write in haste due to time constraints. Wish I had more time to craft a better post, but here goes…”⚬ ⚬ It appears, without anything to say, you made up a story, added my name to the mix. You should know better.
    —–

    Firstly, take those meds Grace. Wait a half hour or so, and if those voices in your head don’t quite down and you must return to spam this site with your typical childish, self-absorbed nutjob rants, then do so and the rest of us will either laugh, shake our heads, or a bit of both.

    Secondly, you have demonstrated your inability to clearly read posts before reacting with vitriolic replies of what you think someone else was saying. Seriously, just what voices other than your given 5 or 6 are you hearing in that head of yours? If you don’t understand what someone else is saying, you immediately claim that they are the ones who are confused. But not you! Never!

    In this instance, my reference to you in my post #130 simply dealt with the fact that you yourself had used the term “replacement theology” in posts on this thread. I never said, as you are asserting, that you “mentioned “Hagee” on this thread”, nor have I ever said that you mentioned him on this blog in general. You yourself, or one of those voices in your head, have wrongly drawn that conclusion. Rather, what I did point out is that you mentioned a relatively new term called “Replacement theology”, treating it in a negative light when the fact is that 90% of the posters would embrace it. But then again, maybe one of you’re motives in constantly posting on a Lutheran/Conservative Reformed blog is to try to proselytize to your sect, like poor Don who has to put up with your attempts at protecting him from being infected by sound Reformation Christianity which is shared on this site, unlike your relatively new heretical sectarian interpretations of Scripture such as this dispensational Christian Zionism you clearly share with people like Hagee and wish to promulgate here on this blog.

    This term “replacement theology” is a relatively new term created by more contemporary sectarian churches like yours which have sprung up. Perhaps since sectarians don’t read very well, as you yourself constantly demonstrate, maybe it was coined in order to replace the more technical term “supersessionism” (which is harder to speak, write, and read). Yet few on this site would know this new term “replacement theology” anymore than they might know “supersessionism”, being as most posters here are Lutheran along with some conservative Reformed folk, and thus do not embrace the dispensational Christian zionism which lies behinds these terms….used as they are in a pejorative way by you and your sect against any of us who do believe that Israel in the Bible is referring to Christ the Head and His Body, the Church, and not to any physical nation/modern state called “Israel”. So my reference to you was tied to the unfamiliar term of “replacement theology” you had used, not to John Hagee, even though he happens to hold/use the term just as you do Grace.

    But having just clarified what I actually did say and did not say (despite whatever those voices in your head have suggested to you), as the saying goes, “If the shoe fits….” Or as good ole Will would pen, “Me’thinks she doth protest too much”. Even if you do not consciously follow heretics like John Hagee himself, you have openly demonstrated in your posts here that you do share at least couple of his beliefs, if nothing else, a shared belief in embracing Christian Zionism/rejecting supersessionism and thinking that it should determine foreign policy in the Middle-East, which was my original point in reply to Dan Kempin So Grace, the Hagee shoe started to fit with one of your first (of too many) posts on this thread, namely, when you said, “Israel isn’t just a country it’s a people, a people to whom God made a covenant with. The Jews are once again in their land, as they were promised.”

    That was the first giveaway, and then all things heterodox in your eschatology went downhill from there in consequent posts of yours in this thread, as the Hagee shoe started to fit more and more. Take your hysterical post #78, where you state like a wild-eyed Michelle Bachmann in overdrive, “Revelation 7 and 14 are prophecy. The twelve tribes of Israel are stated very clearly, it’s not figurative, it’s LITERAL. Just one of the problems all too many people are unwilling to study. God is not through with Israel.”

    Yeesh. Grace, it’s because of fanatics like you that the early church had to deliberate long and hard on whether or not to include the Book of Revelation into the NT Canon. Why? Because they were afraid that people like you and your sect would take it all literally. Then in post #106, you state in your typical “I know because I read my Bible unlike you” kind of tone, you write,

    “You’re in the minority. I say this because you cannot refute Scripture. Romans 11 is very clear, and so is Zechariah 12 (posted above.) You won’t understand the state of Israel or the Jews, or the prophecy unless you study it. There are lots of people just like you, who believe they have replaced the Jewish people. Read Revelation 7 and 14 regarding the 144,000, it’s LITERAL, there is nothing figurtive in those passages. The names of the 12 are listed, each tribe will have 12,000 each.”

    Oh my. Seriously Grace? I’m suprised with you’re failure to recognize anything other than merely a literal sense of all Scripture, that you haven’t plucked your eyes out by now. But then again, as you’ve asserted on a former thread awhile ago, you believe you can’t consciously sin if you’re a true believer, as Todd ably pointed out. Add mental problems to heterodox beliefs, and you’ve got one serious fanatic.

    Lastly, in your post #115, your write to Don, saying,

    “Don @110
    sg did not comment @106, I did.
    I don’t know whether you believe that the Church has replaced Israel, ie; REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY. Calvary Chapel Churches do not advocate that teaching. Courious as to what your stance is regarding that doctrine.”

    So to Don, I only hope you at least consider other points of view here and not just those of Grace or this Calvary Chapel sect. She evidently wants to make sure you aren’t corrupted by conservative Christians embracing sound Reformation theology as most of the posters on this blog espouse and discuss. Seriously. Just be open to other points of view and don’t let her bother you if you question the beliefs of this Calvary Chapel group she so militantly wishes to defend and promote here.

    Though Lutheran and Reformed posters here have their differences in belief, I’ve enjoyed the overall civility in debate between us. Yet our differences pale in comparison with yours and your fanatical sect, and that is reflected in the tone of your posts when anyone says something which you disagree with.

    Grace, Todd’s question of why you keep posting here on what is basically a Lutheran/Conservative Reformed blog is mine as well. I think his answer is right also: You’ve got serious mental issues and seek as much attention as possible amongst whomever will be nice enough to give it to you. Of course, if that “it’s all about me” attention you crave and get becomes one of joking about you or just writing something which opposes your viewpoint on whatever topic at hand, then lo and behold, watch that Norman Bates Mother personality in your head go on a tirade in posts to come. Your hysterics remind me of wild-eyed Michelle Bachmann. But then again, fanatical sectarians tend to be like that with anyone who opposes their heretical views.

  • JunkerGeorg

    Grace @ post 134 writes,

    I have never mentioned “Hagee” on this thread, and to my knowledge have never mentioned him on this blog. You might be in a hurry, however, you’re confused, and deluded. Don’t tag me with Hagee. The entire post concocted in your ‘haste: ⚬ ⚬ “I write in haste due to time constraints. Wish I had more time to craft a better post, but here goes…”⚬ ⚬ It appears, without anything to say, you made up a story, added my name to the mix. You should know better.
    —–

    Firstly, take those meds Grace. Wait a half hour or so, and if those voices in your head don’t quite down and you must return to spam this site with your typical childish, self-absorbed nutjob rants, then do so and the rest of us will either laugh, shake our heads, or a bit of both.

    Secondly, you have demonstrated your inability to clearly read posts before reacting with vitriolic replies of what you think someone else was saying. Seriously, just what voices other than your given 5 or 6 are you hearing in that head of yours? If you don’t understand what someone else is saying, you immediately claim that they are the ones who are confused. But not you! Never!

    In this instance, my reference to you in my post #130 simply dealt with the fact that you yourself had used the term “replacement theology” in posts on this thread. I never said, as you are asserting, that you “mentioned “Hagee” on this thread”, nor have I ever said that you mentioned him on this blog in general. You yourself, or one of those voices in your head, have wrongly drawn that conclusion. Rather, what I did point out is that you mentioned a relatively new term called “Replacement theology”, treating it in a negative light when the fact is that 90% of the posters would embrace it. But then again, maybe one of you’re motives in constantly posting on a Lutheran/Conservative Reformed blog is to try to proselytize to your sect, like poor Don who has to put up with your attempts at protecting him from being infected by sound Reformation Christianity which is shared on this site, unlike your relatively new heretical sectarian interpretations of Scripture such as this dispensational Christian Zionism you clearly share with people like Hagee and wish to promulgate here on this blog.

    This term “replacement theology” is a relatively new term created by more contemporary sectarian churches like yours which have sprung up. Perhaps since sectarians don’t read very well, as you yourself constantly demonstrate, maybe it was coined in order to replace the more technical term “supersessionism” (which is harder to speak, write, and read). Yet few on this site would know this new term “replacement theology” anymore than they might know “supersessionism”, being as most posters here are Lutheran along with some conservative Reformed folk, and thus do not embrace the dispensational Christian zionism which lies behinds these terms….used as they are in a pejorative way by you and your sect against any of us who do believe that Israel in the Bible is referring to Christ the Head and His Body, the Church, and not to any physical nation/modern state called “Israel”. So my reference to you was tied to the unfamiliar term of “replacement theology” you had used, not to John Hagee, even though he happens to hold/use the term just as you do Grace.

    But having just clarified what I actually did say and did not say (despite whatever those voices in your head have suggested to you), as the saying goes, “If the shoe fits….” Or as good ole Will would pen, “Me’thinks she doth protest too much”. Even if you do not consciously follow heretics like John Hagee himself, you have openly demonstrated in your posts here that you do share at least couple of his beliefs, if nothing else, a shared belief in embracing Christian Zionism/rejecting supersessionism and thinking that it should determine foreign policy in the Middle-East, which was my original point in reply to Dan Kempin So Grace, the Hagee shoe started to fit with one of your first (of too many) posts on this thread, namely, when you said, “Israel isn’t just a country it’s a people, a people to whom God made a covenant with. The Jews are once again in their land, as they were promised.”

    That was the first giveaway, and then all things heterodox in your eschatology went downhill from there in consequent posts of yours in this thread, as the Hagee shoe started to fit more and more. Take your hysterical post #78, where you state like a wild-eyed Michelle Bachmann in overdrive, “Revelation 7 and 14 are prophecy. The twelve tribes of Israel are stated very clearly, it’s not figurative, it’s LITERAL. Just one of the problems all too many people are unwilling to study. God is not through with Israel.”

    Yeesh. Grace, it’s because of fanatics like you that the early church had to deliberate long and hard on whether or not to include the Book of Revelation into the NT Canon. Why? Because they were afraid that people like you and your sect would take it all literally. Then in post #106, you state in your typical “I know because I read my Bible unlike you” kind of tone, you write,

    “You’re in the minority. I say this because you cannot refute Scripture. Romans 11 is very clear, and so is Zechariah 12 (posted above.) You won’t understand the state of Israel or the Jews, or the prophecy unless you study it. There are lots of people just like you, who believe they have replaced the Jewish people. Read Revelation 7 and 14 regarding the 144,000, it’s LITERAL, there is nothing figurtive in those passages. The names of the 12 are listed, each tribe will have 12,000 each.”

    Oh my. Seriously Grace? I’m suprised with you’re failure to recognize anything other than merely a literal sense of all Scripture, that you haven’t plucked your eyes out by now. But then again, as you’ve asserted on a former thread awhile ago, you believe you can’t consciously sin if you’re a true believer, as Todd ably pointed out. Add mental problems to heterodox beliefs, and you’ve got one serious fanatic.

    Lastly, in your post #115, your write to Don, saying,

    “Don @110
    sg did not comment @106, I did.
    I don’t know whether you believe that the Church has replaced Israel, ie; REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY. Calvary Chapel Churches do not advocate that teaching. Courious as to what your stance is regarding that doctrine.”

    So to Don, I only hope you at least consider other points of view here and not just those of Grace or this Calvary Chapel sect. She evidently wants to make sure you aren’t corrupted by conservative Christians embracing sound Reformation theology as most of the posters on this blog espouse and discuss. Seriously. Just be open to other points of view and don’t let her bother you if you question the beliefs of this Calvary Chapel group she so militantly wishes to defend and promote here.

    Though Lutheran and Reformed posters here have their differences in belief, I’ve enjoyed the overall civility in debate between us. Yet our differences pale in comparison with yours and your fanatical sect, and that is reflected in the tone of your posts when anyone says something which you disagree with.

    Grace, Todd’s question of why you keep posting here on what is basically a Lutheran/Conservative Reformed blog is mine as well. I think his answer is right also: You’ve got serious mental issues and seek as much attention as possible amongst whomever will be nice enough to give it to you. Of course, if that “it’s all about me” attention you crave and get becomes one of joking about you or just writing something which opposes your viewpoint on whatever topic at hand, then lo and behold, watch that Norman Bates Mother personality in your head go on a tirade in posts to come. Your hysterics remind me of wild-eyed Michelle Bachmann. But then again, fanatical sectarians tend to be like that with anyone who opposes their heretical views.

  • JunkerGeorg

    Btw, to get off all things Grace (yes Todd, you are right)…I think Cincinattus in post #50 hit this topic in a nutshell when he writes,

    “This is completely aside from any claims that the Koran mandates violence (it probably does) or the destruction of Israel (skeptical; Israel didn’t exist prior to 1948). Empirically speaking, most Muslims just don’t fit Dan’s stereotype. Meanwhile, Iran’s regime isn’t pursuing nukes so they can obliterate Israel as soon as possible. They’re doing it for the same reason Pakistan–another majority Muslim country–did: to protect themselves from tangible threats.”

    Brilliant as always Cincinattus, in my opinion. I can’t help but wonder if SKPeterson and you are the same person, given your mutual brilliance in what you say and how you say it.

    Anyways, to echo some of what you’ve said…I think that no one should doubt that Iran wants nukes. Or rather, no one should exclude that as a possible end goal of their nuclear reactors. But why would they want them? How would they benefit? I’m having a hard time believing they want them primarily for religious reasons, at least initially, i.e., for the purpose of nuking Israel or the US or both, which, after all, would assure their complete annihilation in the process. I don’t think whatever fanaticism they have, as spewed forth by their lapdog Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, overrules their handle on reality. Besides, there wouldn’t be any red carpet left to usher in that “12th Imam” in doing so, given that Israel with their own arsenal 200+nukes by conservative estimates, if not also the US Naval 5th Fleet, would launch a much greater counterattack against Iran. No one wins in such a scenario where everthing is obliterated, including any possibility of a ‘visible’ kingdom being left here on this earth for a messianic figure to inherit, whether it be Jewish or Muslim. No, it seems to me that if the endgoal of their nuclear program is to build an arsenal of nukes, then it is simply seen to be the means by which the current regime run by supreme leader Khamenei can maintain their hold on power in Iran. I mean, who wants to end up like Libya? After all, once Iran have nukes, then any aspirations for regime change the US wishes to implement in Iran are thrown out the window. The current leaders in Iran surely know this. I mean, after all, we don’t hear the US openly calling for regime change in North Korea, do we? And given the past US attempt to bring regime change in Iran (via the Shah of Iran), that Iran’s current leaders fear more of the same and wanting to avoid by means of building a nuclear arsenal at least is logical. We decry Iran for wanting nukes, but what about such imposed regime change by the US on another country? But we’re the US, so that’s ok, southern evangelical Christians boo the Golden Rule when such comes to foreign policy, right?

  • JunkerGeorg

    Btw, to get off all things Grace (yes Todd, you are right)…I think Cincinattus in post #50 hit this topic in a nutshell when he writes,

    “This is completely aside from any claims that the Koran mandates violence (it probably does) or the destruction of Israel (skeptical; Israel didn’t exist prior to 1948). Empirically speaking, most Muslims just don’t fit Dan’s stereotype. Meanwhile, Iran’s regime isn’t pursuing nukes so they can obliterate Israel as soon as possible. They’re doing it for the same reason Pakistan–another majority Muslim country–did: to protect themselves from tangible threats.”

    Brilliant as always Cincinattus, in my opinion. I can’t help but wonder if SKPeterson and you are the same person, given your mutual brilliance in what you say and how you say it.

    Anyways, to echo some of what you’ve said…I think that no one should doubt that Iran wants nukes. Or rather, no one should exclude that as a possible end goal of their nuclear reactors. But why would they want them? How would they benefit? I’m having a hard time believing they want them primarily for religious reasons, at least initially, i.e., for the purpose of nuking Israel or the US or both, which, after all, would assure their complete annihilation in the process. I don’t think whatever fanaticism they have, as spewed forth by their lapdog Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, overrules their handle on reality. Besides, there wouldn’t be any red carpet left to usher in that “12th Imam” in doing so, given that Israel with their own arsenal 200+nukes by conservative estimates, if not also the US Naval 5th Fleet, would launch a much greater counterattack against Iran. No one wins in such a scenario where everthing is obliterated, including any possibility of a ‘visible’ kingdom being left here on this earth for a messianic figure to inherit, whether it be Jewish or Muslim. No, it seems to me that if the endgoal of their nuclear program is to build an arsenal of nukes, then it is simply seen to be the means by which the current regime run by supreme leader Khamenei can maintain their hold on power in Iran. I mean, who wants to end up like Libya? After all, once Iran have nukes, then any aspirations for regime change the US wishes to implement in Iran are thrown out the window. The current leaders in Iran surely know this. I mean, after all, we don’t hear the US openly calling for regime change in North Korea, do we? And given the past US attempt to bring regime change in Iran (via the Shah of Iran), that Iran’s current leaders fear more of the same and wanting to avoid by means of building a nuclear arsenal at least is logical. We decry Iran for wanting nukes, but what about such imposed regime change by the US on another country? But we’re the US, so that’s ok, southern evangelical Christians boo the Golden Rule when such comes to foreign policy, right?

  • Grace

    Junker @139

    YOU WROTE: ☇ “Firstly, take those meds Grace. Wait a half hour or so, and if those voices in your head don’t quite down and you must return to spam this site with your typical childish, self-absorbed nutjob rants, then do so and the rest of us will either laugh, shake our heads, or a bit of both.”

    Your rant off matters little, there is no reason to accommodate the comment you made above. That’s an old man’s complaint, when he’s made a bone headed remark, and no one will listen except his cronies, or maybe his long suffering wife, LOL –

    Enough said, to further comment on your latest rant is a waste of time.

    Jaunt along :razz: or whatever you do, when you make a ‘ding ♫ dong’ out of yourself.

  • Grace

    Junker @139

    YOU WROTE: ☇ “Firstly, take those meds Grace. Wait a half hour or so, and if those voices in your head don’t quite down and you must return to spam this site with your typical childish, self-absorbed nutjob rants, then do so and the rest of us will either laugh, shake our heads, or a bit of both.”

    Your rant off matters little, there is no reason to accommodate the comment you made above. That’s an old man’s complaint, when he’s made a bone headed remark, and no one will listen except his cronies, or maybe his long suffering wife, LOL –

    Enough said, to further comment on your latest rant is a waste of time.

    Jaunt along :razz: or whatever you do, when you make a ‘ding ♫ dong’ out of yourself.

  • Grace

    I’m surprised that some of you, are unknowledgable regarding the term “Replacement Theology” – I remember some months ago, another, of your ilk made it known, they have never heard the term before.

    As I’ve discussed with some of my friends today, you people are stuck in your founders books, with no idea of what’s going on around you. The worst part appears to be your dependence on the books your founders wrote, rather than the Word of God. That appears to be the stumbling block in all areas.

  • Grace

    I’m surprised that some of you, are unknowledgable regarding the term “Replacement Theology” – I remember some months ago, another, of your ilk made it known, they have never heard the term before.

    As I’ve discussed with some of my friends today, you people are stuck in your founders books, with no idea of what’s going on around you. The worst part appears to be your dependence on the books your founders wrote, rather than the Word of God. That appears to be the stumbling block in all areas.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace – Because the term “Replacement Theology” is an innovation in terminology. We also don’t take seriously people who use it pejoratively.

    And, if the “books” are true expositions of Scripture, why not stay stuck in the Bible and them? You claim all sorts of inane gobbledygook is in the Bible. We don’t. ‘Cause we’re stuck in our books.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace – Because the term “Replacement Theology” is an innovation in terminology. We also don’t take seriously people who use it pejoratively.

    And, if the “books” are true expositions of Scripture, why not stay stuck in the Bible and them? You claim all sorts of inane gobbledygook is in the Bible. We don’t. ‘Cause we’re stuck in our books.

  • Tom Hering

    Dependence on the Word of God is a good thing, so long as you recognize that the Word doesn’t speak to absolutely everything – like the modern political state that calls itself “Israel.” It’s more than possible that the Word of God never, ever refers to this state, simply because modern Israel, like all political states, is a temporary creation of man that has nothing to do with God’s plan of salvation. The danger in using the Word to provide you with answers to everything, Grace, lies in applying it to things it doesn’t apply to, and twisting it to say things it doesn’t say. As you’ve so often done, Grace.

  • Tom Hering

    Dependence on the Word of God is a good thing, so long as you recognize that the Word doesn’t speak to absolutely everything – like the modern political state that calls itself “Israel.” It’s more than possible that the Word of God never, ever refers to this state, simply because modern Israel, like all political states, is a temporary creation of man that has nothing to do with God’s plan of salvation. The danger in using the Word to provide you with answers to everything, Grace, lies in applying it to things it doesn’t apply to, and twisting it to say things it doesn’t say. As you’ve so often done, Grace.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Loving your neighbor isn’t taking their property, their business, and everything they own. Hauling them off to live in a ghetto, and then marching them down the road, to board a train for a concentration camp. That isn’t love. These people did nothing, but live their lives, and make sure their children were educated, even if it meant spending endless hours, and saving their money.

    Sounds like what happened to my very good friend from Bosnia. Her husband was dragged out of their house and murdered in the middle of the night and she refugeed to the U.S. She is muslim. She is as much my neighbor as a jewish person. My uncle’s relatives in Europe, about 60 people, were murdered by Nazis. He is jewish. He is my neighbor like my Christian and muslim, atheist, hindu friends. The fact is the U.S. is not a theocracy that needs to favor Jews over others. The U.S. is not the country that persecuted the Jews to the point of a holocaust, nor is it the country that persecuted the muslims in Europe, etc. Those injustices were not perpetrated by us. So, I don’t get what you are talking about. We accept persecuted people from all over the world. Israel only accepts Jews, well, white Jews. It deports Africans that refugee to Israel.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/11/israel-african-migrants-deportation_n_1586998.html

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Loving your neighbor isn’t taking their property, their business, and everything they own. Hauling them off to live in a ghetto, and then marching them down the road, to board a train for a concentration camp. That isn’t love. These people did nothing, but live their lives, and make sure their children were educated, even if it meant spending endless hours, and saving their money.

    Sounds like what happened to my very good friend from Bosnia. Her husband was dragged out of their house and murdered in the middle of the night and she refugeed to the U.S. She is muslim. She is as much my neighbor as a jewish person. My uncle’s relatives in Europe, about 60 people, were murdered by Nazis. He is jewish. He is my neighbor like my Christian and muslim, atheist, hindu friends. The fact is the U.S. is not a theocracy that needs to favor Jews over others. The U.S. is not the country that persecuted the Jews to the point of a holocaust, nor is it the country that persecuted the muslims in Europe, etc. Those injustices were not perpetrated by us. So, I don’t get what you are talking about. We accept persecuted people from all over the world. Israel only accepts Jews, well, white Jews. It deports Africans that refugee to Israel.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/11/israel-african-migrants-deportation_n_1586998.html

  • SKPeterson
  • SKPeterson
  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Many on this blog don’t support Israel or the Jews, I do, and so do many other Born Again Christians. That is not going to change.

    Okay, so if Mitt Romney were jewish, would Grace and those who “support Israel or the Jews” vote for Romney? How many percentage points would he gain?

    The prejudice against the nation of Israel is UGLY, it gets even UGLIER, as time goes by.

    Okay, but how about the prejudice against the LDS. I mean, these are people whose leader was murdered by an American, not a German. These people had their religious practices circumscribed by Americans. All they wanted was Utah and polygamy. I mean, there are many Jews in Hollywood involved in promoting vice and pornography. LDS, not so much. Most Jews are pro abortion. LDS, not so much. So, just morally, why the ugly prejudice against good citizen Mormons? Neither group is perfect. Both groups have wonderful individuals. So, why the categorical rejection of Mormons and the unjustified devotion to Jews?

    How about we judge each person individually not based on religion, race, etc.? Or would that be unchristian? Or too American?

    Also, just to pander to base and peculiar political orientations, which presidential candidate would be more likely to support Israel based on his religious identity?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Many on this blog don’t support Israel or the Jews, I do, and so do many other Born Again Christians. That is not going to change.

    Okay, so if Mitt Romney were jewish, would Grace and those who “support Israel or the Jews” vote for Romney? How many percentage points would he gain?

    The prejudice against the nation of Israel is UGLY, it gets even UGLIER, as time goes by.

    Okay, but how about the prejudice against the LDS. I mean, these are people whose leader was murdered by an American, not a German. These people had their religious practices circumscribed by Americans. All they wanted was Utah and polygamy. I mean, there are many Jews in Hollywood involved in promoting vice and pornography. LDS, not so much. Most Jews are pro abortion. LDS, not so much. So, just morally, why the ugly prejudice against good citizen Mormons? Neither group is perfect. Both groups have wonderful individuals. So, why the categorical rejection of Mormons and the unjustified devotion to Jews?

    How about we judge each person individually not based on religion, race, etc.? Or would that be unchristian? Or too American?

    Also, just to pander to base and peculiar political orientations, which presidential candidate would be more likely to support Israel based on his religious identity?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Just to state the obvious, which has been alluded to, yet still needs to be repeated:

    God has fulfilled His covenant with the Jews. He sent His Son, the Jewish Messiah to save them because they could not fulfill the covenant, only God could. As Jesus said, “It is finished.”

    Jesus died for all, Jew and Gentile, slave and free, male and female.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Just to state the obvious, which has been alluded to, yet still needs to be repeated:

    God has fulfilled His covenant with the Jews. He sent His Son, the Jewish Messiah to save them because they could not fulfill the covenant, only God could. As Jesus said, “It is finished.”

    Jesus died for all, Jew and Gentile, slave and free, male and female.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    All this digging around in apocalyptic texts and reinterpreting for some code in the text that tells of something no Bible scholars noted for 1500 years makes me wonder if it is a sort of neo-gnosticism of secret knowledge of some sort.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    All this digging around in apocalyptic texts and reinterpreting for some code in the text that tells of something no Bible scholars noted for 1500 years makes me wonder if it is a sort of neo-gnosticism of secret knowledge of some sort.

  • SKPeterson

    I think this video provides conclusive evidence that God meant to lead the Jews to Australia.

    http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120919/PROMO/120919011/2275/RSS05

  • SKPeterson

    I think this video provides conclusive evidence that God meant to lead the Jews to Australia.

    http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120919/PROMO/120919011/2275/RSS05

  • Grace

    sg “Okay, so if Mitt Romney were jewish, would Grace and those who “support Israel or the Jews” vote for Romney? How many percentage points would he gain? “

    Make it up as you go along? You’ve tried that approach in the past. It’s nonsense, 3rd class.

  • Grace

    sg “Okay, so if Mitt Romney were jewish, would Grace and those who “support Israel or the Jews” vote for Romney? How many percentage points would he gain? “

    Make it up as you go along? You’ve tried that approach in the past. It’s nonsense, 3rd class.

  • Grace

    SKPeterson @143 – - “And, if the “books” are true expositions of Scripture, why not stay stuck in the Bible and them? You claim all sorts of inane gobbledygook is in the Bible. We don’t. ‘Cause we’re stuck in our books.”

    I don’t just “claim it” I print it out for you to read. You don’t even need to look it up! If you believe that’s “gobbledygook” it’s to your shame. I’ve been accused of posting lots of Scripture many times, and now it’s “gobbledygook”

    Yep, you’re “stuck” -

  • Grace

    SKPeterson @143 – - “And, if the “books” are true expositions of Scripture, why not stay stuck in the Bible and them? You claim all sorts of inane gobbledygook is in the Bible. We don’t. ‘Cause we’re stuck in our books.”

    I don’t just “claim it” I print it out for you to read. You don’t even need to look it up! If you believe that’s “gobbledygook” it’s to your shame. I’ve been accused of posting lots of Scripture many times, and now it’s “gobbledygook”

    Yep, you’re “stuck” -

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Hi, everybody! Just checking in to see how things are going. I see it’s fifty-plus comments since I left my little note (@100).

    So, how’s it going? Making headway? Acknowledging common ground? Honing in on areas of disagreement? Okay, well, great!

    You kids enjoy! Boy, is there egg on my face!

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Hi, everybody! Just checking in to see how things are going. I see it’s fifty-plus comments since I left my little note (@100).

    So, how’s it going? Making headway? Acknowledging common ground? Honing in on areas of disagreement? Okay, well, great!

    You kids enjoy! Boy, is there egg on my face!

  • Grace

    “Boy, is there egg on my face!”

    Try some toast!

  • Grace

    “Boy, is there egg on my face!”

    Try some toast!

  • SKPeterson

    Inconceivable!

  • SKPeterson

    Inconceivable!

  • Tom Hering

    Todd @ 153, I don’t think any of us expect to convince Grace of anything. Much less do we expect to have the final word.

    Now, I’m glad you’ve broken the habit of responding to Grace. But ex-responders, like “ex” anything, who chide others with “I did it and so can you,” can sound a bit – superior. I’m sure that’s not the impression you want to give.

  • Tom Hering

    Todd @ 153, I don’t think any of us expect to convince Grace of anything. Much less do we expect to have the final word.

    Now, I’m glad you’ve broken the habit of responding to Grace. But ex-responders, like “ex” anything, who chide others with “I did it and so can you,” can sound a bit – superior. I’m sure that’s not the impression you want to give.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    So, how’s it going? Making headway? Acknowledging common ground? Honing in on areas of disagreement?

    Not trying to make headway. Just trying to investigate and expose. Notice Grace doesn’t want to answer whether she personally would be more likely to vote for Romney if he were jewish. On other threads she has noted that his religion is a problem because he isn’t Christian or because Mormons are to strange or whatever. Others agree with that but may not have really thought it out. Grace may not be willing to discuss it or perhaps even think about it, but what about other more thoughtful people who might read this? Okay, so what about Jews? If they so support Jews, would they vote for one for U.S. president? Why or why not? Why not think about what it is we believe, support, fear, etc.? Yes, Grace is easily stumped and can’t answer, but serious minded others might want to actually think about these ideas. That is the small contribution such discussion could make for those readers. If they wouldn’t vote for a Jew either, why not? If they wouldn’t vote for a Mormon but would vote for a Jew, then why? Superstition? Emotionalism? Some guiding principle?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    So, how’s it going? Making headway? Acknowledging common ground? Honing in on areas of disagreement?

    Not trying to make headway. Just trying to investigate and expose. Notice Grace doesn’t want to answer whether she personally would be more likely to vote for Romney if he were jewish. On other threads she has noted that his religion is a problem because he isn’t Christian or because Mormons are to strange or whatever. Others agree with that but may not have really thought it out. Grace may not be willing to discuss it or perhaps even think about it, but what about other more thoughtful people who might read this? Okay, so what about Jews? If they so support Jews, would they vote for one for U.S. president? Why or why not? Why not think about what it is we believe, support, fear, etc.? Yes, Grace is easily stumped and can’t answer, but serious minded others might want to actually think about these ideas. That is the small contribution such discussion could make for those readers. If they wouldn’t vote for a Jew either, why not? If they wouldn’t vote for a Mormon but would vote for a Jew, then why? Superstition? Emotionalism? Some guiding principle?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I don’t just “claim it” I print it out for you to read. You don’t even need to look it up! If you believe that’s “gobbledygook” it’s to your shame. I’ve been accused of posting lots of Scripture many times, and now it’s “gobbledygook”

    Grace, the problem with the scripture you cite and post is that it doesn’t support what you say. The plain language of the text is either talking about something else, and not what you claim, or it is allegorical because the entire context is allegorical. These innovative interpretations are what is called eisegesis, where you read into it what you want to see. These interpretations are very new. They were invented by guys in the past few hundred years at most. None of the bible scholars before that ever had these notions. It was never part of church teaching in any of the church.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisegesis

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I don’t just “claim it” I print it out for you to read. You don’t even need to look it up! If you believe that’s “gobbledygook” it’s to your shame. I’ve been accused of posting lots of Scripture many times, and now it’s “gobbledygook”

    Grace, the problem with the scripture you cite and post is that it doesn’t support what you say. The plain language of the text is either talking about something else, and not what you claim, or it is allegorical because the entire context is allegorical. These innovative interpretations are what is called eisegesis, where you read into it what you want to see. These interpretations are very new. They were invented by guys in the past few hundred years at most. None of the bible scholars before that ever had these notions. It was never part of church teaching in any of the church.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisegesis

  • Grace

    sg,

    You live for a multitude of nonsensical scenarios, as in your post above. There’s no point to it!

    :razz:

  • Grace

    sg,

    You live for a multitude of nonsensical scenarios, as in your post above. There’s no point to it!

    :razz:

  • Grace

    sg @ 158

    You’re confused!

  • Grace

    sg @ 158

    You’re confused!

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    All I’m saying, Tom and SG, is that while you both are ostensibly commenting for the lurkers — who apparently cannot detect the errors and problems with Grace’s comments on their own — what you are also clearly doing is encouraging Grace to post more of her bizarre, erroneous comments. Thus, you are arguably contributing to the problem you are trying to address.

    Look, I’m not saying don’t reply to commenters you disagree with. Many people who are here — including a number of non-Lutherans — are reasonable folk, capable of listening, understanding, replying, and so on. By all means, carry on discussions with them — even debates! Point out the flaws in their arguments! Hone your own arguments, as well!

    But you’re fooling yourselves if you think that’s happening with Grace. She’s a heckler, and little more. If you want her to stop heckling and derailing conversations, you’ll have to stop listening to her — and, more to the point, replying to her — at some point.

    But as long as you reply, so will she. You are, as such, inviting her back, over and over. If you want her to keep replying, and to keep derailing conversations, then keep it up. But if you don’t …

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    All I’m saying, Tom and SG, is that while you both are ostensibly commenting for the lurkers — who apparently cannot detect the errors and problems with Grace’s comments on their own — what you are also clearly doing is encouraging Grace to post more of her bizarre, erroneous comments. Thus, you are arguably contributing to the problem you are trying to address.

    Look, I’m not saying don’t reply to commenters you disagree with. Many people who are here — including a number of non-Lutherans — are reasonable folk, capable of listening, understanding, replying, and so on. By all means, carry on discussions with them — even debates! Point out the flaws in their arguments! Hone your own arguments, as well!

    But you’re fooling yourselves if you think that’s happening with Grace. She’s a heckler, and little more. If you want her to stop heckling and derailing conversations, you’ll have to stop listening to her — and, more to the point, replying to her — at some point.

    But as long as you reply, so will she. You are, as such, inviting her back, over and over. If you want her to keep replying, and to keep derailing conversations, then keep it up. But if you don’t …

  • Grace

    tODD @ 160 __ “All I’m saying, Tom and SG, is that while you both are ostensibly commenting for the lurkers — who apparently cannot detect the errors and problems with Grace’s comments on their own

    Now you believe the “lurkers” to be stupid, and unlearned? You don’t know what they think. People who refute yours, and others beliefs are not in error, just because you believe differently. The Bible isn’t in error, but many of you refuse to read it, rather taking refuge in books rather than the Word of God.

  • Grace

    tODD @ 160 __ “All I’m saying, Tom and SG, is that while you both are ostensibly commenting for the lurkers — who apparently cannot detect the errors and problems with Grace’s comments on their own

    Now you believe the “lurkers” to be stupid, and unlearned? You don’t know what they think. People who refute yours, and others beliefs are not in error, just because you believe differently. The Bible isn’t in error, but many of you refuse to read it, rather taking refuge in books rather than the Word of God.

  • Grace

    My post @ 162 should have been directed to post 161.

  • Grace

    My post @ 162 should have been directed to post 161.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace @ 162 – You just proved Todd’s (and sg’s) point.

  • SKPeterson

    Grace @ 162 – You just proved Todd’s (and sg’s) point.

  • Grace

    164

    SKP, no I haven’t. LOL

  • Grace

    164

    SKP, no I haven’t. LOL

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    To paraphrase Todd:

    Take your hands off your keyboard and slowly back up, away from the Troll!

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    To paraphrase Todd:

    Take your hands off your keyboard and slowly back up, away from the Troll!

  • BW

    Unintelligible response to KK @ 166 coming in 3…2..1…

  • BW

    Unintelligible response to KK @ 166 coming in 3…2..1…

  • Tom Hering

    Todd @ 161, if we should have learned anything by now, it’s that Grace is going to do what she does no matter what we do or don’t do. So if I feel like responding to her sometimes, and ignoring her at other times, it makes no difference. And personally, I don’t have lurkers in mind. When I respond, I do it to satisfy myself. That’s all.

  • Tom Hering

    Todd @ 161, if we should have learned anything by now, it’s that Grace is going to do what she does no matter what we do or don’t do. So if I feel like responding to her sometimes, and ignoring her at other times, it makes no difference. And personally, I don’t have lurkers in mind. When I respond, I do it to satisfy myself. That’s all.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Tom (@168), the overwhelming majority of Grace’s 40 (and counting, no doubt) comments here are replies to people who replied to her. Don’t tell me it doesn’t matter what we do.

    Yes, she is likely to post a couple of responses to this or that post, whether or not she’s being ignored. And yes, she may also chime in with one of her patented unnecessarily-long blockquotes of an unrelated nature.

    But come on. She’s encouraged by replies to her comments. The evidence is hard to ignore on that one.

    And, once more, if you want her to keep commenting here, then by all means, reply to her.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Tom (@168), the overwhelming majority of Grace’s 40 (and counting, no doubt) comments here are replies to people who replied to her. Don’t tell me it doesn’t matter what we do.

    Yes, she is likely to post a couple of responses to this or that post, whether or not she’s being ignored. And yes, she may also chime in with one of her patented unnecessarily-long blockquotes of an unrelated nature.

    But come on. She’s encouraged by replies to her comments. The evidence is hard to ignore on that one.

    And, once more, if you want her to keep commenting here, then by all means, reply to her.

  • Tom Hering

    Yeah, but, I need someone around here who’s easy to respond to. You and Cincinnatus and a few others are too much work.

  • Tom Hering

    Yeah, but, I need someone around here who’s easy to respond to. You and Cincinnatus and a few others are too much work.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @160

    No, Grace, you are confused.

    repeat.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @160

    No, Grace, you are confused.

    repeat.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Look, I agree that tODD is correct in his assessment. I just don’t like to let egregiously false statements stand without any refutation beyond just saying ignore the troll. A lot of people have fallen for this strange idea that the modern state of Israel is so super special because at a distant past point in history the Bible describes God’s covenant with essentially a different Israel. That argument is in effect anti-Christian as though Christ came for everyone except for the Jews, which is not true. The first Christians were Jews.

    Also, I learned a fair amount here including replacement theology/supersessionism, Christian Zionism, and the Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism.

    The Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism is a document signed on behalf of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem (Catholic), the Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land. It is dated August 22, 2006. The Declaration does reject Christian Zionism, concluding that it is a “false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice and reconciliation.”[1][2] All of the above Churches in support of the Declaration are local and include Palestinian Christians.
    Several reasons are given, among them the following. “The Christian Zionist programme provides a worldview where the Gospel is identified with the ideology of empire, colonialism and militarism. In its extreme form, it places an emphasis on apocalyptic events leading to the end of history rather than living Christ’s love and justice today.” “We call upon Christians in Churches on every continent to pray for the Palestinian and Israeli people.”

    If I had just ignored stuff said here that I felt was wrong because it was promoted by someone who is often wrong, then I would not have learned this stuff. So, yes engaging certain arguments does lead to more comments, but you can learn stuff even tangentially because it is exposed in the process of refuting assertions.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Look, I agree that tODD is correct in his assessment. I just don’t like to let egregiously false statements stand without any refutation beyond just saying ignore the troll. A lot of people have fallen for this strange idea that the modern state of Israel is so super special because at a distant past point in history the Bible describes God’s covenant with essentially a different Israel. That argument is in effect anti-Christian as though Christ came for everyone except for the Jews, which is not true. The first Christians were Jews.

    Also, I learned a fair amount here including replacement theology/supersessionism, Christian Zionism, and the Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism.

    The Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism is a document signed on behalf of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem (Catholic), the Syrian Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jordan and the Holy Land. It is dated August 22, 2006. The Declaration does reject Christian Zionism, concluding that it is a “false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice and reconciliation.”[1][2] All of the above Churches in support of the Declaration are local and include Palestinian Christians.
    Several reasons are given, among them the following. “The Christian Zionist programme provides a worldview where the Gospel is identified with the ideology of empire, colonialism and militarism. In its extreme form, it places an emphasis on apocalyptic events leading to the end of history rather than living Christ’s love and justice today.” “We call upon Christians in Churches on every continent to pray for the Palestinian and Israeli people.”

    If I had just ignored stuff said here that I felt was wrong because it was promoted by someone who is often wrong, then I would not have learned this stuff. So, yes engaging certain arguments does lead to more comments, but you can learn stuff even tangentially because it is exposed in the process of refuting assertions.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Also found as a result of this discussion: voltairenet.org.

    Does anyone know that group? Any opinions of them?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Also found as a result of this discussion: voltairenet.org.

    Does anyone know that group? Any opinions of them?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    SG said (@172):

    I just don’t like to let egregiously false statements stand without any refutation beyond just saying ignore the troll.

    How do you sleep at night? I don’t mean that in the traditional morally accusatory sense. I mean, literally, how do you, then, find time to sleep at night? Because when are egregiously false statements not being made on the Internet? Do I have to post a link to the XKCD comic?

    My point being, we have to pick our battles. And I know you do. I do, too. And recently, I decided not to fight this one anymore. Or rather, that the best way to fight it is … by not fighting it. The only way to win is not to play, and all that.

    The problem is that refutation actually lends an air of legitimacy. You know it’s true.

    One man tells you that Barack Obama is literally an alien from a distant star system, come here to prepare the country for the eventual invasion of his species, who will feast on the ear wax of our citizens. Another man tells you that Barack Obama has created more jobs in his administration than any other President.

    Now, are you going to spend the same amount of time and energy refuting both men’s claims? Are you going to spend a lot of time linking to references that debunk the first man’s claims, researching the notions about space travel, habitable planets, and the nutritional value of ear wax? Are you going to worry that others will be fooled by his arguments?

    Obviously, this is a reductio argument. Grace’s comments here often don’t rise to that level of in(s)anity. But, all the same, to reply to her is to tell her that her comments are, in fact, worthy of a reply. That she is just as much a valued contributor to this blog as anyone else to whom you reply, including Dr. Veith. Grace no doubt believes that’s true (largely because of the many replies she’s received here over time). Do you?

    Look, I know that the ideas Grace subscribes to are actually held by many people (as are the ideas that 9/11 was an inside government job, or that Obama is not actually a citizen). I get that. But Grace is not a competent representative of those ideas. If Hagee were to show up here, yes, you definitely should engage him and explain to him how very, very wrong he is. Show him from Scripture how his rejection of the Church as True Israel is, fundamentally, a rejection of Jesus as Savior, and thus damnable heresy. At least he would be able, I assume, to engage that debate with you.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    SG said (@172):

    I just don’t like to let egregiously false statements stand without any refutation beyond just saying ignore the troll.

    How do you sleep at night? I don’t mean that in the traditional morally accusatory sense. I mean, literally, how do you, then, find time to sleep at night? Because when are egregiously false statements not being made on the Internet? Do I have to post a link to the XKCD comic?

    My point being, we have to pick our battles. And I know you do. I do, too. And recently, I decided not to fight this one anymore. Or rather, that the best way to fight it is … by not fighting it. The only way to win is not to play, and all that.

    The problem is that refutation actually lends an air of legitimacy. You know it’s true.

    One man tells you that Barack Obama is literally an alien from a distant star system, come here to prepare the country for the eventual invasion of his species, who will feast on the ear wax of our citizens. Another man tells you that Barack Obama has created more jobs in his administration than any other President.

    Now, are you going to spend the same amount of time and energy refuting both men’s claims? Are you going to spend a lot of time linking to references that debunk the first man’s claims, researching the notions about space travel, habitable planets, and the nutritional value of ear wax? Are you going to worry that others will be fooled by his arguments?

    Obviously, this is a reductio argument. Grace’s comments here often don’t rise to that level of in(s)anity. But, all the same, to reply to her is to tell her that her comments are, in fact, worthy of a reply. That she is just as much a valued contributor to this blog as anyone else to whom you reply, including Dr. Veith. Grace no doubt believes that’s true (largely because of the many replies she’s received here over time). Do you?

    Look, I know that the ideas Grace subscribes to are actually held by many people (as are the ideas that 9/11 was an inside government job, or that Obama is not actually a citizen). I get that. But Grace is not a competent representative of those ideas. If Hagee were to show up here, yes, you definitely should engage him and explain to him how very, very wrong he is. Show him from Scripture how his rejection of the Church as True Israel is, fundamentally, a rejection of Jesus as Savior, and thus damnable heresy. At least he would be able, I assume, to engage that debate with you.

  • Daniel Gorman

    1. Obama’s abortion policy would probably kill more babies than Romney’s.
    2. Romney’s unjust war policy would probably kill more innocent people than Obama’s.
    3. Obama’s evil reign would probably end in four years whereas Romney’s could continue for eight.
    4. Obama’s open border policy would probably destroy the republic much sooner than Romney’s.
    5. We should probably vote for Romney.

  • Daniel Gorman

    1. Obama’s abortion policy would probably kill more babies than Romney’s.
    2. Romney’s unjust war policy would probably kill more innocent people than Obama’s.
    3. Obama’s evil reign would probably end in four years whereas Romney’s could continue for eight.
    4. Obama’s open border policy would probably destroy the republic much sooner than Romney’s.
    5. We should probably vote for Romney.

  • Daniel Gorman

    Please ignore. I posted on the wrong thread!

  • Daniel Gorman

    Please ignore. I posted on the wrong thread!

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Eh, I am not in it to win (obviously, since I’m not). I mostly want to learn stuff. I also like to share stuff I have seen that I found interesting or challenging because I get interesting feedback which helps me figure stuff out.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Eh, I am not in it to win (obviously, since I’m not). I mostly want to learn stuff. I also like to share stuff I have seen that I found interesting or challenging because I get interesting feedback which helps me figure stuff out.

  • Dan Kempin

    A lutheran church and school in Pakistan was destroyed by a muslim mob last week.

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Church-school-set-afire-in-Pak-film-fury/articleshow/16522293.cms

  • Dan Kempin

    A lutheran church and school in Pakistan was destroyed by a muslim mob last week.

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Church-school-set-afire-in-Pak-film-fury/articleshow/16522293.cms


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X