Examine Yourself America!

Because that's not what Fallwell said. I always had a lot of respoect for him until that moment. Now I wonder if he hasn't lost his mind.

 

Falwell's words were hateful, hurtful and entirely uncalled for and anyone who backs him up should be ashamed of themselves.

Even if you agree with his cruel words, anyone with an ounce of patriotism in their hearts has to agree that his tirade was poorly timed.

Gays didn't cause the attacks on the US. It was a small group of evil, evil men.
They alone should be held respnosible for their actions.

 

I am all for calling sin sin and dealing with it but what you and Falwell are talking about is painting a bullseye on the backs of people for whom Christ died.

It's remarkable how similar that is to what happened during the rise of Nazi Germany in the thirties.

"Our economy is failing! It must be the fault of the Jews!" "We are in a moral freefall! It must be the fault of the homosexuals!"

 

I'm in complete agreement with you brother Barnabas!

Someone has said, "If God doesn't bring judgment on America, then He'll have to apologize for Sodom and Gamorrah."

Now, after the events of Sept. 11th, we suddenly have a lot of temporal faith people. What do I mean by "temporal faith?" Temporal means related to time and/or lasting only a short time. Those are the folks who seek God in "times" of need and distress, but when life turns rosy again, they will forget about God until the next crisis. I just pray that there will be many "true" conversions as a result of those who made the ultimate sacrifice.

God bless!

 

Pleading ignorance. Could someone point to any occurrences of God's wrath upon a nation in the New Testament?

Thanks!

 

Dajuid,

Certainly!

Romans 13:1-5 (ESV)
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

There's the justification. If you're looking for a specific instance, such as when God told Joshua to destroy whole nations in Canaan, it's obviously not there. But then the entire OT is not set aside, right? The only part of the law Jesus did away with was concerning sacrifices and the priesthood, because He was the ultimate and final sacrifice, and established the priesthood of the believer. All other events in the OT are "breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (ESV)

 

Thanks John!

That was exactly what I was looking for!

 

Seems to me that Falwell's remarks were technically correct but in the context that he made them they were not applicable to the situation.

At least the way I read it, it sounded like he was blaming the sodomites, baby-killers, and liberal nut-cases for the destruction of the twin towers. Clearly the twin towers were destroyed by radical muslim terrorists.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Wells:
Dajuid,

Certainly!

Romans 13:1-5 (ESV)
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

There's the justification. If you're looking for a specific instance, such as when God told Joshua to destroy whole nations in Canaan, it's obviously not there. But then the entire OT is not set aside, right? The only part of the law Jesus did away with was concerning sacrifices and the priesthood, because He was the ultimate and final sacrifice, and established the priesthood of the believer. All other events in the OT are "breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (ESV)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

O.K. Let's take your reference here in the context that you used to respond to the previous post.

Remember that when Paul wrote this, what he said would be applied to the Roman government.

If the context you are using is to be applied, then there are a lot of Christians in this country who owe Bill Clinton eight years of apologies, since if this is literally interpreted, he was the man God had appointed over this land for eight years.

Whew! Thank goodness your response here is out of its intended context.

[ October 02, 2001: Message edited by: ellis ]

 

Dear Barnabas:

I guess your views are scripturally correct, but not politically correct. Yes, the question to ask is--Why did God remove his hand of protection?

Massive divorce, adultery and fornication, pornography, witchcraft, satanism, occultic arts, homosexuality, materialism...I guess America is going down the drain and racing towards destruction.

I guess my country, the Philippines, is not far behind.

 

First of all, I'm not going to presume to speak for God, nor twist his word out of shape to justify a presupposition regarding his "removal" of his "hand of protection" from America.

Did we really believe that we had some kind of special disposition from God prior to this time, because of our alleged or supposed "righteousness"? If so, then when would that period of time have been? When was this country ever deserving of, or entitled to anything from our sovereign and merciful God?

The problem with this kind of interpretation stems from our lack of awareness of what is happening in the rest of the world, our lack of knowledge of history in the world (except that which directly affects us, and even then we don't know it very well, or twist it to suit our position), and a common belief that America is the modern day replacement for Israel as the "chosen". Aside from the brash presumption of this position, it isn't scriptural.

In the New Testament, salvation relates to individual accountability, not national religious preference. The covenant between God and man for redemption is made between God and the one being redeemed, and is hardly dependent on the number of redeemed people in the country of residence.

We live in a fallen world. We also live in the most prosperous country in the world, and our prosperity makes us the world superpower. That is an inevitable magnet bound to attract those who feel that they are entitled to a share.

I doubt that the Christians who suffer persecution in many parts of the world today would share this view with us.

 

ellis said, "Whew! Thank goodness your response here is out of its intended context."

I think this country got what it deserved during the "Clinton years" because the majority in this country don't care about integrity and morality.

Regarding your context disagreement, I disagree with you and have no interest in fueling your desire to argue.

[ October 03, 2001: Message edited by: John Wells ]

 

Thank you ellis! once agin, people think sexual sin is the only thing that angers
God. As I write on my page (newly updated):
It's as if those things are the only "sins" that this country has committed or that God is against, "...musing at what a lucky thing it is for the rest of us [who don't commit such sins] that God does not hand out diseases for gossip, greed or self-righteousness [things we know we are guilty of]", says Horton (p.34) and that our belief about America is "Its moral righteousness is the reason God favored it, and its lack of moral righteousness is the reason for God's abandonment"(p.123), which suggests if we follow a particular course of action, (political action to the New-evangelical, and "separation" and "preaching Hell" to the old-line fundamentalist), God will be obligated to bless us again! People...do not understand that God sees more than we see. We see sex outwardly covered up in the past, but blown all over the place now and think "oh, society was so good then, but so evil now". But God saw what was in people's hearts, and as Horton so tactfully points out, "Jesus scolded the Pharisees for attributing sin to the world, instead of their own hearts, and understanding it chiefly as actions, instead of as a condition" (p.80). We are judging acts, comparing those of one age to another, declaring one age "good". But these are only symptoms of a problem man has had in equal measure since Adam. So "this age or this culture was better than that one" can only be the same self-justifying works-righteousness as the nonbelievers thinking their good will outweigh their bad and get them into heaven. It's what the Pharisee did in Jesus' parable: "Thank you, Lord, that I am not as that publican ["sinner"] over there". James 2:10, 11 tells us that "whosoever keeps the whole Law but offends in one point is guilty of all. For he who said 'do not commit adultery' also said 'do not kill'. Now if you commit no adultery, yet if you kill, you have become a transgressor of the Law". This is aimed at precisely the attitude of those who think sexual morality is more important than everything else.
Horton asks:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
Does it offend us to hear that America has no special relationship to God and that God has absolutely no obligation to preserve or save this nation? Does it bother us to hear that God no more favors America that Iraq? ...God is obliged by no treaties or debts. We must always beware of turning God into a mascot of civil religion. (p.105-6) Apart from Christ, all of us as individuals deserve God's wrath, and that is just as true of the nation as it is of its people. Not only in its worst days, but in its finest hours and most God-honoring speeches, there has been reason enough for a holy God to extinguish the life of our nation at any given moment. It is nothing but the sheer mercy of God that accounts for the blessings God sends our way. (p.196) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Meanwhile, I have seen the mention of the fact that the attack on our nation occurred right after we pulled out of the World Conference of Racism in South Africa. That correlation never even occurred to me, until I read it in a small Brooklyn-based black newspaper. (And it wasn't as blatant in placing blame for the tragedy as conservative Christians were.) But this shows us that there are many sins we don't even think of, that people can blame for any misfortune that falls our way.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eric B:


Meanwhile, I have seen the mention of the fact that the attack on our nation occurred right after we pulled out of the World Conference of Racism in South Africa. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

The fact that we pulled out of the racism conference does not show that we, as a nation, have sinned or been mistaken. The reason we did not attend is because the majority of the conference was about how racist the nation of Israel has been, and what they must do to reconcile for their past mistakes. We rightly refused to go because the Jewish people have been some of main victims of racism, not the main perpetrators! In fact, the conference was merely repeating the propaganda of the extremist Islamic leaders who hate Israel with a passion.