Presedential Address:
I'd just like to comment on my happiness with the President's speech last night. It's the first time I remember ever being happy with one of his speeches. Most of my happiness with the speech was due to the humble persona that he presented, which I found greatly contrasting to any other speech I've ever seen him give. Such humbleness caused me to trust what he was saying much more. I for once did not feel like he was lying. He seemed honest, almost even broken, which I believe is a good place from which leaders should make such difficult decisions. I was very sick of the macho-leader persona that he has had up until this point. It made me feel like he was hiding reality in order to convince me that what he had decided about Iraq was correct (this is what I meant by "lying" a couple sentences ago).
Last night he was honest about the dificulty and the pain. I'm much more appreciative of his decisions when he shows that they are difficult decisions, not just "if you vote for the democrats then you're voting for the terrorists," or "you're either for us or against us," or "this is a battle between good and evil, and you either do it our way or your fighting for evil." This is the feeling (and many actual statements) that I've gotten from Bush in the past. I was very happy to see something different last night.
I am, for now, behind him on sending more troops. I just hope it's the right decision for right now. I'm afraid, as I'm sure he is, that it may not be enough troops at this point. From my perspective, this change of strategy is at least a year overdue, but perhaps it will still work.
I think all the Democratic talk about "escalation" is pretty pitiful. It's obvious to me that this is not an escalation, and should not be referred to as such. However, I think the Democrats' actions in Congress, despite the current rhetoric, will be to allow Bush this last chance to get control of the situation in Iraq.
If this doesn't work, then Bush's presidency will be seen as a great failure. If it does work, there may be some salvaging of his reputation for the history books.
I hope it works.
Jan 11, 2007
Jan 4, 2007
Hopefully Jason won't mind that I decided to post his comment to my last blog and then comment back to him
Jslimbaugh said...
Greetings -It is to me an interesting, if not mystifying, development that many professing Christians in our day are turning their backs on Israel.
Support for Israel does not mean that we condone every action or support every policy. But we cannot forget the prophecy that the Lord Himself gave to Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation: "I will give this land to your descendants as an EVERLASTING possession."
The Lord stripped the land from its prior inhabitants and gave it to the children of Israel. At various times, this inheritance right has been challenged...at other times, God punished the children of Israel via exile. But Israel has always come back into her God-ordained inheritance.
Indeed, the Diaspora was prophesied - the longest and farthest reaching exile. And we see clearly in Zechariah Ch.12 that Israel would again come back into their inheritance closer to the end of all things:"I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that sends all the surrounding nations reeling...on that day when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock."
Later in the chapter, this crisis is linked to Israel's recognition of the Messiah.
The one who fights Israel - with sword, tongue, or even in heart - is fighting God.
The current turn from Israeli support among Christians is in tandem with the turn of so many Christian youth towards thinking that embraces the world, embraces the flesh, and embraces liberal ideologies that SEEM to mirror Christianity on the surface, but are founded on the spirit of anti-christ and lawlessness.
Blessings,
Jason
My Reply:::
Jason,
You say support for Israel does not mean we condone every action. What does support for Israel look like? The nation of Israel is a secular state. In what sense do God's promises to God's people apply to a secular state? I'm not denying that they do; I'm just questioning where the connection is between Old Testament promises and the current state of Israel.
For example, Old Testament prophecies (given while the people were in exile) about the people returning to the land are nearly always put into the context of the Messiah coming to deliver them. Jews have now for over 2,000 years been waiting for the Messiah to come and return them to their land. In fact, when the state of Israel was established in 1948, many (if not most) Orthodox Jews in America were against it and at first refused to return to Palestine/Israel. Their reason for being against the establishment of the nation was that their expectation was that their return to the land would be the work of the Messiah, not their own doing.
To be quite honest, despite having studied them some I find those Old Testament (OT) prophecies about the return to the land to be quite confusing. The people of Jesus' time thought they understood those prophecies, and so when Jesus did the Messianic/prophetic act of riding into Jerusalem on a donkey (to fulfill the prophecy from Zech. 9 that everyone obviously knew), the people recognized this act and began welcoming him as the king (using the language of Zech. 9). The people seem to think (because this is how they've understood the prophecies) that if Jesus is the Messiah then he will return them to their land, which of course would involve expelling the Romans and such (most of the Jews did not live in Palestine at the time but were still spread out because of the exiles a few hundred years previous).
However, instead of Jesus being happy that they have figured out who he is and are welcoming him as Messiah and king, he weeps over the city. And he says, "If you had known in this day, even you, the things that make for peace!"
Jesus' way to peace is the way of the cross, not the way that the people had understood the prophecies. This is the lesson that Martin Luther King, Jr. learned and attempted to teach us.
I am not trying to say that God has discarded Israel and has no use for them. However, I believe that to use interpretation of OT prophecies concerning Israel's return to the land as a reason to support the modern, secular state of Israel is a dangerous step to take, particularly when the modern state of Israel is practicing apartheid. I believe that to support Israel's removal of, and domination over, the Palestinians makes Jesus weep, and say - "If only you knew the things that make for peace."
Whatever God's plans are for his people the Jews in the end times, there is nowhere that God calls us to fight on their behalf or to attempt to put them in power by our own means. What we are called to, over and over and over and over throughout the whole Bible, is to do justice, to help the poor and the widow, and to walk humbly with our God.
Jslimbaugh said...
Greetings -It is to me an interesting, if not mystifying, development that many professing Christians in our day are turning their backs on Israel.
Support for Israel does not mean that we condone every action or support every policy. But we cannot forget the prophecy that the Lord Himself gave to Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation: "I will give this land to your descendants as an EVERLASTING possession."
The Lord stripped the land from its prior inhabitants and gave it to the children of Israel. At various times, this inheritance right has been challenged...at other times, God punished the children of Israel via exile. But Israel has always come back into her God-ordained inheritance.
Indeed, the Diaspora was prophesied - the longest and farthest reaching exile. And we see clearly in Zechariah Ch.12 that Israel would again come back into their inheritance closer to the end of all things:"I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that sends all the surrounding nations reeling...on that day when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock."
Later in the chapter, this crisis is linked to Israel's recognition of the Messiah.
The one who fights Israel - with sword, tongue, or even in heart - is fighting God.
The current turn from Israeli support among Christians is in tandem with the turn of so many Christian youth towards thinking that embraces the world, embraces the flesh, and embraces liberal ideologies that SEEM to mirror Christianity on the surface, but are founded on the spirit of anti-christ and lawlessness.
Blessings,
Jason
My Reply:::
Jason,
You say support for Israel does not mean we condone every action. What does support for Israel look like? The nation of Israel is a secular state. In what sense do God's promises to God's people apply to a secular state? I'm not denying that they do; I'm just questioning where the connection is between Old Testament promises and the current state of Israel.
For example, Old Testament prophecies (given while the people were in exile) about the people returning to the land are nearly always put into the context of the Messiah coming to deliver them. Jews have now for over 2,000 years been waiting for the Messiah to come and return them to their land. In fact, when the state of Israel was established in 1948, many (if not most) Orthodox Jews in America were against it and at first refused to return to Palestine/Israel. Their reason for being against the establishment of the nation was that their expectation was that their return to the land would be the work of the Messiah, not their own doing.
To be quite honest, despite having studied them some I find those Old Testament (OT) prophecies about the return to the land to be quite confusing. The people of Jesus' time thought they understood those prophecies, and so when Jesus did the Messianic/prophetic act of riding into Jerusalem on a donkey (to fulfill the prophecy from Zech. 9 that everyone obviously knew), the people recognized this act and began welcoming him as the king (using the language of Zech. 9). The people seem to think (because this is how they've understood the prophecies) that if Jesus is the Messiah then he will return them to their land, which of course would involve expelling the Romans and such (most of the Jews did not live in Palestine at the time but were still spread out because of the exiles a few hundred years previous).
However, instead of Jesus being happy that they have figured out who he is and are welcoming him as Messiah and king, he weeps over the city. And he says, "If you had known in this day, even you, the things that make for peace!"
Jesus' way to peace is the way of the cross, not the way that the people had understood the prophecies. This is the lesson that Martin Luther King, Jr. learned and attempted to teach us.
I am not trying to say that God has discarded Israel and has no use for them. However, I believe that to use interpretation of OT prophecies concerning Israel's return to the land as a reason to support the modern, secular state of Israel is a dangerous step to take, particularly when the modern state of Israel is practicing apartheid. I believe that to support Israel's removal of, and domination over, the Palestinians makes Jesus weep, and say - "If only you knew the things that make for peace."
Whatever God's plans are for his people the Jews in the end times, there is nowhere that God calls us to fight on their behalf or to attempt to put them in power by our own means. What we are called to, over and over and over and over throughout the whole Bible, is to do justice, to help the poor and the widow, and to walk humbly with our God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)