Justified.....?

Folks I'm a little worried, a little disenchanted. Apparently I have it wrong. I should be justified when I want to support my country and it's Government as it sets policies that condone war. Apparently it is condoned even by God to invade foreign sovereign countries in the name of "they started it!"

It must be true. A soldier who fought on the ground in one of those foreign countries said so.

This is what he said:
I am a Special Forces Officer and veteran of combat in Afghanistan.

The 6th Commandment of the Christian Bible (and Jewish Torah) is "Thou Shall Not Kill" or "Thou Shall Not Murder" depending on the translation of ancient Hebrew.

I prefer the "Thou Shall Not Murder" as it is the more accurate translation.

I would like to stop it there a moment and mention the convenience of the alteration in interpretation of just one word from "Kill" to "Murder" and the implications of that.
Removal of the word kill which is a blanketing word that encompasses all forms of violence against another causing death leaves no real room for movement and we can't exclude warfare that causes death and begin our justification of that.
Murder is a legal word in our current English language and according to most Western legal systems one must have intended beyond a reasonable doubt to have taken another's life. There are reasonable defenses to the charge - the main being self defense or defense of another under serious threat from the person killed.
So the implications here are that one "is justified" in killing another with some specific conditions.

Let's hear some more:

Becoming a Christian is not a suicide pact. It does not mean that now as I am a Christian that anyone can come and beat me or kill me, rape women in my house and take anything you want from me and I will not fight back. That I will just lay there as a slug (or run away) because of my religion.

Interesting first sentence because Jesus has called many to serve him who have died in his name many quite violently as is attested by the accounts of Christian martyrs through history. I bring to the fore a recent martyr's (Dietrich Bonhoeffer) prophetic words regarding this "when Christ calls a man he bids him come and die."

The rest of this paragraph paints a noble, male supremist picture and builds with it a narrative of the 'enemy that is not in my home' which conveniently slots into that wider narrative of 'the enemy that is not in my country or doesn't follow my superior belief system'.

Let's go on:

Defending yourself is not murder. This is very clear in the Bible.

Also, "Thou Shall Not Murder" ties in completely when Jesus was asked what he thought was the greatest of the 10 Commandments

Matthew 22:37-40 -- Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

And Jesus also said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." (Luke 6:31; Luke 10:27 (affirming of Moses) and Matthew 7:12)

If I saw "bad men" breaking into my neighbor's house, I would go and defend my neighbor. I would willingly put my life in danger to prevent my neighbor from getting murdered, raped or beaten. That is also the way I would want my neighbor to treat me. I would be a coward and a very bad neighbor if I knew bad men were killing my neighbor and raping his wife and I did nothing. I would be evil if I justified "doing nothing" because I am a Christian.

I am still scratching my head at the twist of logic here. The scriptures are plainly pointing me in a direction and clearly telling me how to treat my neighbour and how to situate myself in relation to God.
The scenario after the scriptures is going back to the White Night narrative we saw earlier where he is identifying an enemy 'bad men' (obviously pigeon holing a type of person) putting them on a different level to his 'good' neighbour that most likely shares his values and beliefs. He then goes on to paint an unlikely picture that nowhere near fits into the wider scenario he is attempting to justify. Lets not kid ourselves he is attempting to fit this narrative into the invasion of both Iraq and Afghanistan.
If my neighbour America is such a good neighbour I would be expecting that he would not invade me and my home. I would expect that he would consult me on who is and isn't my enemy. I would ask him to assist me in restraining my enemy instead of thrusting his superior beliefs on me and tearing my loved ones and home apart in a vendetta against his self made enemies.

There's more:

What makes murder inherently wrong is not that it feels wrong, but that a transcendent Creator to whom we are answerable commands: "Thou shalt not murder." What makes kindness to others inherently right is not that human reason says so, but that God does: "Love thy neighbor as thyself; I am the Lord."

This doesn't do much for the argument. I would just say that an inner conscience would reflect the Creator's commands of though shalt not kill and usher us toward kindness.

As far as being a soldier in the American Army. The American Army and the American solider does not invade countries for money or booty or for power (as most armies do). We go (and fight and die) in hard places around this brutal world to liberate people and to bring freedom. This is what good neighbors do. I would leave the American Army if we invaded Iraq just to kill or Iraqis or invaded Afghanistan to take all their gold and make them slaves.

We were attacked on 9-11. 3,000 American died. More Americans will die if the terrorists are not confronted. We either go after them or surrender to them. Again, being a Christian or a Christian nation is not a suicide pact. It does not mean you just lay there and let people do whatever evil they want to you without fighting back.

Self defense is not immoral - not by an individual or by a nation.

God sent David to slay Goliath. Did God break his own Commandment?

Just the way I see it.

Best Regards,

The first paragraph reads like a narrative of one who is working against their conscience and needs to somehow justify the actions of their country. I am glad that many are beginning to see America for what it is and the motives behind it's Government's policies. Every aspect that this soldier says that America doesn't do, IT DOES DO!
I don't want to play down the fact that American and other country's soldiers don't go into difficult, horrific situations overseas. They do an extremely hard job under difficult circumstances and often die for that cause.
What I do want to question and oppose is the idea that the soldiers in these places need to be where they are and specifically doing what they are doing. Driven by questionable policies that are in place for the profit of a few and the detriment of many.
I would also question the automatic notion that Terrorists will flourish if not confronted. If internal American and Western policies were to shift away from accelerated corporate gain at the expense of neighbouring countries I don't believe these minority groups would have a reason to attack us.

But hey that's just the way I see it!

Fading.....

I have been reaching back into my metal music archives after recently hearing the latest album from Metallica. This new album is harking back to older familiar sounds of theirs.
As always I'm drawn back to old favorites when I hear the familiar sound and could not help listening to one of their more impacting and enduring tracks - Fade to Black.
Its theme fits well with recent news covering the health and wellbeing of the twenty somethings in our (better? superior? functional? capitalistic)society.
I also remember vividly the church's line on such music. As you can imagine it was not all that well received or accepted.
Inadvertently this line on such music effectively separated church people from these 'sorts'. Hmmm another thing I don't agree with church about. Never mind I would probably find those 'sorts' more accepting, more realistic regarding life's issues and easier to talk to than most church people anyway.
So as I listen again to the words and great music of this song I am reminded of those living on the fringe. Those that are out of most people's sight but never God's. And I ask myself the question...what makes this song so moving, so enduring and so relevant to those on the fringe? I'll let you make up your own mind on that one.
Also as I listen I remember the younger brother of a good friend of mine who used to listen to all this and other great music with us when we were younger. My friend although distant still remains but his younger brother found solace at the end of a rope barely into his twenties. It brings home the grim reality.

Have a listen and as you do have a thought for the kids mentioned in the article:

ONE sixth of Australians aged 23-24 suffer depression or anxiety.

ONE sixth engage in anti-social behaviour.

ONE fifth use marijuana, other illegal drugs, or are regular binge drinkers.

ONE fifth have a long-term physical or mental health problem.

Overall, 40 per cent showed severe signs of problems including depression, anxiety, antisocial behaviour or illegal drug-taking.

The study also found that alcohol use increased markedly for many in their mid-20s - most particularly among moderate drinkers.

I'm having trouble putting the video here i'll post it on my facebook for you

Good Dog - Bad Dog

I am recently reminded, by stories in the papers and blogland, about a story or parable I have heard repeated many a time in evangelical churches. You may know it... the one about the good dog and the bad dog inside us all. Pointing to the capacity of good and evil within the heart of everyone. The line that the church preaches on this subject is simply: The dominant dog will be the one that you feed the most. i.e if you feed bad dog most it will dominate. If you feed good dog most then the good dog will dominate.
Recently after rethinking most things church, I began to think about the idea of the starving dog. This viewpoint seems to be grossly overlooked by the simple feed the good dog or feed the bad dog line.
A starved dog if you have ever seen one is as you could imagine a very formidable beast. Getting more and more nasty the hungrier it becomes. Not necessarily weaker as the Church viewpoint suggests but more dangerous and difficult to deal with.
So following this idea through and applying it to the heart I am wondering if this church line is a healthy one. Does it clearly portray the human heart for what it is? Does it allow for the hearts capacity for evil or does it try to deny it? Does it portray a false idea that all evil can be expelled from the heart by our own action?
I suggest that this simplistic line of thinking is denying the reality of the heart and its impulses toward evil, even for the most 'good' or 'Godly' person. I also suggest that the more a person denies these impulses within themselves the more susceptible they become to such impulses.
So by continually pushing a simple line of: starving the evil dog within; are churches unwittingly forming a culture of denial. A dangerous denial for the capacity for evil and thereby turning a blind eye to it. Much like dropping ones guard, or dropping the armour as portrayed vividly in Romans.
When I read recently about Mike Guglielmucci and his very public and shameful fall from a high place in Australia's AOG ministry. I guess I should not be surprised. I believe the system of church has pushed a small group of hierachy into such an unrealisic pressured lifestyle of perfectionism and 'Godliness' that those chosen few come to a point of desperation that they would do anything to maintain the facade. Under this light the unthinkable acts like: faking disease and; forming a facade of supernatural healing, become understandable and remind me that they are human afterall. I feel that I would be more connected to Mike now that he's 'back on Earth' with us rather than previously when he was cramped into a supernatural and unrealistic lifestyle. A life that he had to lie about just to keep up the lofty expectencies of those around him.
The real shame of all this is that really good people with the best of intentions are continually eaten up by these systems. It's this (church) system that I despise most. I don't think Jesus' idea for his Church looked anything remotely like the systems we have in place these days.
Thank Christ there are movements and leanings to alternatives!

Embracing Ambiguities

Yes its been a while since I posted last.
I've been stewing a little.
Stewing on a couple of books I've been reading.
A thinking man's assault on the Christian Right in America
and another on the "New Athiests"
And more recently appreciating a story of an obscure songwriter and poet Bob DYLAN as portrayed by 6 different characters in a recent biopic.
Interestingly enough both books and the film have a similar undercurrent of wisdom pertaining to the ambiguities, the uncertainties, the mysteries that life throw at us.
Late in his book I Don't Believe in Atheists, Chris Hedges makes a very good point about these ambiguities and throws light on them pointing out the book of Ecclesiastes where the author Koheleth saw the pathetic, vain projects we spend a lifetime constructing. Warning man that "all the deeds that are done under the sun; all is vanity and chasing after wind. Nothing is certain or permanent, nothing real or unreal. Koheleth points out that "all things are wearisome, the eye is not satisfied with seeing nor the ear with hearing." "What has been is what will be and what has been done is what will be done." The King that asked God for wisdom and got what he asked for (Solomon) reinforced these points with his own life and the story it told.
Koheleth goes on "what is crooked cannot be made straight and what is lacking cannot be counted." Ecclesiastes points out that it is not so much what we do in life but what we do with what life hands us. We have limited real choices. We carry our human flaws to the grave. Our attempts to become Godlike by denying the emptiness, rythms and cycles of life are vanity. The best we can do is endure with compassion, wisdom and humility and accept the ambiguity and ultimate mystery of existence.
In the film I'm not there the caricature of Dylan played by Kate Blanchette sitting in an old style black taxi driving through city streets answering questions put to him/her?? by an inquiring journalist makes the same point. "the music is full of mysteries." "There are contradictions."

Chris Hedges argues in both books the dangerous practices professed by two differing ideologies (Christian fundamentalism and New Atheism). The expression of fundamentalist certainty. Ideas portrayed by a selected portion of humanity instituting a moral superiority and the omnipotence of human reason. Practices that become dangerous when non believers or the non enlightened are made separate and placed on a lower plateau. The natural progression of this is to suppress the alternate ideas of the lesser, the lower, the unenlightened and when they won't be silenced...use force or more commonly use the more accepted method of drowning them in a sea of irrelevance and obscurity.
The first step of both ideologies is to ignore the ambiguity. To formulate a faith of certainty. Where followers are absolutely right and all outsiders are not. A powerful motivator when you think about it. Tapping into a person's primal drive for control and certainty when facing questions of mortality, spirituality and the supernatural.
Another danger posed by these ideologies is the tendency to externalise evil. Placing emphasis on the perceived evil of the non believing outsiders while ignoring the reality of an internal struggle that takes place in the human heart. The believer of either ideology falling prey to self righteousness.

Another sobering point that Hedges explores is the deadening effect of visual distraction (i.e. TV, internet, video gaming etc) on the Western Capitalist Psyche. He draws an interesting idea from Niel Postman (Author: Amusing Ourselves to Death) contrasting George Orwell's 1984 and Aldous Huxley's Brave New World.

"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books, what Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who would want to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would be a captive society. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture preoccupied with some equivalent of positive feelings, pornographic delusions and an egocentrically generated utopia. In 1984 people are controlled by inflicting pain. In A Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared what we love will ruin us."

With that I'll be off to deaden myself on the PS2 shortly!

Here's a clip of Kate's Dylan performance. The section I'm talking about is in the last 2 minutes. I recommend you check out the full feature.

I Never Signed Up To Be Superman...

It has been some time since I have attended my usual place of worship. I love the people there and it's relatively easy to be accepted there... just turn up on a regular basis with your mask on.

For a little background this church lends itself to labels like: evangelical, fundamental, spirit filled and the main banner of apostolic.

I know I'm going to sound very cynical here but some things need saying.

I was a little unsettled about six months ago in the congregation when a pastor was invited to the front to testify regarding a dream and vision that he had. My ears immediately pricked up because it was a first in the six or so months that I had been going along. The vision was simply of Jesus staggering toward him in a pleading manner with both hands plastered and bandaged. The interpretation of the pastor about that vision was a simplistic idea of the church being recently tied down financially due to the ongoing works on the building.

Once I heard the interpretation my mind was immediately flooded with other problems of hierarchical problems with the clergy there, it's lack of impact on the community, particularly the poor and other minority groups.

My thoughts didn't have much time to develop though when the senior pastor chimed in and gave his interpretation siting recent threats made by some unknown Muslim group toward him due to his public support of a Ps. Danny Naliah. (This pastor had over the previous year been fighting in Victorian Courts for the right to speak 'freely' and accuse Muslims of trying to make Australia an Islamic State and brand them all dangerous. The pastor lost the court case but vowed to continue his public preaching and defamation regardless. ) As soon as this interpretation was said the whole congregation gasped. That gasp was enough to say it all... without a word being said. These Muslim Terrorists are out to get us! Threatening to attack our Pastor!

Needless to say I was choking silently looking around the huge hall in disbelief.

The second choking incident came via a friend who used to be a part of the church. I began wondering why I had not heard from a prominent female pastor who in the past had preached regularly but I hadn't heard of for some time; and I mean hadn't even sighted there for some time. My presumption was that they were on holiday because no one even made a mention of them. When I say them I mean the husband as well who was also a Pastor there and just happened to be the Senior Pastor's own son. Well my friend in the know told me that there had been a falling out between father and son. Son who was a chippy and plasterer by trade had put in a huge amount of time on the ongoing renovations to the church complex. I guess he expected to be put into a senior role in the church along with his wife as his father intended to retire in a short time. Expectations fell short when that role was handed to a prominent young super Pastor who had charged through the ranks and obviously did the spiritual hard yards. It was around this time I was being introduced to alternative concepts of doing church without dominant hierachy and minus most of the politics. It was and still is very appealing. So now I had a few new words in the vocabulary and could brand it the dualistic induced power struggle
that it was.

Meanwhile as all this was going on the Super Pastor was in full flight. Letting us know in one fully fledged sermon that Jesus the man was not poor at all. He was the son of the father who has the 'cattle on a thousand hills'. He wore an extremely expensive garment and other similar arguments. Letting us know (inadvertently) that it's okay to be rich in our already rich society even if our neighbours and our neighbours in other countries experience horrendous poverty. I found that problems in his sermons came up not in what he said but what was inferred and left unsaid.

As I kept going I felt like I just didn't belong. I didn't cut it. I wasn't enthusiastic at 'worship' time. I thought more and more differently than the people there. I found myself picking the eyes out of sermons and disagreeing more and more. I was beginning to roll my eyes at the never ending stream of Super Speakers visiting the church. Each with their super plan to follow: what I needed to be all that I could be in Christ. Along with their super testimony of how they were saved from whichever huge pit that they found themselves in and how they were powering on. Letting me know loud and clear (again inferred) how I wasn't being all that I could be and not powering on at all. I began to look around to see if there were any folks like me. On the fringes, not with the 'in crowd'. I found they came and went sporadically (like I was) and I never had opportunity to connect.

Mostly I was beginning to become disenchanted. I could see more and more of the picture this church was painting of Jesus. It was beginning to look exactly like the one at the top of this post. A super Jesus that expects some sort of plastic perfection from me. A need to be rich, powerful, desirable, beautiful etc. in order to be accepted. It just doesn't wash anymore. It smells more like empire than the Jesus I know.

I never signed up to be Superman.

A Manifesto for Church

Being pushed into a box is not my idea of comfortable. So to pigeon hole my idea of what church should be and create some sort of formula for it irritates me a great deal.

For this reason I will have my headings under "Church could" rater than "Church Should."

So here goes:

Church could be inspired by Christ's exhibition of unconditional love and desire to live it out.

Church could endeavour to exhibit and live out the ideas of "Your kingdom come, your will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven"
Church could strive for "forgiveness of those who trespass against us just as Christ has set the example of forgiveness toward us."

Church could paint a picture of longsuffering and service to those who starve, who are ill, who are in prison, who are in need and who are broken hearted.

Church could be active in resistance to war and all forms of violence.

Church could actively oppose policies and power structures that maintain poverty and slavery while enriching a minority i.e. exhibit and desire Jubilee.

Church could move through the tribes, communities, societies and nations leavening, salting and lighting up with the love, wisdom and inspiration of the example of Christ.

Church Could desire and live out humility, meekness, hospice, creating safe space and being last toward others in an effort to subvert the dominant empire that desires the opposite.

Church could say "stick the rules (that hurt and don't help and don't promote the kingdom) where the sun don't shine."

Now some recommendations for the tagged.
1. Feel free to post to your blog on the subject “A Manifesto for Church”, outlining your thoughts on what an ideal church would/should or could be like. Posts can be as detailed or as short as you like.
2. You might like to include a copy of these rules.
3. A link to your post in the comments to this post could be helpful.
4. Tag others as you feel inspired!

Heather you know I hate rules
so I've turned your rules into
recommendations so the tagged
can feel free and inspired.

I tag:
1. Simon

LEGGOFORD Wives

Thanks Heather for the inspiration for this one. It's nice to be tagged.

I had to stick with my original ideas for this post because I must admit Heather's and Abmo's
ideas gave me too much to think about.

My original ideas for this concept of a city being taken for Christ took two paths.

The first centered around the inception of Roman Catholicism through Constantine. It was then and there that idea of take or taking for Christ began. Where Christianity could be enforced through the blade of a sword. Where the idea that Christianity could marry empire and live deplorably (for what feels like) ever after. Where kings and priests found power so addictive that to keep it those cornerstone concepts of love, peace and non violence of the early church could be overlooked. So when I take these ideas and envision a City full of those imperialistic Kings and Priests living together some dark thoughts come to mind. Firstly the wall around the city would have to be impenetrable to keep the undesirables and rejected out. Inside the mix of power hungry dominants competing with one another for command over one another brings disturbing visions of bloodshed and betrayal. The cycle of violence would be unending as individuals and groups compete for dominance. Women and children would be scarce; the quickest to fall during the infighting. With the male dominance of the society the natural progression would be to sexual immorality. So the city would look pretty similar to those twin cities of old Sodom and Gomorrah. When I think of that type of city I think of a prison without guards. Where rape, torture, violence and vengeance are the order of the day. Where the most horrific of crimes are condoned by the strongest, dominant overpowering leadership. A terrifyingly scary place where a mutual loving same sex relationship would be the least of ones troubles.

The second train of thought is a lot less sinister. It involves the ideas of plasticity and masks so prevalent in many mainstream churches today. The idea that Christians are just perfect, perpetually happy servants of everyone! The vision of a City full of these types is well...sickening to be polite. All the streets are perfectly paved and every building and park is pristine clean. Everyone has perfect bodies, teeth, eyes, hair and skin. Every face wears a perpetual grin. There are no sad or angry people in this city. Children skip to school and love and perfectly obey their parents and teachers. Mothers stay at home and clean the perfect mansion. Fathers go off to work the perfect job that pays more than the family ever needs. The policeman and fireman work perfectly together to get the neighbour's cat out of the tree. You know the place it's a cross between Stepford and Leggoland. It's LEGGOFORD and it's that place that Utah strives for but hopefully won't reach!

Please Lord don't let them take my city!