One last chance

S

Sir_Ryan

Moderator
Hello Christian Gamers! I don't know if anyone listens to Breakpoint with Chuck Colson, but I found today's topic very humbling and thought-provoking.

I have, as I am sure many of you have, asked myself "What can I, as a Christian, do to help make a difference in the world I live in?" I think that all of us, as believers, should live out our faith in the way we conduct our daily life.

The situation overseas in Iraq is growing uglier. Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator bent, like many other nations, on leaving the United States in the dust of a nuclear bomb, wiping our faces off of the world map.

"What can we do about the situation in the Middle-East?", you may ask. The Bible has the answer!

In 2 Chronicles 7:14 we read about God talking to Solomon:

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

THERE IS THE ANSWER! WE are the "people" God is talking about!

Please read this article from Chuck Colson:

http://www.breakpoint.org/Breakpo....nce.htm
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator bent, like many other nations, on leaving the United States in the dust of a nuclear bomb, wiping our faces off of the world map.
Click to expand...
How do you know this? Because Ari Fleicher and George W. Bush keep saying so? Sorry but that isn't enough for me. I can't ignore the fact that Saddam Hussein has no history of aggression towards the united states. I can't ignore the fact that Saddam had no connection to the 9/11 terrorists, or any other terrorist act against the US. I can't ignore the fact that if Saddam Hussein were to attack us it would mean the certain end to his reign of power, which I think he would not want to give up. He lives in a world where he is the most powerful and loved person, he lives in great wealth and opulence, statues and pictures all around the country honor him. Why would he want to give all that up just to kill a few Americans? The Bush team has tried very hard to blur the line between Saddam Hussein and terrorists like Osama Bin Laden, there is a big difference between a dictator and a terrorist and what they are willing to do.
 
Dude, we told him to disarm. He said he did. We come back years later and he hasn't. If Saddam's higher officials finally admit to gassing their own people with hydrogen cynacide. I wouldn't call that nice.
But then again, our own military spread bacteria over large cities to test what needs to be done in case attacked by Soviets. No man is perfect, but by far this man is a threat. Then on the other side we got some crazy Korean taunting us with his nukes...what next I wonder? WE just sit here and wait for the first attacker? THEN we retaliate? Wait for another Pearl Harbor, eh?
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ] WE just sit here and wait for the first attacker? THEN we retaliate? Wait for another Pearl Harbor, eh?
Click to expand...

Wasn't Christ against violence? Wasn't it him that said to turn the other cheek?

Cory
 
Within reason, Thaddeus. If there is something to be gained (in the case of witnessing or ministering), then yes. If something (or someone) is actively bent on our destruction, then no. If an athiest were to bring an attack on the validity of the Bible, would you curl up on your pew and not defend your faith for fear of violating the turn-the-cheek directive? There are times when I think that Christians have taken this too far. Christ was for peace, Thaddeus, but not peace at all costs. There were times when he fought (not physically, but if called to it, I'm sure he would have). He fought the Pharisees and he fought the principalities and powers of the enemy. He was not afraid or apprehensive.
 
I never said I was afraid.  I said turn the other cheek.  Iraq has done nothing to us.  They defy the U.N. but if we attack Iraq, without there backing so do we, and that puts us exactly the same as it does him.  Hypocracy runs deep in this country and we have to be careful where we through our weight.  I'm not saying Afghanastan was not justifiable, but I think this vendetta against Iraq is a mistake.

Cory
 
I agree, peace at all costs is unnaceptable. It is true that Christ spoke against violence, but I don't think that a message of pacifism is the ultimate story here. If it wasn't, then how could God possibly have led the Israelites thousands of years ago to completely wipe out civilizations in their promised land? I don't mean defeated or dominated. Wiped out. Exterminated. Zip. God can accomplish anything He wishes by any means He wishes, that has been shown throughout history. War is but one tool.

Turn the other cheek, hmm. I beleive this refers more to being perscuted for your beliefs, or facing day to day struggles in your own life. If Sadaam uses a bioweapon of some kind, and takes out, say...ten million people, are you going to say to him, "Hey, good shot, we've just stood another ten million outside in New York city. Thank you, sir, may I have another?" That, in my opinion, would be a case of murder. Does anyone recall what the penalty for murder is? Anyone? This guy, in case you have forgotten, is already a murderer. He has already killed, and he has already plotted to kill. This isa matter of the security of an entire country, an organization of countless millions of people. Turning the cheek is a decision you must make in dealing with an enemy to you as an individual. You cannot make it for an entire nation. You especially can't make it when the people under you are expecting you to stand up and protect them.

If every human being in the world had a cookie-cutter mental pattern to be pacifistic, then, yes, the concept would work. However, there are a few crazy ones who like to kill. They force the rest of us to take action against them to preserve life. Now is not the time to be a hippie. George Bush and the U.S. is doing what is necessary to take a villain down. The least you could do is back them up.

Good to see you again, Avatar, I've been underway too long :).
 
The 'Turn The Other Cheek' is applied to people not nations.

A person, a single individual, should always be a pacifist, willing to forgive at a moment's notice.

At the same time, a community, a state, a country should NEVER be pacifistic. It's purpose is to protect the individual's that comprise it at all costs, against any threat, both foreign and domestic
 
ok points taken.

What has Sadam done to us as a country?

As for backing dubya, I don't back him in this Iraq issue. Afghanastan, sure we knew who attacked us and why we were after them. Iraq hasn't really done anything to us to justify attacking them.

Cory
 
Excuse me, Cory, but are you actually serious? Should we wait until we get blown off the map before we say, "Hey, maybe we should do something." The guy has untold amounts of anthrax and biological weapons, not to mention missiles. "What are we waiting on?", is the question I ask myself.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not one to go to war at the drop of a hat. The United States government has shown extensive proof that Saddam Hussein has links to Al Queda, one of the most terrible terrorist organizations in the world. Would you call what they did on 9-11 excuseable? The thousands that they killed? Can you still sit there and say, "They haven't done anything to harm us, why should we harm them?"

I for one, think enough is enough. If we value our freedom and our LIVES, then I think the best thing to do is to re-evaluate what our mindset is. I do not like the idea of war, much less war itself. But we have to draw the line in the sand somewhere. If war is our last option, which it seems like it may be, then I would say, "May God be with us and protect us!"
 
right...Iraq can bearly fire a missle to hit Isreal, much less the U.S. mainland. The problem I have with this whole Iraq war is that they are not a direct threat to us. North Korea is a worse threat as they have missles that possibly could hit U.S. soil and a nuclear reactor that is now being reactivated. To me, that is a much bigger threat that should be neutralized.

esplain to me how Iraq is a bigger issue than that.

Cory
 
He helps terrorists that CAN hurt us, besides having broken a LOT of important promises involving some very dangerous possibilities.  No, Saddam can't hit the US with a nuke or chemical weapon.  But he can hit US troops in the middle east, as well as our allies there (to whom we also have a responsibility), and can also give these WMD's to terrorists who will try to use them on the US.  This is a matter of common sense - the man can and will eventually hurt us, in some form or another.  The threat must be eliminated, even if it means going to war.  Bush does not want another 9/11 (or worse, knowing the likes of Osama and Saddam).

I appreciate your commitment to peace, as well as your zeal for serving God. Whether anyone on this board lets you know it or not, this world does need people like you. I'm just concerned that Christians can and do take the "turn-the-other-cheek" idea a bit to far.
 
Thank you for those words, Katarn. My point exactly. North Korea is as much as a threat to the U.S. as Iraq is. Yes, I know that. The point I'm trying to make is that Saddam Hussein must be stopped, and North Korea also.

My question is, where are all of our Allies in this time of trial? Has the United States done nothing to help the international community, that they should help us in our time of need? France? Russia? World War 2? Ring a bell?

People, we need to be praying that God will protect us and those who stand with us, if this situation leads to war.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Intelligence documents that U.S. and British governments said were strong evidence that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons have been dismissed as forgeries by U.N. weapons inspectors.

The documents, given to International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, indicated that Iraq might have tried to buy 500 tons of uranium from Niger, but the agency said they were "obvious" fakes.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell referred to the documents directly in his presentation to the U.N. Security Council outlining the Bush administration's case against Iraq.

"I'm sure the FBI and CIA must be mortified by this because it is extremely embarrassing to them," former CIA official Ray Close said.

Responding to questions about the documents from lawmakers, Powell said, "It was provided in good faith to the inspectors and our agency received it in good faith, not participating ... in any way in any falsification activities."

"It was the information that we had. We provided it. If that information is inaccurate, fine," Powell said on NBC's "Meet the Press" last Sunday.

"We don't believe that all the issues surrounding nuclear weapons have been resolved [in Iraq]," he said.

How were forgeries missed?
But the discovery raises questions such as why the apparent forgeries were given to inspectors and why U.S. and British intelligence agents did not recognize that they were not authentic.

Sources said that one of the documents was a letter discussing the uranium deal supposedly signed by Niger President Tandja Mamadou. The sources described the signature as "childlike" and said that it clearly was not Mamadou's.

Another, written on paper from a 1980s military government in Niger, bears the date of October 2000 and the signature of a man who by then had not been foreign minister of Niger in 14 years, sources said.

"The IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts that these documents -- which formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger -- are not in fact authentic," ElBaradei said in his March 7 presentation to the U.N. Security Council.

Close said the CIA should have known better.

"They have tremendously sophisticated and experienced people in their technical services division, who wouldn't allow a forgery like this to get by," Close said. "I mean it's just mystifying to me. I can't understand it."

A U.S. intelligence official said that the documents were passed on to the International Atomic Energy Agency within days of being received with the comment, " 'We don't know the provenance of this information, but here it is.' "

If a mistake was made, a U.S. official suggested, it was more likely due to incompetence not malice.

"That's a convenient explanation, but it doesn't satisfy me," Close said. "Incompetence I have not seen in those agencies. I've seen plenty of malice, but I've never seen incompetence."
Click to expand...

I know it doesn't really change anything but I thought it funny that our strong evidence is fake. go figure.

cory
 
One of the biggest excuses for not going to war that I've heard is "Well, he hasn't done anything to me."

Great. Nice. He hasn't done anything to you. No need to worry about all the other helpless innocent lives he's brutally destroyed. You're okay. "Hey, quick, call of the war, Sadaam hasn't done anything to us yet!"

Are you all crazy?

This war is as much about defending us from potential attacks as it is defending thousands of other innocent people. That's one of the biggest problems in the world today, the fact that no one wants to stand up for anyone else. The U.S. is not perfect, but I admire the fact that we are able to stand up and speak or fight for the rights of those who cannot defend themselves as well. It's not all about "you."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top