United Methodists Attempt to Develop More Young Leaders

Rhi Bran »

Fri Nov 20, 2009 12:43 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 2

This sounds great but the young ministers in training will still encounter the same structures and most will be told they need to be loyal to the institution in order to progress or have opportunities. A few will get plum assignments to active congregations and will be sponsored by older clergy. But many will encounter those who do not wish to have to deal with change.

The ones whose ideas do not coincide with their bishop will be told they have a problem and need to get with the program. Insular older congregations want growth but they want it to be with people very much like themselves. If theyounger clergy persist on going forward with their new young leadership perspective, the bishop will send them to small declining rural church purgatory. The discouraged will go elsewhere to minister or drop out of ministry completely.

On Faith: Religious Belief and the Military

Rhi Bran »

Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:26 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

believer, once again you misquote me. I am beginning to lose respect for you. I did not say anything was justified. I indicated the military is not very good at investigating despite NCIS and its clone. The military likes to avoid negative publicity. So stories about atrocities and stories about a muslim doctor being investigated for radical Islamic beliefs are not popular.

In Arizona, we are still hearing from the Tillman familiy whose son Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire. The military, reaching to the highest levels presented false stories outraging the family. Investigations have resulted in nothing being done. The military lied repeatedly to the family of this brave individual. Officers knew from the first that Tillman was shot by his fellow soldiers.

Ted Haggard to Host Regular Prayer Gatherings

Rhi Bran »

Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:16 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Fullgospel, I might wait and see if his teaching and action had much resemblance to the teaching and ministry of Jesus.

Stand Up for Religious Freedom

Rhi Bran »

Thu Nov 19, 2009 5:14 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

Do Christian doctors only treat Christians? In vitro vertalization is not a religious act, it is a medical procedure. What would we say if they refused to treat interracial couples? The Methodist retreat center rented a space for weddings to all faiths. It was a business. Then they discriminated by not renting the same service to a couple who were Lesbian. The retreat center was not asked to provide a marriage service, only space they rent to others.

Colson quotes the Declaration of Independenc but does not think it applies equally to Gay and Lesbian people.

Some Christians are greate defenders of religious freedom. Colson is not one of them. He is selective with regard to religious freedom and appears willing to deny it to faith groups that support gay marriage.

Religious groups have a choice with regard to intering into secular business arrangements. In Arizona, Churches can have day care centers but they are licensed by the state and must meet safety and health requirements. If you want federal or state dollars, you abide by laws that govern all. Churches are free to preach and teach.

Problems occur when churches want to take over secular hospitals and then deny legal medical procedures and services that offend their doctrine. (abortion, morning after treatement, sterilization, birth control etc.)

Colson is once again fear mongering. He seems unable to move away from his conservative political talking points.

Human freedom, historically speaking, has not always gone to the heart of some Christians (slavery, no equal rights for women, censorship, inquisition, etc.)
The Catholic leaders mentioned in the article are part of a system that remains notorious for attempting to deny religious freedom to its own members. Protestants continue to have difficulties in countries dominated by the RC. Things are changing in South America and Latin America but the Church is often on the side of repression while it's clergy who fight for the rights of the poor are denounced.

Ministry Distributes 'Origin of Species' with Intelligent Design Intro

Rhi Bran »

Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:51 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 3

Next they will give out Christmas ornaments with Charles Darwin kneeling at the manger.

WEA: Climate Change Not Controversial Among Non-U.S. Evangelicals

Rhi Bran »

Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:47 pm Agree: 4   Disagree: 2

It shows how much political conservatism (of the Palin/Cheney brand) motivates some evangelical leaders. They hate to admit the need for action because it calls into question their intermarriage of religion and right wing politics.

Boys Wearing Skirts to School? What's Going On?

Rhi Bran »

Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:48 am Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

So if a man ought not cover his head then I guess all the guys in West Texas should leave their cowboy hats at home. If a guy wears a scarf, is it girl's clothing or a guy's clothing. I have a friend who prefers trousers but sometimes worked at a job where skirt and hose were required as professional dress. She wrote a song about guys in ties and women in hose. It concludes that we are all just people in clothes.

Mohler is right about all clothing expressing a point of view. And all attempts to restrict clothing choices expresses a point of view as well. In Bastrop, Texas during the 1990s a grade school boy was put in a solitary room because of his hair style. He had a crew cut with a small braided tail at the back.

Schools can adopt a policy regarding skirt lenght but if they guy has the legs for it, what is the harm. Our local school system looked at requiring uniforms, although there had been no incidents or problems according to the school leadership, My son said, "Dad, don't let them make me look like a geek." I didn't . Self expression is not a sin. Dressing kids in uniform is not a cure all.

Some schools have extreme problems due to gangs. But wearing skirts is not the reason most schools want uniforms. Besides, what if the guy/girl wants to wear the uniform of the oppositie sex or with a scarf? Do we really need to make a student into an outlaw because we are uncomfortable? Alice Miller, author of "Thou Shalt Not Be Aware," concludes that adults attempt to impose rules that are designed to secure the comfort level of adults.

Pastors Test Expanded Hate Crimes Law

Rhi Bran »

Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:09 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

Flagged as inappropriate. show I will predict that if no arrests occur we will not hear an apology from those who swore they would happen based upon speech not action. hide

'Fireproof' Creators' Next Film about Fatherhood

Rhi Bran »

Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:46 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Never heard of any of these.

Greek Orthodox Church Opposes Crucifix Ban

Rhi Bran »

Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:45 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 1

msnchris70, . The pro-crucifix argument of the Italian government is that the crucifix is not a reminder of Calvary but just a cultural artifact. For those Jews, dissenters, and free thinkers who were tortured, executed and hounded by the inquisition, the crucifix is a symbol of oppression. The Roman Church has add a lot of baggage to the crucifix. In Italy, I doubt there is going to be any shortage of crucifixes. But please put up a crucifix in your church, home, religious school in solidarity. I am sure all the Baptists, Missouri Synod Lutherans, etc. will jump at the opportunity.

Maybe you can start a move among fundamentalist and evangelical Christians to adopt the crucifix instead of the empty cross

On Faith: Religious Belief and the Military

Rhi Bran »

Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:32 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

Yes believer, which is why I asked for your theological basis. It seems clear that you are unfamiliar with the Just War doctrine. That is not unusual. Christians seem to assume as you do that God blesses any war our government chooses to enter. This was why "faithful" Christians fought for Hitler and against Hitler.

In ancient times, Charles the Great conquered pagans and offered them the choice to convert or die. He was king so nobody argued. Today we live in a democracy. We can vote our faith and protest and preach our convictions. So it is strange to me that followers of Jesus seem reluctant to do so except for issues not mentioned by Jesus.

Speaking to the original article here, it seems that Hassan tried many times to get the miitary to investigate possible war crimes based upon what he was hearing from some of the soldiers who were his patients. The military was no more interested in investigating possible violations of the Uniform Code than it was to investigate the bizarre statements and actions of Hassan.

Depressingly Predictable

Rhi Bran »

Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:25 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

Wow, how often do you get to read a story about Tristan da Cunha? It is one the most remote spots on earth right up there with Pitcairn's Island. I doubt very much that an island where everyone is related, there is no regular plane or boat transportation, and there are no real facilities for tourists should they get there is going to be much impacted. Does it seem sometimes like Colson is desperate to find a topic that demonstrates how much government threatens religion? I think Colson is the one who has become depressingly predictable.

Ted Haggard Draws Over 100 to Prayer Meeting

Rhi Bran »

Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:18 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

Cincy, this is a time when people have television shows because they used fertilitiy drugs and had lots of kids. I am surprized the the crowd wasn't bigger. Americans love freak shows.

Darwin Was Wrong, Scientists Argue

Rhi Bran »

Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:16 am Agree: 7   Disagree: 10

Flagged as inappropriate. show A scientific conference at Calvary Chapel. Somehow I do not think this was a peer reviewed presentation likely to garner any Nobel Prizes. hide

On Faith: Religious Belief and the Military

Rhi Bran »

Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:42 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

contd.
You seem unable to say much about these issues except to say I am anti-military. I am not. I am anti killing civilians, anti declaring wars of aggression when we have not been attacked and anti-torture. All of these are part of the Just War doctrine. But I do not have much faith in the Just War doctrine because religious groups who espouse it do little when the nation they belong to violate its precepts.

Military training (I am speaking of combat arms) requires that the soldier dehumanize the enemy. While Gary Cooper's portrayal of Sgt. York may provide a pleasant myth, the reality of combat is more like Tom Hanks "Saving Private Ryan" or "Band of Brothers." The ideal recruit must not think about conscience but obey orders. This is not the teaching of Jesus.

Your idea of Christians in military service sounds more like the Crusades. The Crusaders, upon entering Jerusalem slaughtered Muslim and Jew alike. Christian Arabs who looked a lot like Muslim Arabs were out of luck. The words of a priest traveling with the crusaders who broke in on refugees hiding in the Dome of the Rock states that blood ran deep as the stirrups. Jews were burned alive in the Synagogue. Do you think Jesus would have rebuked them?

I spoke with a Japanese pastor who survived the bombing of Nagasaki. He attended a Christian School but was home for a visit. Returning to the school on the day of the bombing, all the children were dead. Two orders of Catholic Nuns were wiped out at the bombing of Nagasaki. Jesus might not rebuke the men who created and dropped that bomb. I know the pastor forgave them.

Jesus was executed by soldiers doing their duty. He asked God to forgive them. Jesus also said, Matthew 25, that what we do to the least of these is as though we did it to him. But I understand you follow the religion of nationalism in this regard, “My country, right or wrong, my country.”

You state that there might not be Christians without the military. I wonder if the Christians who continue to survive in China would agree that God is not sufficient.
But you are correct in that I would fight to protect my freedoms and my loved ones.
I do not delude myself into thinking such action is following Jesus. It is simply human.

On Faith: Religious Belief and the Military

Rhi Bran »

Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:41 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

Gee believer, I haven't condemned anyone. I have asked questions which I see you are unable to answer. If military service has no theological implications then why did both Catholics and Reformation Protestants develop the Just War Doctrine? You have yet to even refer to it. Perhaps Southern Baptists are unfamiliar with the history of doctrine outside their group.

Are you completely unfamiliar with the writings of the Church Fathers? There are stories of Roman soldiers refusing to kill after becoming Christians. Many were executed. Jesus did not condemn much of anyone. He did not condemn those in the military. He stated that we should love our enemies and repay evil with good. You have affirmed that the words of Jesus have nothing to do with the military. I agree. I do think they have a lot to do with human beings, some of whom enter the military to serve or because they cannot find employment. You have mentioned the Uniform Code of Military Justice (which managed not to hold anyone of rank accountable for Abu Garaib). I would suggest that followers of Jesus put his words above any code. You are free to disagree or say it doesn’t apply. In truth, I find that conservatives posting on this board care more about the Hebrew Scriptures and Paul than they do about the sayings of Jesus.

On Faith: Religious Belief and the Military

Rhi Bran »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 9:25 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

believer, with regard to your statement about Jesus not rebuking the Centurion, well the Centurion was occupying the nation of Israel with brute force. Do you think failing to rebuke him for that meant Jesus was supporting the Roman army? That is just silly.

I am not anti-military although I do oppose some actions by the military. Don't you? I am stating the military is not a Christian institution although there are Christians in the military of the U.S. just as there were Christians in Kaiser's army and Hitler's army, and all the wars between European countries after 315 C.E. Both Protestants and Catholics believed they needed to formulate a doctrine under which they could justify Christians participating in acts of aggression, violence toward others including other Christians, and the other acts which have always accompanied war.

For example, the union army in Nashville established a system for medically supervising whores in order to prevent its men from being rendered unfit for service due to disease. I believe Patton tried the same thing. I am sure you don't consider that Christian. I also understand that the availability of contraband penicillin around Subic Bay and in Viet Nam contributed to the introduction of drug resistant gonorrhea in the U.S. servicemen and subsequently to their wives. Prostitution has always followed the military.

Also, military service, long deployments and months at sea, have always had a negative impact upon marriage. Recently we have seen major increases in suicide among service people and violence against wives and girl friends by some returning from months spent in a violent situation. It seems that we should acknowledge that military service is not designed to support the family (although chaplains and commanding officers surely want to do everything they can to help families).

You seem afraid. You refuse to state your belief system or show how the teachings of Jesus support your understanding. All you can do is hurl insults at me and misrepresent my statements. You have not even attempted to answer the theological issues I've raised. If you are not interested in actually discussing the issue of military and religious faith, why are you posting here?

On Faith: Religious Belief and the Military

Rhi Bran »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 5:42 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

Sorry believer, where did I express my view of the military. I am attempting to discuss the Just War doctrine. You continually try to redirect the discussion. I have no problem with the need for a military. I think we have to accept that the military is at best a non-Chrisitian institution. The presence of chaplains who are themselves officers creates an impression that God blesses the actions of the military.

I ask again, what is your theology of military service. You have not been reluctant to talk about the theology of abortion (not mentioned in the Bible). You assert that God/Jesus support only one type of marriage. Homosexuality, a subject never mentioned by Jesus is an issue you argue about as though it were central to Christianity.

Jesus states that we are to love our enemy, repay evil with good, turn the other cheek. These are obviously not absolutes in your theology. I simply want to know where you stand on the issue of Christian involvement in war. What are the boundaries? Do you accept the Just War doctrine with whatever denominational variations the Baptists put on it? Do you have some other teaching.

Now you make assumptions about my views on the military. Your last statement makes no sense. It seems little more than an effort to deflect the discussion from what I am beginning to think is unwillingness to apply the teachings of Jesus to an area of public life. Would Jesus bomb a target with virtual certainty of civilian casualties? If innocents are killed is there a NT exemption on the words of Jesus in regard to war?

I am not oppposed to the military but do feel that the fear of the enemy leads us to refuse to examine our behavior. At the "Battle" of Wounded Knee, little more than the slaughter of women, children, and old people, the U.S. handed out an unprecedented number of medals of honor. We (humans) are great at lying to ourselves. The Christian supports the weak - yes/no? Christians stand for justice, mercy, truth or simply follow the "patriotic" propaganda? Did you read Twain's "War Prayer?"

I understand that you feel your faith may be unequal to following the teachings of Jesus when threatened or attacked. I simply think that it is wrong to cover up the reality of violence (which we may feel is necessary) and try to baptize it. So how about a real discussion and say what your position is with regard to violence based upon the teaching of Jesus. As you are fond of saying, show me in scripture where followers of Jesus are told to resort to violence. The "render unto Caesar" involved taxes and as you know the Jews never rendered Caesar the worship the state demanded. The second part of the statement involves rendering unto God the things that are God's.

On Faith: Religious Belief and the Military

Rhi Bran »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:11 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 1

contd.
My wife is a military brat born on a base in Japan. She tells me that Protestant military services are a bland non-denominational experience. I can tell you from speaking to her father, a career officer serving in WWII, Korea and Viet Nam, that he recieved no theological insight from chaplains. He appreciated their service but never saw them as anything other than a part of the military system designed to help soldiers deal with war and separation. Chaplains did not raise the issue of Just War.

Chaplains may work with soldiers around personal issues of objecting to war. The last time I looked, conscientious objection required a belief of opposition to all war which is not the Just War doctrine.

I have yet to hear you respond to the central issue. What in the teaching of Jesus permits a Christian to place his/her conscience into the hands of a secular ruler and commit acts of violence? Self defense is not the issue when one attacks a country which has not attacked. Self defense may apply in the heat of battle but not with regard to the decision to pledge to obey at the time of enlistment.

I assume that you accept the statement by Jesus that we are not to repay evil with evil but to repay evil with good. Nations do not do that but individuals decide if they will follow the teachings of Jesus or not. My own denomination states that war is incompatible with the teachings of Christ but then goes on to support those who choose to serve in the military and provide chaplains.

Do you believe that war is incompatible with the teachings of Jesus? Please do not bother to say I do not understand chaplains. If you are going to engage in discussion, please address the issue of Just War or your own theology of aggression.
-30-

On Faith: Religious Belief and the Military

Rhi Bran »

Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:10 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

believer, what is unclear about my asking for the theological underpinnings for Christian participation in war? You respond by saying I do not understand the military. I am asking for your understanding of Christian theology regarding Just War and whether or not you believe chaplains are obligated to teach Just War with the corresponding duty to refuse to participate in unjust wars (according to the theory).

If you do not subscribe to the Just War theology, that is fine. I wish to know how you then reconcile the teachings of Jesus with the realities of war. To say that there is a Uniform Code of Military Justice is to once again put the military above the teachings of Jesus. I am simply stating that in fact (by your comments and lack of comment) you seem to say that Christian principles are subservient to military orders.

I believe that was part of why early Christians rejected military service. How do you understand the pre-Constantine teachings in this regard?

I spoke directly with a group of seven military chaplains regarding these issues and they also cite their work to provide support for troops and their families. I do not dispute this. But that does not address the underlying questions I have raised. If the Mafia had chaplains (some might argue they do), does the fact that they limit themselves to religious functions (don't engage in hits) mitigate the fact that they tacitly support the organization. But this analogy is faulty. Chaplains wear the uniform and as you have said, take an oath. Does the oath relieve them of their obligation to the words of Jesus?
-no 30-