A Senseless, Heinous Act

April 16, 2007 at 10:02 pm (Random thoughts)

Ordinarily I try to post an interesting topic at the beginning of the week for the Den readers to discuss. Usually my topics are trivial or at least theoretical. I had in mind an entirely different conversation for this week but due to the tragic event on the campus of Virginia tech this morning I feel I would rather open up a forum for opinions and thoughts on this tragedy.

Though very few facts have been revealed I think it is clear that the debate that will rage in the coming weeks ahead will range from gun-control laws to the callusing effects of violence in the media. I can think of many questions that would be relevant to discuss but quite frankly I am hesitant to do so of fear of rushing to judgment.  Nevertheless I personally find it therapeutic to discuss tragedies. I don’t claim to have the answers or to offer any resolutions but I do appreciate the opportunity to just talk about how I feel. Thus, this blog exists and thus you read it.

This post is dedicated to the topic of the Virginia Tech tragedy. If you want to express outrage or attribute blame feel free to do so in a respectful manner. If you wish to voice words of hope or consolations please free to do that as well. If you think you know how this could have been avoided then let the readers know.

Advertisements

68 Comments

  1. danielbalc said,

    My prayers go out for the students and faculty of Va Tech today. this truly is a tragic event. Perhaps most tragic and angering report that I have heard thus far (and i reserve the right to recant this statement if the following information is found to be untrue) is that the weapons the shooter used were merely a 9MM and a 22 Cal handgun.

    This is shocking to me.

    How is it possible to kill this many people with just those two weapons?

    I remember seeing the movie of the story of the university of Texas shooting in the 60’s. From an elevated position with multiple high powered rifles that man killed 16 people. How could this man with just side arms kill 32 people and wound so many more? I’m shocked, repulsed, outraged and confused. This just doesn’t seem possible.

  2. Gregg said,

    Daniel,
    As we pray, pray also for the law enforcers who have to investigate this case. They see depravity all day, but this one- and the guilt some will feel for lack of action between the two events, will stick with them for the rest of their lives.
    I have known fellow deputies who have ended their lives for less then that.
    Gregg

  3. Matt S said,

    If indeed there was one shooter like is being reported, where was he in the two hours between the 2 shootings? Very strange and very tragic to be sure.

  4. Echo_ohcE said,

    1Jn 3:12 We should not be like Cain, who was of the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own deeds were evil and his brother’s righteous.
    1Jn 3:13 Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world hates you.
    1Jn 3:14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers. Whoever does not love abides in death.
    1Jn 3:15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.
    1Jn 3:16 By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers.

    The person who did this does not have the Spirit of God living in him. The life that courses through his veins is death, so it only naturally follows that death is what comes out of him.

    In a similar way, those who do have the Spirit in them, the life in them is the love of God, so it only naturally follows that love is what comes out of them.

    When something like this happens, we should not be surprised. This is the depth of the depravity of the world. All men are made in the image of God, and do, to an extent, reflect his glory. The height of depravity is the desire to destroy these glorious image bearers out of hatred towards God.

    This depraved soul even chained the doors to the building, to trap people inside, that he might kill more of them. This man was just going to rage at God. As God poured out his wrath on Sodom without mercy, so too was this man going to pour out his wrath at God on the people who are God’s creation. His hatred and rage at God was such that his rage had to be manifested, had to be expressed at this level of cruelty and depravity.

    This is nothing more complex than simply acting out hatred towards God, killing others, and then finally killing himself, not to punish himself for what he had done, thus acting as God’s agent, but rather in one final act of defiance, he wanted to show God that he, not God, was in control of his destiny. His suicide was rather like giving God the finger after all the killing he had done.

    I shudder to think of the rude awakening he received when he realized the full consequences of his actions beyond the vale of death.

    Justice is always served. We need not fear that justice will not be served. God always has the last word. The young man who did this has met his Maker, and his judgments cannot be appealed, for they are final.

    This is a fundamental showing of evil to us. We who hope in Christ ought to know how to interpret what has gone on here:

    Pro 1:10 My son, if sinners entice you, do not consent.
    Pro 1:11 If they say, “Come with us, let us lie in wait for blood; let us ambush the innocent without reason;
    Pro 1:12 like Sheol let us swallow them alive, and whole, like those who go down to the pit;
    Pro 1:13 we shall find all precious goods, we shall fill our houses with plunder;
    Pro 1:14 throw in your lot among us; we will all have one purse”–
    Pro 1:15 my son, do not walk in the way with them; hold back your foot from their paths,
    Pro 1:16 for their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed blood.
    Pro 1:17 For in vain is a net spread in the sight of any bird,
    Pro 1:18 but these men lie in wait for their own blood; they set an ambush for their own lives.
    Pro 1:19 Such are the ways of everyone who is greedy for unjust gain; it takes away the life of its possessors.

    Luk 13:2 And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way?
    Luk 13:3 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.
    Luk 13:4 Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem?
    Luk 13:5 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”

  5. Anthony said,

    This was a horrible tragedy that makes me physically sick and angry.

    I’m guessing prescribed depression drugs, relationship gone south, and failing grades. That adds up to a problem. Universities should query ever students’ current GPA for the current year every couple weeks. If any single one is failing across the board, then they are red flagged. Maybe if there was some grace for turning around grades maybe they wouldn’t resort to this. If he was doing fine in school then he probably only shoots his girlfriend and the counselor. I’m certain he went and killed his classmates because he was upset he couldn’t carry the load like them. The pressure to do well is tremendous when you are paying a lot of money to be there. Reports say he was an Asian student on a visa. Academics are taken VERY seriously in Asia. I think there are lots of suicides related to this (and careers) in those countries.

    Daniel, he was able to kill that many people because he chained off an entire building so that nobody could enter or leave. A single classroom or lecture hall can have between 30 and 100 students. 32 could have been 60+ if this coward hadn’t killed himself. What I am surprised is that nobody gang talcked him. It’s sad.

  6. Albino Hayford said,

    Just as in Columbine, I wish one of the profs or students had a gun in their backpack. Really sad. May the students and faculty turn to God in their sorrow.

  7. Gregg said,

    Hey Albino why don’t you endorse an armed national guard member in ever classroom! Or maybe if we do not allow any foreigners into the country they will not kill our students! Come on dude, lets not jump to politicing the 2nd ammendment this is a time for mourning, not for agenda pushing.
    Thankfully our God will meet them in their sorrow.

  8. Albino Hayford said,

    One of these school shootings happened in Mississippi back in 1997. A school administrator went straght to his pickup, got his gun, and stopped the killer, saving untold lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting

    The lesson here is that you cannot depend on security or cops to save you from a madman. If you are unfortunate enough to live in a state that doesn’t permit concealed carry weapons, then throw books, desks, pens, anything you have at him and rush him together…go down swinging. The police will not get there in time to save you. Whatever you do, don’t calmly obey the gunmen, like those Amish children. GO DOWN FIGHTING.

  9. Albino Hayford said,

    Another example: Flight 93 on September 11 — GO DOWN FIGHTING.

  10. Alex said,

    One of the students that was shot by this madman joined with another classmate to prevent the kid from coming back into the classroom for round 2. They barricaded the door after he had shot 20 students in one classroom, left the class and then tried to come back to finish them off.

    In 2001 I went with Greg DelaCruz to counsel with the students of the Santana High shooting and that was unforgettable. The look of fear that was on those kid’s faces I will never forget.

  11. Echo_ohcE said,

    Leave it to a Texan…hahahaha…

    But seriously, most people can’t act when they’re that afraid. Some can.

    E

  12. Gregg said,

    When I was a deputy we did some active shooter training at a local school. In the training there was an unknown number of shooters in a mock classroom setting. Even in that training environment, with people who are trained to respond to violent situations (where most of us were former military- including a force recon Marine) it was erratic. Crazy!
    In fact, I have to be honest, I shot a kid as he ran towards me! Thankfully we were using blanks.
    Echo is right, from my experience people in violent stress rarely act rationally. I was primary on a case where the dad hancuffed two of his children to a bed then he shot the mom, abducted and raped three of the other children. The kids just sat handcuffed until I arrived and did not try to get free. It is not rational, They could have gotten to a phone with little effort.

  13. Echo_ohcE said,

    Yeah, fear can be paralyzing, or can cause you to react in ways that don’t make much sense. Yep.

    I’m surprised the force recon Marine acted weird though. I always found those guys to be, well, quite tough and disciplined, even moreso than the rest of us. But what do I know.

  14. Gregg said,

    Echo,
    He definately was the most squared away of us. However, even a force recon can only do so much. All you hear is shooting and screaming so you are a bit discombobulated, then to try to get target identification is crazy because people are running an all directions. Some towards you in a threatening manner, so away, in an evasive manner.
    As for the hardcore nature of this Marine. Later he lost half his foot in Iraq when a teenageer threw a sim-gernade (You know the directional ones in the howitzer munitions) into his humvee. After a year of rehab he received an insert and is back in law enforcement chasing down bad guys. Definately a tough guy
    Gregg

  15. danielbalc said,

    What I meant by “How is it possible to kill this many people with just those two weapons?” is basically “why didn’t someone try to stop him?”

    it may come out that someone did try to stop him and he alluded their attempts. Nevertheless I think our culture has hamstrung us a people. This would be especially prevalent on a college campus where there is a belief in “non-violent solutions” to just about everything. Don’t get me wrong I am not blaming the actions or inactions of the victims, the university or even the local authorities. But I think people need to realize that words don’t always do the trick and sometimes action is necessary.

    here is a link to a really great article that explains my position. We really do need to… “Get past this paralysis of fear over liability issues. Our country is so litigious and concerned about doing the wrong thing and about doing the politically correct thing that we don’t do anything.”

  16. Albino Hayford said,

    Here’s another GREAT article from Mark Styn:
    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzEzYzQ0Y2MyZjNlNjY1ZTEzMTA0MGRmM2EyMTQ0NjY=

    My wife knows one of the victims. Guillermo is a graduate student from Uruguay that used to translate for missionary teams in Saltillo. Apparently he was shot in the neck and in the shoulder, and, when he went down, an Indonesian student threw himself on top of him (was killed) and saved his life. The bullet, which lodged in his neck, was removed in surgery, thank God, and he’ s back home.

  17. danielbalc said,

    Albino, thank you for that article. I was totally unaware of the 1989 “Montreal massacre”. After reading about it on wikipedia I shuddered at the thought that we may come see that the exact same scenario having been played out in Norris Hall.

    Reading this article makes me sick. How could “men” stand by and not try to stop something like that? How could people comply to commands of someone trying to kill them?

  18. Gregg said,

    Lt Col Grossman wrote a book called On killing. he is a former SF commander now educator at westpoint. Col. Grossman suggests that when faced with both taking life and lossing life people choose one of four options. Of course fight or flight, but also posture and surrender.
    Complying to commands (surrender) is a normal reaction to that kind of stress. I know you guys think it is odd that people are not stepping up to the plate and taking Cho out. However, these people did take action. These actions are consistent with Col. Grossmans work. Intersting enough these four options are consistent with all human cultures Col. Grossman reviewed, so have a more agressive “Spartan” culture of a less agressive “French” culture (my illustrations not Grossmans!) does not change the outcome. So Daniel, I am not sure if we are being hamstringed by litigation or pacificism.
    Albino, I am very glad that your wifes friend survived.

  19. danielbalc said,

    But Gregg, that’s the point. What is the reason for the “Spartan” culture and the “French” culture? What causes those cultural shifts in society?

    There are still few details about what happened at Va Tech but what happened in Motreal is well documented. FIFTY full grown men walked out or a room and listened while the man armed with a rifle and hunting knife executed 9 women. That was a group of men who had been culturally castrated.

    yes it easy to talk about when you aren’t actually faced with it, but that is why we need to train people in how to respond to a situation like this. The link on comment 15 leads to a security director who advocates teaching our kids what to do if there is a school shooter. Things like Run around. Charge. Throw things. Not things like “obey him because he has a gun”. I have friends who are bank tellers and they are all trained that if someone is robbing the bank “don’t try and be a hero”. that’s why people can rob banks with a note or with their hand in their pockets. Maybe I don’t get it because I’ve always wanted to be a hero.

  20. Echo_ohcE said,

    Or maybe you don’t get it because there’s part of you can accept the possibility that you might die if you react heroically.

    Something we Christians don’t really understand is what it means to be more terrified of death than of anything else. For example, if my wife were in danger, I think I would find it reasonable to risk my life to save her. I would not be afraid of dying for that reason, because I’m simply not all that afraid of dying. I’m not just talking out of my…I went to war and did so with little fear. Not because I’m particularly courageous, but because I simply wasn’t really afraid. Let me be honest, I wasn’t afraid at all. Because when I die, I know I’ll go to heaven. I understand that death is still a bad thing, and I would feel sorry for family and friends I leave behind, but the fact is, I’m going to die some day, and when that happens I won’t face God’s judgment because I will be exonerated.

    But the unbeliever is in quite a different position, whether consciously aware of it or not. The unbeliever is terrified of death, because on the other side of death is the judgment of God. The fear of death for the unbeliever is really the fear of God. The Bible tells us that when confronted with this fear, people call out to mountains and hills to fall on them rather than face the wrath of God. Just spend a minute digesting that. Imagine the desperation required to cry out for help to a mountain. Imagine running TOWARD the collapsing World Trade Center towers in order to run from the wrath of God. Just imagine that!

    For unbelievers, death is the wrath of God, and they would rather face anything than that. They’d rather a mountain fall on them. It’s no surprise to me that unbelievers would do whatever a gunman told them to because they don’t want to die. They’re doing whatever they can to survive, because death is the worst fear imaginable.

    It is somewhat difficult for us to understand even having that kind of fear, because we don’t have to fear the wrath of God, because we are assured of his love toward us. God is for us, so what should we fear? Sure, we do sometimes experience fear, but nothing like what an unbeliever experiences when faced with death. We will never know that kind of fear. Not ever.

    E

  21. danielbalc said,

    I agree with the notion that I am unafraid of death because of my faith, yet I am sure there are many believers who are afraid. Ia m sure many of those who complied to this killers commands were believers. I am also sure that there are many unbelievers who ran towards the WTC and who took out the terrorist on flight 93. I think the “spartan” culture that Gregg referred to isn’t a matter of religious faith but of social emphasis. Our society stopped emphasizing heroism in the 60’s.

  22. danielbalc said,

    news is just now breaking that the shooter sent pictures, videos and text to NBC. Nothing could be more indicative of our societal emphasis.”Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” might as well be changed to “life, liberty and fame at any cost.” Which is greater a famous psycho or an unknown moral person? The narcissism of America puts another feather in it’s cap.

  23. Echo_ohcE said,

    This guy thought he had become a god, wielding the power of death, showing his mastery of it by not fearing it, even killing himself. And all in defiance of a wrathful God.

    I don’t think anything is merely a matter of societal influence, but everything is religious. More heroism = more common grace, because more people are less sinful, being willing to die for someone else.

    E

  24. Echo_ohcE said,

    By the way, the Spartans were pagans and very religious, whereas the French are mostly atheists.

  25. Echo_ohcE said,

    What I mean is that the religious are willing to die in service to their gods or God or whatever. Meanwhile, those who worship only themselves, such as atheists, are willing to die for no one, because they are their own god. How do you die to serve yourself? Well, like this shooter did, killing yourself in defiance of God.

  26. danielbalc said,

    What about the “greatest generation”? I would say the American culture was predominantly “spartan” at that time. How do you suppose we get back to that?

  27. Gregg said,

    Daniel,
    Yeah that video is interesting. I will hold my opinion on the video until after we hear what he sent. By the way, we are not in disagreement about cultural differences. (an intersting research on the “why different cultures” is dr Jarod diamonds Gun, germs, and Steel) Col Grossmans point is that all peoples- regardless of the level of agressive reaction still falls into those categories. Based on Col Grossmans theory, If you train children to properly defend themselves there would still be a percentage who would flee, submit, or posture instead of fight. However, this might be a mute point as we can play arm chair security officer but we do not know how we will respond in these situation I also wish you were wrong about the famous psycho vs moral person comment I wish you were wrong, but I have to agree.

    Echo,
    I guess I am not quite sure what your point is with “The Bible tells us that when confronted with this fear, people call out to mountains and hills to fall on them rather than face the wrath of God. Just spend a minute digesting that. Imagine the desperation required to cry out for help to a mountain.”
    Ancient people put their places of worship on higher points of ground. ie. mountains and hills. When the prophets (specifically Isaiah) talks about calling out to the mountains he is making reference to their places of worship, not to the mountain itself. You appear to be saying that they fell to the mountains. You are missing the imagery and fuller meaning of the text. they are calling out to their false gods, not to the terra firma. But I might be making much ado about nothing.
    Gregg

  28. Echo_ohcE said,

    Daniel,

    The greatest generation of WWII fame was a lot like the ancient Greeks. There was a real “serve the state” mindset. They were afraid our way of life would perish. It is very much like the Greeks and the Persians; there are a lot of parallels.

    But religion played a role in that. At the very least, you can say that some people were Christians and fought to maintain their freedom of religion. Some people thought Hitler was like an AntiChrist, and so they wanted to fight back. Others fought for our other freedoms, fearing that Hitler would take them away.

    So whether God was their God, or whether they were fighting for their families, or whether the state was their god, they were willing to die for what they believed in. People today believe in only themselves.

    It has a lot to do with the post-modern mindset that says that what you believe to be true is a matter of taste. Almost everyone thinks this way these days. “It may be true for you, but not for me.” Everyone thinks that they can make truth simply by choosing to believe it. By doing so, they elevate themselves to the status of a god in their own little personal universe. Such people will never do anything heroic, because they believe themselves to be the highest good. Nothing is worth dying for but me. Everyone else should be willing to die for me, but I am not willing to die for anyone.\

    But it’s not pathetic because it’s not heroic, it’s pathetic because it is the height of sin. It is self worship, thinking that I am my own god. I understand this way of thinking first hand. It’s pathetic and disgusting, the ultimate manifestation of idolatry.

    E

  29. Echo_ohcE said,

    Gregg,

    What you said is intelligent, but:

    Rev 6:15 Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains,
    Rev 6:16 calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb,
    Rev 6:17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

    This is what I was talking about. They are asking the mountains and rocks to fall on them to cover them and hide them from the Lamb, so that he cannot see them. The idea of covering stretches all the way back to Adam and Eve hiding from God because they were naked, and then God made clothes for them out of animal skins. They were exposed, and they wanted to be covered. In Joshua 10, the 5 kings that Israel defeated went and hid in a cave as well, a picture of judgment day in miniature.

    Now, you could argue that there is a connection between this and the high places where they worshiped, but I don’t know. I’m not sure what passage you’re specifically referring to in Isaiah.

    E

  30. Gregg said,

    Echo,
    My bad, thanks for the clarification.
    By the way, did you deploy to Operation Just Cause? Or Desert Storm (Shield) with the Marines?

  31. Echo_ohcE said,

    No, I was in Iraq in 2003.

    What passage in Isaiah were you talking about?

    E

  32. Gregg said,

    I refer mostly to the theme of mountains found in the prophets. I mixed up Isaiah with Hosea (I guess that is what happens when you type from the hip all the time!.)
    Hosea 4:13 is the best proof text you are looking for. The Theology of High Places is a fun study but at the end of the day i don’t think it adds to much to the text. It gives it fuller meaning, but like I said earlier I think it is much ado about nothing. People are going to worship false gods And YHWH is going to deal with it. The fact that people worship in a place that puts them closer to the sun is not to revelent. But that is just me.

    I have a lot of friends who deployed out in 2003. Some were 1st division. What did you do when you deployed? I understand all Marines are riflemen, were you a ground pounder or did you have a different MOS? My Army days I was field artillery (secretly I hope to be assigned with the Marines when I get my orders- if I am lucky it will be with the Gun Bunnies!)
    Gregg

    Gregg

  33. RubeRad said,

    This would be especially prevalent on a college campus where there is a belief in “non-violent solutions” to just about everything.

    There is no place more liberal than a college campus, and liberal push nonviolence so hard, you really begin to wonder if they believe anything is worth fighting for.

  34. Gregg said,

    Rube,
    I am not disputing your point about being willing to fight for your beliefs, nor shall I dispute how liberal college campuses are. I am disputing your logic that violence is the only acceptable form of fighting. I think there is a strong Biblical arguement for non-violence. It is not liberal to state this fact, its Biblical accurate. Lets not merely give the liberals the realm of nonviolence. Quackers and JWs (both ideologically conservative) are for nonviolence.
    Pacificism is action. Pacifics are fighting for something and in all honesty it sometimes takes great courage to chose nonviolence. Case in point, the 1000 Indians who were clubbed and bayonetted to death as they nonviolently stood their ground against British oppression.
    I will not question that at times, perhaps too often, a nonviolent solution does not solve the issue it exasperates them, however, that does not nullify the truth of my point. Bottom line we should not yield this Biblical principal to the liberals, not should we excuse it away from our circles because it is a bedfellow to the libs.
    Thanks, Gregg

  35. danielbalc said,

    Rube, Without passing judgment on the Va Tech tragedy I would call to mind the Montreal Massacre as evidence that liberalism does NOT believe anything is worth fighting for.

  36. Albino Hayford said,

    2 Quotes to help us cowboy up in the face of hand-wringing, bed-wetting pacifistic cowardice:

    Winston Churchill

    “Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, and still yet if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you, and only a precarious chance for survival. – There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

    —Aragorn, from J.R.R. Tolkien’s Return of the King

    “My brothers. I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me! A day may come, when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of Fellowship, but it is not this day! An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the age of men comes crashing down! But it is not this day! This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you, stand, Men of the West!”

  37. Matt S said,

    …And then there is this interesting quote from Cho’s uncle talking about Cho’s mother,

    “She said the children were studying well. She didn’t seem worried about her children at all,” Kim said. “She just talked about how hard she had to work to make a living, to support the children.”

    I submit the burden falls on us as parents to insure our kids do not grow up to be so troubled. So many parents are “too busy” or “work too much” to spend time talking and interacting with their children. These kids gets kid ridiculed and put down all the time and when they come home looking for support there is none to be found.

    We should not look to the government for help. Gun control policies will not solve the problem, legislating violence in video game and movie production will not solve the problem. The school system and counseling centers will not solve the problem.

    We as parents can solve the problem by paying attention to our kids, spending time with them, loving them when no one else seems to, and by showing them the love God has for them.

    Just don’t expect to hear this from any news outlet….

  38. Gregg said,

    is anyone else having trouble sending postings? I have responded to Albino twice and they have not shown up. This is third attempt to send. I would hate to think either 1) my computer is demon possessed and is hiding the truth from Albino, or,
    2) The Spirit intervined, or,
    3) I am too stupid to realize how to press “submit comment”

    Cheers
    Gregg
    (by the way if this one shows up we will have our answer it is obviously number 3)

  39. Echo_ohcE said,

    Gregg, 32

    Hosea 4:13 certainly illustrates what you were talking about, just not what I was talking about. There may be some connection there, but I don’t know. I’d have to think about it.

    I was an intelligence analyst, and I’ll say no more, if you please.

    E

  40. Echo_ohcE said,

    Matt,

    are you saying that parents have – gasp – authority over their children, and are – gasp – responsible for how they turn out???

    Where on EARTH would you get such a notion???

    Echo

  41. Albino Hayford said,

    Gregg, the NRA is blocking your liberal, anti-self-defense postings.

  42. Albino Hayford said,

  43. Gregg said,

    Albino,
    I know it is crazy! I wrote up my response, them did something with my computer and lost the first write up. The second one got lost in limbo. I wrote the test post which when fine then wrote another brillant, Spirit-led, diatribe of conviction and it was lost!

    Apparently Daniels Den has a anti-logic filter because your illogical partisonship make it in and my pitty logical responses are controlled by the illuminate that is the NRA!
    well even though the NRA has its blood soaked boot on my neck I will still blog!
    Sempri Pax Christi!
    Gregg

  44. Gregg said,

    See what the heck! That one made it too. Conspiracy I say!

  45. danielbalc said,

    Gregg I just checked to see if any of your posts were put into moderation but they weren’t. It’s clearly your own fault.

  46. danielbalc said,

    Albino. Very cool blog post.

  47. Gregg said,

    Albino,
    I WILL HAVE MY SAY! Even if it takes me four times to write this. If I cannot post this on Daniels Den, I will post it elsewhere. I WILL NOT BE SILENCED!
    You want to equip us with some great quotes to help us face up to the sissy “liberal” pacifists. Well I will equip us with some great quotes to help us fall on our faces to the Prince of Peace. You be the judge which is better.

    Bible:
    Romans 12:18
    If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.

    Hebrews 12:14
    Pursue peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord.

    Matthew 22:37-40
    You shall love the Lord your God will all your heart, and will all you soul, and with all your mind… You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

    Martin Luther King Jr.
    True pacifism is not unrealistic submission to an evil power. …It is rather a courageous confrontation with evil by the power of love, in the faith that it is better to be the recipient of violence than the inflicter of it, since the latter only multiplies the existence of violence and bitterness in the universe, while the former may develop a sense of shame in the opponent, and thereby bring about a transformation and change of heart.

    You will no doubt call me an anti-self defense advocate. But like Jim Elliott says, “He is no fool to give up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.”
    I am not anti defense; I recognize that God is our defense. I am not philosophically against your position. I have spent most my adult life in either the military or law enforcement. I understand the need for the 2nd amendment. I agree with it, but lets not confuse our Biblical mandate to pursue peace with our emotional response to protect our lives. Perhaps if you used Christ instead of Tolkien as your moral compass in this situation you too would understand.

    Nonviolence is not liberal it is not sissy, it is Biblical. It is Christs desire for His people. I challenge you to give me a solid Biblical Theology of self defense. And just to make it a worthy challenge for you, how about doing it without all your emotional arguments like you often bring into it. Forget talking about if I would pull the trigger to defense my wife.

    There it is, censors by the NRA, blocked by the un-logic police, and like Michael the Arch angel, detained by demons, but arrived through much prayer and fasting!

    Gregg

  48. Gregg said,

    FINALLY!!!!!!

  49. Echo_ohcE said,

    Albino,

    You said:
    “Romans 13 reminds us that the government is God’s agent of wrath to punish the evildoer – and does not “bear the sword” in vain.”

    I would just add that since our government allows us to defend ourselves, they delegate that authority to us. So the government is giving us the authority to bear the sword in some cases, and God has given the government their sword bearing authority. When we act in self defense, we may think of this as acting on behalf of the government to protect us, since the government gave us the authority to defend ourselves, which authority of theirs was of course given by God.

    You can say this even if you don’t think God has given everyone the right to defend themselves, which of course he clearly has. But even if you don’t see that in Scripture, or by common sense, then you can look at it this way, and once again you find justification for self defense.

    I think Gregg’s ORIGINAL point might have been a good one though, namely that many people act…cowardly…when their life is threatened.

    E

  50. Echo_ohcE said,

    My post 49 should have come after Albino’s post 50.

  51. Echo_ohcE said,

    Good grief.

  52. Gregg said,

    Albino,
    You cannot use Romans 13 as a defense for self defense, as that is clearly a case of national defense, unless you are saying nations are equal to individual? If you are then I assume you are trying to collect taxes from everyone you meet too?

    So onto the subject of Bible Baseball, let me lob some verses in favor of God as our defense and he is the prince of peace. This is a very easy assignment for anyone because the Biblical evidence is saturated by these two principles. In fact, let’s do it this way. Which section of Scripture would you like me to me limited to? I will easily be able to defend the position of peace. You could not make the same boast?

    Let’s cut to the chase. Violence is sometimes required in this world. From a Christian perspective it should not be sought after, nor glorified. I again ask that you create a solid, (not one or two verse) but a solid, consistent theology of self defense. I can, without much effort, make a powerful Biblical Theology of nonviolence. I make this boast, not because I know the Bible, but because the Bible is so consistently filled with examples of nonviolence. Perhaps I could start with the fruits of the Spirit Vs. the works of the flesh. Or I’ll look at the life of Paul, when he was wronged he sang from prison.

    Face it Albino, you are making a great argument as an American, perhaps a needed argument as a society, but a weak argument as an Christian. Which is more important to you? Choose today who you will serve. I will give you two anthems to rally behind

    Option 1) “I’m proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free”
    Option 2) “Be thou my vision, O Lord of my heart”

    Oh, by the way Your wife and daughter are Christs charge before they are yours.
    Gregg

  53. Gregg said,

    I echo Echos’ good grief. This postings are showing up everywhere!

  54. Albino Hayford said,

    I say “Amen” to the Bible verses. I would highlight “SO FAR AS IT DEPENDS ON YOU be at peace with all men.”

    But here’s some food for thought for pacifists everywhere:

    In Exodus 22:2-3, God permits killing in self-defense. In the New Testament, Jesus told the disciples to make sure and buy a sword (Luke 22:36). When Jesus rebuked Peter in the garden for cutting of the soldier’s ear, He never told Peter to get rid of his sword. He told him to “put it back in its place.” Clearly, Peter was foolishly getting in the way of Jesus sacrifice.

    Romans 13 reminds us that the government is God’s agent of wrath to punish the evildoer – and does not “bear the sword” in vain.

    As for Jesus’ commands to “turn the other cheek”, I believe that Christ is referring to our desire for “revenge”, not rebuking us for self-defense.

    If someone attempts to do harm to my wife or little girl, I will do everything in my power to incapacitate them. God has put them in my care.

    On a side note, I do not own a gun. I don’t have a problem with anyone else owning a firearm, but I just don’t have the desire to have one.

  55. Echo_ohcE said,

    Gregg,

    You’re not utilizing common sense. Albino does go a little too far, but you are not interpreting Scripture correctly. Sure, seek to be at peace with all men, but you can defend yourself if you’re in mortal danger. Remember, God gives us our bodies, our lives, and puts those into our care. You are to be a good steward of your life. You are responsible to nurture and care for your body. If you simply throw it away because you wanted to absolutize one command of God at the expense of another, you’re making a mistake. If someone broke into your house and started stealing your stuff, you wouldn’t just sit there and watch, and offer to give them a hand. You’d call the police, unless you’re an absolute moron. God gave us the police to provide justice for us. That’s the reason for the existence of the state. Part of how the state operates is that it allows us to defend ourselves. This is God’s provision for justice. There are fewer murders than there could be because people are afraid that people WILL try to defend themselves. Man’s will to survive is God given, and it is a deterrent to murder, making the world less sinful. Now, just exercise common sense and think this through. Don’t take parts of the Bible out of the context of the rest of Scripture. God is not only merciful, he is also just.

    E

  56. Albino Hayford said,

    Common ground with Echo? Inconceivable!

  57. Gregg said,

    Echo,
    You are right. It defies commpon sense to be a Biblcal pacifist. That is why I cannot whole heartedly adhere to it. But it does seem to be Biblical honest to say that in Christ economy giving up power is how power to attained. a Philippians 2 sort of thing. Is it logical? No, but it does seem to be an honest response to the problem of evil. Do I like it? No really.
    I think I am responding more to the fact that we Conservative Christians too often jumpo onto “defending our rights” stance when Christ gave up rights for the redemption of His people. And as I pointed out to Albino, it is far earier to craft a consistent theology of nonviolence then it is to craft on of self defense or as I am calling it now, of “defending our rights”

    I agree with you that this is a lofty ideal but I think it is one that Christ desires, after all we have such a rich history of believers who through nonviolence advanced the kingdom. Could you imagine if Martin Luther King Jr. endorsed a violent self defense posture?

    On a side bar, I would have imagined you would be more agreeable with me. God in His soveriegnty would allow for the criminal to break into your house, for God’s purposes- perhaps to keep you more fucosed on Him and less on your stuff. And if that criminal took your life it would be within Gods plan.

    Gregg

  58. Echo_ohcE said,

    Gregg,

    You’re absolutizing again. We who believe in the sovereignty of God, contrary to popular belief, are not fatalists. What you are articulating is fatalism.

    For example, I feel that I am called to preach. I don’t just sit on my couch and wait for a church to call me up out of the blue and ask me to be their pastor. Rather, I am studying in order to become qualified for that high office.

    In the same way, God has given us common sense. He has also given us reason. Read the book of Proverbs. There’s plenty in there about defending yourself from evil.

    Sure, look to God to provide for you. But “give us this day our daily bread” doesn’t mean you sit on the couch and wait for someone to knock on your door and give you a loaf of bread. You go out and get a job, and even though you are earning your daily bread through working for it, you can still say that that’s God’s provision for you.

    In the same way, God has given us the state to uphold justice. The state has that right, and God has given them that right. It’s the state’s job under God, given by God, to protect us from murderers. See Gen 9 for the common grace covenant with Noah. “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by MAN shall his blood be shed.” The state bears the sword for this reason. Well, one of the deterrents that the state makes use of in protecting us is that it allows us to defend ourselves. The state authorizes us to act on its behalf by defending ourselves. If someone breaks into your home and tries to rape your wife, do you really think you’re going to jail if you break a couple of his bones before the police show up? Or even if you end up having to kill him to defend yourself? No, of course not, because there is a provision for it in the law, and there’s ALWAYS been such a provision in the laws of any civilization I can think of. The state’s job is to uphold justice, and this is one of the ways in which they do it. It provides a great deterrent to murder.

    Following Christ’s example does NOT mean letting someone steal your stuff or take your life. That’s not what it means. Now, if the state puts you to death for your faith, that’s one thing, but if some random idiot tries to shoot you in your classroom, you’re not suffering for the gospel if you just let him shoot you. Rather, you have failed to value your life that God has given you. That’s just stupid.

    The Bible promises us many things, but the Bible also gives us wisdom, and allows us to utilize common sense. God didn’t just give us the Bible, he also gave us common sense, but just in case this confuses us, he makes it clear that we can utilize wisdom and common sense.

    Consider Paul’s escaping from many cities because his life was in danger. He FLED. Was he guilty of sin? No, of course not.

    And by the way, not everyone is convinced that Martin Luther King Jr. is a shining example of biblical ethics. I’m not. And in fact, I’m far from being convinced that he believed in salvation in Christ alone. He was one of these guys that believed that there were many ways to heaven, and this is well documented. We would not call him properly then, a conservative Christian. Maybe he is in heaven, but I’d be pretty surprised. You have to believe that salvation is in Christ alone to get there.

    E

  59. Gregg said,

    Echo,
    For the most part I agree with what you are selling. I have to be honest, in this issue I am very much in flux, trying to process externally. For me it all boils down to “rights” I see the Biblical principle of not seeking our rights as what the Trinity is all about. God does not fight for his rights, he needs to prove nothing. God is our defense is a valid defense. But you are right it is fool hearty to blindly put yourself in dangerous situations because Christ is your shield. Wearing bling after midnight in a dark ally is just stupid.

    A few points we might want to interact with is
    1) Our right to defend ourselves is based, largely, on the God established government giving us this right. Zimbabweans do not have this right; Jews in Nazi germany did not have that right, nor do many in China. Yet Gods principles of nonviolence stsill stand there. It seems to me that we are making a defense from an American grid, more then a Biblical grid. Similar to our popular theology of suffering. American theology on suffering is very different from what I experienced in Africa

    2) whether King is saved or not is not relevent to this point. Had King not peddled a Christian nonviolence position I shutter to think of what it would have meant for our country. Rarely in human history has major power been reliquished without violence and I thank God it did not happen.
    Gregg

  60. Echo_ohcE said,

    Gregg,

    I’m sorry, but I find you being inconsistent. You’re advocating that we suffer, yet MLK did what he did as a non-violent way of fighting for rights. I don’t think what he did was entirely ethical, biblically speaking. Sure, I think all people should have equal rights, but I’m not sure that his legacy has really shown a good profit. It has made many people quite bitter and hateful. By their fruit you shall know them.

    Again, I’m in favor of equal rights for all people. I just think he went about it in a rebellious way that continues to bear fruit to rebellion.

    I’m glad to see you concerned with suffering. I am too. I think God calls us to suffer. I do believe that. But God also calls us to be good stewards. It’s my job to defend my wife with my life if I have to, if someone breaks into our home and tries to rape her. It’s not my rights as a husband I’m protecting there or fighting for.

    In the VT shootings, can you at least agree that it would have been ok to defend yourself, NOT to uphold YOUR rights, but to prevent the guy from killing so many? What if the second person he killed would have killed him instead? Instead of 30 some dead, there’d be only 1. In that case, it’s not just yourself you’re protecting, but the other people this person wishes to harm. Can you at least agree that self defense, at least for this reason, is a good idea?

    But look, in general, I do not advocate seeking revenge for having your rights violated. That belongs to God. But God has given us certain provisions in THIS LIFE for justice. He has given us the state to act ON HIS BEHALF. They have HIS authority to uphold justice. It’s a pretty serious calling to be a magistrate or a king or whatever. That’s a serious responsibility. They act on God’s behalf. Consider that carefully. When the state puts someone to death because they are a murderer – GOD IS GLORIFIED.

    Again, I would encourage you to read through Proverbs. There is much in there about protecting yourself and your property. Here’s an example:

    Pro 6:1 My son, if you have put up security for your neighbor, have given your pledge for a stranger,
    Pro 6:2 if you are snared in the words of your mouth, caught in the words of your mouth,
    Pro 6:3 then do this, my son, and save yourself, for you have come into the hand of your neighbor: go, hasten, and plead urgently with your neighbor.
    Pro 6:4 Give your eyes no sleep and your eyelids no slumber;
    Pro 6:5 save yourself like a gazelle from the hand of the hunter, like a bird from the hand of the fowler.

    If you doubt that we are to nurture and care for our own bodies:
    Eph 5:28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
    Eph 5:29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church,

    and:
    Pro 24:11 Rescue those who are being taken away to death; hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter.

    Pro 31:8 Open your mouth for the mute, for the rights of all who are destitute.
    Pro 31:9 Open your mouth, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy.

    So maybe you can’t in good conscience hold your life to be valuable enough to defend yourself, but certainly you can defend your family, fight for their rights and protect them, and you can try to subdue a murderer, by killing him if need be, to protect the others whom he might kill – can’t you?

    And by the way, why DID Jesus tell Peter to strap on a sword? That’s an interesting question.

    E

  61. Gregg said,

    Echo,
    Once again I understand I have a very incomplete argument. As I in fux here. As I process it I could very easily fall on either side of the fence. The verses you have provided are not helping your cause, but there are still valid Biblical support.
    This is pedestran and does not mean that your position is wrong.

    Ephesians tells us to love our wives as Christ loves the church and gave himself for her. One could argue it calls for self sacrifice as Christ sacrificed for love.

    If we used the proverbs text as you would imply when we would have to use violence to whenever we are wronged by our neighbors or whenever the rights of the down trodden are affected.

    Why did Jesus tell Peter to put away his sword? That is a good question I do not know. I do not know why Jesus talks about bring the sword. I also think it is hard to view Revelation from a nonviolence position. Jesus kicks butt when he comes back. Jesus is dripped in blood, riding a war horse, and carying a sword. If He was all about nonviolence God could easily have another solution to the problem with evil and still judge the world (Not down playing hell here) Why He allows for governmental defense and war is problematic, but it is not an argument for or against personal self defense as I have already pointed out there are governments where self defense was not permitted.

    So I admit, regertably, I am inconsistent in my argument. But I expect as I continue to think Scripturally, but outside of our traditional conservative boxes about it I will develop a theology of nonviolence.

    One point about Dr. King. Are you saying that MLK was less then Biblical because he rebelled against the God established government? Because our country was founded in the same way- only with more bloodshed. Or are you saying that the results divided sections of the country and made some people angry and bitter? Just curious.

    Gregg

  62. Echo_ohcE said,

    Gregg,

    I don’t understand why you don’t think those verses help my cause. I’m not saying that they directly say: “If someone is trying to kill you, it’s ok to kill them if you have to.” If the Bible said that, you wouldn’t be confused, would you? But the Bible doesn’t say that, as it doesn’t say many things in clear language. The Bible urges us, again, to wisdom. If you’re looking for everything you do to be spelled out clearly in the Bible, you will never develop wisdom, and you will be unable to do many things. The Bible never says it’s ok to serve communion to women. Think about it.

    But anyway, the passage in Proverbs that I quoted shows that you SHOULD look out for yourself. That was my only point. You should seek to save yourself from being someone else’s prey. That’s what it says. It says that to do so is wisdom, if you read it in context.

    Paul treats it as a matter of course: he might as well have said, hey, everyone takes care of their own body right? Everyone defends it and nourishes it, right? This is common sense, right? So, husbands, love your wife like your own body. If you love your wife, then you love yourself. And you want to love yourself right? In fact, you DO love yourself, so therefore, love your wife, because if you don’t love your wife, you don’t love yourself.

    And finally I quoted two passages from Proverbs that COMMANDS US to defend the rights of others. I have made simple argumentation about doing just that, so I don’t see how these passages don’t help my cause. Clearly, they demand that you accept my arguments, and quit resisting.

    What is the meaning of your stating that getting outside the traditional conservative boxes – as if getting outside these boxes is somehow virtuous? Sometimes we need to rethink some things and sometimes our traditions keep us from being able to see what’s really supposed to be conveyed by something, because we come at it with certain expectations, but those traditions didn’t become traditions by accident. Those traditions come about by long histories of careful thought by learned men over a long period of time. I’m not saying that we should never go against this grain, but I am saying that we should not do so lightly. And I would strongly resist the thinking that is so common today that going against this grain is somehow virtuous and noble and a sure way to attain truth, because that’s just stupid. Such people think that they are better able to attain truth ALL ON THEIR OWN rather than work together with other minds over the course of history. Such people want to reinvent the wheel, but all they’re doing is rehearsing all the old problems that have already been addressed from of old.

    Rejecting tradition is not virtuous. More often than not it’s stupid. Sometimes it IS a good idea, but only when that tradition is clearly wrong. It’s never a good idea to just throw out what generations and generations before us have said. We aren’t better than them simply because we live in some grander age or something.

    In fact, I’m going to soapbox a little bit. Many people approach the ancient writers with extreme arrogance. They assume that these ancient writers are unsophisticated and ignorant. Thus they always assume that the Bible is a much, much simpler piece of literature than it really is. They can’t understand that some things are meant to be taken figuratively, or that there is more there than meets the eye. The ironic thing about it is that when ancient writers demonstrate that they were able to write in such a way as to produce a text with layers upon layers of meaning, and moderns refuse to acknowledge such a thing because they arrogantly assume that the ancients could not have been that sophisticated, then it is actually the case that the ancients are more sophisticated than we moderns. Hahahaha… We are so ignorant and arrogant today it’s not even funny.

    But it is this same line of thinking that seems to presume that not listening to the wise words of those older generations that have gone before is somehow virtuous. This is profane. This is like a child saying that it is virtuous not to listen to what his father tells him. To be sure, his father is a fallible, sinful man, but that doesn’t mean you don’t listen to your father by default. Maybe when you get older and you begin to understand what your father’s sins were/are, then you’ll know which things to take away from him and which things to leave aside and do differently with your children. But you default to your father. He is your starting point in life. You can’t avoid that because he raised you. How silly and ridiculous would we think it was if someone said, “Yeah, when I have kids, I won’t listen to anything my father ever told me about it.” We might assume that he had an abusive and heinous upbringing, so we ask him, “Was your father very abusive?” “No, he loved me and did the best he could, and he disciplined me consistently. He was a good father. Sure he made mistakes, but he was a good father.” “Then why do you think it’s a good idea to throw out all his advice?” “Because I’ll understand it better when I figure it all out for myself.” What a stupid way to think! What a stupid thing to say! It doesn’t even make sense to think that way. It can only be some hyper-inflated ego that can think that way.

    E

    PS I’m not interested in discussing MLK any further.

  63. Albino Hayford said,

    Echo — Obviously we agree on the right to bear arms — Biblically and constitutionally

    But, I just gotta say — Shame on all Christians and pastors in the South who did not stand up and march for their Black brothers and sisters who were cruelly discriminated against. ML King’s legacy is seen every day when you walk into the same restroom as a Black man or when you sit at the table next to a Black man. His influence is all around us, but, because we are so used to it, we don’t notice it.

  64. Albino Hayford said,

    It would have been a little harder for those racist cops and troopers to fire water cannons and unleash the dogs if respected, white pastors from the local community were there to support their Black brothers and sisters….SHAME on those who let their prejudices and cowardice rule their hearts and betray their brothers and sisters in Christ.

  65. Albino Hayford said,

    NOW you got me all worked up again…

  66. Echo_ohcE said,

    Well, I’m not standing in your way of getting all worked up – say on.

    E

  67. danielbalc said,

    OK ok i’ve ignored this conversation long enough. I stopped reading once Echo started getting into his mile-long diatribes, but i’ve spent the better part of this morning catching up with the three of you. Here’s what I have to say.

    Gregg this assumption… “But I expect as I continue to think Scripturally, but outside of our traditional conservative boxes about it I will develop a theology of nonviolence.”

    Is a sad testimony to you NOT thinking critically. You can’t say “i’m not sure BUT I think i’ll come to this outcome.” Once you add the “BUT” you have already stated your “sure” position. In addition to your “BUT” you added the clause of “outside of our traditional conservative boxes” which Echo has already elaborated on.

    At present there is a tendency in the university culture to advocate pacifism. This has infiltrated Christians on campuses and become “Christian-pacifism”. This is a classic example of the worlds system being adopted by the church. Yet in this case with tragic results.

    Let me give you a personal example of the ILlogic that is used to come to this position.

    It starts with a world-contrived assumption- Jesus was a pacifist
    It flows into a world-contrived tradition- Jesus is what all believers should be.
    Then becomes a world-contrived “theology”- Believers should be pacifists.

    The difference between world-contrived and Word-derived is tremendous and must be taken into account.

    If you objectively examine scripture in an effort to prove just one of those above points you are going to fail. it’s impossible to do, because they are NOT Word-derived.

    Was Jesus a pacifist? John 2:12-16

    Is Jesus what all believers should be? This has really taken off with the “what would Jesus do?” fad. A better approach is “what would Jesus command?” because Jesus is God, we are not. Sometimes in our effort to be “Christ like” we are really trying to be god, and usually so that we feel right to judge others. Regardless there countless aspects of who Christ was and is that believers aren’t created or intended to be. Pacifistic is one of those. But then again we just pointed out that Jesus wasn’t a pacifist so we don’t even need to make this argument. To be fair there are those who would sight Matthew 5 as Jesus “Commanding” pacifism but that isn’t the case any more then it is the case that Jesus is “commanding” self-mutilation.

    Should believers be pacifist?- I got into a nice little debate over this subject with a friend of mine. She had just gotten engaged to a gentlemen who calls himself a “Christian-pacifist” and lectured on the subject at a local college. Knowing about his lectures I asked her if she too had adopted this “Christian-pacifism”. Saddly she had. I sighed deeply and asked her if police officers ought be able to use lethal force. She agreed that it is reasonable for government authorities to indeed “bear the sword” (She was familiar with the Romans 13 argument). So I further queried if she thought it was acceptable for Christians to be government authorities with such sword wielding powers. Tragically trying to adhere to her “Christian-pacifism” led her to only one conclusion. “It is sinful for a believer to be a government employee with ‘sword-wielding’ authority.” Do you see how her insistence on avoiding the “traditional conservative boxes” led her to such an illogical conclusion? every police officer, every soldier, every justice and even every legislator is now condemned in her sight. The Bible is filled with soldiers, authorities, legislators etc that were saved, and never were they commanded to give up their positions. In fact the conclusion of Romans sights such an individual (Romans 16:23) “Erastus, who is the city’s director of public works”. How dare Erastus maintain a position in the corrupt Roman government? How dare he maintain a position that may require him to enforce legislation, perhaps even lethally? I choose Erastus because he is an obscure individual. Probably the closest thing to what you and I will ever be in the kingdom. We aren’t super-stars of Christiandom, we are just Christians. We have eternal life. We are saved. We live because of Christ. Let’s not try to over-complicate it by feeling pressure to adopt neo-political movements in order to make our salvation more acceptable to the world.

    I urge you strongly to objectively study the scriptures without the prejudice against “traditional conservative boxes” and see if you still come to a “theology of non-violence”.

  68. danielbalc said,

    This Colorado Church shooting tragedy on reiterates the fact that “shooters” are cowards and cannot face even the slightest opposition. Which begs the question. Why, oh why, do we not permit qualified school faculty to carry fire arms?

    The man who was so vehemently intent on killing “as many Christians as I can”. Was stopped by a female security guard who, *GASP*, had a gun at Church!

    They are investigating as to whether or not he killed himself, but that point is indifferent because if he did kill himself it cam only after he saw someone pointing a gun back at him.

    At VA-Tech the psycho killed himself just moment after police loudly shattered the chained shut glass door.

    Shooters are cowards. Charge them and they will back down. All you need is more bravery than they have, and since they have none It shouldn’t take much on your part.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: