Bodies covered, uncovered
broken, whole, clean or soiled;
casualties all and caring naught
for the politics of war
The rhetoric of the living
never reach their ears
The rhetoric of the living
do not halt the slow corruption of death
or a single spade-full of earth
each adding cover to the shame of war;
the casualties of war
It doesn't matter who fired first
blame is levied venomous and searing
upon whomever suffers the misfortune
of being the stronger
It doesn't matter what duplicity
has led events to these bloodied grounds
and the sound of spades cutting through earth
blame is assigned to him whose success
stacks the casualties of war highest
The world hates Israel;
despises her God favored status ~
spits at the mere mention of her name
The world defends Hizbullah;
princes of murder and subterfuge
shedding their tears for each killer slain
For who else will silence God?
Who else but Islam?
Who else but Hell's disciples?
Whose only love is death...
Whose only lover is murder...
whose only god is evil incarnate...
Whose only fear is Light
And only the dead have truly learned the lessons of war
ELAshley
073006.061141.6
--------
For other examples of ELAshley's war poetry:
Trilogy of War:
The Poetry of War
Long Corridors
Euphrates
Line of Fire
Resurrection
despises her God favored status"
Nice poem, but as to the above point: Not so much in reality. The "world" is largely too busy with their own lives to care much about Israel, Lebanon or Hezbollah.
For the most part, the world does pay attention when greater injustices are being committed (it's a shame it has to reach ever-increasing levels to shock us). When Hezbollah kills one or two Israelis, the "world" - as much as is paying attention - is shocked and opposed to Hezbollah's actions.
When Israel bombs and kills 37 children, the "world" pays a bit more attention and stands opposed to Israel's actions.
Don't create persecution where none exists.
Persecution exists anywhere one nation is refused the basic right to insure its own survival.
No one would refuse Israel her right to self-defense. Killing children is not self-defense. Israel's current actions are working against Israel's best interests and will work to ensure the collapse of Israel more than any Hezbollah bomb could ever do.
But the world only has condemnation for Israel. The world demands Israel cease and desist. If Israel accedes to the will of the world, will the world defend Israel against her enemies? Will the world punish her enemies? Will the world be equally outraged when her enemies again begin shelling Israeli towns and killing innocent men, women, and children? Of course not.
Oh, and Israel will not collapse. God holds her up. And no weapon formed against her will prosper. That's the way it is, and we should all get used to it.
This is certifiably not true. The world condemns Hezbollah when Hezbollah has taken wrong actions. It's just that, by the destructive nature of her power, Israel is doing much more severe damage to many more children. In this world, greater injustices result in greater condemnation (ideally, every child being killed would be condemned...)
But the fact that the world is demanding that Israel cease and desist does not mean that we are pro-Hezbollah, just that we are opposed to the killing of civilians. It is arguably an illegal action that Israel has been taking and the world is right to stand against illegal actions that result in the deaths of civilians, whether those actions are taken by Hezbollah or by Israel.
Surely you could agree with this?
I suppose you're trying to wax biblical here, suggesting that God will always and forever bless Israel?
'Tis bad theology and/or biblical exegesis.
God blessed Israel when Israel followed God and God cursed Israel when they didn't (biblically-speaking). John the Baptist told the religious Jews:
"Do not start saying within yourselves: As a father we have Abraham. For I say to you that God has power to raise up children to Abraham from these stones." (Luke 3)
And Jesus had similar (if harsher) words for Israelis who were relying upon the supposed mantle of God upon them:
The Pharisees said to Jesus,
"We are not illegitimate. We have one Father, God."
Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and am here...
Why do you not understand what I am saying? Because you cannot bear to hear my word. You belong to your father the devil and you willingly carry out your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in truth, because there is no truth in him.
Yowch. Harsh words.
Is Jesus anti-semitic? Of course not, he is a Jew. But he was pointing out (as the Old Testament does repeatedly) that the blessing spoke of in the Bible doesn't include blessing Israel when they are taking ungodly actions.
Instead, the bible teaches that God's children are those people (Jews, Christians, Muslims) who follow God's teachings. THESE are the people God blesses.
Hezbollah, knew what would happen if they hid themselves among civilians.... civilians would die. But they didn't care. Pictures of dead women and children would only further their cause.
Which is exactly what CBS News said this evening... 'the deaths at Qana only bolster Hezbollah's cause.' Bolster? In whose eyes? JUST the Lebanese people? Just brainwashed ignorant Muslims? Isn't it also seen as such in the eyes of American and European sympathizers who can't seem to grasp the idea that any cease fire that does not see Hezbollah and Hamas disarmed and toothless will only insure the violence continue some days, weeks, months or years down the road?
No one, especially in the media-- and remember I work in media and follow it closely --gives equal coverage to the deaths of Israeli women and children at the hands of Hezbollah. The criticizm is decidedly one-sided. And it doesn't take an intellectual giant to see it. Hezbollah must be made to beg for peace. They must be publically humiliated. They must come to the decision that they are genuinely tired of bloodshed, tired of hearing their wives, mothers, and daughters crying for the dead. They must disarm, and forsake their psychotic hatred of Jews and Israel.
I find it more than a little interesting that you you see illegal actions in every conflict... always seeming to side with the side whose chances of winning only increase if the U.S. or Israel, or which ever side you feel to be guilty of war crimes, pulls out.
How many times must Israel back down and allow murderers the opportunity to strike again another day, before the 'Peace' crowd sees that cease fires do not win peace... blood of innocents wins peace.
But the point is... Israel exists because God has allowed it, every bit as much as He allowed Israel to be scattered to the four corners of the earth.
And to reiterate... God judges individuals differently than the NATION of Israel. But please note, I speak of the nation as a whole, at the time the nations will all be judged. Are we near that time? I believe so. Hence my belief.
All this could better be said thusly... God does not protect Israel so much as He defends His own honor. He does not protect Israel because he approves of the sins of the nation and it's individuals. Instead, God protects Israel because He has made certain promises... Unconditional promises... Promises He must keep... Because God is not a man that He should lie, or the son of man that He should repent. He CANNOT lie, and, in point of fact, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Him to lie.
Yeah, that will work. If someone were able to devastate the US and have us begging for peace, publicly humiliated, we'd be peaceful from then on, never seeking vengeance having learned our place.
You think?
And did you really mean to end your last comment with "blood of innocents wins peace."? Are you calling for slaughtering innocents to secure peace or am I missing something? I'm sure I must be misunderstanding your intent.
You also said:
"Pictures of dead women and children would only further their cause."
If this is the case (and I agree with you that it is), WHY would Israel play in to their hands? Why take actions that will only strengthen your enemies? This is one reason why the world's outcry is not anti-Israel - we're asking Israel to act in her own best interest, not taking the current steps that will only undo her.
This is an extrabiblical teaching.
Yes, it's harsh, but nits make lice. And that's exactly what the Palestinians and the other terrorists are doing; teaching their children, from the moment they are able to string two sentences together, to hate and desire to kill Jews. How does one fight such an enemy?
It was actually suggested to me last night that Israel should just live with Hezbollah missles raining down on her for a year or two while the UN and the US bolstered, and strengthened the Lebanese military so THEY can take care of Hezbollah... a year or so from now. In the meantime, will anyone shed a tear for all the innocent Israelis Hezbollah will kill with their continued rocket campaign? And how would Israels pacifism be perceived by the rest of the Terrorist nations? I'll answer that for you-- As weakness, and a sign that their desire to utterly destroy Israel is on the cusp of fulfillment.
There is no clear choice here. But it IS clear that Israel cannot sit back and do nothing. And the idea that Israel should order their campaign using proportional responses is utterly ridiculous... and criminal.
There are actually 5 different judgments. As to the third...
1. Subject-- The Jews
2. Time-- "The Great Tribulation"
3.Place-- Jerusalem & vicinity
4. Basis of Judgment-- Rejection of Godhead
5. Result-- Their conversion & reception of Christ as their Messiah.
This judgment is FUTURE
While the church is being judged at the Judgment Seat of Christ in the air, the Jews will be judged under Antichrist on the earth. The Jews are an "earthly" people; and as all the promises to them are "earthly," it follows that their Judgment must be of an "earthly" character. The basis of their Judgment is their "rejection of the Godhead." In the days of Samuel they rejected God the Father [1 Sam 8:7]. In the days of Christ they rejected God the Son [Luke 23:18]. In the says of Stephen they rejected God the Holy Spirit [Acts 7:51, 7:54-60]. For their sin they have been scattered among the nations until the Times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. When the Times of the Gentiles are aobut to end the Jews will be gathered back to the Holy Land "unconverted," and caused to "pass under the rod" [Eze 20:34-38]. They will be cast into God's "Melting Pot" [Eze 22:19-22], and pass through an experience spoken of by Jeremiah and Daniel as the "TIME OF JACOB'S TROUBLE" [Jer 30:4-7, Dan 12:1]. Christ calls it "The Great Tribulation," and He and Zechariah the Prophet associate it with the "Return of the Lord" [Mat 24:21-31, Zec 14:1-11].
The human agent the Lord will use will be Antichrist, the awful-ness of whose rule will be supplemented by the pouring out of the "Vials of God's Wrath" upon the earth [Rev 15:1, 15:5-8, 16:21].
The result of these terrible Judgments will be that the Jews will call in their misery upon the Lord [Zec 12:10]. Then Christ will come back to the Mount of Olives [Zec 14:3] and the Jews will look upon Him whom they "pierced" [Zec 12:10], and a nation, the Jewish nation, shall be "born (converted) in a day" [Isa 66:8]. This will complete the Judgment of the Jews.
--Clarence Larkin
Dispensational Truth; 1918,1920
Larkin, of course is extrabiblical, but his references are not; nor, I believe, are his conclusions. But judge for yourself.
Well it seems two ways are being suggested here, with a third being referred to frequently, but that no one is really advocating.
That third way is doing nothing. No one I know is advocating this.
One way is to do as you seem to be suggesting: Wipe out every last enemy, their children, friends and neighbors - anyone who might be sympathetic to the enemy, or those who, while not sympathetic to the enemy, might turn sympathetic as they are systematically destroyed.
Another way is to do as the Bible commands, "Overcome evil with good." To stand up to evil, confront it, expose it for what it is, not allow it to continue BUT not using the same tools that the enemy is advocating.
Setting aside doing nothing, which of the other two suggestions sounds more plausible, more realistically likely to happen, more Godly/ethically sound?
That's the most fallacious statement you've used as an argument yet, Dan.
Must you continually use false witness to support your position?
Is it sometimes right to do wrong or is it always wrong to do wrong?
Just asking.
I will bless you abundantly and make your descendants as countless as the stars of the sky and the sands of the seashore; your descendants shall take possession of the gates of their enemies, and in your descendants all the nations of the earth shall find blessing--all this because you obeyed my command.
God's blessing is to Abraham's descendants. But Jesus makes it clear in the NT (and it is a common theme throughout the OT, as well) that God is talking about those spiritual descendants of Abraham, suggesting that their familial lineage means nothing, but rather their acts and faith that determines whether one is a descendant of Abraham.
To suggest that God is going to limit some blessing to the nation calling itself Israel is extrabiblical and counterintuitive, to boot. It has become a fairly common and oft-cited teaching in the modern church, but it is extrabiblical...or what would you do with the words of Jesus?
Of course, you are free to disagree with me on this point. I just tire of religious folk defending the nation of Israel (no matter what they do) merely because of some poorly interpreted cherry-picked verses from the Bible.
I suspect the more superstitious of the religious folk are hestitant to say anything bad about Israel because of the verse that says, "I will bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel..."
God won't "curse" us for calling upon any nation to not kill children. In fact, I'd worry more about those who do support the killing of children (even if they regret it as a sad fact of war) receiving any "curse."
" Israel is doing much more severe damage to many more children"
And daddio responded:
"That's the most fallacious statement you've used as an argument yet, Dan."
Oh? Hezbollah has killed more children than Israel? If so, then I shall condemn both parties, as I have done already. I wasn't aware of Hezbollah killing so many children.
It's wrong regardless of who's done it. And it's wrong of Hezbollah to hide behind civilians, too. And Israel is being singled out more right now because they are the ones who've currently killed the greatest number of children, after Hezbollah hid behind them.
I'm no apologist for Hezbollah, you haven't read one word of support from them from me. I'm just saying (what seems like should be obvious - and IS obvious to the bulk of the world - that it is wrong to kill children, EVEN when you're trying to kill "bad guys.")
And you accuse me of extrabiblical doctrine?
The right or wrong of any one sides' cause is not determined by how many children each side has killed. THAT is a fallacious argument. Why then do you use it as a determining factor in saying Israel is in the wrong?
Does Hezbollah receive its fair share of responsibility in the Qana affair considering they used the building in question as a fire base for their rockets? Is media telling the world that Israel warned the citizens of Qana to leave? Of course not... that's because Israel is Evil, and Hezbollah's cause is just.
As for superstition-- How convenient! You cling to one set of verses while calling those who cling to other's with whom you happen to disagree, superstitious.
The fact is-- Either "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" [2 Tim 3:16] Or no one has any assurance or hope of eternal life. God does not, and cannot lie. Ergo.....
I didn't say their "wrongness" depended upon how many children were killed, I said it was the fact that they were killing children (and hiding behind children) that made BOTH sides wrong.
I've not condemned Israel only, but I WILL condemn Israel for taking actions that they know are likely to kill civilians. And I'll do the same for Hezbollah.
Where's the confusion, here? It is WRONG to kill children. It is WRONG to hide behind children, knowing they may be killed by your actions.
I feel like I'm being fairly straightforward here.
" Is media telling the world that Israel warned the citizens of Qana to leave? "
Well, yes. That's how I learned about Israel leafleting some of the places they've attacked. Through the media. You said you were an observer of media, surely you've seen this in the media?
(for the record, I saw this on CNN, in Louisville's newspaper and probably on the CNN website - I've seen it several places.)
Again, I'd suggest that you're creating persecution where none exists. The people of the world are not out to get Israel. I'd suggest that the ones currently doing most damage to Israel are the Israeli leaders taking actions that help their enemies (as you rightly noted).
I will sidestep the heart of this assertion, but must point out that the "nation of Israel" is one thing and the secular state of Israel that came into being in 1948 is quite another. The state could very well be brought down; the "nation" could very well be scattered to the winds again; the nation would continue to exist is diaspora as it did before.
From the time I was a child, I rejected this as any assertion having to do with the "inerrance" or even veracity of the Bible. The fact is, when those words were penned, "all Scripture" included all the letters, Gospels and other writings that later were culled out of the canon. To apply the assertion in this verse to what we now call "the Bible" doesn't make any sense, logical, common or otherwise.
When you write that "God doesn't lie!" I get the impression that what you are really saying is,
"Scofield and Darby don't lie!"
God has never been able to fit nicely inside of man's theological boxes. He is not bound by dispensationalism or any extrabiblical theories.
In other words, for Him to operate in a way you or I do not understand does not make him a liar.
It only shows the limits of man when compared to the sovereign God.
BTW, you don't, um, "fence" the Communion table, do you? :-)
Huh?
---
When I say God does not lie, I mean God in his communications with man, speaks in a manner in which man can understand. He lowers Himself, so to speak, so we can understand. God cannot lie to us... It's not in His nature to do so. Saying man has no capacity to understand an infinite God and therefore may see something God has said as a lie, when in fact it is not... well, that is a fine example of what I referred to in an earlier post as 'Shameless Sophistry.' It's akin to the Serpent saying, "yea, hath God said?"
God speaks to us in terms we can understand, even if we don't understand the imagery. And the veracity of God's word could never be hidden for very long in enigmatic imagery. One explanation for Revelation's fantastic imagery could simply be the interpretation of 21st century events by a 1st century mind. How else does John describe attack helicopters other than 'locusts'? That of course is speculation, maybe he saw literal locusts. But sooner or later, despite imagery, the veracity of God's word is always established. Daniel was ordered to seal up the book until the time of the end... when mankind would understand the imagery, perhaps.
Deny the veracity of the creation story if you wish. Deny also, if you wish, the claims that man is decended from a single pair, affectionately known by Christians everywhere, as Adam and Eve. But will you also deny Number 23:19? God says the proof is in the pudding...
"...hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"
What about Titus 1:2 and Hebrews 6:18? God cannot lie; it is impossible for God to lie?
And in light of that, what does an honest read of Ezekiel 38 & 39 tell you? It tells me that once God has brought Israel back to the land from whence he scattered them He will not allow them to be moved again.
Christians should instead seek to convict the non-believer that they might be brought into the family of God. Only then would communion be appropriate.
Adam "hid" from God? God had to ask "where is Adam?" Metaphor, brother.
As for fencing: I just learned that term from Pastor Timothy.
The Bible, and tradition, admonish people not to partake of the Last Supper unworthily. NOTHING in the Communion narrative or tradition says anything about judging others who profess Christ in their relationship with God. Nada.
Since Communion is a Christian rite, nonChristians weren't part of my question. Beyond that, I believe the Communion table should be wide open. I expect those who partake to do so honestly, openly and seriously. On the other hand, I dare not judge their intentions.