God Is Back

WSJ Opinion Journal ^ | 28 September 2001 | Peggy Noonan

[Darlin']

In the wake of an atrocity, he shows he hasn't forsaken New York.

God is back. He's bursting out all over. It's a beautiful thing to see.

In the past 17 days, since the big terrible thing, our country has, unconsciously but quite clearly, chosen a new national anthem. It is "God Bless America," the song everyone sang in the days after the blasts to show they loved their country. It's what they sang on television, it's what kids sang in school, it's what families sang in New York at 7 p.m. the Friday after the atrocity when we all went outside with our candles and stood together in little groups in front of big apartment buildings. A friend of mine told me you could hear it on Park Avenue from uptown to downtown, the soft choruses wafting from block to block.

[Matchett-PI]

#77: "God-given rights is correct, ... No mention of my religion being better than yours, or which is right."

You didn't answer my question. Did you miss it?

From where did America's Framers get those "self-evident (ABSOLUTE) truths"????

[Jefferson Adams]

Having "God" upon our lips is nothing unusual in America. America has always "believed" in "God." Check the polls over the years. However, when you introduce Jesus Christ into the equation things change real fast.

Very true.

And as a friend of mine said the other day, "God will bless America when America blesses God."

[stuartcr]

Thanks, but I have to say I don't believe our conscience came from Adam. I also don't believe that moral laws were given to us per se. I believe that morality is one of those inherently human things. I don't believe in the concept of salvation, because I don't believe in hell/eternal damnation or similar concepts.

[independentmind]

I'm more interested in their behavior than in their beliefs. I do, however, prefer that Christians understand that their conception of God is neither proven nor universally accepted.

I don't think that many Christians would say that their faith is proven. What they believe is that it is TRUE. Something doesn't have to be proven to be true. Reason alone is inadequate to find TRUTH, thus the need for FAITH.

Whoever said that Christians believe their faith is universally accepted? Again, however, acceptance has nothing to do with TRUTH.

[stuartcr]

How would I know? If they are self-evident, then I guess they just knew them to be truths. It's probably part of being a human being. Can't see where someone would need an organized religion to figure something out that's self-evident.

[A. Pole]

I have no objective.

I am sorry to read it. "Life is absurd and you are convicted to freedom to make purposeless arbitrary choices"

[stuartcr]

Sorry, I thought you knew that my saying I have no objective, was in response to your #27.

[RichInOC]

Darlin', I always like Peggy Noonan's work, but you're right, this one's particularly nice. Thanks.

[A. Pole]

God-given rights is correct

Says who? I would rather think that God being the authocratic monarch does not grant rights but only privileges. He can give them or take away (like talents from the parable) at His leisure.

[stuartcr]

Once again, I apologize for not making myself more clear. My saying God-given rights was in response to #74.

[Matchett-PI]

#85: "How would I know?"

Of course that answers it, doesn't it. If you don't know, then you should realize that your opinion will carry little weight with those who "do know" from where the Framers got their "ABSOLUTE TRUTH".

[stuartcr]

Did you read the rest of my reply?

[stuartcr]

I will repeat my response, to your #81, which you apparently didn't read in full, leaving out the 'How would I know?'. I didn't realize my poor attempt at humor would so completely confuse you, I apologize......'If they are self-evident, then I guess they just knew them to be truths. It's probably part of being a human being. Can't see where someone would need an organized religion to figure something out that's self-evident.'

[Matchett-PI]

#92: "Did you read the rest of my reply?"

Yes I did. You said: "IF" ......", "then I guess"..." . "It's probably" ....".

Those comments expose *uncertainty* and merely back up your "how would I know?" comment.

You also wrote: "Can't see where someone would need an organized religion to figure something out that's self-evident."

Your "Can't see" comment further exposes uncertainty.

You used the word, "need", but what does "need" have to do with it??

Here are the FACTS: America's Framers recognized the self-evident truths taught in The Holy (God-breathed) Scriptures. (They didn't "need to figure them out from organized religion", as you put it.)

[stuartcr]

This is ridiculou, you obviously don't want to discuss anything, you seem bent on picking apart my wordage. Goodbye.

[okimhere]

Thanks, Darlin'. I truly enjoy Peggy Noonan's work. I have a traveling office service, going to people's homes and offices. Shortly after the tragedy, people began hugging me as I left. Not an 'air hug' but a strong, heartfelt hug. And almost without exception, said a warm "God bless you" - and we were strangers to each other, for the most part. I know they were believers before the Event but quietly and in the privacy of their hearts and homes. Then it just welled up and came pouring out, creating lasting bonds. Peggy's article reminded me of this.

[Egg]

This is ridiculou, you obviously don't want to discuss anything, you seem bent on picking apart my wordage. Goodbye.
--stuartcr

Where have I heard the expression "words mean things" before? What the heck is left to discuss if not ideas!? If we aren't free to test the logic of other people's beliefs and vice-versa, if we aren't free to reference the historical outcomes of espousing certain worldviews, then we are simply ignoring the inevitable while closing our minds to reality. Yet reality will eventually put our beliefs to a relentless test whether we are ready or not.

Bravo for those who aren't afraid to have their views challenged.

Help! We're surrounded by intellectual pansies!!!

[calebcar]

A special thanks for bringing God back into public life must go to W. He seized the moment. The moment was created by the outpouring of love and prayer through the land. W seized it at the Cathedral. He brought all three branches of Government together for the service. The service was ecumenical, with leaders of all faiths participating. It was bipartisan. W went to the effort of flying the Clintons in from distant continents and stomached seating them next to his mother on behalf of a greater cause. W's talk was the perfect melding of the sacred and the secular. After he talked it was impossible to imagine it could be otherwise and has been otherwise for forty years.

Whatever fancy phrases are made in court to keep prayer out of public life will seem silly to people who remember that service. When my child's public school handbook came to my house in August I winced when the phrase " It takes a village to raise a child" was printed on the front cover. I attended back to school night 4 days after the bombing. We participated in the National Anthem, had a moment of prayer, and sang God Bless America. I don't know if the Principal had planned to do so before the bombing, but she introduced all the staff, including janitors, secretaries and food workers. All were applauded enthusiastically.

God is back in public life, not because of religious quarrels (like the one's in this thread), partly because of political activism, but mostly because of acts of courage, sacrifice and caring by millions, and exemplified by our Commander in Chief.

[Matchett-PI]

#97: "Help! We're surrounded by intellectual pansies!!!"

Emotionally immature relativists believe things because they want to, not because they've arrived at their conclusions after critical examination of the facts.

When challenged to defend their beliefs, they can't. Most either change the subject by setting up straw man, making personal attacks, etc, etc. Others run.

[GWfan]

God is always with those who genuinely seek Him. He promises to never, ever fail or forsake us. It is we who forsake Him regularly. It is our very nature, our sinful nature. The Old Testament is an account, not of a war god, but of a patient, forgiving God who demands perfection. His very nature cannot tolerate unholiness. Yet, He can forgive us because the debt was paid by His Son. I know He is for us, and if He is for us, who can be against us?