Posted on 11/15/2002 12:01:45 PM PST by nickcarraway
Colin Powell, the US secretary of state, condemned America's Christian right yesterday for propagating hatred against Muslims, in what appeared to be a coordinated White House campaign to confront anti-Islamic rhetoric from a constituency that includes some of the Bush administration's staunchest supporters. Days after the televangelist Pat Robertson said on his Christian Broadcasting Network that "what the Muslims want to do to the Jews is worse" than the Holocaust, Mr Powell told a gathering in Washington: "This kind of hatred must be rejected."
The escalation in anti-Muslim comments from conservative Christians includes a recent claim by Jerry Falwell, the country's leading rightwing Baptist, that the prophet Mohammed was "a terrorist".
Veteran evangelist Jimmy Swaggart followed that this week by calling Mohammed a "sex deviant" and a pervert and demanding that Muslim students in the US be expelled. "We ought to tell every other Muslim living in this nation that if you say one word, you're gone," he said.
As the likelihood grows of a war in Iraq there are strategic benefits for the White House in convincing Muslims that it would not be a war against their religion.
The administration's increased willingness to confront the Christian right reflects the Republicans' sweeping victories in last week's mid-term elections, reducing Mr Bush's reliance on the extreme fringes of his supporter base.
The CNN article I referenced does a surprisingly good job of allowing Falwell to clarify his original statement. I agree with his clarifications & his apology.
Yes, I read your full post #174 and quotes from the CNN article.
However I find the "clarification" and "apology" to be contradictory.
The CNN clarification is nothing more than an attempt to justify his comments by claiming those who were offended simply didn't understand what he said. That there was nothing wrong with the original statement.
The AP account on the other hand quotes Falwell as saying flat out that his original statements were wrong and he apologized.
These two statements cannot be reconciled.
The fact is Falwell was just trying to weazel his way out of a bad situation by attempting to fashion his statement in a manner that would please both sides.
I'll believe that when I hear them pray/say "Allah bless America." Hasn't happened yet.
You're right about one thing though, there are "moderate" moslems. It's just that they are the ones who either don't believe or don't know their own scriptures that unequivocably instruct them to kill all non-moslems.
The terrorists are the ones who believe and obey the quoran and the hadiths.
...acting as an agent of the Iraqi Government.
I understand what Powell and Bush are trying to do, but I think it's wrong to call truth "hate speech". This is no time to be going PC about things. Truth should be spoken, in it's proper setting, and in its proper time, and spoken is such a way that it enlightens rather than antagonizes.
Rev. Falwell Apologizes for Remarks
By Kevin Hall
Associated Press Writer
Monday, Sept. 17, 2001; 8:32 p.m. EDT
RICHMOND, Va. –– The Rev. Jerry Falwell apologized Monday for saying God had allowed terrorists to attack America because of the work of civil liberties groups, abortion rights supporters, and feminists.
Falwell said his comments were ill-timed, insensitive, and divisive at a time of national mourning. President Bush had called the minister's statement inappropriate.
"In the midst of the shock and mourning of a dark week for America, I made a statement that I should not have made and which I sincerely regret," Falwell said.
He added: "I want to apologize to every American, including those I named."
In an interview Thursday during religious broadcaster Pat Robertson's TV program "The 700 Club," Falwell blamed the devastation on pagans, abortionists, feminists, homosexuals, the American Civil Liberties Union and the People for the American Way.
"All of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the finger in their face and say, 'You helped this happen,'" he said.
Falwell, a Baptist minister and chancellor of Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., also expressed a belief shared by other evangelicals that divine protection is withdrawn from nations that violate God's will.
However, some Christian thinkers warned there was no way to know which sin led to which punishment. On Monday, Falwell agreed.
"When I talked about God lifting the curtain of protection on our nation, I should have made it very clear that no one on this earth knows whether or not that occurred or did not occur," he said.
He said if the destruction was a judgment from God it was a judgment on all sinners, including himself.
Falwell told The Associated Press that no one from the evangelical community or the White House pressured him to apologize.
However, he said a White House representative called him Friday while he was driving to the National Cathedral memorial service in Washington, and told him the president disapproved.
Falwell said he told the White House that he also felt he had misspoken.
Falwell made his apology minutes after Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network released its own statement calling Falwell's on-air remarks "severe and harsh in tone and, frankly, not fully understood" by Robertson and his two co-hosts.
During World War 2, we had German-Americans, Italian-Americans, and Japanese-Americans volunteering to join the military and fight. Our commander of US forces against Germany (General Eisenhower) was a German-American
When I start seeing stories of Muslim Americans lining up at the Army recruiters offices for a chance to go fight against the Islamofascists, I'll start feeling a little better towards them. Not before
Not mine, Gods.
His is pretty clear, thing is you don't have to listen.
You mean He went around telling folks they were wrong and He was right? That He had the Truth and the only Truth? Sounds like inflammatory and divisive rhetoric. Of course He did not go around inciting one group against another causing violence, but it happened. The Word of God got more than one Christian killed, that does not mean their words were wrong. I can't believe you actually are going to debate that.
Jesus spoke out mostly against the established Jewish religious leaders..the Pharisees...He said very little about pagan religions and never even mentioned homosexuality directly anywhere in the Bible.
ROTFLMAO! You must be reading that PC version Bible. The one where they take out all the inflammatory and divisive rhetoric!
Jesus not only spoke to the sin of paganism and homosexuality (a fairly new word btw, look for the words they used like effeminate), He also affirmed that he came to to change the law but to fulfill it. The law did not change, just the enforcement and redemption from it. Only baby Christians and seculars trying to find fault in Christians fall for that worn out reasoning and misrepresentation of the Bible.
Jesus not only spoke to the sin of paganism and homosexuality (a fairly new word btw, look for the words they used like effeminate), He also affirmed that he came to to change the law but to fulfill it.
Show me one quote from Jesus where He mentions homosexuality in the Bible.
You can't because He doesn't even address the topic.
Not that homosexuality isn't clearly defined as sin by the Bible. It is.
But you claimed "Jesus spoke out against Pagans, Homosexuals and the establishment religions" when the truth is there isn't a single quote from Jesus in the Bible on the topic of homosexuality.
Futhermore, I never said anything about taking inflammatory or divisive rhetotic and a single word out of the Bible.
But I did say that the issues/people Falwell and Robertson, and you seem to think Jesus was most critical of, were either not mentioned by Him at all or were barely mentioned.
As I said before, Jesus saved His most scathing criticisms for the self-righteous religeous leaders who thought they were so much better than everybody else. The Pharisees. And the rhetoric of Falwell and Robertson following 9-11, pointing their fingers at others resembled just these people.
I can't believe you actually thought I was going to debate that. You obviously missed my point.
Jesus clearly made known His views concerning homosexuality in direct affirmation of Gods Laws and affirmation of heterosexuality and in Gods statements on the matter (as Jesus is God, I guess Jesus did say something directly to the matter) and though His Apostles.
You must go against the foundational principle of God in three persons to avoid the law of God spoken by God, which would include Jesus. Only God can change the law or the punishment of sin and Jesus did not remove homosexuality from the sin column, He changed the punishment time table and allowed for a pardon upon repentance and acceptance of His Godhood and sacrifice. These are very basic principles and I am not sure why so many Christians never learn them.
To remove Jesus from the Transcendent Godhood or to rationalize what is sin and what is not sin based on the lack of direct statement from one personhood of God is neo-paganism. It also violates the very words of Jesus as He did not nor could He contradict God (or Himself as it is).
Lastly, Jesus was most critical of sin, all sin being sin.
Which 2 statements exactly?
The statements where he apologizes for what he said and claimed it was wrong for him to say it, and the statements you provided in which he defends and attempts to justify the exact same statements he apologized for.
Jorge;"The fact is Falwell was just trying to weazel his way out of a bad situation by attempting to fashion his statement in a manner that would please both sides."
Taking Falwell's apologies in both articles at face value, I see him as sincerely apologizing, not "weaseling."
In my opinion if he had presented his explanations for what he said in a manner that didn't sound like he was trying to justify them...then I could reconcile them with his apology.
He could have pointed out the truth of what the Bible says, and then gone on to say he misapplied it in this situation and then his apology would have sounded more sincere to me.
Huh? Who said that?
I said;
"Not that homosexuality isn't clearly defined as sin by the Bible. It is."
It helps to actually read a post before you respond to it. Ok? Just a suggestion.
Because Jesus does not say the word "rape" or address it directly is rape okay?
Of course not. Jesus didn't address incest or bestiality either and nobody in their right mind would believe this means He thinks these things are OK.
But again, you miss my point.
Firstly I was responding to your claim that Jesus "spoke out" against homosexuals.
The fact is Jesus never actually spoke out against homosexuals. Your statement was factually wrong.
Secondly, the fact that Jesus might have been against many things He never directly addressed does nothing to support your attempt to use Jesus to defend Jerry Falwell pointing at "homosexuals, pagans and feminists" as bringing God's judgement upon America on 9-11.
By your reasoning we could also say that since lying, adultery, lust, greed, gossip and self righteousness are sins that Jesus was against, therefore 9-11 was a judgement against those things.
The fact is Jerry Falwell picked out those sins which he personally finds most offensive and blamed them for 9-11.
When the fact is He doesn't have a clue.
With all due respect this is totally amusing.
First you claimed that Jesus "spoke out" against homosexuality.
When I challanged you to show me any actual statements in the Bible by Jesus against homosexuality, you couldn't do it.
(probably because there aren't any)
So you then attempted to modify it with "look for the words they used like effeminate".
( who are "they"?)
Well guess what. There are no verses in the Bible where Jesus even uses words like "effeminate" to "speak out" against homosexuality either.
Once again you were wrong.
Now your denial has morphed into yet another shape.....the "God in three persons" argument.
You actually accuse me of going against the "the foundational principle of God in three persons to avoid the law of God spoken by God" (even though I did no such thing) to avoid having to admit you were wrong when you claimed Jesus personally "spoke out" against homosexuality.
What a convoluted argument. Give me a break.
His is pretty clear, thing is you don't have to listen.
God doesn't have "pet-peeves'. People do.
God calls all sins...sin. Homosexuality, adultery, stealing, lying, gossip, greed, self-righteousness etc. etc..
Like I said. Jerry Falwell and the rest of those fat-fingered Pharisees picked out ONLY those sins which they harbor as their personal pet-peeves and decided 9-11 was God avenging them.
That is disgusting.
I "won't accept His deity"????
How can you claim to be speaking for the the Word of God and yet repeatedly post such dishonest accusations against me?
Would you like me to list all the false and unfounded accusations you have made against me in your attempt to avoid admitting you were wrong about what Jesus said in the Bible?
Accusing me of wanting to "remove Christ from the Bible",of going "against the foundational principle of God in three persons" of wanting "to believe that it [homosexuality] is permissive for a Christian or that it is not a sin".
Not only are these statements the opposite of my beliefs but there is nothing in any of my posts that justify your making such wild and reckless accusations.
You need to apologize.
You know that I am right, you just don't like the fact that I made an end run around your argument.
I like to let guys like you go on and on about your opinion and dig your holes. Bottom line is Jesus is God and God has "spoke out" concerning homosexuality.
I said Jesus spoke out about homosexuality and Jesus has. The only way to ignore this is to say Jesus is NOT God.
You said Jesus did not say anything about homosexuality so I assume you don't believe in Jesus as the deity. A safe assumption bearing in mind your statements about what Jesus said and did not say, knowing full well that God did say.
You must separate Jesus from God to say Jesus did not speak to homosexuality.
So, you sir, must accept that Jesus has made His statement on the matter or come out and say you do not believe in the Trinity.
As you say, sin is sin. So what is wrong with dealing with one particular sin? You seem angry that Falwell mentioned homosexuality and not blasphemy.
I would be very careful about calling any Christian a Pharisee, you will be judged by your own judgments.
I suggest you deal with your anger towards certain brothers and recognize Jesus in them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.