Nuking Japan: Bloody Evil

The last issue of The Taney County Times ran a jingoistic piece justifying the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I was provoked to send a response (the TCT printed it on 11-23-11).

Mr. Groman’s defense of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki expressed the politically correct version of history so replete in textbooks and so confidently asserted by both Conservatives and Liberals.

The dilemma of whether to end the war by nuking Japan, or permit many more people to die by continuing the war was resolved in favor of the former option, thereby saving many lives. This narrative provides true comfort in the face of our having caused hundreds of thousands of children, women, and old men to die horrific deaths by fire.

Correction: This narrative provides FALSE comfort in the face of our having caused hundreds of thousands of children, women, and old men to die horrific deaths by fire. False, because there was a third option besides, 1.) nuking Japan, and 2.) continuing the war.

Option three was as follows: Instead of holding to our demand for Japan’s unconditional surrender Truman could’ve offered peace feelers granting one concession - that being an assurance that Emperor Hirohito would be allowed to remain enthroned. This likely would’ve resulted in Japan’s earlier surrender, particularly in the aftermath of the massive conventional firebombing of Tokyo by B-29s.

Of course, allowing the Japanese to keep their Emperor would arguably have been too much to concede.

Except for one fact. That’s what we ended up doing, anyway. Emperor Hirohito remained Japan’s figurehead ruler until his death in 1989.


(see quotes from American leaders who disagreed with the decision to use atomic bombs on Japan here:)

http://www.doug-long.com/quotes.htm

Nobel Peace Prizee Obama orders hit on American citizen

The issue isn't whether Al-Awlaki was evil. He was.

The issue is the President ordering the killing of an American citizen without due process.

Ditto with the government killings of the Weavers and the Branch Davidians.

The Weavers celebrated Hitler's birthday. Creepy!

Trust me - my kids wouldn't be playing at their house. But that doesn't justify federal sniper Lon Horiuchi shooting Mrs. Weaver's face off as she held her child in the doorway of their home.

Probably even Hamilton would be against this; certainly Jefferson would be.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/95959.html

Community Chapel: Was it a Cult?

Was Community Chapel...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Chapel_and_Bible_Training_Center

(Discussion over the content of this wiki page is here ["onesimuss" is me] ):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Chapel_and_Bible_Training_Center

...a cult?

Depends on how one defines “cult.”

Here are some possible responses to the question when considering seven different definitions:

AMERICAN HERITAGE DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS (incomplete list);

1. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.

Well, we had the authoritarian leader and were generally considered a cult by most.

So any group with pyramid government that does poorly in the polls, so to speak, is a cult.

Ergo, the Catholic church is not a cult (scandals over homosexual and pedophile priests notwithstanding) - but the Fundamentalists are a cabal with potential to turn America into an oppressive theocracy.

2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.

Liturgical churches are cults, too.


RELIGIOUS DEFINITIONS GLEANED FROM COMMON PARLANCE

3. A group claiming to be Christian which denies the doctrine of the Trinity.

That's enough for the Bible Answer Man. Of course Community Chapel was a cult; what further need have we of proof?

4. A group which claims to have revelation from God apart from the Bible.

All non-cessationist (in regards to utterance gifts of 1 Corinthians 14) churches are cults.

5. A group whose members become separate from their families.

Remember the cult leader who came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law?

Excluding those who deserted spouses for "connections," (I knew dozens who did that) Community Chapel members were much more often ostracized by their families than the reverse.

Some relatives not only regard former members as second class citizens, but - as I know from experience - feel complete liberty to interfere in their personal lives. My meddling kinsman (“meddling” - meaning he undermined my efforts to place my wayward son in a Christian program for troubled boys) formed his own sect that, relative to number of members, was more extreme than Community Chapel (more elitist, more sensationalist eschatology – obsessed with proving that Arnold Shorts-n-sneakers {sp?} is the Anti-Christ, and my kinsman even had a “spiritual” relationship with a woman not his wife – over which he mistakenly sought counsel/ support from former Community Chapel members who never endorsed such liaisons.)

My testimony is that cultic behavior towards family members was evinced by a family member towards me, but not vice-versa.

6. A group which falls into sin and deception.

Did you hear about the church which acquired a bunch of gold and followed their leader into the wilderness? Then when the leader mysteriously disappeared, his brother made a golden calf and led the people into an orgy - a cult for sure. Eve was beguiled by the serpent. When our brothers and sisters are beguiled, they don't get set free by being labeled a cult!


DEFINITION (falsely) ATTRIBUTED TO ATTORNEY GENERAL JANET RENO, but which likely describes the beliefs of many statists:

7. “A cultist is one who has a strong belief in the Bible and the second coming of Christ; who frequently attends Bible studies; who has a high level of financial giving to Christian causes; who home schools his children; who has accumulated survival foods and has a strong belief in the 2nd Amendment; and who distrusts big government.”

The term “Christian;” was originally a pejorative term applied to followers of Christ. Could post-Christian America become a place where Christianity is considered a cult?

COMMENTS

In modern vernacular “cult” is a highly charged term with broad implications. I submit that casual use of the term can only hinder effective communication because of the wide variety of connotations. Motives of those eager to label others as a cult are suspect.

The tabloid television show West 57th Street featured former members of Community Chapel in an episode, c. 1989. One of our former elders was filmed as a regular family man, playing ball with his kids and then decrying the cult that he had left. No mention was made that those weren't his kids with whom he was tossing the ball - he had left his own wife and daughter to marry their mother. But who cares about the truth when there's a cult to expose? A member of my brother's cult, who never attended the Chapel, publicly described Community Chapel as JUST [about]wife swapping. Ask Constance Cumby about the Chapel, and I bet you'll learn it was JUST “new age.” Can't other Christians be regarded as “deceived,” or “prideful,” or just “wrong.” Must they be pigeonholed - JUST “wife swappers,” JUST “new age,” etc. God called people there at the same time He led others away..even after connections started. Note - this is important - the level of involvement of individuals ran the gamut - from those who consciously practiced witchcraft, to those involved in “mega connections” to lesser “connections” to those who didn't “connect” at all.

For what its worth, my own definition, subject to change - of “cult” would include some elements of most of the above (not #7) with the qualification that for a group to be considered a “cult” there must be a prolonged and determined refusal to receive clear corrections, warnings, and/or instructions, and an explicitly stated belief that the group alone is chosen by God above all others.

My testimony

I loved Jesus Christ before, during, and after my involvement with Community Chapel.

My heart was right before God before, during, and after my involvement with this church - even when I was in deception.

Spiritual growth continued in my life before, during, and after my time there.

Community Chapel was a great experience that I would not recommend to anyone!

Doctrine: Christology - What I Believe about Jesus

There is but one God, the Father.

God, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son.

The words that Jesus says to you He does not speak of his own initiative, but the Father abiding in Him does His works.

He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father.

In Jesus all the fulness of Deity dwells in bodily form.

All authority has been given to Jesus in heaven and on earth.

God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ.

God highly exalted Jesus, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name.

Every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

"And this is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent."

cp. 1 Cor 8:6; Heb 1:1,2; Jn 14:10; Jn 14:9; Col 2:9; Mt 28:18; Acts 2:36; Php 2:9,11; Jn 17:3

Being a Friend of Israel

During my twenty years as a Fundamentalist, I often heard it asserted that Christians, and the United States, have a mandate from God to support Israel.

Eschatology, you know.

But most information about Israel and the Middle East is very one sided, eschatology notwithstanding.

For my part, the PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah, et al are evil terrorists.

A caveat, however: so are Mossad, and much of the Israeli high command.

Denouncing the terrorist acts of one side, while giving a pass to the other side...

...is no way to appraise facts.

When Menachim (Nobel Peace Prize winner) Begin's Irgun set off expolosives in the King David Hotel in 1946, it was the largest terrorist bombing in history up to that time.

Then there was the massacre of men, women, and children at Deir Yassin, also carried out by Irgun:

http://www.deiryassin.org/

The attack on the USS Liberty, during the Six Day War in 1967
http://www.gtr5.com/ was not the action of a friend.

Former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky wrote a book http//www.amazon.com/Way-Deception-Making-Mossad-officer/dp/0971759502 exposing the perfidy of Mossad. The Israeli government tried to block publication in the USA. The late Joe Sobran recounted Ostrovsky's story of Israeli complicity in the attack by Arab terrorists on the US Marines' barracks in Beirut:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/beirut.html

Time for Christians to be consistent in their denunciations of terrorists. Israel wasn't given a pass when they engaged in treacherous behaviour in the Old Testament, and God hasn't changed.

No scripture proscribes honest criticism of the nation of Israel.

Shalom

Defending myself against libelous statements

For some six years now, there's been a serious accusation against me afloat in cyberspace. It's on a now deactivated forum known as "The Simple Truth Discussion Center," in the section called "The Haven." The accusation is leveled by my brother Phil, from whom I've been estranged for over 15 years, and supported by his family members, who are also his employees.

The accusation is that I publicly exposed a rape victim, through a since deleted post on the Factnet discussion board.

Most who know both my brother and me don't believe the accusation. Indeed, more people have commiserated with me over it than have believed it. Also, the lame threats that accompany the accusation (of legal action against me, and of beating me with a baseball bat) caused many to doubt the character of my brother and his family.

Therefore, while I don't enjoy having such evil ascribed to me in cyberspace, until now I've been silent about it. Would that this was out of some sublime spiritual strength of mine, but the truth is it's been a simple matter of pragmatism.

But now, I've changed my mind about being silent, for these reasons:

1. It has come to my attention that two or more people have construed my silence as an admission of guilt.
2. Others who hear of the accusation might like to hear me deny it.

Ergo, I hereby unequivocally deny that I exposed a rape victim on an internet forum. Phil doubtless has the post in question in his archives - it is noteworthy that nowhere in the thousands of libelous words on the matter did he bother to quote even one (1) word from it.

Please contact me privately if you have questions.

Thank you,

Steve

The Apostle - great movie

If you have any interest in Fundamentalism, and more particularly Pentecostalism, Robert Duvall's The Apostle http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi1183383833/ is a film worth seeing. Duvall wrote the script, produced, directed, and played the lead role of Eulis “Sonny” Dewey. Such was his passion for this project that he used his own money to finance it when he found no takers in Hollywood. http://www.unomaha.edu/~jrf/apostle.INTERVIEW.htm

The Apostle Sonny embodies the dilemma face by the Apostle Paul: “For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do” (Romans 7:19).

This film is a work of art, a nuanced picture of part of our cultural landscape. It conveys affection for Pentecostals - yet the characters have unflattering quirks. Its portrayal of zealous faith strikes a middle ground between the gaudiness of a televangelist's program and the hatefulness of Bill Maher's movie, Religulous. It's not a hit-piece or a puff-piece. Pentecostal power wins the heart of a hardcore racist redneck. Pentecostal petulance has grown women quarreling childishly on the church bus.

In the flesh, the Pentecostal preacher clubs his wife's lover with a baseball bat. In the spirit, he shows poor folks on the wrong side of the tracks how to work together and love each other.

Pentecostals are worthy of respect as part of America. You don't have to choose between adoring them and loathing them.

Some personal background information about myself might explain why I so appreciate this movie.

After my conversion to Christianity in 1976, I spent twenty years in Fundamentalist, Pentecostal, and Holiness churches, including over ten in the notorious Community Chapel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Chapel_and_Bible_Training_Center

Those two decades were the best and worst years of my life. During them, I saw and experienced extremes of both: joy and despair; friendship and betrayal; affirmation and abuse; enlightenment and deception; revelation and confusion. I met the love of my life, my wife, and came to know God as my very best friend.

Fundamentalists and Pentecostals were there with encouragement and friendship for me at several key times in my life. They taught me many good things that will always be part of my foundation.

During those years, I also met tremendously gifted people who committed suicide, and others who did unspeakable things.

I wouldn't trade those experiences for anything. Nor would I want to go through them again.

Today, I'm just a Christian, not a Fundamentalist or a Pentecostal. I find their views of the Bible and Christian faith to be truncated. Nevertheless, I'll defend these good people against scurrilous attacks, and denounce the bigotry so often directed at them from those who claim to stand for tolerance and diversity.

And recommend The Apostle as a worthy approach to the subject.