A gunman who was an army officer and a medical doctor opened fire at Ft. Hood in Texas, killing 12 and wounding 30, by last count. The killer was eventually shot to death.
NBC News’ Pete Williams reported that U.S. officials identified the gunman as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist who had been promoted to major in May. A defense official told NBC News that Hasan arrived at Fort Hood in July for his first assignment after completing his psychiatry residency at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, followed by a fellowship in disaster and preventive psychiatry.
Hasan, who was 39 or 40, was scheduled to be deployed to Iraq on Nov. 28, officials said. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, said military officials had told her that Hasan was “pretty upset” about his deployment orders.
First reports were that he had accomplices. Major Hasan’s Arabic name makes one think immediately of Islamic terrorism, though right now (Thursday night) there is no evidence to that effect. Still, army bases had been mentioned as possible targets by the jihadists. All of this is to say that America may have been attacked by terrorists.
UPDATE: The shooter is alive, but in a coma. Meanwhile another of his victims died, bringing the death toll to 13.
UPDATE: It turns out, as some of you have noted, that Major Dr. Hasan is a Muslim, a radical, and an apologist for suicide bombings. See this. So I think we can reasonably term this as an act of terrorism. As DonS says, the only question is whether it is an individual act of terrorism or if it was planned with a larger group.
{ 60 comments… read them below or add one }
Thoughts and prays are with the families of the victims. The family of the gunman according to news reports here seemed to be mystified.
We avoided a similar incident when australian Federal police arrested 5 men mainly from Somalia-who were planning to attack our 2nd Commando regiment at their base.
God Bless America at this time
Evil is not “us versus the bad guys” as Bush often phrased it.
The line between good and evil passes right down the middle of each and every one of us.
Only dying with Christ and rising again with him can resolve this condition. Sweetly. By Grace alone.
I too pray for the families of all involved and the perpetrator as well, whom they say is still alive. He must be a tortured individual to have done such a thing. I sure hope there were no accomplises and that this was not a terrorist attack.
Correction (from later last night): the gunman was NOT killed; he was shot, but is alive and in the hospital.
fws said:
Evil is not “us versus the bad guys” as Bush often phrased it.
True, Frank, it is never “innocent vs. sinners” as though all policemen were without sin, while all criminals are sinful. But that is irrelevant to the fact that a country has enemies and that police arrest criminals. Romans 13 clearly sets even pagan governments against “evildoers.”
With delays in releasing the news that the gunman was actually still alive, there is also now an AP report that soldiers who witnessed the mass murder at Ft. Hood, said Nidal Malik Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar!” before opening fire on his fellow soldiers.
I guess we can eliminate “Amish” as Hasan’s religion.
And I would hope that before any official announcement of “no terrorist plot; nothing to see; just move along,” investigators look for something more than flashing neon lights pointing to a pile of terrorist planning documents and 8×10 glossies of the group’s leadership.
This fellow is not only tortured but involved in a terribly evil act. If deliberately Killing thirteen people and wounding many others isn’t evil, then what it is. Doing this in the name of his God makes it even a worse evil.
Saying that the line between good and evil passes through all is a blinding statement of the obvious that doesn’t in the least excuse this evil act.
We all recognize evil in the world; we all are aware of the terrorists and others who hate our country who wish to attack and kill us.
The sadness of this story lies in that those who have offered to protect us expect to come under fire when they are deployed in enemy territory, not when they are on base, where they are learning the necessary skills and defending their own country.
In her web page, “The massacre at Fort Hood and Muslim soldiers with attitude” Michelle Malkin has a lot of information and links to even more information, including a long continuing record of news updates and their changing nature compiled by Allahpundit at the Hot Air website, and a link to the video showing 0bama’s weird behavior in addressing the Fort Hood shootings.
#4 elb
“True, Frank, it is never “innocent vs. sinners” as though all policemen were without sin, while all criminals are sinful. But that is irrelevant to the fact that a country has enemies and that police arrest criminals. ”
No. It is not “irrelevant” to these facts. The exact same lawlessness that we observe in “evildoers ” exists, really and truly, in each of us.
Just how do you feel that this fact is an irrelevant one in your context?
#6 peter levitt
“Saying that the line between good and evil passes through all is a blinding statement of the obvious that doesn’t in the least excuse this evil act.”
How does my saying that you and I have the same evil as this man has within us excuse in ANY way you or me OR him?
How exactly do you feel that this statement is “blinding”?
Lord have mercy!
It would seem, indeed, that this was an act of terrorism, based upon the information we have at present. Eyewitness accounts indicating that he was distributing copies of the Koran and shouted “Allahu Akbar!” before beginning his murderous rampage, prior blog entries indicating his sympathies with Middle Eastern terrorism and its goals, and his self-identification in recent documents as being “Palestinian”, even though he was born on U.S. soil, all point in that direction. It was entirely irresponsible of the FBI to immediately declare that this was not a terrorist act. A question still to be answered is whether this was an act of individual terrorism or whether it was an organized effort.
My prayers are with our brave men and women in uniform around the world, who put themselves in harm’s way for our protection, and now must deal with the added fear of traitorous evil within their own ranks. Worse yet, this man was an officer! I am also praying for those directly affected by this event, including those who were injured, and those families who suffered the loss of their loved ones. God bless our troops in extra measure in these dark days.
Frank, it is irrelevent in this way. The sinfulness of the policeman is irrelevant to who goes to jail. While all are sinners the overt act of murder brings down the power of the sword upon the perpetrator.
Put another way, the sinfulness of all men is irrelevant to the fact that some people engage in such overt evil that the power of the state will take their life. My sinfulness doesn’t keep me from calling a murderer evil and, by the power of the state, requiring his life of him.
Frank, ELB says it well. The fact that all of us are capable of evil is obvious. This fellow was involved in a dastardly act of evil, compounded by prefacing it in the name of his God.
Let us not kid ourselves. The Koran provides ample sources for the slaughter of Infidels. While undoubtedly, many Muslims are decent people, their religion is basically corrosive in its attitude toward the Christian religion. There is not a word in the New Testament that condones the slaughter of anyone.
Well, it’s true we’re all evil sinners in the eyes of God. However, we stand aghast at the fact that this man, in the name of his “god”, killed thirteen individuals and wounded dozens more. How does simply saying, “Well, we’re all sinners” address this fact? Under civil law (man’s eyes), I would guess we are all much better than this murderer. Should a judge just say, “Well, we’re all sinners” and let this murderer go free? You can’t run a legal system by the Gospel. It has to be all Law. The Gospel is for our souls…the Law is for our temporal lives here on earth to maintain order. Don’t confuse them. I’m thinking the first use of the Law, in this case.
E-Raj:
My point really is this:
We christians are visibly and tangibly NO different than the most pagan of pagans.
We are all sinners, all capable of doing the most heinous of things we read about depending on the circumstances that befall us.
I am failing to see how anything I wrote must be, in any way set in opposition to anything you or peter or the rest have written. Peter called my comment “blinding”. It seems scriptural to me. Read Romans Chapter 1, and in that context romans 2:1.
Feel free to enlighten me.
One of the questions discussed on a number of web sites is whether Hasan, if he is found guilty by a military court, will receive a life sentence or the death penalty (presuming he does not receive a presidential pardon). During 20th century, U.S. soldiers convicted of capital crimes and receiving the death penalty were either hanged or shot, the last one (a hanging) being in 1961. Later the electric chair was added to the approved methods but never used.
In 2006, the “Army Regulation 190-55: U. S. Army Correctional System: Procedures For Military Executions” changed the method of execution to lethal injection which was to be carried out while the Joint Chiefs of Staff sang a lullaby in three-part harmony.
Given Hasan’s degrees, I suppose we can rule out the usual ‘insanity’ defense.
“Evil is not ‘us vs. the bad guys,’ as Bush often phrased it.
The short answer, in this case, is:
It’ll do.
El-Raj nails it; it’s all about the first use of the Law.
And while people dither about, wringing their hands regarding the socio-anthropological impact, thirteen people are still dead, dozens wounded, and the ‘religion of peace’ spin-machine threatens to explode from working so hard to convince non-thinkers around the globe.
Calling Christians to recollect that we’re all sinners is akin to reminding everyone that peanut butter is, in fact, made from peanuts.
Care to enlighten the nuances between ‘capable’ and ‘actual?’
#18 wyldeirishman:
Interesting. Nothing in my post denies the force of Law, first, second, third or 4th use. To the contrary.
Yet the responses assume otherwise.
I am curious why that is. I am missing the contrary point and why it needs to be asserted, against, what the Bible says about sin. Actual and capable.
Ok, fine fws: all human beings are sinful and capable of terrific acts of evil. This fact is, however, utterly irrelevant as to whether Dr. Hasan is guilty of murder and whether he should be punished. Indeed, why has this argument even arisen? Everyone may be a sinner, but not everyone deserves to go to jail according the the laws of the land; in this case, I haven’t murdered thirteen people, so, no, the question of my own sinfulness has nothing whatsoever to do with this.
And, as others have pointed out, the quest for civic law and, in fact, international relations will always, always be about “us vs. them.” It has not, cannot, and will not be otherwise. I hesitate to say that this is proper, but it is inevitable, regardless of whether a Bush or an Obama occupies the White House.
To utilize a fictional example, then:
I certainly don’t recall feeling an overwhelming sense of pity when Orthanc and Barad-Dur collapsed.
The contrary point that you are asserting is no contrary point at all.
This is displayed nowhere more clearly than in our President’s insistence upon ‘negotiation’ as policy instead of a means to an end, as far as international relations are concerned.
What’ll it take?
A nuke?
Your continued insistence that I acknowledge the same streak of sin within all of humanity is obviously aiming at a bullseye that I cannot clearly identify. Since when did society punish ‘capable’ and neglect ‘actual?’
The onus is upon you to more clearly articulate exactly what it is that you are wishing us to understand. There is not a single soul here that disagrees with your basic premise, but I fear that your repeated insistences assume a lack of pity upon our part(s).
On the one hand, you would be in error, for Scripture is clear that we are, in fact, to pray for our enemies.
Nowehere does it suggest that we ought to do this instead of laying down our arms in defense of the country, both here an dabroad.
Defending civilization at large would also seem to minimize the amount of active time spent on one’s knees, unless one is exceptionally gifted at picking off targets while simultaneously remaining in a state of reverent and contemplative prayer.
What IS you point?
I don’t think he has one that is entirely useful here.
#20 Cincinatus:
“Indeed, why has this argument even arisen? Everyone may be a sinner, but not everyone deserves to go to jail according the the laws of the land”
You might not be Lutheran. Lutherans confess publicly every sunday to the whole world that they are “unclean” and that they deserve for what they do and omit to do the following: “temporal and eternal punishment”. ie we confess that we DESERVE to go straight to hell for all we have done in the previous week.
I am at a loss to see how the reaction to this FACT about you from the Word of God needs to be:
” in this case, I haven’t murdered thirteen people, so, no, the question of my own sinfulness has nothing whatsoever to do with this.”
response: “thou shalt not kill” Yes you certainly have broken this commandment again and again and again and again. You have harbored hatred and illwill towards others in your heart, and you have also failed to adequately deal with the claim the poor and needy have upon you. How do I know this about you? God´s Word tells me this about you. and by the way, me too.
So dear christian brothers , Cincinatus and Wyldeirishman: ok . I agree, maybe you should not be prosecuted and placed in jail under civil law. I assume as much at least. I do know with certainty though, that you SHOULD by all right of the Law and just Will of God, be sent to hell and suffer severe punishment here on earth before you get sent to hell for your misdeeds.
So I guess I am still missing where you see any point of contention, especially since you make a point that you disagree with nothing I am presenting from plain scripture.
#23 cincinatus
What is the point of prosecuting someone when we must confess, from God´s plain word, that we are equally and sickeningly as evil and bad and putrid as a serial rapist/murderer, a child molester, a homosexual, a fill-in-the-blank-with-the-people-whose-sins-repulse-you-the-most?
we are not talking here about “potentially” as bad. God´s Word does not present that option unfortunately.
God requires you to confess that you are EQUALLY in fact and reality in your own thoughts, words and deeds ACTUALLY as unclean.
Thus far, I have stated simple facts from God´s Word that are all true personally about you, have I not?
And yes, the government has a duty to stop people from continuing to harm their neighbors. There should probably be more laws here in fact. Prosecution of and jail time for adultery would be a great start wouldn´t it? I am sure you can think of more….
Your point here again is?
#22 WyldeIrishman
are you suggesting that I am weak on the law or some sort of “bleeding heart” scurd to punish sin because I too am a sinner who is just as bad?
you take issue with me on what point?
Quote back to me exactly the words I have typed that you find not to be exactly true.
#22 wyldirishman
“On the one hand, you would be in error, for Scripture is clear that we are, in fact, to pray for our enemies.”
naw, the bible is harder on you and me than that: It requires that you LOVE your enemies and those who hate you.
I think there is a point here maybe?
What would that look like here in the form of what you type here dear , and I assume christian, brother?
The point, fws, is that we’re here lamenting that a criminal has massacred thirteen soldiers and you’re here blathering on about how we’re all sinners. We all know this is true, but such recognitions are a) insensitive at such times as these and b) unhelpful in finding a solution or appropriate punishment.
#28 cincinatus
ok. I get it now. we are looking for a solution for what happened or we are trying to decide what punishment is appropriate.
You are right then.
What I blather about would not be in anyway useful in that twin pursuit.
Frank, a fundamental tenet of Christianity is the equality of sin coupled with the inequality of guilt. Cain and Abel being human were both sinners, though the evil one, Cain, received severe condemnation and punishment for his terrible sin of murder.
Reinhold Neibuhr, the great Lutheran theologian, has a section in the Nature and Destiny of Man titled The Equality of Sin and the Inequality of Guilt.
The Bible is full of hard judgments of guilt, while acknowledging the universality of sin. Common sense and reason condemn the terribly evil act of Nidal Malik Hasan, your specious sophistry notwithstanding
fws,
Contrary to what you assert, the answer to whether or not everyone deserves to go to jail for breaking the laws of the land is a resounding NO.
Breaking the Law of God is a different matter entirely, although you will find that ‘heart-thread’ which He has inscribed us with running through this or that mandate by degree, depending upon the country that you find yourself in.
But the law of the land and the Law of God are and remain separate matters as we find ourselves discussing them here.
Not Lutheran enough? Good luck.
We are not here speaking of the punishment of our collective sins, be they minute peccadilloes or epic monstrosities (for we are all certainly guilty of either kind), but the punishment due for THIS despicable act in particular. No one here is asserting that ‘we’ are any better than ‘them,’ but this is a theme to which you insist upon returning, for what I can only assume to be reasons that run along the lines of an assumption that those of us who write contrary to what you yourself do are soft on Gospel.
Further, the fact that you throw your presumption about that I am somehow acting unloving and un-Christian because of what I have posted is, quite frankly, just as much of a bad joke as continuing in mock indignation that we are not all engaged in the same degree of hair-splitting that you seem to revel in.
Stop judging by mere outward appearances, and make a CORRECT judgment.
My own gross catalog of sins is atoned for, and will ever remain so.
But I didn’t shoot up Ft. Hood.
Not ONCE have I asserted that this somehow makes me any better off, for though I have not broken certain parts of God’s Law, there are others which I have most certainly transgressed, accidentally as well as deliberately. No one can honestly say any less, lest they be a liar.
But going back to ‘potential’ versus ‘actual,’ which of those falls under being atoned for?
The answer, of course, is: both of them.
Now, which of those two categories apply to Maj. Hasan?
…
Nowhere did I once post that I would not pray for him as well as the families of the victims of the shooting. Did I give some indication otherwise?
Again, is it a presumed lack of pity for which you continue to take me to task? Is it MY pity that is needed?
Would the Israelites that left Egypt have been overwhelmed with pity that their foe had perished, or would it more likely have been relief? Given that their story exists in Scripture not only for their benefit but for ours as well, the question remains…
…what’s your point?
Strewth FWS you are on a roll. I agree with Wyldeirishman that our individual sins have been atoned for. What we have here at Fort Hood is plain and utter murder,carried out in the Name of God,well the perpetuator’s god. St Paul reminds us that the Government is the sword bearer to punish evildoers lawbreakers .
Yes he needs our prayers as does his family, as does the entire Fort Hood community ,and the gutsy police sergeant who shot him.But he will have to pay for his crime, life sentence or the death penalty.
My son sits an exam tomorrow to enter the Australian Defence Force,either as an officer or as an other rank.This action has made him more resolute in his resolve to combat terrorism .
“My son sits an exam tomorrow to enter the Australian Defence Force,either as an officer or as an other rank.This action has made him more resolute in his resolve to combat terrorism .”
More power to him, then; I only wish that there were more that shared both his level of resolve as well as truly understanding the level of the problem.
One clarification, though: when replying to fws earlier, I stated that I wasn’t any better off with regard to my sins than Maj. Hasan or ‘the next guy.’
Actually, because of Christ…
…I most certainly am.
On a related note, on Nov. 10, at 9PM EST, John Allen Muhammad will steal his final oxygen.
Fox News reports that Hasan, the purportedly “devout” Muslim, liked to frequent the local strip joint outside the Army post where he was known to (Gasp!) drink alcohol.
Hasan is apparently a very conflicted Muslim soul to say the least–yea, verily, even a sinner is he. So would Allah overlook his blasphemous sins and let him into paradise for smiting the infidel Americans where he found them? No Muslim can be sure Allah will favor him; it’s all ‘inshalla.’
#30
Peter Leavitt said:
Frank, a fundamental tenet of Christianity is the equality of sin coupled with the inequality of guilt.
In two words Peter: B*ll. S**t.
The ONLY tenant of Christianity is that Christ Jesus bore both the sins and guilt of the entire world, equally, for everyone who has ever existed. Shame on you for twisting the fundamental core of christian faith thussly.
#31, #32, #33
All acts of evil are calls to repentance, reminding us that this exact same evil is within us, and can only be damage-controlled, even in christians, by the threats and punishments, the carrots and sticks of the Law breathing hot down the necks of each and every one of us. They are also calls to acting as priests for the world. All believers are priestly-intercessors for the world are they not. We bear the sins of the world in this way as “little christs” or christians.
Further: There is NO solution for this situation. Not even if everyone on the planet had true faith in Christ! Consider that. Even faith in Christ will not fix the problem of sin in the world in the sense of making it go away. The evil is that profound.
Seeing that God´s Word declares these things as facts, our consciences should be terrified.
This brings me to the second point, which is only meaningful for those whose consciences are, in fact, terrified by the evil they see within:
The entire, appropriate(!), punishment for evil and evildoers, was fully borne by Christ on the holy cross.
There, on that cross, ie, only in faith received in the waters of baptism where we are actually joined to that death on the cruss, can we see that Christ conquered, fully and eternally, sin death and the devil.
The victory over sin and evil was fully and conclusively won, by Christ, on the cross, in his death.
You will know that this is personally true for you, by the fact that you have been baptized. Why? There God has promised you personally that this is so and has been applied to you personally.
Now. You can call this irrelevant to the current discussions where I am told that the discussion is properly about “finding a solution [to this evil] and determining the appropriate punishment.”
Ok. If that is what you feel, then I really have nothing more to say do I?
Comment #34
Carl Vehse said:
On a related note, on Nov. 10, at 9PM EST, John Allen Muhammad will steal his final oxygen.
God does not take joy in the death of sinners. Neither should you.
#31 wild irish man
“Further, the fact that you throw your presumption about that I am somehow acting unloving and un-Christian because of what I have posted is…”
Show me in any of my posts where I assumed or presummed anything about you.
I will immediately apologize , if that is the case. That would be wrong on my part and impolite to say the least!
#32 wayne pelling
Jesus paid for his crime already wayne. and yours and mine too. Jesus bore the “appropriate punishment” for all of us. Both temporal and eternal I might add.
I do hope and trust that the government will do the right thing and keep him from harming anyone else. This might result in a life sentence or execution. I am glad I don´t have to deal with all that and that God has place people in charge of this.
This is about keeping a lid on things and damage control. This is not really about punishment is it for a christian?
I would love to see everyone involved, including the perpetrator, find strength and forgiveness in Our Lord. Praying for that end is how we can best love our neighbor I think.
FWS @ 40:
I have no desire to insert myself into this ongoing discussion concerning good and evil, but must respond to your point that “Jesus paid for his crime already”. Of course, that is not the case, since Christ was sinless. His payment was for our sin, not His own. And it was only possible BECAUSE He was sinless.
Since I’m now “in”, let me only say that there is a lot of talking past each other in this thread. Of course, everyone who is a believer acknowledges universal sin and the evil in each of us. But, the issue of evil which also transcends man’s societal law is different than that of evil which is abhorrent to God. We are accountable to society as well as to God for our violations of man’s law, i.e. societal evil. It is this latter evil which is the subject of this thread.
FWS thanks for the reminder of the price the Sinless one paid for my sins. I am always struck by Rembrandts painting the RAISING OF THE CROSS ,where he places himself amongst those raising the Cross with Jesus nailed to it. He is saying ‘my sins put HIm here’,but it is up to Hassan as it is up to Obama to accept the gift that Christ offers.
We had an appalling massacre in tasmania in 1996 when one gunman killed 35 people at a historic convict built site. I had a student who was Christian who’s best friend was a Tasmanian Special Operations group copper (SWAT team for usa).He arrested the gunman and was going to blow him away but he realised that he woukld be no better than the person he was apprehending. That gunman Martin Bryant,is residing in a gaol for the term of his natural life,whilst that young policeman took a while to speak about his epxeriences
Speaking of “talking past each other”, Don (@41), I’m pretty certain you’ve misinterpreted FWS’s comment (@40), and in a way I find pretty odd, since you must know what FWS believes on this matter.
Wayne said (@32), “But he [clearly referring to Maj. Hasan] will have to pay for his crime, life sentence or the death penalty.” To which FWS replied (@40), “Jesus paid for his crime already wayne.”
I am near certain that FWS’s “his” there also refers to Maj. Hasan, not Jesus. Context!
tODD @ 43: Yes, I’d rather suspect you are right. FWS, my apologies for the misinterpretation. I knew that you knew better, but thought perhaps you had misspoken (miswritten?, given the length of your discussion back and forth on this issue.
#36)
Thanks for playing the ‘lowest-common-denominator’ card, the one that assumes that, in light of THE fundamental tenet of the faith, there is nothing else that ought to bear consideration, let alone interact with it.
Good one.
#37)
As stated elsewhere, it’s not irrelevant to me. It’s irrelevant to Maj. Hasan.
#39)
You indeed presume far too much, for your posts practically drip with the assumption that, because I find your comments erratic and uneven, I am somehow not acting out of Christian love for daring to say so. So, if you mean ‘did I use these exact words,’ then the answer, of course, is no. If this is not the case, then either you have failed to articulate what it is that you mean, or I am merely obtuse (which, I admit, is entirely possible).
#40)
How else could we ‘best love our neighbor’ here? How about defending America, both here and abroad, against this outrageous horror? The current administration may have declared an end to the ‘War on Terror,’ but does wishing really make it so? The choice is NOT an ‘either-or’ one: we continue to pray for our enemies just as surely as we work to ensure that they cannot harm our citizens (to say nothing of free citizens of countries across the globe).
Sometimes that will require shooting them.
To death.
I love my neighbors enough to insist that they remain adequately defended by those most capable of doing so.
Wayne @42 said:
“but it is up to Hassan as it is up to Obama to accept the gift that Christ offers.”
Lutherans would say that repentence and conversion is not a personal work of the individual; it is the work of the HS, totally and completely. We, as sinful humans, are free to reject Good News, but we cannot by our own reason or strength believe in JC or come to Him, except through the power of the HS. (See Luther’s Small Catechism, Apostles’ Creed, Article III explanation.)
#46 Jonathan
You can go even further Jonathan and you should!
Christ HAS paid for the sins of the whole world. Christ HAS reconciled the whole world to God. This is actual fact and not merely potentially so, depending on whether we have faith and repentance or not.
We deserve hell for our faith and repentance in fact. Those are filthy rags according to Isaiah. Faith and Repentance do not exist to actualize what christ has only potentially won.
Good news: “while we were yet ?, christ died for us. God was in christ, reconciling the ?. God has condemned ? so that he might have mercy on ?. Christ died for ?.”
The court case before God of every man woman and child who has ever existed has been dismissed and the file has been labeled “pardoned”.
The fact that some insist on reopening and rearguing their case and so reject that full pardon that has been, really and truly won, does not negate the fact that the pardon has, in fact and reality, been fully granted.
The fact that eternal life with Jesus is sadly lost through unbelief does not mean, conversely, that it is won because of or by faith or repentance.
Faith and repentence-as-reformation-of-life are not ingredients we must add as an addition to what Christ has done as our potential savior in order for him to become our actual savior.
Telling Major Hasan that Christ HAS paid for his sins and has borne the full punishment that Major Hasan deserves and that he can and should trust in that.
This can and should be done regardless of whether he believes it or not.
Why? That is the only message through which the Holy Spirit has promised to create faith, children of Abraham, from hearts of stone. This is the single charge given by Christ to his bride the Holy Christian, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
This message is the Rock that the very gates of Hell cannot prevail over.
#45
“love your enemies. …. Bless those who curse you.”
Acting in self defense or acting when your vocation is to defend the lives of others does not violate this.
seeking retribution or punishment (eye for eye, tooth for tooth) for evil does violate this.
Assuming that you love your mother, wife and children: What would be your posture if they committed such a heinous crime? I would assume that you would, with heaviness of heart, want them to be restrained and brought to justice, and peace and hearts able to mend by a capacity to forgive for the families of the victims, and also, it would be evident to the world, that you still loved your criminal loved ones by the way you talked about them and their crime.
Am I missing some important truth here by declaring that this, and nothing less, is what God demands of us? And that God forgives us in Christ, when we do not measure up to this high standard?
#46 Jomathan yes you are right- excuse me i am baptist-shock ,horror you say ,it is of course th work of the Holy Ghost convicting people of their sin their need ot be forgiven of their sins and trust in the Atoning death of Christ on the Cross.
wyldeirishman-my son will be going into a Calvary regiment he hopes,and we are looking at him being called to undertake basic training from anytime now.He will be going to a place called kapooka 250 miles north us here in Melbourne
fws, you’re missing the important truth that while all people sin, men can and should make careful, discriminating judgments regarding relative guilt.
Reinhold Neibuhr puts the matter as follows in book section, The Equality of Sin and Inequality of Guilt:
Orthodox Christianity has held consistently to the proposition that all men are equally sinners in the sight of God…. Yet it is quite apparent that this assertion imperils and seems to weaken all moral judgments which deal with the “nicely calculated less and more” of justice and goodness revealed in the relativities of history. It seems to inhibit the preference between the victim and his oppressor, between the congenital liar and the moderately truthful man, between the debauched sensualist and the moderately self-disciplined worker, between the egoist who drives egocentricity to the point of sickness and the moderately “unselfish” devotee of the general welfare. Though it is quite necessary that these distinctions disappear at the ultimate level of judgment, yet it is obviously important to draw them provisionally in all historic judgments.
Avoiding these discriminate historical judgments is both impractical and irresponsible.
What was behind Nidal Malik Hasan’s ‘going Islamal’ at Fort Hood?
According to one media clymer, it’s Bush’s fault, “The War on Terror Made Him Do It”.
Comment #50
Peter Leavitt said:
“fws, you’re missing the important truth that while all people sin, men can and should make careful, discriminating judgments regarding relative guilt.”
why is this important.
how do you know that this is a truth?
I think we should attempt to erect fws’s proposed society, where everyone is guilty, and thus no one is guilty. All crimes will be forgiven because Christ forgave them, and no one will be punished. Anarchy has worked in the past, right? Either that, or, since everyone is equally guilty, everyone can go to prison. That has been an historical winner as well.
/and that’s why “this”–making discriminating judgments regarding relative guilt–is important, sir.
FWS, making discriminating judgment about guilt is important in order to protect people from the tendency of fallen men to wreak cruelty and harsh injustice on other, usually men. Hasan’s recent vicious outrage would be an example. Also, individuals are Biblically commanded to live according to the truth of revealed and rational moral law, as opposed to assorted perverse biological drives.
As to truth, note that Neibuhr is wise enough to speak of making provisional judgments about relative guilt. Truth is complex and difficult to discern, though we need to make careful and determined effort to reach it. Those who shirk the hard task due to its difficulty are correctly regarded as nihilists.
Strike out usually in the above first sentence in para. one. I do need to edit these hasty posts.
Discriminating judgment, and the various degrees to which we ought to dispense justice to those found guilty of this or that, is as plain a necessity as the nose on your face is for identifying when something stinks.
Consider the converse of your proposal: by this same approach, I cannot and must not tell my daughters that they are ‘good girls,’ because heaping such empty praise upon them will no doubt cause them to forget God and assume that they’re really not so bad after all. Since, in the sight of God, no one is ‘good,’ this would be tantamount to lying to their faces by doing so. Likewise. telling them that they’ve done a ‘good job’ would also be indicative of this false assumption, since our own efforts never measure up to what they should; the work, whatever it may be, fails to be perfect, therefore it should be counted as rubbish.
Does this sound somewhat problematic to you?
It should, because it’s utter nonsense.
In like manner, it is and remains imperative that we judge correctly as best as we can, in any case that we can rightly lend thoughtful dialogue to a given national or intimate discourse. No one in their right mind would sentence a shoplifter to death (except perhaps in Somalia, but I DID say ‘right mind,’ after all), but the state has determined that the penalty of summary execution be reserved for those criminal acts heinous enough to warrant it.
That issue may be up for reasoned, even impassioned, debate. The issue of degrees of guilt and subsequent punishment, however, should not.
Regarding what you’ve written (#48)…of course, what you suggest is so. This does not mean that, should they be found guilty of such an act as we are here discussing that the state would have no basis for their own execution (God forbid!). This would, no doubt, increase the aforementioned heaviness of heart; I would not expect any different.
But I also would not expect the state to make an exception in my case because I have some sudden epiphany about the sacredness of all life (note: this is a purely fictitious example-I already hold such a view) and now wish to force them to capitulate to MY will against an already well-understood and generally agreed-upon principle of societal justice.
I fail to see how this could make me heartless, or love my enemies less than anybody else here.
Was Solomon acting in foolishness when he rightly decided the case of the infant’s true mother? Or should he have simply given the child over to be devoured to a pack of wild dogs in order to cease their caterwauling?
Something stinks in here
#56 wylde
“Something stinks in here ”
Yeah. It´s called sin.
There is nothing whatsoever in what I wrote that would suggest that evildoers (including each of us) should not be restrained by force from doing more evil and that good deeds should not be encouraged in civil society is there?
Carrot and stick of the Law are reinforced, not vitiated by what my simple recitation of Holy Scripture says.
So where is the problem? Sin. It DOES smell bad.
Sin causes us to feel convicted and then self-justify our sinful heart attitudes.
#56 wylde
feel free to go back to my previous posts and cite one single example to prove that my most #57 is incorrect.
In her column, P.C. in the U.S.A.: A deadly, bipartisan infection, Michelle Malkin states:
Hey, you know how President Obama constantly carps about having inherited all the nation’s worst problems? Well, there’s one problem he did indeed inherit from the Bush administration — but it’s a problem he won’t acknowledge because it indicts the wretched excesses of the Left. The problem is Washington’s tolerance fetish. The path to Fort Hood was paved not just with political correctness (as even some left-wingers are beginning to acknowledge), but specifically with blind tolerance for “diversity” and open borders and indiscriminate lowering of standards at the expense of national security.
The death toll will not abate until this administration tears off the Hello Kitty band-aids it applied to the body politics in its rush to “heal” — and instead treats the gangrenous p.c. infection….
How did Fort Hood happen, obtuse Washington asks. Simple: Blind diversity equals death.
…boring conversation, anyway…
*blasts instrument panel*
“Theophilus, we’re gonna have compamy!”