Posted by 
Nearly half of the bishops of the United Methodist Church, America’s third largest (though declining) denomination, are demanding that the U.S. withdraw from Afghanistan by next year.
“We believe there is no path to military victory in Afghanistan,” harrumphed the bishops in their November letter to President Obama. But it’s not clear that these bishops ever wanted a “victory” in Afghanistan. After 9-11, the Council of Bishops declined to condemn al Qaeda or the Taliban, preferring only to seek “solidarity with victimized peoples throughout the world” and to intone that that “violence in all of its forms and expressions is contrary to God’s purpose for the world.” In other words, there were no necessarily great moral distinction between Osama bin Laden and those U.S. led military forces that sought his capture.
The bishops also have 4 times denounced U.S. military actions in Iraq while never expressing any special concern about Saddam Hussein’s mass murders or epic torture prisons, much less what even greater horrors might have prevailed to Iraqis had the U.S. withdrawn precipitously. With Iraq now relatively subdued, the bishops are now aiming their outrage at any U.S. military presence in Afghanistan.
We “are deeply concerned about the escalating war in Afghanistan,” they bewailed, though they were never publicly concerned about Taliban tyranny or Afghanistan’s sinister role as a nest for international terror by al Qaeda. Urging Obama to “set a timetable for the withdrawal of all coalition forces by the end of 2010,” the bishops lamented the war in Afghanistan has “no end in sight,” as they cited U.S., coalition and Afghan casualty figures.
The bishops promised that their “vision is a world in which people live together in peace and with mutual respect.” Of course, they do not outline how such peace and mutual respect will arise in a Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. “We believe that human values must outweigh military claims as governments determine their priorities,’ they banally proclaimed, seemingly indifferent to the consequence of their recommendation, preferring instead the satisfaction of their own moral preening.
“We wanted to get this to Obama before he made his decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan,” explained retired Bishop Marshall L. Meadors, who drafted the Afghanistan decree. “I have struggled with the war in Iraq,” he said. “I held public prayer services when the 3,000th and 4,000th soldier was killed in Iraq.” For left-leaning religionists, concern and political empathy have replaced thoughtful public witness.
Many of these bishops pretend that their church is pacifist, and they insisted that their denomination believes “war is incompatible with the teachings of Christ.” But The United Methodist Church also acknowledges that “many Christians believe that, when peaceful alternatives have failed, the force of arms may regretfully be preferable to unchecked aggression, tyranny and genocide.” Actually “many” should say “vast majority,” as the pacifist tradition among Methodists and among Christians globally has always been small. Methodist founder John Wesley once offered to help raise troops for his King in case of a French invasion of Britain.
But in the early 20th century, much of Mainline Protestantism’s academic and social elites in America surrendered to pacifism, which only accelerated after World War, and which even Nazi and Japanese militarist aggression did not dissuade. In 1940, Methodism’s governing General Conference adopted a pacifist stance, even as Europe and Asia were being overrun by darkness, saying “The Methodist Church will not officially support, endorse or participate in war.” After Pearl Harbor, the bishops tried to compensate for that stance by insisting, “In this crisis, as in all previous crises in our history, the Methodists of America will support our President and our nation.”
Even at Methodism’s 1944 General Conference, church elites proposed a continued pacifist stance, while 1 million American Methodists were serving in the armed forces. Its primary spokesman explained that we “do not think that a Christian Church should pray for a military victory” because the “God of the Christian Church is the God of all mankind.”
The head of the Methodist Publishing House who later became a bishop, Nolan Harmon, responded to the pacifists by noting: “We have spent more time in calling attention to the plight of the 600 Methodist conscientious objectors than we have to three times that many Methodist boys, dead and buried under crosses on battlefields in the far-flung corners of the earth.” Harmon also insisted: “The ultimate control of moral evil in this world must be by force.” He later explained in his memoir 40 years later: “If we do want to stop crime, or on the world stage, to stop Hitler or evil dictator, it will take force to do it,” declaring that “in principle, the policeman’s club and the ICBM warhead are no different.”
A minority report among the Methodist delegates in 1944 just barely prevailed by asserting: “We are well within the Christian position when we assert the necessity of the use of military forces to resist an aggression which would overthrow every right which is held sacred by civilized men.” In 1952, the Methodist bishops supported U.S. resistance to, in one bishop’s words, the “Russian-planned and dictated invasion of Korea,” with that bishop, Bromley Oxnam, further declaring that a Christian “must courageously resolve that mankind shall not be engulfed in materialism nor shackled by tyranny,” as the Christian is “called upon to live dangerously in the spirit of Jesus and in loyalty to the principles symbolized by the cross.”
Predictably, the 1960’s erased most remnants of traditional Christian Just War teaching among the United Methodists. Some Just War language was restored to the church’s official teaching in 2000, just in time for 9-11. But despite this prescient revival, and the pleas of Virginia’s Methodist bishop, who had personally visited the Pentagon right after the terror strike, the bishops opted for milquetoast pacifism and working towards “alleviating the root causes of poverty and the other social conditions that are exploited by terrorists.”
The repeated Methodist denunciations of Iraq’s liberation from Saddam Hussein never expressed any concern about human rights or a just regime in Iraq; they focused exclusively on condemning the U.S. as the seeming only source of injustice and violence in otherwise peaceable Iraq. The Religious Left’s brand of pacifism is typically only concerned about restraining U.S. military efforts and does not usually quibble with aggression or oppression by tyrants, even when genocidal.
Equating justice with reflexive anti-Americanism is old hat for the Religious Left, including many modern American Methodist bishops, who, unlike their more robust predecessors of 60 years, preside over a dwindling flock that no longer seriously heeds their political posturing.
You can't blame the Methodists for pointing out that Iraq was generally peaceful, secular and had about the best reputation for women's rights in the Middle East. The mass-graves there are largely filled with our victims, not Saddams.
The British are about to investigate the run-up to the Iraq War, prepare for fireworks. The first major discovery is that preparations for war started a year earlier – but Blair denied it to Parliament, as a result of which almost nobody could be told. No wonder there was this almighty disaster with extremists in both Iran and Saudi both more popular and much better trained than they were before.
Goodness knows what Obama thinks he's doing leading us into another Vietnam, where the “democratic” government is busy earning billions from drug money.
These Methodists are clueless about Islam, they are a disgrace as Christians for not being able to state what is wrong about Islam and that Muslims need Christ. But it is true that the U.S., also being clueless about Islam, has caused more trouble for the Christians of Iraq. Christians were in Iraq long before Islam was even invented. But at this point, as in all countries conquered and subjugated by Islam, they are a tiny minority holding on as best as possible under terrible conditions. The clueless Americans did a good thing taking out Saddam but they failed to protect the Christians. Bringing “democratic” reforms to an Islamic country only means that the various Muslim groups will fight one another and that they will all fight all the non-Muslim groups. Sadly, the truth is, America will be forever shamed for what it has done, or not done as the case may be, to or for the Christians of Iraq and all the other so-called “Islamic” countries around the world.
This is the primary reason why I left the Methodist ministry, and then, the church itself. I didn't believe that I could be a Methodist pastor AND a patriotic American, at the same time.
What the Methodist bishops have done doesn't surprise me, at all.
A Long Post (But one that has been long coming…)
For those of you who follow these blind hypocrites….know:
The New Testament Scriptures have Supreme Authority over them. And so, let the God that they claim to be represenatives of have His say.
And remember, if your leader is headed for the pit – then so are you (Mat 15:14)
Also…a man's enemies are the men of his own house (Mic 7:6) – And a man's foes shall be they of his own household (Mat 10:36) – The Christian Household, that is.
They say…
the “God of the Christian Church is the God of all mankind.”
Jam 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
Jhn 10:5 And a stranger will they (True Christians) not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.
1Jo 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. THERE IS A SIN UNTO DEATH: I DO NOT SAY THAT HE SHALL PRAY FOR IT.
2Jo 1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not THIS DOCTRINE [of Christ], RECEIVE HIM NOT into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jo 1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
…”the bishops opted for milquetoast pacifism and working towards “alleviating the root causes of poverty and the other social conditions that are exploited by terrorists”
Woe unto them!.. 2Ti 2:19 Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity…for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain Exd 20:7.
Those bishops were/are Commanded Eph 4:25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth
The Koran calls the Son of God an abomination and all of His apostles liars:
009.030 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; in this they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
037.151 Is it not that they say, from their own invention,
037.152 Allah has begotten children? but they are liars!
019.088 They say: (Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!
019.089 Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!
When have they ever come forth to object? *crickets*
The Koran teaches…
Beheadings (047.004) – Racism (005.041) – Gang Rape (033.052) – Crucifixions (005.033) – Genocide (033.061) – Treason – (008.067) [[[ The tree is known by his fruit....And we reap what we sow - so keep handing out those Korans people]]]
The New Testament teaches…
Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. { Beyond this Christian Command, there are no more Commands]
We can not sit at the table that calls the Son of God an abomination (a regular activity for these bishops) – and then sit at the Son's table too.
Woe unto them! because…Rev 15:3 And they [the true Christians] 'sing' the song of Moses the servant of God
Do hear those bishops singing it? If they were – it would ROCK this whole world!
How many of you reading this even believe that they know what that 'song' is?
For the Christains reading this….SEE: http://palestinename.com/frlord.htm And then ask yourselves… Are you 'singing' it?
Luk 6:39 And He spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?
Eph 4:25 Wherefore putting away lying, SPEAK EVERY MAN TRUTH with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.
1Ti 1:18 This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, – according to the prophecies which went before on thee – that thou by – them mightest war a good warfare.
Rev 15:3 And they 'sing' the song [the prophecy] of Moses the servant of God
Rev 22:7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy {not plural] of this book.
Woe unto those bishops! and on a level that a ten yr old can understand, thereby having the power to shut the mouths of kings and leaving them all without excuse for the Judgment.
The bishops of the United Methodist Church are of the opinion that non intervention is the correct line to follow. China practices the same philosophy. As good Methodists we should not care about the next door criminal unless he attacks us personally.
“As good Methodists we should not care about the next door criminal unless he attacks us personally.” That doesn't sound like sound Christian doctrine. And while promoting democracy where Islam is in control may be a waste of time all Christians in the West are terribly wrong, evil frankly, for ignoring the plight of Christians in “Islamic” lands. Christians should stand up to Islam worldwide. Also, Christians in the West who have failed to educate their flocks about the evils of Islam have created the situation we have now where idiot politicians and decision makers are allowing Islam to spread in the West.
Did the Methodist bishops also urge surrender against Hitler?
Most people now are secular and don't listen to religious figures telling them how to run the U.S. For them, I believe it's time to start spending time studying Islam's 7th cent. mindset so they won't be surprised at what jihadists in our midst like Maj. Nidal Hisan have in store for us. Study free online with the historyscoper at http://go.to/islamhistory
George Carlin has these guys numbers and all organized religion's numbers. Watch it – it is both informing and funny,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o
So often the case of religious leaders to day they have chosen the worldly life and its rewards rather than following God's word. Selling of forgiveness has become a source of real income. One only has to look at other religious originations for the same income forgiveness items such as forgetting a small thing like marriage, or other social misconduct. Yet if one is a Christian and believes in the word of God one only needs to ask for forgiveness and no go-be-twine is needed.
My dad left the Methodist Church (though he wasn't clergy) years before I was born, for the same reason. Knowing the very wide range of beliefs of people and Churches that call themselves fellow Baptists (and the pell mell and democratic nature of our associations), I've always been reluctant to tar the whole denomination for what I was hearing out of some. I still don't, but for a long time I didn't realize how rigid the denominational structure of the Methodist church was.
Yea andy, it's all our fault saddam filled up all those mass graves, invaded Kuwait, and wouldn't live up to the GWCFA. What's any treaty or agreement worth (or what's your word worth, for that matter), if you're not willing to hold the other party to it? And face it, after 12 years of blatant noncompliance, and over 4 years shooting at our aircraft daily, you never would.
Knowing that, why would anyone live up to their end of any agreement with us?
Nobody would trust the judgement of the religious on any subject whatsoever. Well, except perhaps one. When it comes to finding the real problems of any particular religion, you can trust their enemies to identify it.
But if there are Christians who don't see insuperable theological or other problems with Islam, I think we're bound to suppose they know what they're talking about.
Saddam's mass graves in 1991 were tiny compared with the ones we've filled. Far from there being 100s of 1000s as we were promised, only some 5,000 were ever found.
And while a few must have been executed (after all, we wanted there to be a Civil War and played lots of tricks to try and get one started), many more of the dead were simply unidentified, bull-dozed into trenches because, with the Allies having targetted all the infrastructure, there was no electricity to store them and no telephones to contact relatives.
Still, as we know, Muslim deaths don't count and our forces boast that they don't attempt to count the dead. For the longest time, the Iraq Body Count considered their exact count to be near enough correct, perhaps only some 200,000 died. But even they've now abandoned that pretence, and it looks as if it's nearer to the latest figure of 1.2 million derived from statistical methods.
But of course – Saddam had to be executed for killing 150 of his own people (which was done after a judicial process) but we don't care about a thousand or ten thousand times more that we've killed with precision weapons!
They've found over 350,000 of saddam's victims in mass graves, some with their infants.
You're 5000 statistic is more in line with Kosovo, and those were almost all males between 15-60.
I don't know what screwed up world you're from, but in this one you win wars by killing the enemy faster than they can train, equip, and field replacements. I'm long out of pity for the Aholes fighting us, they deliberately blow up markets and children's hospitals, and use human shields. I can't think of a more noble cause than to rid the world of scum like that, or a sillier objection than we'll have to kill too many terrorists or terrorist sponsors.
If technology allows us to kill the enemy with near impunity, thank God, the US Service Member, and the US military industrial complex. I think it's great that we can take out one house, and leave the rest of the town standing. How are high enemy with low US and indig civilian casualties a bad thing? Maybe you're just on the wrong side.
By all means the interests of Israel must be defended by the U.S. No cost, either moral or monetary, can be considered too great to accomplish this end.