You live by the sword, you die by the sword

As we look back in recent days to Tucson Arizona and the rhetoric that has been discussed, we all took a step backwards and contemplated what it all meant. Lives were taken, was there more than just one person to blame. Had it been the climate of discontent and the angry rhetoric that has been tossed about in the past few decades? Is all this a precursor to worse days ahead? We just celebrated Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. birthday and reread his Letter from the Birmingham Jail. This should be required reading by everyone once a year. It is rich with ideas of non-violence and using rhetoric that lifts up and not tears down. It is full of profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every human being as a creature fashioned in the very image of God, possessing inherent rights of equal dignity and life. Broadly speaking, non-violence has meant not relying on arms and weapons of struggle. It has meant direct participation of masses in protest, rather than reliance on indirect methods which frequently do not involve masses in action at all.

Violence as a way of achieving justice is impractical and immoral, but also mindful of the fact that violence often brings about momentary results. Our nation has frequently won their independence in battle. But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers. As Dr. King said “the ends don’t justify the means, for the means represents the seed and the ends represent the tree.”

Dr. King has been the moral guide of our time, if there was a prophet ever sent to our nation he was the man. But where did Dr. King learn this from, did he just snatch this out of thin air? Dr. King was also a Baptist Minister, he had studied, learned, and preached from the Bible. I believe it was his encounter with God that made him into what he eventually became. He felt after his release from the Birmingham jail that God had knocked on his door, which God was showing that non-violence and the direction that he was taking was a path that God wanted him to take. Dr. King describes this encounter in the book “A testament of hope: the essential writings and speeches of Martin Luther King Jr.”.

Even though the Bible does not directly say to not use violence, it does so indirectly. In the sermon on the mount in Matthew chapter five Jesus says “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Contrary to many people's understanding, the Law wasn't given so that we could keep it and earn relationship with God.

The Law was given to show us that it was impossible to have relationship with God by our good acts. The Law showed us how sinful we were so that we would quit trying to earn God's favor and call out to Him for mercy.

In these verses, Jesus was simply amplifying the impact of the Law by going beyond actions to the thoughts and intents of the heart. The Old Testament law had said not to do these things. Here, Jesus was saying that if we have embraced them in our hearts, we are guilty of the same transgression as if we had done them. God looks on the heart and not just the actions. In Matthew chapter twelve Jesus further reveals for out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. That is where we are with rhetoric, it starts in the heart and will eventually work its way to our actions. Our actions will follow our heart.

In Luke chapter nine Jesus directs His disciples to go out and preach the kingdom of God, heal the sick, and bless whatever home they stay in. Jesus told them not to take a staff, bag, bread, money, or extra coat. He was trying to show the disciples how to trust and rely on God and that He would take care of all their needs. In Luke chapter ten Jesus then appoints seventy two others to go out and do the same. He directed them the same way He told the twelve disciples. When the seventy two returned they announced how powerful that God worked through them that even evil fell like lightning from heaven.

If we depend on God, He will provide all that we need. In Second Corinthians chapter ten, the apostle Paul says “Though we walk in the flesh, we don’t war in the flesh for the weapons of our warfare are not carnal. But mighty through God.” In Ephesians chapter six Paul iterates “the war is not against flesh and blood”, if we are coming against the flesh it is the wrong war. Non-violence fits perfectly here.

Jesus continued to show the disciples in a very real manner all that He was trying to teach them, and in this way He showed them the path to non-violence. In Luke chapter twenty two it looks like Jesus was giving the disciples a contradiction in what He told them in chapter nine and ten of Luke. “Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" "Nothing," they answered. He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment." The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied.”

This was not a contradiction but Jesus showing the disciples in a very real manner that the consequences of following Jesus, depending upon Him, that all their needs were going to be taken care of. Using the world’s ways and using violence was going to cause more violence to come. In Matthew twenty six the guards, Judas, and a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people had come for Jesus and violence was taken up. “With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear”. "Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.”

Jesus was teaching that violence begets violence. In contrast Jesus who used no violence, showed that depending upon Him that everything was going to be taken care of. All of this starts in our hearts. The vitriolic rhetoric that has been used the last few decades has invaded every aspect of our life here in these United States. This rhetoric has laid seeds that we are experiencing today and seeing the fruit of the tree in our government, schools, churches, and in all aspects of our lives. We need to quit planting those seeds, it starts in our hearts. Non-violence does not seek to humiliate or defeat but to win friendship and understanding. The aftermath of violence is bitterness, anger and in the end death, the aftermath of non-violence is reconciliation, peace and in the end redemption.

Anniversary of Roe vs. Wade and Soylent Green

In the film Soylent Green the police procedural and science fiction it depicts is an investigation into the brutal murder of a wealthy businessman in a dystopian future suffering from pollution, overpopulation, depleted resources, poverty, dying oceans and a hot climate due to the greenhouse effect and climate change. Much of the population survives on processed food rations, including "soylent green" which is processed food (small green wafers) made from humans who were euthanized at a designated early age.

Even though this film is science fiction it has some truth in our reality today. The earth is suffering from pollution, overpopulation, depleted resources, poverty, and climate change. Even though these are the categories most known they are not the least. As in the film we are also coming to the place of genocide where the earth and its resources are more important than human life. With the advent of terrorism, risk of nuclear war, and conventional war our hubris on handling such proves how naive we really are. We are already heading towards the brink of denying human life not just by the depleted resources which lessens availability to each person but we are already eating other human beings as in Soylent Green.

How so you ask? It is our sexual appetite that has caused a Soylent Green type situation. Since January 22, 1973 we as Americans have had over 50 million abortions. If that date sounds familiar it is the landmark decision of Roe vs. Wade. It is legal euthanasia and no matter what words that someone wants to put to this, it is still killing babies. Some say they are not babies, for they have not been fully conceived. However you want to call it, it is still not allowing life to continue. It does not matter if the person is 1 month old in the womb or 95 years old out of the womb it is still not allowing a life to continue.

This way of life, which has continued for almost 40 years, has now been accepted and imbedded in our psyche, what is our next step as we look at pollution, overpopulation, depleted resources, poverty, and climate change? Will we be more interested in saving our planet and less interested in saving life. Are animals more important than humans, are the oceans more important than humans, is our climate more important than humans? If we think that sex is more important than humans then why not these other things. Wars and terrorism is already denying humanity of others and killing them, why not climate control.

Soylent Green is already taking place, like anything when it is done in small ways it will always be a precursor to larger events. Never underestimate what a small band of committed people can do. Do you know why? It is because it is the only thing that has worked. It is the small group of people who were dedicated with our new government in 1776, it is the small group of disciples of Jesus Christ that turned the world upside down. But just as much as these were two positive instances, the same applies to negative ways. These precursors of eliminating life has grown into 50 million with abortions, now add wars, terrorism, and ecological disasters and we have the making of genocide on a major scale. Put into our psyche that your own carbon dioxide, and depletion of resources footprint can be the precursor to global genocide. That is when Roe vs. Wade will be minor in comparison to euthanasia to save our planet.


btw - The movie Soylent Green was released in 1973

Tell Republicans: Repeal health care? Give up your own first!

For two years, GOP leaders in Congress fought tooth and nail to oppose health care reform. They did their best to keep tens of millions without coverage, decrying any effort to help citizens as "socialist," "fascist" or some other equally baffling "ist."

Incredibly, now that they are the majority, their first act will be to vote to repeal health care reform that gives affordable care to 32 million Americans.
And yet, when it comes to their own coverage, Republicans in Congress are not only using government-sponsored health care, they even whined about having had to wait for it.

As the Republicans are gearing up to appease Tea Party extremists and vote to repeal health care reform for Americans who need it, Senator Chuck Schumer is calling the GOP on their hypocrisy, and calling on them to give up their government-sponsored health care:

"It was a central value to us when we passed health care, and a central value to the American people, that members of Congress should get the same health care as everyone else. It seems unfair that house Republicans want to deprive middle-class Americans of the same health care as members of Congress but to keep it for themselves."

"Will Eric Cantor urge every Republican who is going to be for repeal to not take government health care themselves and to drop their existing health care?"

We think he should, and applaud Schumer for his challenge. Write Eric Cantor, and ask him if he will practice what he preaches — and ask other GOP members to do the same. Click here to automatically sign this petition.