“Identity”: Duane W.H. Arnold PhD
I was in email correspondence with a friend.
We were discussing matters of Church polity, practice and doctrine. He made the comment that many of his views had changed since his early days as a Christian. “It’s natural, I’m a different person than I was back then. I’ve matured a bit, I’ve learned, I’ve developed and I don’t think the Holy Spirit is through with me yet, I’m still learning who I am and what I’m supposed to be, but I’m not quite sure how to describe myself these days…”
Reading this, I could do nothing but agree. We take it as a matter of course that as we grow older we change. Yes, we still have the “inner core” of who we are, but we also refine our thought process, our judgements and, hopefully, we recognize our innate prejudices and seek to temper them accordingly.
This is especially true, I think, when it comes to the issue of identity. As we develop, it is a continuing search for “self-description”.
For instance, in a recent discussion, we tried to define the term “evangelical” (a term which many apply to themselves) and found it to be a difficult task. There are few clear markers that all might agree upon. Secular survey companies come up with an essentially sociological/political definition. Denominations who claim the term, place it within their own particular set of self-defining statements of faith. So called “online discernment ministries” set the term within a narrow definition of their own making, surrounded by the paranoia that is symptomatic of the deluded who believe that they alone know the truth. Some, who actually carry many of the distinctions associated with the term “evangelical” – high view of Scripture, conversion, mission oriented, substitutionary atonement – still reject the term out of hand as not being descriptive of their faith.
Now, if this is the case with the term, “evangelical”, how much more difficult is it to deal with the far more basic description, “Christian”? As an adjective, it’s used with all the abandon of ketchup at a roadside diner… you can put it on everything. So now we have “Christian radio”, “Christian movies”, “Christian books”, “Christian music”, “Christian counseling”, “Christian festivals”, “Christian social action”… you name it and we can add the adjective. Rather than helping to define the term, however, its diffusion has only added to the confusion of what it really means. In politics these days, you often hear that America is a “Christian nation” founded on “Christian values” (never mind that most of the Founding Fathers were actually enlightenment Deists). Then again, on the other side of the divide are those who claim the name “Christian” in arguing for a more inclusive approach to LGBTQ rights (in the Church and society at large) along with a whole host of other social issues upon which there are widely diverging opinions.
Try as we might, however, it seems we cannot claim the description as exclusively our own.
Scripture indicates (Acts 26:11) that believers first acquired the designation in Antioch. Interestingly enough, however, it does not seem to be an appellation that they claimed for themselves. We are simply told that it was first in Antioch that they were “called Christians” – that is, others applied the term to them; they didn’t take it on themselves. The term literally means “follower of Christ”. Something about the life, teaching and conduct of this small group of Jews and Gentiles was extraordinary enough that those who knew of them simply called them, “followers of Christ”.
Maybe, however, that is the point – It’s not about us, it’s about who we follow.
In the mid to late second century, a Christian named Mathetes, sent a letter to Diognetus (possibly the tutor of the emperor, Marcus Aurelius) in which he gave a description of what he understood it meant to bear the appellation, “Christian”. In our current day and age, we might do well to give it consideration…
“For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. They are poor, yet make many rich; they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonored, and yet in their very dishonor are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honor; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.
To sum up all in one word–what the soul is in the body, that are Christians in the world. The soul is dispersed through all the members of the body, and Christians are scattered through all the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body, yet is not of the body; and Christians dwell in the world, yet are not of the world. The invisible soul is guarded by the visible body, and Christians are known indeed to be in the world, but their godliness remains invisible. The flesh hates the soul, and wars against it, though itself suffering no injury, because it is prevented from enjoying pleasures; the world also hates the Christians, though in nowise injured, because they abjure pleasures. The soul loves the flesh that hates it, and [loves also] the members; Christians likewise love those that hate them. The soul is imprisoned in the body, yet preserves that very body; and Christians are confined in the world as in a prison, and yet they are the preservers of the world. The immortal soul dwells in a mortal tabernacle; and Christians dwell as sojourners in corruptible [bodies], looking for an incorruptible dwelling in the heavens. The soul, when but ill-provided with food and drink, becomes better; in like manner, the Christians, though subjected day by day to punishment, increase the more in number. God has assigned them this illustrious position…”
Duane W.H. Arnold, PhD
The Project
Those last two paragraphs…
Amin.
So…here’s the question before the house.
Should this description of Christians in the world from the second century be normative for Christians today?
I say yes and amen…
As do I; I keep thinking that if we could just get small enough to really be affected by those who live to our left and right, rather than building big organizations to reach the world.
Rick,
I’m being really intentional about being small…and focusing on what’s directly in my own sphere of influence rather than broader concerns.
It is, in many ways, the exact opposite of how many Christians wish to be perceived. There has to be some point, however, when, as Christians, we stop lusting after “the power and the glory” of this world…
Duane,
Perhaps it will take real persecution to make it so.
I corrected one of my congregation who said that Christians are persecuted in this country…in reality we are not persecuted,but annoyed…
I think the persecution aspect of both the three uses of the word in the Bible, as well as the letter quoted at length (and the times in which it was written) can’t be overstated.
I say yes and amen but we cannot expect perfection. We can, with God’s help, move in this direction.
“when, as Christians, we stop lusting after “the power and the glory” of this world…”
I don’t think “most” Christians desire this. I find that “most” Christians want to be left alone to raise their families and live peacefully in their own neighborhoods.
We could cite a lengthy list of persecutions of Christians in this country. Yes, we still have freedom of worship and there is not really much on the horizon that would suggest it is threatened anytime soon.
Freedom of religion for the Christian (outside the Sunday hour of worship) is a thing of the past. in a variety of ways. If God hating people successfully deprive a brother or sister in Christ of livelihood, property, income….that most definitely meets the definition of persecution.
Typical Pphx Discussion, and I say this w/ affection:
MLD telling us to calm down, nothing’s happening;
Steve Wright offering a word study;
Duane referencing ancient sources;
MIchael and Xenia agreeing w/ Duane
🙂
Xenia,
🙂
If that description is normative…let’s use the word “biblical”… do we try to recapture those attitudes or just blame Constantine and changing times?
#7 Michael
I agree. I also think you were right to use the word “annoyed”. I think that we should also say, demanding certain privileges based upon our “rights” as Christians (right to segregated schools, etc.) and being denied those privileges is not persecution…
#12 Xenia…
You made my day with that one!
“MLD telling us to calm down, nothing’s happening;”
Well, I didn’t say nothing is happening. Something is always happening with a vocal minority in the church – However I think most (meaning the vast majority) want to live quietly in their God given vocation and not disturb others.
I will ask – who here as a Christian is lusting after worldly power? Who here attends the church lusting after worldly glory? What, are we at the Phoenix Preacher a unique exception?
What, are we at the Phoenix Preacher a unique exception?<<<<
After all these years, probably yes.
MLD,
I knew scores of people that were (for example) almost beside themselves before the election because to them it was a contest between God and the devil.
Read how both sides of the division in this country speak…and it is really nothing more than a contest over earthly power that people believe is a spiritual battle.
#18 MLD
Although you may not have meant it in this way, I think you said something very profound –
“Something is always happening with a vocal minority in the church – However I think most (meaning the vast majority) want to live quietly in their God given vocation and not disturb others.”
A succinct description of the fall and failure of many, if not most, mainline denominations… Unfortunately in the case of the denominations folk were quiet until it was too late.
I do think there is a spiritual battle as well…when homosexuals align themselves with Islam, while actively fearing the most homosexual affirming man to ever be elected President in this country….there is an irrationality that speaks to spiritual blindness.
I could say something similar about a large percentage of the women as well…given Islam’s treatment of women wherever they have the power. Did you see the female mayor who spoke to give solidarity at a mosque recently, who first was required to sit in the back behind all the men….
MLD has shared with us about his Jewish family convinced the concentration camps are coming back…despite a President with Jewish grandkids, in-laws, and a converted Jewish daughter. Again I ask, what is the Islamic point of view concerning the Jews?
I do affirm the contest concerns earthly power…but there is definitely a component of spiritual battle as well….I just can’t believe that people are that ignorant of Islam as practiced around the world.
Duane,
“Unfortunately in the case of the denominations folk were quiet until it was too late.”
Too late for what? Persecution? – I thought that was what the rally call is this morning.
Are you saying that we should be the ones bringing persecution to those Christian brothers who we think “are not doing it right?”
So I will ask another question – what are you personally doing to bring persecution on the Church, so we learn our lesson of what it means to be a ‘true’ Christian.
I see just as much fanaticism on your side of the fence as you see on the other.
Steve, MLD,
The question before the house is whether that description of Christian conduct should be normative today.
How would you answer that?
My “word study” comment was noting that the word, Christian, has minimal references in Scripture and they do seem connected to persecution or pejoratives. As Duane noted, the word has greatly evolved today (especially as an adjective)
We do not have clear examples in Scripture or even the early Church, of believers with rights secured by law for their faith and its practice. Thus, discussing America today is unique, because we are in a unique time, country, and situation…something I often say to the congregation in reminding them that MOST of the Body of Christ throughout MOST of the world, throughout MOST of the 2000 years of Church history has known persecution, including today. And that we are truly blessed in this nation.
I do see that in Scripture, people who were persecuted always sought freedom from prison when possible, mourned as tragic the death of fellow believers, and (in the case of Paul) were not hesitant to use their legal earthly citizen rights to fight for their freedoms.
And I do see a teaching on stewardship throughout the Bible. In all things given to us by God (which is all things..at least every good gift). I also see in communication with believers around the world not blessed with our freedoms a desire to share in them – (i.e. just look at how precious voting rights are to people who have never known them or had them taken from them).
Thus, I feel we fall back on some guiding principles..namely that the Holy Spirit dwells in every Christian, and we are not to judge another’s servant as to his/her service and convictions.
#22 MLD
With respect, I will deal with a question, but not a rant…
#21 Steve
I recognize the issue with Islam. I would ask you, as Christians within a secular society, how do you think we should deal with Islam, recognizing that the early Church also had to deal with competing ideologies and religions?
I would say yes it should be normative – AND that with most Christians it is – probably in the same ratios as in the 2nd century.
You probably had Christians in those days sneaking into the gladiator fights. 😉
Duane – that is the reply of a fanatic.- sorry I am not like some others here who just give you one word answers..
it is an old truism that we can’t have an intelligent discussion without an agreement on the definition of the words/terms in play… so much of the disagreement within the world of Christianity is based on labels that have little or nothing to do with what constitutes a Believer…
it is sad that those of us who accept the concept of eternal security are forced to deal with the yin and yang of “there is nothing you can do to lose your salvation” and “there is no work you can do to secure your salvation” … and i won’t even presume to go into the baptismal salvation bestowed on infants…
read Mathetes’ description with which Duane’s post today blesses all who pass by here and ask yourself does that ring true? i think it does… i think i may have some ground to gain to catch up with the folk 2,000 years behind me
John 20:29,
I was going to look up that piece for an article this week…Duane handled it better than I would have.
It is very convicting to me…
Michael, i am wondering this morning about that term, “convict” … does it sometimes keep us from rejoicing? if we are looking for Truth, shouldn’t we rejoice more than we slouch under conviction?
not sure of what i am getting at as the theory hasn’t jelled in my frame of reference, yet LOL
John 20:29,
Conviction to me simply means I’m confronted with truth that I’m not putting in practice.
I rejoice that there is “true” truth and that God cares enough about me to allow me to see it.
There is great blessing from acting on conviction that leads to rejoicing.
recognizing that the early Church also had to deal with competing ideologies and religions?
——————————————————-
But that’s the point. The early Church did not compete from a position of stewardship.
So as a Christian in a secular society, with that secular society being the United States of America which is governed by its Constitution, I would most certainly support and defend freedom of speech, freedom of religion – and most of all I would recognize, as did the Founders (whether deists or not) that government exists primarily to secure the rights we are given by our Creator.
There was a tremendous article written in the Huffington Post of all places by a Muslim female refugee…and she stated that Muslim immigrants come in four basic groups. Some 1) do want a better way of life (i.e. the American dream) and seek to work hard, live in peace with their neighbors and identify as American Muslim no differently than the average American Christian. This is best seen by those in the country that many of us know through work or school. Muslim Americans who have been here for 10-20 years or more.
Others, however, are either 2) angry young men who seek to cause lots of trouble, as seen clearly in Europe and the rise in criminal activity, especially towards women. 3) uneducated, unskilled people, often older, who want to live off the benefits that American taxpayers can provide them, have no interest in working or assimilating. Again, Europe has shown this truism as well. And finally 4) a few are jihadists bent on terrorism. Europe has shown this as well.
Again, I simply report what a female Muslim refugee herself affirms on a very liberal website. And what any dispassionate look at the facts on the ground in Europe would show.
America was built on people like those in item #1. Our immigration policies should always be geared to such people – and I could care less what religion they happen to be.
America will be weakened, and its people hurt by those in groups 2-4. The violence speaks for itself and the economics behind group 3 make sustainability an impossibility. Besides, it is not the role of government to be a worldwide charity. There are more than enough options for those who want to freely give their money to help people overseas. And Americans are quite generous in their charity.
Europe is waking up to this fact and changing policy to try to deal with the problems they have created for themselves. It seems wisdom to avoid stepping into the problem in the first place….
#24 Steve
I think dealing with changing circumstances is part of the issue. During the first 300 years of the Church, persecution was random and sporadic and often local. Two, three, and in some cases, four generations could could pass with no persecution at all. Churches were built, communities formed, etc.. Then it happened, for anything from a few months to several years. Slowly life would return to normal. We have records of Christians petitioning imperial officials for the return of churches that had been confiscated. What I’m concerned with is what is the “constant” in these changeable times? How do we act or react?
If for instance, if taxes were levied on church properties in the US, would that constitute persecution or simply a legal issue to be dealt with as an incorporated group? Do we oppose refugees of a certain faith owing to our own religious world view? Hindus have been persecuting Christians in India. Do we ban Hindus? The list could go on and on. I’m not saying that I have any definitive answers, but I think it is worthwhile for us to thoughtfully deal with the questions.
#32 Steve
My post passed you in transmission…
In many respects, the Cold War was “easier” for Christians, especially in America. An officially atheistic Soviet Union, bent on world conquest, brings clarity.
There is no separation of mosque and state in Islam. That has to be understood as step one. That is why we see no such separation in sharia governments. The random Muslim may affirm such a separation, especially in the West, but that does not make the norm.
Nobody believes in fighting for Christianity with the sword, with killing the pagans, simply because they are pagans. However, the secular nation of America (and free nations worldwide) have an enemy that is no longer thousands of miles away, nor (thanks to foreign dependence on oil) can be ignored by the international community.
And this enemy is motivated by a religious fervor. It matters not whether they have “hijacked” Islam, anymore than it matters if Lenin hijacked Karl Marx’s writings. Present reality is all that matters.
So when a largely Christian nation fights back against an entirely Islamic enemy for freedom for all people within its borders (including other religions, homosexuals, women) it is NOT a religious war on our side, nor should we wring our hands as followers of Christ that we are violating Christ’s teachings anymore than those who fought fascism and communism.
And the government owes its citizens the wisdom and commitment to discern the tactics of the enemy…and that ever since the Greeks presented a certain horse to Troy, failure to recognize this fact has led to disaster. Even the Bible contains examples of military victory brought about by subterfuge.
Hindus have been persecuting Christians in India. Do we ban Hindus?
——————————————-
Duane, because of my strong connection to India which you may not be aware of but most regular here know, I thought of this before you wrote it….I almost added above that I do not care what religion those in groups 2-4 happen to be either….
I add that now.
#35 Steve
I largely agree with you, but with a few caveats –
1. “largely Christian nation”, I think I would dispute…
2. Islam is a danger as practiced among many groups and nations. Saudi Arabia has been notorious for decades in this regard. I do not see Saudis being banned or even considered.
3. Pakistan (no oil) has equally been aggressive in their intolerance, but again, no ban.
4. “Nobody believes in fighting for Christianity with the sword…” I think many do believe in this.
1. “largely Christian nation”, I think I would dispute…
——————————————-
What matters is this discussion is that 75% of the voters in 2016 profess to be Christians. The discussion here is public policy, not the wheat and the tares.
2-3) You are not going to find me supporting the inconsistent international policies of our government with Islamic nations around the world. We could start with the Bush family. However, since you write in the context of the temporary ban, you actually are doing a fine job of supporting Trump’s view — namely, that this is not a Muslim ban but directly connected to nations that have broken down as to their governments. They can’t provide us the needed materials to vet that other Islamic, stable, governments can provide. I NEVER implied that oil had anything to do with this temporary ban through the Executive Order, nor was I speaking of the ban at all – but rather our history as a country over the last several decades.
4) – I don’t know what to say to such a worldview. I feel sorry your liberalism has gotten you to embrace it. No different than those on the right convinced the left wanted them thrown into FEMA camps during the Obama years. Utter madness.
Needless to say, there is no evidence Christians are running around the streets of America using violence in the name of Jesus Christ against unbelievers. In fact, I would wager that for every loon who vandalizes a mosque there is a fake news report of someone lying about being harassed.
Maybe you define the word “many” as in a few nobodies on twitter….but you will not find a denomination, influential leaders, or serious argument that non Christians are to be killed for Jesus’ sake while waving the stars and stripes.
But if “many” are advocating the murder or forced conversion of Muslims in America, then it should not be too hard to come up with half a dozen or so names to list out here for evaluation.
My very best friends, whom I’ve known since early childhood, are by and large not Christian. It was about the time that we were all separating and going to college, before social media, that I was saved. They kept going in the same direction. I turned around.
Coming this December, I’ve been married for 20 years. Most of those really old friends see that as a super human feat from the stone-age. When they’ve asked me how in the world it worked, they had the idea that we have agreed on every issue for 20 years, never argued or fought, and think each other are insanely hot every moment of the day. When I tell them that none of those things are true, but in fact, we are very different people. We disagree on a ton of stuff. We used to argue all the times. There have been times where I felt like I hated her guts, and I’m sure the feeling was returned.
True, she has always thought I was insanely hot, but what can I say?
Grasping for some way to tell my agnostic friend and his atheist wife to keep their marriage together, I had to admit, I have no clue. If you remove Jesus from the picture of my marriage, my wife and I are far too different, and it would never work. However, because I love Jesus, and she loves Jesus, when we are both focusing on him we can tolerate our differences. We can even love each other, and enjoy spending time together more than anything in the world.
And yes, that story is about the current topic 🙂
.
I’ve got to make some calls….off now.
“Typical Pphx Discussion, and I say this w/ affection:
MLD telling us to calm down, nothing’s happening;
Steve Wright offering a word study;
Duane referencing ancient sources;
MIchael and Xenia agreeing w/ Duane”
And Josh tells a seemingly unrelated story. 🙂
Josh, I was trying to think of something clever to characterize your contributions but the fact is, you are an independent thinker and I can never predict what you are going to say!
Steve Wright said “Maybe you define the word “many” as in a few nobodies on twitter….but you will not find a denomination, influential leaders, or serious argument that non Christians are to be killed for Jesus’ sake while waving the stars and stripes.”
This is what I was trying to say above that got labeled a “rant” – just because you hear about something does not mean many are following.
#38 Steve
On “largely Christian nation”, I am frankly disturbed as apart from self-description in a survey, I do not believe in “national Christianity” in any way…
On the Bush family, oil, etc., I think we would largely agree although I think we would disagree concerning the current attempted ban for a whole range of reasons.
Finally, I’m not sure about my “liberalism”, but there are those within the greater Church in this country, I believe, that have gone beyond the pale in mixing their Christian faith with images of waving flags and F16s flying by… and yes, I have seen it in numerous conservative churches.
I prefer the identity of the early believers – “They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers.”
I agree that no serious Christian group wants to kill unbelievers in the name of Christ.
But I do know a lot of Christians (in real life, not FB) who are always talking about their guns and how they are preparing for…. something. So I don’t know who these people are expecting to shoot but it worries me some. I imagine they are thinking of self-defense against….. who?
“They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers.”
I don’t know how we get around that this is the description of the church in the NT…and should be about us as well.
After the Challenger Space Shuttle disaster, I read a letter to the editor of the San Jose, CA, paper where the writer said that it was improper to read a Bible verse at the memorial due to an Israeli being one of the crew. The verse was from the Old Testament, so aside the obvious ignorance on display, there was here a savior looking for a victim…
Since there was an Indian crew member on board, I asked my Indian co-worker if she was offended that a verse from The Bible was read at the memorial. She was Hindu, a Brahman, in fact. She looked at me curiously and said, “of course not, America is a Christian nation.”
Interesting point-of-view.
Oops. Columbia disaster in 2003, not the Challenger in ’86.
“What matters is this discussion is that 75% of the voters in 2016 profess to be Christians. The discussion here is public policy, not the wheat and the tares.”
Any way you want to slice it, it is dead wrong to say America is a Christian nation or that it runs on Christian values or ethics. There are secular nations in Europe which are closer than America.
The nation of America is by definition a left hand kingdom order. By definition, it must be run under the Law. Christ’ kingdom runs under grace. He plainly said His kingdom is not of this world. Christ does not resist His enemies, He dies for them.
If we are going to cite the Fathers, let’s also hear from the Father of Latin Christianity:
“We are worshippers of one God, of whose existence and character Nature teaches all men; at whose lightnings and thunders you tremble, whose benefits minister to your happiness. You think that others, too, are gods, whom we know to be devils. However, it is a fundamental human right, a privilege of nature, that every man should worship according to his own convictions….”
Jean
I think we call that “two for two”… Agreed and well cited…
I may get in trouble for sharing this, but my son asked me to review a paper he’s teaching from this Wednesday evening. Here, from one section, is a comment on our topic. What do youy’all think?
“So where does that leave us? St. Peter calls the church “a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light” [citation omitted]. Jesus calls us to be a city on a hill; an example to those around us. He urges us, “let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven” [citation omitted]. Our purpose is to bring other people to praise and worship God. We are the “salt of the Earth” [citation omitted]. What do we use salt for? It adds flavor and we can flavor the world with mercy and love. But more than that, salt is used as a preservative. God preserves people; he saves people through the proclamation of Jesus Christ. Listen again to Peter, “Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us” [citation omitted]. These good deeds are about more than just doing the right things and avoiding the wrong things. It’s not about fear of punishment or trying to earn our ticket to heaven. It’s about revealing God’s love through how we live our lives. John writes that ”no one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.”
“So when a largely Christian nation fights back against an entirely Islamic enemy for freedom for all people within its borders (including other religions, homosexuals, women) it is NOT a religious war on our side, nor should we wring our hands as followers of Christ that we are violating Christ’s teachings anymore than those who fought fascism and communism.”
weeel i thot that this was worth repeating as it dovetails with the letter posted – IMHO
FWIW @37, i don’t think that the present head of the Saudi government is as treacherous as the guy that died recently (can’t think of what they call their leader – sheik?)… a little know fact, perhaps, is that there has been ongoing cooperation of sorts between Israel and the Saudis … and Bush Jr. was waay too influenced by Cheney, who is an oiil man to the core, IMO…
there is so much more that goes on behind the scenes than what we see…
i know it will grate on most here, but we sure do look to be lining up to fulfill end times as prophesy is understood by many of us
the Church truly is just a life boat on the sea of history, ready to rescue all, but so few climb aboard… sorry, but my thot processes just work that way 🙂
BTW, for those you are skeptical about others mixing Church and State, it is worth looking at the remarks of Rep. Mike Pompeo at Wichita Summit Church, “God and Country Rally” on June 28, 2015… Oh, yes, he’s now in charge of the CIA…
Duane
I bet the CIA has always been in the church.
#55 – make that churches and you got that right…
i remember long years ago we were hosting a couple really nice fellows who were headed over to Turkey as part of a search for Noah’s Ark… i had to bite my tongue because these fellows were so government, but they were good guys non the less
#52 Jean
Do you know who is being quoted?
Duane,
My son wrote that.
Jean
I wondered. You should be proud, it’s very good!
“…we can flavor the world with mercy and love.”