American evangelism??

[aldona]

Here is a cartoon from today's newspaper.

[]http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2005/03/16/cartoon_1703_gallery__550x389.jpg[/]

[Dr. Shane]

The hate America campaign continues. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

[aldona]

I was waiting for a "hate-America" accusation from you, Brother Shane, and you have not disappointed me.

Instead of this reflex action whenever someone out there criticizes US actions or policy, why not spend some time pondering WHY it is that citizens of other nations sometimes have grave reservations about the methods that America has used (now and in the past) to:

- spread religious beliefs to other parts of the world

- spread "democracy" to other parts of the world

aldona

[Dr. Shane]

You are so insensative to my feelings. I was so offended by you not only attacking my country but attacking my avocation. Do you just have a heart of stone? You should really consider the feelings of others.

You may find it hard to believe but American missionaries have actually won hundreds of thousands of souls to Jesus and minsitered to millions. Perhaps you are perplexed why God started His remnant church in America and from here sent out missionaries to the world to finish the work. I can personally testify that I have never, not once, shown up to someone's door with a rifle in my hand. I am insulted that American missionaries are charachterized as such.

Perhaps you should spend some time in front of the mirror and ask why you hate America so much and feel the need to insult those of us doing God's work.

[Dr. Shane]

First Coaspen, aldona is not American so why would anyone call her "unamerican"?

Second if you look at the cartoon what it is saying is that the way America carries the gospel to the world is by force. If you believe that, you ought to stop paying a faithful tithe right now. America has been one of the most active nations in carrying the gospel to the world and it has been through methods such as humanitarian aid and education, not by means of force. Yet remember that Sister Aldona thought it a scandel for the tsunami relief workers to share Jesus with those they helped. She obviously has a low opinion of American missionaries - perhaps even contempt.

[Rosie]

I'll side with Shane on this one.

It's not funny, nor is this a realistic depiction of evangelizing the gospel to anyone.

[Bravus]

Shane, I have lost a huge amount of the respect I used to have for you. Your behaviour around the whole 'being offended' thing is purely that of a spoiled, selfish, spiteful brat. You did something mildly wrong, but you've blown it up to take over your whole web persona and come across as a bitter whiner. Let it go already, and salvage a little dignity.

Michael Leunig is a deeply spiritual Australian cartoonist whose work explores ideas at a deep level and with multiple meanings. He does *not* mean that America spreads the gospel at the point of a gun, he means, among other things, that America spreads Americanness at the point of a gun. You'll notice he said 'American evangelists', not 'Christian evangelists'. Of course there's a link between American militarism and American 'Christianity', much to Christianity's shame, but the cartoon challenges all of us to think at a number of levels.

And if a cartoon is more offensive to you than people with weapons that will rip a human being to bloody chunks kicking in someone's door...

[Ron Lambert]

I notice that Aldona also seemes to disparage democracy, as if it is somehow ignoble for America to try to bring democracy to the downtrodden in the world who do not have it. As far as I am concerned, anyone who declares themselves against democracy for any reason, anyone who would ever question whether bringing democracy to everyone on earth is not a worthy cause, is declaring themselves opposed to all that is good and decent on the earth.

Is the appeal being made by such as Aldona that people should have the freedom not to have democracy brought to them? But freedom to choose is precisely what democracy brings to those who do not have it. Only those who do not want others to have the freedom to choose are opposed to democracy. They are afraid the people might choose differently than the opposers of democracy want them to choose.

In Iraq, the vast majority showed how much they desire the freedom of choice democracy brings, voting and proudly upholding their purple-stained thumbs, despite all the threats and violence of the vicious opponents of democracy.

And please notice that in Iraq, it is the handful who are opposed to democracy who are the ones engaging in violence. They are the ones with whom should be associated scenes of violence. When U.S. Marines kick down doors, it is only in pursuit of those who have murdened their countrymen in barbarous acts of violence against unarmed civilians, whose only "crime" is the desire to have freedom of choice.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

I have lost a huge amount of the respect I used to have for you.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I don't know why you insist on up holding a double standard. In so doing you play the part of a hypocrit. Is it that hard to admit you are wrong? Try it sometime. I find it refreshing when I do it.

[Bravus]

Show me the double standard and I'll gladly repent of it. If you recall, when I posted something that you said you found offensive I removed it immediately and apologised.

On the other hand, it seems to me as though you haven't enjoyed that particular refreshment for a while: I honestly can't recall *ever* seeing you admit that you were wrong in this forum, but I'll charitably blame that on faults of my memory. You can show me an example if you like, to remind me.

Let me try to do it a little less confrontationally. You put a particular interpretation on the cartoon, and ripped into aldona for it. I believe that is a mistaken interpretation of the cartoon, and I tried to clarify what I believe the cartoon is saying.

What you have been doing though, ever since the lapdance kerfuffle, is trying to play the 'you offended me and hurt my feelings' card in every single discussion as a way of getting your way and silencing dissent. It's not working, and it's not going to work.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Show me the double standard and I'll gladly repent of it.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I am going to take you up on that.

I make a statement without the intent to offend anyone. Someone is offended. You say I should appoligize not because what I said was offensive but simply because someone was offended. According to you, it doesn't matter if what a person says is offensive. All that matters is if someone is offended. It doesn't matter if a person intended to offend. All that matters is if someone was offended. That was your position when I was accused of offending someone.

Now look at the switch. Look at the double standard.

When I am offended I am still in the wrong for being so sensative. In this case, Aldona intended to offend me and other loyal Americans. She, herself, admitted "I was waiting for a 'hate-America' accusation from you, Brother Shane". You see, she made the post "waiting" for me to be offended. She was trying to offend me. Yet I am still in the wrong for being offended <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> If you can't see the double standard there you really need help with self-examination.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

it seems to me as though you haven't enjoyed that particular refreshment for a while:

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

First off, this is a very judgmental statement. You thought I needed to be sensative to others when I offended them but you obviously don't think you need to play by the same rules you set for others. You don't follow me around all day and you really have no idea how often I admit to being wrong. Believe me, it is often enough that I know the refreshment well.

One doesn't need to look too far back in threads here at C/A to see where I have admitted to reacting wrong and wording statements wrong. I know I am a sinner. As a sinner I know I am not perfect. Since I know I am not perfect I know I am going to make errors. Since I am going to make errors I know I need to examine myself on a regular basis. Upon self-examination I know I will need to admit when I am wrong and make a regular habit of it. I am not perfect, just forgiven.

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Nothing in the cartoon said anything about the 'gospel'.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Are you the type of person that would defend a child molester as long as the child was "consenting"? I mean, who would really be willing to defend this cartoon?

In case you are not that familiar with the English language, evangelists carry the gospel. In Spanish the word gospel is evangelio.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

as if it is somehow ignoble for America to try to bring democracy to the downtrodden in the world

---

"they have got to be protected,

all their rights protected,

at least until somebody we like has been elected"

- Tom Lehrer circa 1970

Strange how the USA idea of democracy involves installing buddies of GWB in countries where the USA has a strong vested interested - and interesting to see that those countries somehow don't seem to enjoy the experience.

More than 100,000 Iraqis killed by the USA in 2 years, probably in excess of 1 million injured - how many did Saddam kill?

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

No, your position is ignoring the obvious. What they are saying is that America uses soldiers to spread the gospel. This is the lie radical muslems are spreading. They are teaching that Americans want to force Christianity on them by force.

The truth is that American missionaries do not use force nor do we use coercion. My tactic is to help the poor improve their lifestyle by improving their residence (i.e. home). ADRA is a fine example of how Americans spread the gospel.

This cartoon would fit right in on an Al Queda recruiting poster.

[Bravus]

I will reply to this in some detail later this afternoon, but I'm teaching all day today. Just a note to let you know you're not being ignored or anything!

[Neil D]

Shane,

How you have interpreted the cartoon IS offensive....

While I do not agree with your interpretation of the cartoon, you have been brought to the place, and are being brought there again, where IRONY is lost to you...You don't understand it and where others show parables where multiple interpretations can be gleened, you have consistantly choosen the worst meaning of the parable, and have claimed it to be the ONLY meaning of the parable.....

Parables are not interpreted by JUST you, Shane...That is what makes parables so interesting...they are mult-faceted gems that allows the beholder to see many other facets of the gem/truth....

By insisting that there can be ONLY one interpretation, and only YOURS is the accepted one, shows another facet of the parable...that of revealing the character of the person interpreting the parable.....

While your interpretation is allowable, yours is not the only interpretation....Don't make the world revolve around you. At least attempt to be a bit more ...sublime...

[Bravus]

OK, I'm back, and I think I see a breakthrough!

The way you interpreted the cartoon is offensive to you, Shane, and I accept that, and am sorry that you were made to feel that way. (Oh, but hang on, you can't have your buttons pressed or be *made* to feel any way, right? That's your stated position. You are responsible for your reactions, no-one else.)

I accept that your interpretation is one possible interpretation of the cartoon, but would suggest to you very strongly that it's (a) by no means the only possible interpretation (note the several interpretations I listed above, and those other people have suggested) and ( not a particularly plausible/probable interpretation, in my opinion. In part I saw that based on knowing Leunig, the cartoonist, and his other work, and that's something you didn't have the benefit of, so I can understand your arriving at a different interpretation.

I also don't think your interpretation of aldona's comments - that she posted the cartoon with the intention of offending you - is plausible (though of course I'll let her clarify her own intentions if she so chooses). Noting that she 'expects' a certain reaction from you simply means she knows you well: in my opinion it's a little arrogant of you to assume that it was you for whom she posted the cartoon.

I guess I need to withdraw my insinuation that your offense and outrage were not real, but were wording carried over from the lapdance thing. As I said above, if you were generally upset and offended, I'm sorry for you and sorry that it happened. I'd like to encourage you to at least consider the possibility that the cartoon might have other possible meanings than the single one that first struck you, however.

[Restin]

What the "cartoon" brings to me is in the future when America will be the enforcer for the papacy, to force all both great and small, rich and poor, to receive The Mark in their forehead or in their hand. So, I see that as appropriate for later rather than for now.

[Dr. Shane]

I agree with you, Restin. The cartoon does depict what will be the lambilike power enforcing the mark of the beast.

I have very thick skin and understand that those that strike out at me in an attempt to offend me are themselves spiritually sick. I have compassion and pity for them. In this thread I have used irony to show the double standard that is out there. And it is out there.

I do not think there is a need for someone to appologize when they have done nothing wrong. Nor am I asking Sister Aldona to appologize to me. It seems to me that Sister Aldona has just gotten so wrapped up in a radical political viewpoint that she has lost prespective. That happens to many and I don't fault her personally for that.

[aldona]

OK, I have been away from the computer for a couple of days and it is interesting to see the direction the debate has taken.

Let me start off by saying this.

Because I am opposed to war, I know in advance that any pacifist statement I make (or indeed any criticism of anything that US foreign policy does) will be taken as a sign that I am an America-hater. I have come to expect this as predictable. This does not mean that I make such statements in an effort to offend Shane, or any other person. If I have offended anyone I apologise, as this was not my intent.

But I cannot keep silent and deny what I believe simply because some of my fellow Christians believe differently. I will continue to speak out against war, violence and militarism.

Because it is becoming more apparent to me that a pacifist and social justice activist like myself is out of place in this type of online environment, I will continue to gradually step back (like I have been doing for the past few months) and find other forums where I can be free to say "PEACE, NOT WAR" without constantly having to dodge the inevitable verbal barrage that follows.

I'll just end with an image. It is from the Melbourne Independent Media website and it is from the anti-war rally that took place on Friday (March 18) to commemorate the 2nd anniversary of the war.

You can't see me but you can see my sign (Axis of Error) making its way down Swanston Street, Melbourne.

I made the sign 2 years ago for the original anti-war protest just before the war began. I have kept it and brought it out again because it remains just as relevant.

Disclaimer:

This is not an attempt to offend Shane, or anybody else.

I do not hate America, or any other nation. I include criticism of my own government in my statement.

I am not calling anybody names or trying to say something offensive. I am simply making the statement that I believe the war was (and remains) a mistake.

[]http://melbourne.indymedia.org/uploads/d-u_thumb.jpg[/]

aldona

[jasd]

aldona

Quote:

---

I include criticism of my own government in my statement.

---

Hey Mum! The American Evangelists Are At The Front Door…

However, the ‘bubble’ was singularly American in tone, wasn’t it? I don’t suppose the ellipsis contains a denouement, and --is really innocuous, hmmm…? (not knocking you, merely deconstructing)

There is a tide in the affairs of men,

Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;

Omitted, all the voyage of its life

Is bound in shallows and in miseries. --Brutus,

There is that thing called petrodollars. It is not called petroDOLLARS for nothing.

When Saddam moved to sever the dollar as the denominator of the oil markets in favor of €uros --together with the attempt of the Muslim world to tie oil to its gold dinar, it behooved

America to take ACTION. For America to have sought-for a Platonic resolution in the face of an economic threat of such magnitude --together with a declared worldwide jihad --would have been insanity. If America collapsed into a third world nation for insufficiency of fuel, --the entire world collapses. There is only one outcome to that scenario; it is, at least in the temporary,

collapse of civilization --as we know it. Following,

would be incessant war --leading to a social order eventually imposed and best describes, as a One-World Govt. Now, the question that follows would be,

where, or in which hands will the reins of that New Order be deposited? If one suggests America with her history of relative benignity: Oops! wrong answer… That being said,

Democracy is an acceptable façade.

A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

…

A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away

…

A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace. –Eccl 3

all being said, I respect a person who acts upon his/her beliefs; the question of right vs wrong being, sometimes, tangential

[Dr. Shane]

It is all about tactfulness. As Christians we should be the first to be tackful when we disagree with others. Brother Bevin is also a pacifist but notice how he uses tact.

Political cartoons are rarely tactful. Brother Neil often criticises me for using certain words that he thinks are inflamatory and yet finds no problem with political cartoons which are drawn up for inflamatory purposes alone. I could go tit for tat and post conservative inflamatory cartoons for every liberal inflamtory cartoon but I have choosen to take the high road and be the better man. I can state my opinion without a cartoon to support it.

If you choose to withdraw that is your decision but if you only feel comfortable interacting with others that believe as you do, truth will always evade you. There are chat rooms and forums where any of us can go and chat with others that think the same way we do. However those areas stimulate little thought and offer few challenges to our idealogy.

This cartoon is insulting to American missionaries and American soldiers alike. It is one of the most inflamatory political cartoons I have seen in some time. It is exactly the type of cartoon one would expect Al Queda to use as propoganda.

[Bravus]

OK, so basically, everyone in the thread has learned something except Shane, who remains exactly where he started.

That's not an insult, or an attack, that's calling it as I see it. Aldona has clarified her perception, I have clarified my position and backed off somewhat - basically, everyone has been conciliatory, but you, Shane, continue to believe you are absolutely, indubitably right and can learn nothing.

[Dr. Shane]

Once again, a very judgmental statement, Brother Bravus. Since you are in the judging mood, why don't you clarify exactly what everyone has learned? I don't know what Aldona has learned. I don't know what Neil has learned. I don't know what Coaspen has learned. If everyone has learned something, why don't you share what they have learned?

I have learned something too. I have learned that Brother Bravus is unwilling to admit his double standard or too blind to see it. So there, I have learned something.

[Neil D]

Quote:

---

I have learned something too. I have learned that Brother Bravus is unwilling to admit his double standard or too blind to see it. So there, I have learned something.

---

And I have an observation that I have seen in you, Shane....

myopia...