An article in the "Adventist Peace Messenger"

[aldona]

(quote)

Divine Strake in the Desert Delayed

The massive test explosion code-named Divine Strake scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site has been postponed until at least June 23, the Deseret Morning News reported on May 10. Opponents thus have a bit more time to make their case that igniting 700 tons of conventional explosives underground carries the unacceptable risk of launching into the atmosphere radiation left in the ground from the nuclear test blasts during the 1950s and 1960s. Critics of the Bush administration’s nuclear weapons policies also can’t help wondering if the test marks a step toward development of nuclear “bunker-buster” bombs.

Utah Senator Orrin Hatch was among those calling for greater scrutiny before the test is carried out. In a letter to James Tegnelia, director of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Sen. Hatch raised the following questions:

· Is there a possibility that contaminated soil could become airborne during the explosion?

· How close is the U16a tunnel area (where six underground nuclear tests were held) to the Divine Strake location?

· Could radioactive material become dislodged from the U16a site?

Salt Lake Tribune columnist Barb Guy had some questions of her own in mind in her commentary on the test:

…[W]hat makes me go nuclear is the use of “Divine” in the name. I’ve really had it with the Bush administration positioning things like they were ordered up by God. And this isn't the first time. There are at least nine other divine tests on the books, including Divine Warhawk and, to really prove the point, Divine Hates.

Up close, each day, Americans are doing lovely, honorable things, but I wonder how we look as a group from far away. We ignore poor people and people stricken with unrelenting illness and pain, we turn our backs on genocide, and we spend our vast wealth and waste our sharp minds on war.…

Could this be why people hate us? We make bad choices. We choose to enrich the already wealthy, making everyone else poorer; we ignore the sick and starving; we invent wars but give them very real death tolls; we ruin the only land the world will ever get; we spend sinful amounts of money to create a better way to wage war; and, more and more, we literally do it in God's name.…

We see people across the globe possessed by such a religious vehemence that their humanity is ruined. Crazed with bloodlust, they must destroy human life, American life, to prove God is on their side. Americans find this indefensible – that’s not how reasonable people behave.

Then why is President Bush’s team putting the language of the holy to our war efforts? To imply that God approves of our actions? I can only wonder what God might really think of America’s “Divine” projects.

Who would Jesus bomb? First and foremost, no one. If we fail to grasp that lesson, if we keep confusing the unholy with the sacred, our jihad looks a lot like theirs.

(end quote)

[Dr. Shane]

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

Who would Jesus bomb?

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

Would Jesus hold elected office?

"When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone." John 6:15

[Neil D]

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

Would Jesus hold elected office?

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

Isn't He the King of kings and Lord of lords?

[there buster]

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

Who would Jesus bomb?

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

[:"red"]Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens.

[/] Gen 19:24

[:"red"]11 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. 12His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. 16On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

17And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, "Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and mighty men, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, small and great."

19Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to make war against the rider on the horse and his army. 20But the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped his image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. 21The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh. [/] Rev 19:11-21

[:"red"]esus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight . . ." "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." [/] John 18:36; Matt 22:21

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

I’ve really had it with the Bush administration positioning things like they were ordered up by God.

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

What a silly comment. 1)Does anyone really believe the White House is involved in naming every operation that takes place in this vast government? 2)I'm unaware of any claims that any of the administration's actions were "ordered up by God." Disagree? Fine. But don't hallucinate.

[Dr. Shane]

Jesus did not mess with civil government when He was on earth. His mission was a spiritual one. While we should always ask ourselves WWJD, we need to keep that in context.

A mechanic when taking apart an engine may ask himself which part Jesus would take off first. It is a valid question but since Jesus wasn't a mechanic the answer may not be that clear.

The same is true with politics. I hope our politicians do ask themselves WWJD, but I also understand that since Jesus wasn't a politician, the answers will not be that clear.

[Neil D]

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

Jesus did not mess with civil government when He was on earth. His mission was a spiritual one. While we should always ask ourselves WWJD, we need to keep that in context.

A mechanic when taking apart an engine may ask himself which part Jesus would take off first. It is a valid question but since Jesus wasn't a mechanic the answer may not be that clear.

The same is true with politics. I hope our politicians do ask themselves WWJD, but I also understand that since Jesus wasn't a politician, the answers will not be that clear.

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

There is much here that begs to be address. The concept that "Jesus did not mess with civil government " is to deny the facts of His court case, His dealings with soldiers and centurians, and His relationships with Pharisees and Sadducees and others. Even temple taxes were paid, when Jesus didn't need to "mess with civil goverment"...

And the concept of separating Jesus' life from spiritual things is, in my mind, a legalistic way of separating the concept that Jesus dedicated His WHOLE life to his mission...just as we are to dedicate our lives WHOLEY to Him, there is no separation of spiritual and secular [as implied in the statement].

And while I agree that Jesus was NOT a mechanic, He was a tradesman, specifically a CARPENTER, and knows the principles of the craft. As such, those prinicples need to be applied to all disciples who WHOLEY dedicate thier lives to Him.

As for the WWJD question, the answer is totally dependant upon the depth, of knowledge and experience with Jesus, of the questioner, and may not be in agreement with any bystander. Therefore, that question is kinda moot...

And as for the problem of Jesus dealing with politics, it occurs to me that politics is beneath Jesus...When it came to politics between the disciples, [James and John and who would be on His right hand], Jesus showed different priniciples in His goverment. Not the 'behind the scenes backroom deals made late at night', but rather something different...something rather obvious that mankind could figure out...[remove the dictatorship/emporior concepts of dealing with mass people, and put into place a republican form of goverment, like USA. Of course, theocracies were also set up by God, but they depended upon the reasoning abilities of the people..... and, in some cases, monarchs].

It behooves us to use a more reasoned principles when it comes to civil goverments....ones that show a REPRESENTATION of the PEOPLE, and not a few cronys....

[Dr. Shane]

Jesus dealt with civil government only to the extent He was required to by it. Jesus did not live in a democracy which is government for the people by the people.

[Neil D]

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

Jesus dealt with civil government only to the extent He was required to by it.

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

That arguement is a questionable arguement at best. But I leave this to others to figure out.

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

Jesus did not live in a democracy which is government for the people by the people.

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

Democracy is a form of goverment that is more equitable to it's citizens, and hence is a goverment that is more loving to the individual, than an authoritarian goveerment, ie a monachy which is more dependant upon the character of the King/Queen.

Jesus' goverment, while here on earth, was demonstrated between Him and his disciples. Jesus enacted principles of love and freedom within His kingdom. EGW gives some evidence of a republican form of goverment outside of His authority. Whether this is author prejudice, or perception is unknown, and, granted, the evidence is there, however it is speculation....

Nevertheless, assuming a republican form of goverement, I would conclude that a republican form of goverment IS a loving form of goverment, and well sanctioned by Jesus.