barnhart wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2026 7:06 am
Of all the false religions in the world, this one may be the deadliest and most pervasive.
"Redemptive violence" is the very core of Shiite Islam. It is interesting to see people busy defending it here on MennoNet.
I don’t see anyone here defending Shiite Islam.
It seems like you’re interpreting disagreement as endorsement, which is the same kind of move you’ve objected to when it’s done to you.
I see quite vigorous defences of the current Iranian regime, which functions as a Shiite theocracy.
The appropriate thing to do is identify both Reformed-Calvinist Christianity (and all other not-non-resistant “Christian” religions) and Shiite Islam (and other similar Islamic faiths) as false religions, and proclaim the good news of Jesus’ kingdom of peace. Of course, there doesn’t seem to be much desire to do that outside of scoring cheap partisan wins.
JohnH wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2026 7:45 am
"Redemptive violence" is the very core of Shiite Islam. It is interesting to see people busy defending it here on MennoNet.
I don’t see anyone here defending Shiite Islam.
I see quite vigorous defences of the current Iranian regime.
I don't see it either. Could you provide some specific examples?
"Redemptive violence" is the very core of Shiite Islam. It is interesting to see people busy defending it here on MennoNet.
I don’t see anyone here defending Shiite Islam.
It seems like you’re interpreting disagreement as endorsement, which is the same kind of move you’ve objected to when it’s done to you.
I see quite vigorous defences of the current Iranian regime, which functions as a Shiite theocracy.
The appropriate thing to do is identify both Reformed-Calvinist Christianity (and all other not-non-resistant “Christian” religions) and Shiite Islam (and other similar Islamic faiths) as false religions, and proclaim the good news of Jesus’ kingdom of peace. Of course, there doesn’t seem to be much desire to do that outside of scoring cheap partisan wins.
Nobody is defending the Iranian regime here. What’s being criticized and questioned is the US’s use of power and violence.
Shiite Islam and the Iranian regime are separate to Christianity. The prayer Dan mentioned hits closer to home.
A prayer asking for “overwhelming violence” and “no mercy” is worth examining, especially when it’s coming from someone who claims to be a Christian leading an American institution.
Islam is external. Hegseth’s prayer is in our house.
2 x
"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless."
JohnH wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2026 3:29 pm
The appropriate thing to do is identify both Reformed-Calvinist Christianity (and all other not-non-resistant “Christian” religions) and Shiite Islam (and other similar Islamic faiths) as false religions, and proclaim the good news of Jesus’ kingdom of peace. Of course, there doesn’t seem to be much desire to do that outside of scoring cheap partisan wins.
I'm not sure what fault you can find with the statement below, but there's probably something.
My journey into Anabaptist understandings of following Jesus began after the Sept. 11 attacks and the subsequent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq by U.S. military forces.
I was unsettled by the ease with which many Christians tried to baptize violence, eager to make it seem that taking life was a Christian duty. It didn't look anything like Jesus.
When I tell the story, I sometimes joke that all the prayers sounded like "God, make our bullets straighter and our bombs bigger than theirs."
Turns out I wasn't just being hyperbolic. Yesterday, the Secretary of War gathered together the staff of the Pentagon and offered a prayer that included these lines:
"Grant this task force clear and righteous targets for violence..."
"Let every round find its mark."
"... overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy."
This language sounds religious and even Biblical, but it is not Christian. At the risk of being hyperbolic again, this is a doctrine of demons.
There is no one who deserves mercy—and no one who is excluded from it. This is the heart of the Gospel. While we were enemies of God, Jesus died for us. Sacrificial love, not violence, is God's response to wrongdoing.
Christians can differ as to the proper role of state violence (eg. Ro. 13), but what we cannot do is try to act as if violence is somehow itself "Christian." As the authors of the Schleitheim Confession recognized, the sword is "ordained outside the perfection of Christ."
The only place Jesus can be found in violent conflict is under the rubble.
Has anyone else thought about that a Department of War (rather than a Department of Defense) doesn’t seem like a very needful department, unless it really has wars to fight?
0 x
A wee little man can’t say, I’m sorry. A big man owns his mistakes and apologizes.
A wee little man trusts himself and his own discernment. A big man is humble enough to know that he needs the counsel and input of others.
A wee little man can’t say, I’m sorry. A big man owns his mistakes and apologizes.
A wee little man trusts himself and his own discernment. A big man is humble enough to know that he needs the counsel and input of others.
Ernie wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2026 10:01 pm
Has anyone else thought about that a Department of War (rather than a Department of Defense) doesn’t seem like a very needful department, unless it really has wars to fight?
I thought the name change was sending signals.
0 x
"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless."
Wife: This probably ages me, but I find it so odd now that we are seeing Shiite as the extra bad version when just a decade ago, the Shiites were our allies, not Iran specifically, and the Sunni were the terrorists. A lot of our interpreters were shiites from Afghanistan, and we actually ate with a family who had moved over here, and they seemed pretty chill and more into Bollywood than religion.
i’ve always sort of thought of Shiites as the Catholics and Sunni as the Protestants of Islam. My guess would be that hard core Shiite as in Iran gov is not very peace loving and friendly, but they are just following what their religion preaches. I’m reminded of Michael Sattler with the Turks of the flesh and the Turks of the spirit comment that got him in trouble.
Ernie wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2026 10:01 pm
Has anyone else thought about that a Department of War (rather than a Department of Defense) doesn’t seem like a very needful department, unless it really has wars to fight?
I thought the name change was sending signals.
It was originally called that. From what I’ve heard Trump say is that under Biden America started to look very weak. The name change was to align with his “Peace by Strength “ and to convey that to those who see us as a weakened nation thereby taking advantage of that.
Ernie wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2026 10:01 pm
Has anyone else thought about that a Department of War (rather than a Department of Defense) doesn’t seem like a very needful department, unless it really has wars to fight?
I thought the name change was sending signals.
It was originally called that. From what I’ve heard Trump say is that under Biden America started to look very weak. The name change was to align with his “Peace by Strength “ and to convey that to those who see us as a weakened nation thereby taking advantage of that.
Wife: it was called that back around World War II. It’s been the department of defense since 1949.
Could you provide some specific examples?