Friday, January 12, 2007
June 27th 2006 was the date of my last blog. I don't know why I stopped. It's not like I don't like to write, I do. Any way, as part of my New Year's resolution I am starting up again. Mostly because I will be publishing my first book and having a web series pilot out this spring, I figure can use whatever meager publicity this will get me.
There is so much to write about these days that narrowing down to one topic is difficult, but I just watched a vid from CNN on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., since his holiday is Monday I figured I say a couple of things in and around him.
It's hard to imagine Dr. King not wanting to march these days considering how violent we've become. As a nation we are inundated with violence and death. Two days ago, a US gunship flew over the Somali countryside and sprayed bullets on a village killing 20 or so people in a matter of minutes in the name of the "War on Terror". The President has asked for 20000 more troops for a failing war effort in Iraq where 3000 kids have died in just under four years and another 22000 have been wounded. Not to mention the 100000 or so Iraqis killed.
Here in America, my hometown of New Orleans has suffered through 9 murders in the first 12 days of the year. If that pace remains they will have 274 murders this year or roughly a hundred and fifteen or so more than last year. Making New Orleans by far the most violent city in a country where 30000 people die each year as a result of gun violence.
Yes, there is no question, to me at least, that Dr. King would march. His biggest dilemma with so much going on would be which cause to march about. With ten times the number of dead here at home on an annual basis than the war in Iraq has cost us in four years, perhaps he would see that as a nation we need to begin to search within ourselves for an answer to violence first, before we can go to other countries and point out their faults.
Like the citizens of New Orleans did yesterday, perhaps Dr. King would call our politicians to the mat, turn their heads away from the oil rich fields of the middle east long enough to recognize that the crisis of faith in this world does not pit muslims, christians and jews against one another, but person against person.
Dr. King would push us to recognize that the violence that culminates now in the streets of Baghdad, begins in the fear that is grown in our own cities, and in the mindset of our own people.
Dr. King would also remind us Jesus said, we need to remove the log from our own eyes before we can remove the splinter from our neighbor's eye.
Peace,
RW
There is so much to write about these days that narrowing down to one topic is difficult, but I just watched a vid from CNN on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., since his holiday is Monday I figured I say a couple of things in and around him.
It's hard to imagine Dr. King not wanting to march these days considering how violent we've become. As a nation we are inundated with violence and death. Two days ago, a US gunship flew over the Somali countryside and sprayed bullets on a village killing 20 or so people in a matter of minutes in the name of the "War on Terror". The President has asked for 20000 more troops for a failing war effort in Iraq where 3000 kids have died in just under four years and another 22000 have been wounded. Not to mention the 100000 or so Iraqis killed.
Here in America, my hometown of New Orleans has suffered through 9 murders in the first 12 days of the year. If that pace remains they will have 274 murders this year or roughly a hundred and fifteen or so more than last year. Making New Orleans by far the most violent city in a country where 30000 people die each year as a result of gun violence.
Yes, there is no question, to me at least, that Dr. King would march. His biggest dilemma with so much going on would be which cause to march about. With ten times the number of dead here at home on an annual basis than the war in Iraq has cost us in four years, perhaps he would see that as a nation we need to begin to search within ourselves for an answer to violence first, before we can go to other countries and point out their faults.
Like the citizens of New Orleans did yesterday, perhaps Dr. King would call our politicians to the mat, turn their heads away from the oil rich fields of the middle east long enough to recognize that the crisis of faith in this world does not pit muslims, christians and jews against one another, but person against person.
Dr. King would push us to recognize that the violence that culminates now in the streets of Baghdad, begins in the fear that is grown in our own cities, and in the mindset of our own people.
Dr. King would also remind us Jesus said, we need to remove the log from our own eyes before we can remove the splinter from our neighbor's eye.
Peace,
RW
# posted by Unknown @ 7:15 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
In coming late to the table, I start by quoting one of your earlier blogs: "We are Christian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, Hindu, Taoist and a hundred other faiths all acceptable, all valid. Televangelists want everyone to believe in God the same way, they demand of it as if it were an undeniable truth and place scorn upon anyone who fails to measure up to their version of Christianity. In doing so they themselves are denying the reason for Jesus in the first place, the reassurance that as long as a person had faith in God and loves their fellow human, there is always a place at the table." As I said, I'm late coming to the table but in light of the honest dialoge, this is where I would like to begin. I would open the discussion by asking: Are all faiths "acceptable, all valid"? To whom? If my faith involves killing small children (see some of those from ancient Israel and even Rome) does that count? I certainly don't find that acceptable. I would also take issue with the use of a broad-brushing of televangelists. While I am no fan of most said preachers, many of them want us to believe (and therefore worship) in different ways -- that's why, in part, there are so many of them. Further, as for "scorn" in failing to measure up "to their version of Christianity"... by definition, Christiantity (being a disciple of Christ or "little Christ"), is something to which we will never measure up -- certainly not w/o Christ's help and absoluetely not until we are resurrected and transformed through His saving grace. We all fall short of the glory of God. Which brings me to my final point (thanks for listening...) Jesus did not come to provide reassurance that if we just "had faith in God..." there would always be "a place at the table." First and foremost, Jesus came to die for a sinful world; to be our propitiation for our sins (which make us unnacceptable in His sight) so that "whosoever believeth in Him [Christ] should not perish but have everlasting life." John 3:16, one of the "biggies". Also bear in mind, Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." No one. Except. Through [Christ]. (Emphasis His.) I am thrilled to have open dialogue here and thank the bloggers involved. But I leave with this final question: Can we ALL be "acceptable" (read: valid, right) as you've hypothesized? Just throwing it out there.
Post a Comment
# posted by 
: 1:03 PM
: 1:03 PM << Home
