procrastination, heresy, and navel-gazing.

Friday, December 08, 2006

God - The Ultimate Terrorist?

with no more SOCM, i am able to go to the Christianity and Contemporary Thought seminars held by CASE, and heard this talk by Andrew Cameron, entitled Terrorism and Christianity.

as the talk went on, with various definitions of Terrorism being bandied about, i kept thinking more and more (no pun intended), that God would actually fit many of the definitions of a terrorist.
Oliver O'Donovan's definition is (paraphrased, from memory), "one who furthers their viewpoint by intimidation", excluding those who would set up a viable, alternative government.
but would not this include God? i present the following reasons:
    And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28)
    For the Lord your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God. (Deuteronomy 4:24)
    Honour everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the emperor. (1 Peter 2:17)
God obviously presents a choice of Him, or destruction. if you're not on the God-Train, you're going to get run over.
    Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” (John 18:36)
there is no viable alternative government (at least in the here-and-now) proposed. rather (as in 1 Peter 2:17 ob cit.) we are to honour, not least pray for, the secular governments placed over us.

this sounds not at all dissimilar to many terrorist manifestos, there is simply a claim to legitimacy, of heritage, of third-knowledge, and the proven ability to carry out any and all threats.

of course the thing with terrorism is the unacceptability of their methods and the questionability of their ends. God, being the creator of all that is seen and unseen, is righteous. though perhaps not not a terrorist.

is this an acceptable apologetic angle, or has psychodougie gone too far this time?

ps sorry about the lack of blogging of late. i have no excuse, my priorities have simply been elsewhere.

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Blogger byron said...

Reminded me of the great Lewis quote about Aslan being safe (see the bottom of here).

5:50 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And yet, God 'furthered his viewpoint' by sending his Son, to serve rather than intimidate, to die as a ransom for many, rather than hold many to ransom.

Perhaps it is not so much God a terrorist, as terrorists attempting to appropriate the right fear of God to their own cause? Impersonating God? A terrifying thing...

"if you're not on the God-Train, you're going to get run over"

There is also a timetable for these things. Terrorists aren't interested in waiting.

9:37 am  
Blogger Georgina said...

Ah Psychodougie, a good attempt at making us think! But(!), as I see it, the inherent intuitive problem with terrorists is the unreasonability and extremeness of their response and their own belief in validity of their own cause, despite mainstream condemnation. They seem to be blind to their own fallibility and biased regarding their own cause and are keen to take lives without justification.

I don't think God is that way: He is not unreasonable (being patient with us, and wanting us to come into faith through repentance), God has a valid cause (he is creator and sustainer of the universe and us). He is infallible and he is utterly just and without bias. And he has complete right to take life that he created.

And while I'm disagreeing with Doug mode - nice clarinet playing!! Despite your protestations I think it made a big difference in the service and added a layer of texture over the top of the other instruments.

4:19 pm  
Blogger psychodougie said...

thanks for comments.
i still fail to see the difference in definition, the only discernible difference being the absolute right of God to terrorise.
likewise, terrorists may give what they believe ample opportunity for violence to be averted - but, unfortunately, we are not all like Ninevah, heeding the call to repent. rather, without the softening of the Holy Spirit, we are all hardened and believe it unreasonable that anyone determine how we should relate to them.
just as "we don't negotiate with terrorists", as the catch-cry goes, others say"we don't negotiate with God". can we really blame them?

2:20 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

hmmm... I do not think that you can call God a terrorist!!! :)

9:14 pm  
Blogger psychodougie said...

he's surely big enough to take it? or how little a box do you want to put him in? he calls himself jealous, vengeful, a consuming fire.
my point, and i think most people are on board with this, is that tho he may be all those things, he is completely righteous in that.

9:10 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

maybe that's it - you cannot box Him into a box ... say labelled "terrorist".

He is Awesome and Mighty and will bring about His Just Judgement but He is Loving and merciful and gave his own son to take pay the penalty!

It does not fit with the "irrationality" of a terrorist!!

But I do get your point that He is
"jealous, vengeful, a consuming fire... that tho he may be all those things, he is completely righteous in that"
I would agree with that comment just not labeling him the "ultimate terrorist"!! :)

5:49 pm  
Anonymous taavi said...

righteous in what way

2:54 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home