Mon, Jan 19th - 9:57AM
The response is hard for me.
Let me explain one thing:
I am not perfect in the one thing that will be the worst. That is, forgiveness and the abilty to not hold a sin against someone. For that very reason, I had to let my anger subside before I could even begin to address this.
Now I begin.
This letter was sent to me through my wife's email, which may be appropriate in the eyes of some. I ask you to re-examine that notion. I am not easy to get in touch with directly at times, but it can be done if you think it worth the effort. This would have been better to come to me alone. Examine what you may think the reasons would be to not do so. You may be right. If so, convince me, please, for my good.
Now I need to be clear on one thing: I may be wrong, and he may be right on the underlying arguement on the rightness and wrongness of actions of our leaders. He has good points from time to time, and can even explain them with better than empty rhetoric, should he choose to do so. The underlying theme in all of this is that of Authority. He may have points right here or there, but is wrong in the overall view, as I see it.
This began with a holiday letter sent out that we received just before Thanksgiving time. He is my wife's Uncle. Her mother was married, and although divorced, has not put herself under his Authority and still stands for her broken marriage, even if despondent at times about this. At least, that is my understanding.
The letter itself was fine as far as I could see. However, included was a little slip of paper with the following on it:
Support Prima Facie
Initial JC Hearing on Bush & Cheney
Held July 25th
And it included a hyperlink that I will not honor here.
Not really a problem, except that his mother, my wife's grandmother, requested that he refrain from such rhetoric around the family. Now she did not command it. That is not her way or nature, and I count that to her credit. I have been asked to refrain from similar things about Clinton. Ok?
Her authority here is exactly the same as Mary's over Jesus when he performed his first miracle. Go back and check that one out. You will find that she does not seem to have given her son any sort of order, and from his response about this not being his time, I would say this was not the will of Christ himself to do this at this time. Go back to the old testament 10 Commandments if you need to and understand. What did God (the son) himself do there? That is powerful to understand!
Understand that the Patriarch Authority he aludes to is very real in my mind, and very ancient as well. Let me illustrate:
24 When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said,
"Cursed be Canaan!
The lowest of slaves
will he be to his brothers."
26 He also said,
"Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem!
May Canaan be the slave of Shem.
27 May God extend the territory of Japheth;
may Japheth live in the tents of Shem,
and may Canaan be his slave."
28 After the flood Noah lived 350 years.
Genesis 9:24-28 (NIV)
What terrible thing had Ham done to deserve this upon his children? The understanding I have is that he stumbled across his father naked and drunk, and rather than do something about it, he embarassed his father in front of his other sons. Understand, Noah was drunk and not exactly in the right in all things here. But the curse stood. That is just how powerful this authority is!
So without my laying out more here, can you see the problem I have with his claims of leadership over me along those lines? A hint would be when he talks about my father.
Ok. He does have age on me. I must respect his wisdom for his grey hairs. I do try and do that, and not always do as well as I should. His point there is sound. So I have to work on that. But in the way it is said, I think you can understand how hard that can be at times. But like Noah's drunkeness, this does not excuse my fault.
The reference is made to approach this scripturally, as if I do not have the support of God's Word in my point of view. Well, that is fair enough to ask, but not fair to do so in the way of The Accuser, and you know of who I speak. I'll not bang that scripture out here. In Acts 17, I ask you to examine the way that Paul addresses the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers. Did he use scripture to talk to them? Yes, it is fair to ask for scriptural backing to what we say. We should welcome this. We should always pursue the Truth, and this is a very good way to do so.
I can speculate on the meaning of the specific charges he lays at my feet. Some I think I know where they come from and will answer as best I can. Those accusations actually do not bother me as much. I attribute them more to my not explaining my position well enough, or <<gasp!!!>>, I am wrong!
Go in Grace,