Europe - Thy Name Is Cowardice

[niufan99]

A friend sent a copy of this article by Mathias Dapfner (Nov, 2004) to me and I was stunned when I read it. Stunned, because the author is not a "right-wing conservative" but a prominent German publisher. These are only excerpts; to read the entire article simply Google "Mathias Dapfner" or check out "www.snopes.com".

EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE

(Commentary by Mathias Dapfner CEO, Axel Springer,AG)

A few days ago Henry

Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, "Europe - your family name is

appeasement." It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so

terribly true.

Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives, as England and

France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they

noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements.

Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then

East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe, where for decades,

inhuman suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the

ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities.

Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore

nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam's torture and murder machinery and,

motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace movement, has the gall to

issue bad grades to George Bush...

What else has to happen before the European public and its political

leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an

especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic

Muslims, focused on civilians , directed against our free, open Western

societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction.

It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great

military conflicts of the last century - a conflict conducted by an enemy

that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually

spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be

taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness. Only two recent American

Presidents had the courage needed for Anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush.

For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts

of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the

American economy - because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what

is at stake - literally everything.

These days, Europe reminds

me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last

pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor's

house.

Appeasement?

Europe, thy name is Cowardice.

IN GOD WE TRUST GOD BLESS AMERICA TAKE CARE & PEACE

This hit it right on the head!!

[Celtic Warrior]

To quote Jesus further: "A strong man, armed, keepeth his house." And "He who hath not a sword, let him sell his very winter garments to buy one."

And you forgot the Latin proverb: "Si vis pacem, para bellum."

Well that would be Luke 11:21 and Luke 22:36 and you've taken BOTH completely out of context;

in Luke 11:21 Jesus is talking about casting out demons and where His power comes from, AND further he says

Luke 11:22 - 23 (KJV) 22But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils. 23He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.

and in this passage He is talking about Himself coming and being stronger than Satan. He also says that whoever is not with Him is against Him.

And in Luke 22:36 He is telling the Disciples to get swords so that the prophecy concerning Him will be fulfilled, and they reply by saying they already have 2 swords. He later tells them that Whosoever lives by the sword will perish by the sword Mt 26:52

Perhaps you should read you Bible a little better before you reply.

[Celtic Warrior]

Celctic warrior...

Only one quote from the Bible...and a quote that deals with personal issues and not government ones?

This shows you lack biblical support, but hold plenty of humanistic support.

As for using Tony Campolo...the man teaches that homosexuality is okay, is a follower of Barth, and says the Bible merely contains the Word of God and isn't the Word of God. You really think I should trust His quotation and exegesis of scripture?

This is not an arrogant statement but a factual statement - I know more about interpretation, theology, and philosophy than Tony Campolo does...so does a vast majority of this board. The reason people don't like it when he speaks of Jesus is because he so often wrong.

Regardless, Christians should stand for justice. Justice teaches that sometimes war is necessary.

Do I support the war in Iraq? I honestly don't know, and I can't say that I do or don't. For me, there isn't a Biblical case for or against the war...thus I do not make judgements for those on either side. I will say, however, that since we are involved we should support our effort to win it. Likewise, our government does hold a right to wage war on percieved threats (Biblically). However, to say that Christians should not support war is to justify some horrible dictators that were removed by war.

It doesn't surprise me that you would find ways to diminish and/or ignore the intent behind quote by deflecting it through defaming the individual that made it. It never really matters that the sentiment behind the quote is accurate if one needs a way to ignore it. Why yes, National Israel was told to go to war often in God's name, BY GOD Himself though, and everytime they did it without His express command they lost. EVEN when they were doing it for 'righteous' reasons. But that 'power' IS NOT extended to Christians. And perhaps if we truly trusted God as much as we claim to (Nationally), we wouldn't need to rush off to war ourselves, or back presidents who think exhausting all diplomatic efforts first is satisfied by making a halfhearted and very superficial attempt to convince the world of our rightness and then rush into it when others request one more opportunity to try diplomacy. As far as I know, we are NOT National Israel of OT times, and God isn't speaking to President Bush or a High Priest of Aaron's line. If that is indeed the case, then maybe you should let the rest of us in on that secret so we have legitimate reasons to ignore Jesus and support war.

And, aside from that, the point of my post was to point out how quickly 'Christians', who claim to honor peace, choose more often than not, to rush to the side of supporting war instead. They are also very quick at attacking those who support peace by name calling and derisions. I posted those quotes to show that many famous historical figures, including military men, held the completely opposite view point. All of the quotes are intended to show how many historical figures, including such notables as Abraham Lincoln viewed war and how they supported exhausting ALL avenues of Peace before resorting to it. War was forced on Lincoln, he didn't eagerly rush blind into it. And I'm convinced he would have tried hard to find a peaceable solution if the Southern states would have let him.

Christians are commanded to Love their enemies, to do good to those that oppress them, to feed and give drink to those that harm them. The list goes on and on, but modern "Christians" seem ever so eager to find more reasons to "praise the Lord and pass the ammuntion" or "kill a commie for Christ", etc. One constantly is seeing people who claim to be followers of Jesus eagerly embracing the very opposite approach that He preached, and verbally assaulting those who try to live by His teachings by trying to be Peacemakers. Sometimes the assaults aren't limited to verbal ones too.

And, had I intended to add scriptural support, I am quite capable of finding lots of passages that support the pacifism that has been so callously derided in this thread. In fact it was the derogatory comment about pacifists that prompted me to write in the first place

Edited April 22, 2007 by Celtic Warrior

[apothanein kerdos]

It doesn't surprise me that you would find ways to diminish and/or ignore the intent behind quote by deflecting it through defaming the individual that made it. It never really matters that the sentiment behind the quote is accurate if one needs a way to ignore it.

I gave you three examples of where he is wrong and why he shouldn't be trusted. You side-stepped this in order to keep him up there. The fact is, he isn't right on many things. His stance on war is one of these things. Pacifism is an evil, EVIL, philosophy.

Why yes, National Israel was told to go to war often in God's name, BY GOD Himself though, and everytime they did it without His express command they lost. EVEN when they were doing it for 'righteous' reasons.

Wow...you didn't get any of the statements correct in here. Only a few times does God actually tell Israel to go to war. More often than not they simply go to war...a cursory reading of Samuel or Kings will show this. Many of these times they win. The only time they lose a war is when they have been disobedient to God...not when they go to war without His blessing.

But that 'power' IS NOT extended to Christians. And perhaps if we truly trusted God as much as we claim to (Nationally), we wouldn't need to rush off to war ourselves, or back presidents who think exhausting all diplomatic efforts first is satisfied by making a halfheared and very superficial attempt to convince the world of our rightness and then rush into it when others want one more opportunity to try diplomacy.

Though the power to wage war is not extended to Christians, it is extended to the government. Thus, as individuals (whom Jesus directs His peace passages to) we should seek peace. Right now, Christians should be going over to Iraq (those called) and helping to win people to Christ and restore what has been destroyed. This happened after World War II. One of the greatest Christian theologians/philosophers/apologists of this century, Francis Schaeffer, grew up in Europe because his family were missionaries to war-torn Europe.

This is what Christians should do in the case of war. We can look to what Christians did during the Roman era and we see them going onto the battlefield to witness to the dying, and remove the dead.

At the same time, this does not negate the need for war. Though I agree we should be very slow in approaching war, and that American policy has been too quick to jump into war the past sixty years, this does not mean a government cannot wage war.

And, aside from that, the point of my post was to point out how quickly 'Christians', who claim to honor peace, choose more often than not, to rush to the side of supporting war instead. They are also very quick at attacking those who support peace by name calling and derisions. I posted those quotes to show that many famous historical figures, including military men, held the completely opposite view point. All of the quotes are intended to show how many historical figures, including such notables as Abraham Lincoln viewed war and how they supported exhausting ALL avenues of Peace before resorting to it. War was forced on Lincoln, he didn't eagerly rush blind into it. And I'm convinced he would have tried hard to find a peaceable solution if the Southern states would have let him.

In the modern day it is often hard to know when it is too late for diplomacy. We had the advantage in the Civil War, World War I, and World War II because we were attacked. At that point, diplomacy is gone and we must go to war. At the same time, when diplomacy hits a perpetual stalemate...war is a viable option for a government.

Assume, for one second, that Japan never attacked the US. Should FDR have continued diplomatic means to end the war? I would argue that, no, he should not have. I would instead argue that we joined the war at the right time, and even if we had not been attacked we should have stilled joined the war. It was a noble cause and had to be done. One can trust God and go to war at the same time - He often uses us to fulfill His purposes. I believe whole-heartedly that the Allied forces were used by God to achieve His purpose in defeating the Japanese and the Germans.

Regardless, I agree, we shouldn't rush into conflicts. Though one could argue that Bush rushed into conflict with Iraq...that can become quite a sticky issue. If Bush merely attacked because of the supposed WMD's or 9/11 ties...then yes, he rushed in. If, however, we also take into account all of Sadam's violations of UN resolutions, some of which called for military action, then the US waited 10 years before attacking Sadam. It all depends on why you view us going to war, what caused it, etc.

Christians are commanded to Love their enemies, to do good to those that oppress them, to feed and give drink to those that harm them. The list goes on and on, but modern "Christians" seem ever so eager to find more reasons to "praise the Lord and pass the ammuntion" or "kill a commie for Christ", etc. One constantly is seeing people who claim to be followers of Jesus eagerly embracing the very opposite approach that He preached, and verbally assaulting those who try to live by His teachings by trying to be Peacemakers. Sometimes the assaults aren't limited to verbal ones too.

The problem is too many Americans buy into Americanism rather than Christianity. I fully admit that I am guilty of this at times. Regardless, you run into problems of your own. For one, you use scare quotes when writing out Christians. You are questioning people's salvation simply because they support the war in Iraq. That puts you in a position that, quite frankly, I wouldn't want to be in. The reason is some of them support the war because it freed Iraqis and gave them freedom. Even if they are misguided and wrong, they are still supporting something for noble reasons...not because they enjoy watching people die. To question their salvation in light of this shows you have violence in your heart.

The pacifism of Jesus, that you are attempting to teach to us, is not merely a physical abstention of violence. It is a mental one as well. When you question the salvation of Christians based on minimal matters, and accuse them of the things you are accusing them of, you become violent in your rhetoric...thus violating the true pacifism of Jesus. Questioning the salvation of a fellow believer on a non-biblical issue is akin to dropping a bomb on a house full of children and laughing about it. Morally, they are the same thing (though the pragmatic ramifications are different).

And, had I intended to add scriptural support, I am quite capable of finding lots of passages that support the pacifism that has been so callously derided in this thread. In fact it was the derogatory comment about pacifists that prompted me to write in the first place

The problem is there are no passages that support governmental pacifism or deny Christians from engaging in war. All we see are what Christians are to do when it deals with them personally.

[Leonard]

Celtic Warrior: It could be the case also that your single quote from the Scriptures was out of context, could it not?

NO WHERE do the Scriptures enjoin pacifism. Are you a Pacifist?

[Celtic Warrior]

Celtic Warrior: It could be the case also that your single quote from the Scriptures was out of context, could it not?

NO WHERE do the Scriptures enjoin pacifism. Are you a Pacifist?

Show me how my Bible quote is out of context!!

as to being a pacifist? I would say that I am a Christian who believes Jesus teaches us to choose the path of Peace whereever and however possible, even unto giving our lives for our fellow man. And I do take exception to Hawk Christians attacking those of us who believe that way. Being a "Pacifist" is not an evil thing, but instead if all men would follow the path of peace, instead of running headlong to war at every drop of the hat and every perceived injustice or threat, there would be far fewer dead innocents in this world.

And, as to the Bible teaching Pacifism, yes it does, in many places. Rather I would challenge you to provide me with Scripture to back up your stance of warring with others

Romans 12:14 - 21 (ESV) 14Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. 15Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 16Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly.

[Celtic Warrior]

It doesn't surprise me that you would find ways to diminish and/or ignore the intent behind quote by deflecting it through defaming the individual that made it. It never really matters that the sentiment behind the quote is accurate if one needs a way to ignore it.

I gave you three examples of where he is wrong and why he shouldn't be trusted. You side-stepped this in order to keep him up there. The fact is, he isn't right on many things. His stance on war is one of these things. Pacifism is an evil, EVIL, philosophy.

Why yes, National Israel was told to go to war often in God's name, BY GOD Himself though, and everytime they did it without His express command they lost. EVEN when they were doing it for 'righteous' reasons.

Wow...you didn't get any of the statements correct in here. Only a few times does God actually tell Israel to go to war. More often than not they simply go to war...a cursory reading of Samuel or Kings will show this. Many of these times they win. The only time they lose a war is when they have been disobedient to God...not when they go to war without His blessing.

But that 'power' IS NOT extended to Christians. And perhaps if we truly trusted God as much as we claim to (Nationally), we wouldn't need to rush off to war ourselves, or back presidents who think exhausting all diplomatic efforts first is satisfied by making a halfheared and very superficial attempt to convince the world of our rightness and then rush into it when others want one more opportunity to try diplomacy.

Though the power to wage war is not extended to Christians, it is extended to the government. Thus, as individuals (whom Jesus directs His peace passages to) we should seek peace. Right now, Christians should be going over to Iraq (those called) and helping to win people to Christ and restore what has been destroyed. This happened after World War II. One of the greatest Christian theologians/philosophers/apologists of this century, Francis Schaeffer, grew up in Europe because his family were missionaries to war-torn Europe.

This is what Christians should do in the case of war. We can look to what Christians did during the Roman era and we see them going onto the battlefield to witness to the dying, and remove the dead.

At the same time, this does not negate the need for war. Though I agree we should be very slow in approaching war, and that American policy has been too quick to jump into war the past sixty years, this does not mean a government cannot wage war.

And, aside from that, the point of my post was to point out how quickly 'Christians', who claim to honor peace, choose more often than not, to rush to the side of supporting war instead. They are also very quick at attacking those who support peace by name calling and derisions. I posted those quotes to show that many famous historical figures, including military men, held the completely opposite view point. All of the quotes are intended to show how many historical figures, including such notables as Abraham Lincoln viewed war and how they supported exhausting ALL avenues of Peace before resorting to it. War was forced on Lincoln, he didn't eagerly rush blind into it. And I'm convinced he would have tried hard to find a peaceable solution if the Southern states would have let him.

In the modern day it is often hard to know when it is too late for diplomacy. We had the advantage in the Civil War, World War I, and World War II because we were attacked. At that point, diplomacy is gone and we must go to war. At the same time, when diplomacy hits a perpetual stalemate...war is a viable option for a government.

Assume, for one second, that Japan never attacked the US. Should FDR have continued diplomatic means to end the war? I would argue that, no, he should not have. I would instead argue that we joined the war at the right time, and even if we had not been attacked we should have stilled joined the war. It was a noble cause and had to be done. One can trust God and go to war at the same time - He often uses us to fulfill His purposes. I believe whole-heartedly that the Allied forces were used by God to achieve His purpose in defeating the Japanese and the Germans.

Regardless, I agree, we shouldn't rush into conflicts. Though one could argue that Bush rushed into conflict with Iraq...that can become quite a sticky issue. If Bush merely attacked because of the supposed WMD's or 9/11 ties...then yes, he rushed in. If, however, we also take into account all of Sadam's violations of UN resolutions, some of which called for military action, then the US waited 10 years before attacking Sadam. It all depends on why you view us going to war, what caused it, etc.

Christians are commanded to Love their enemies, to do good to those that oppress them, to feed and give drink to those that harm them. The list goes on and on, but modern "Christians" seem ever so eager to find more reasons to "praise the Lord and pass the ammuntion" or "kill a commie for Christ", etc. One constantly is seeing people who claim to be followers of Jesus eagerly embracing the very opposite approach that He preached, and verbally assaulting those who try to live by His teachings by trying to be Peacemakers. Sometimes the assaults aren't limited to verbal ones too.

The problem is too many Americans buy into Americanism rather than Christianity. I fully admit that I am guilty of this at times. Regardless, you run into problems of your own. For one, you use scare quotes when writing out Christians. You are questioning people's salvation simply because they support the war in Iraq. That puts you in a position that, quite frankly, I wouldn't want to be in. The reason is some of them support the war because it freed Iraqis and gave them freedom. Even if they are misguided and wrong, they are still supporting something for noble reasons...not because they enjoy watching people die. To question their salvation in light of this shows you have violence in your heart.

The pacifism of Jesus, that you are attempting to teach to us, is not merely a physical abstention of violence. It is a mental one as well. When you question the salvation of Christians based on minimal matters, and accuse them of the things you are accusing them of, you become violent in your rhetoric...thus violating the true pacifism of Jesus. Questioning the salvation of a fellow believer on a non-biblical issue is akin to dropping a bomb on a house full of children and laughing about it. Morally, they are the same thing (though the pragmatic ramifications are different).

And, had I intended to add scriptural support, I am quite capable of finding lots of passages that support the pacifism that has been so callously derided in this thread. In fact it was the derogatory comment about pacifists that prompted me to write in the first place

The problem is there are no passages that support governmental pacifism or deny Christians from engaging in war. All we see are what Christians are to do when it deals with them personally.

I'm afraid I don't have time to address everything in your post right now, so I will reply to a couple of select ones and try to come back later for a more thorough debate

First, I am not using "Scare Quotes" (sounds like something from the Wizard of OZ), I'm using quotes to separate Christians who promote war and deride Christians who see things from the side of Peacemaking. The attack on Pacifists, of any sort, began on this thread, I'm merely objecting to it.

As to Govermental pacifism, yes you are right, the Bible doesn't address Governmental pacifism (or warmongering) in the New Testament. That's because Christians are called to be separate and apart from the world and the NT isn't concerning itself with Governmental/worldly activities, except to tell Christians to obey the Government fully except where it forces us to disobey the Laws of God.

As to your comments about that quote from Tony Campolo, no you did NOT give me 3 or 4 reasons why his quote was wrong, you gave me reasons why you object to his quote based on his personal views, not scriptural or contextual ones. You cited nothing to prove where he was wrong scripturally or contextually. In fact he is right about many American Christians, they don't want to hear what the Bible plainly teaches unless it supports their preconceived and preapproved notions. Am I immune to that fault? Probably not, and neither are you, though I strive to be diligent and correct in my understanding.

I'm afraid the rest of your reply will have to wait for another time, my work schedule prohibits me from going into more depth at this time.

[Leonard]

Sorry, but you are completely wrong. (Edited by moderator) The Pacifist would sit by while 6,000,000 Jews were gased. The Pacifist would not raise one finger to stop Saddam from murdering the 5,000,000 Iraqis he killed.

(edited by moderator)

When you are intellectually honest enough to answer your own question about how your Scripture quote was out of context, you will be ready to engage in realistic discussion.

[Celtic Warrior]

Sorry, but you are completely wrong. (Edited by moderator). The Pacifist would sit by while 6,000,000 Jews were gased. The Pacifist would not raise one finger to stop Saddam from murdering the 5,000,000 Iraqis he killed.

Pacifism is an (edited by moderator)

When you are intellectually honest enough to answer your own question about how your Scripture quote was out of context, you will be ready to engage in realistic discussion.

(edited by moderator). I'd wish you a peaceful day, but that would be so 'pacifistic' and I'd hate to do that to you.

[eric]

Celtic Warrior,

Jesus was not a pacifist. All the passages you quoted from the NT. including Matt.5:9 Blessed are the peace-makers, etc, were not about warring nations, but the persecution of the righteous (those who followed Jesus) and the unrighteous (those who hated Jesus)

It was spiritual warfare, not physical warfare. Christ was urging the righteous not to squabble with those who hated Him, but to preach the gospel to them and act like christians and they will be blessed by the Father.

He never suggested that they should lie down and be trodden on like a bunch of pacifists. I don't recall anywhere, where Jesus gave any of the pharasees a brotherly hug either..........and they were jews. Pacifism is another word for cowardice. Christ's sacrifice wasn't done out of pacifism, it was done out of love for mankind and obedience, including His enemies.