Kyle Rittenhouse case

KoolDoon

Sparrow
Unfortunately I have to agree. He and his mom are being controlled by deep-state shill David Hancock who is creating a lot of division in conservative circles.

Journalist Gordon Rose goes into it quite a bit here.

He mentions General Flynn. I stopped watching InfoWars for promoting Flynn, because the Flynn thing is so obviously sketchy. Very interesting that Kyle does not get that he was persecuted for being White (because con inc does not like to talk about anti-white racism).
 

NoMoreTO

Hummingbird
A very good summary of the Rittenhouse case, with relevant quotes from Scripture to frame things up.

For Accustomed to hear and to speak without stopping to make inquiry, they repeat as random everything which comes their without any regard for the truth of it" - St. John Crystosm

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall have their fill - Matthew 5:6

Even though I've followed the case somewhat, there are parts that I have definitely missed. It helps to see it laid out in a single video. Rosenbaum yelling "nigger" beforehand was something to see, or that the guy with the skateboard was going for his gun.

 

Easy_C

Peacock
Exactly.
So what does your correct observation tell us about all these militias, even those that did their actions in His name - even though His written word commands otherwise? Reason it out to the logical conclusion, SpaceShredder - you're already half-way there.


The first century Christians made it without any armed rebellion; why would the hand of God be cut short in the centuries following?
If our God is so weak that we have to form earthly 'Christian' militias to fight in His behalf/protect ourselves, then that would make our God and religion just as pathetic and worthless as the religion of Islam and the non-existent god allah whom they serve.

 

Elipe

Pelican
The first century Christians made it without any armed rebellion; why would the hand of God be cut short in the centuries following?
If our God is so weak that we have to form earthly 'Christian' militias to fight in His behalf/protect ourselves, then that would make our God and religion just as pathetic and worthless as the religion of Islam and the non-existent god allah whom they serve.
The same case could have been made of ancient Israel. Why did the Hebrews need to fight the Canaanites if God could just wipe them out with a plague, a flood, or a meteor storm?

Our God is the same God who stood by as Moses raised his staff in the air and blessed the Hebrew soldiers in combat, and when Moses got tired and couldn't hold the staff up anymore, the Hebrews got slain. So Moses had to get some help holding his arm up to keep the Hebrews blessed in war.

You're calling that God "weak", "pathetic", and "worthless" because He made it appear like human effort played a role. The truth is that our God clearly prefers to work through the hands of men than put on flashy firework shows in the sky. Not because He's too weak or tired to bother to do all the thunder and lightning smiting Himself, but for a couple of reasons I can think of off the top of my head:
  • He tests us and our faith and resolve. What tests faith and resolve more than requiring that the person actually step forward and do something? It's easy to claim you have faith when you can just stand back and claim that God will just zap our enemies with lightning, so there's no reason for you to do anything. This is the prevailing attitude of many modern Christians, that you can just let God do all the work and you sit back and relax.
  • Flashy shows of miracles defeat the point of faith and also frighten rather than invite love. Jesus says that we are blessed for never having personally seen Him in real life, and yet believe. And we also know from Scripture that even the presence of angels in all their splendor tends to frighten humans. God doesn't want us to be afraid of Him, He wants us to love Him.
You are also ignoring many centuries of faithful Christian soldiers who genuinely believed and still saw their military duty as a calling. Christianity is not strict pacifism. Peace is preferred, but not mandatory as it is in strict pacifism. It is better to describe what Christianity teaches with respect to being attacked and bullied as stoicism than pacifism. You can endure it stoically, but that does not preclude you from taking action to end the threat, especially if the threat is persistent after you've made peaceful attempts to deal with it (e.g. letting a man take your cloak, and he does it again, and again, and again without showing any sign of remorse or penitence - it becomes clear that this course of action is not "heaping burning coals on your enemy's head" as intended).

We are told to overcome evil with good. But is it good to simply sit there like a cow and take unlimited abuse? What of your Christian neighbors? Should you do nothing to protect them?

Is it likewise "overcoming evil with good" when a father strikes his child with a rod to discipline him, in accordance with Proverbs 13:24? So then, is all violence one-and-the-same or does motivation change the picture?

Is there a difference between vengeance and an act of self-defense?
 
Top