It is not enough

10670191_10152756368903185_6436640874602357279_nThis is a day when we remember a tragedy and it is good and right that we do so. It is a day to respect the dead and to remember those who were misguided enough to cause those deaths. It is a day that we pray for the peace that only Christ can bring so that instances such as this will not be repeated. It is a solemn day for those we lost and a day of rejoicing in those who survived. All of this is good and right…and it is not enough. We have built memorials and have memorials. There are moments of silence and moving tributes to those who died. There are television specials and the news shows do their best to make certain that we remember. All of this is good and right…but it is not enough.

It is not enough to just remember, we must remember with hope that the future holds a better day, not with the fear of the inevitability of this happening again. Those who will killed, died because of fear. If we are to remember, let us remember in hope, The Blessed Hope, that one day the world will be conformed to His image. If we remember those who have died in fear, we remember only the death, but when we remember in hope, we remember in the power of Resurrection, we remember not in a spirit of fear, but in a spirit of love and power and a sound mind. It was good advice from Paul many years ago and it is good advice now. We are not people of fear, we are a people of love, of a sound mind and of the power of God. It is not enough to remember, we must remember properly.

It is not enough to build memorials and hold memorial services. It is not enough to have moments of solemn silence for those who have past. It is not enough because the lives that were lost this day and in the events that followed did not die for moments of silence, or for mortar monuments, they died for the idea that there would be a better day. They died for the idea that there would be a better world. They died for the idea that not only could we be better people, that we would actively pursue being better people. The memorial that they need is our lives better reflecting the mission of Christ. The bible says that greater love has no man than he lay down his life for his friend. Make no mistake, many lives were laid down for us. I say that greater honor and respect has no man than this, that he live a live worth the sacrifice. It is not enough to have a memorial, we must be the memorial.

You Might Also Like

12 Replies to “It is not enough”

  1. But Chuck Colson? I wonder what the date was on this statement, since he died in 2012? If I was him, I would have been ashamed to say anything about 9/11.

    http://erlc.com/article/the-so-called-land-letter/

    Proof that religion should “BUTT OUT” of government foreign policy!

    Sadam had nothing to do with 9/11, no “mushroom clouds” per dumb-ass Condi Rice, and Sadam was Iran and ISIS-type organizations’ worst enemies. Plus Colson was a anti-evolution ID’er, and against prop 8.

    I apologize ahead of time to Scott. I normally would not comment, but this is just too much for me to let go. Not looking for discussion, just expressing my opinion, which is the purpose of a blog.

    1. I do not at all mind that you express your opinion, it would just be nice if it had anything at all to do with what I wrote.

  2. The source of all your writing was the quote from Colson. Your writing, I have no problem with. The source of the quote, I have a problem with. Not worth arguing about.

  3. I said the source of the quote. If you made the quote, no problem. Colson making the quote while using 9/11 as a political ploy to encourage a war in Iraq as a justified (biblically) war, seems rather anti-Christian. Note the date on the Land letter was BEFORE the actual start of the Iraq war. Colson was the worst kind of neo-con, a biblical war advocate. Was he “living his life worthy of their sacrifices”, by trying to advocated sending more Americans to die in Iraq? Now, does that sound very Christian? Should any religious person advocate war as a solution to anything, in their religious capacity? If he was Secretary of State or Defense, OK. But as a head of a multi million dollar religious charity? He hasn’t made any sacrifices to justify his BS.

  4. The letter states that they believed that the invasion of Iraq would indeed meet the criteria of ‘just war’ which is accepted by a good many as valid theology, and has been accepted as valid theology for a few hundred years now. Whether they were correct in that assertion or not is certainly a matter for debate, I personally do not believe that they were. The remainder of the letter goes on to describe why they felt as if this would fit the category of ‘just war’. Again, I believe that the war in Iraq was a tragic error, but to call just war, and anyone who would consider it, anti-christian, is quite a bit rough. I would not say Augustine was anti-christian, nor would I say that Thomas Aquinas was either. As for the question, should any religious person advocate war as a solution to anything, the answer is yes, there is a time when that is a necessity. As an example, while I am not a huge fan of the Catholic church, I would not call Pope Francis anti-christian, and he has called action against ISIS ‘just war’ according to the doctrine of ‘just war’ accepted by the Catholic Church.

  5. It is only useless because there is no response from you. It is not a fantasy of mine. I read the letter and stated what the intent was. I also stated that I disagreed with it oddly enough seemingly putting me in agreement with you in most things. I also brought up the idea of “just War” which has been around for longer than both of us put together to promote discussion. You asked if any Christian leader should ever promote war, and, according to the ideas brought about in “just war” yes there are times. You asked and I rendered an answer. That is conversation. I was rather eagerly awaiting your response to “just war” in relation to your question of whether a Christian leader should call for war. I did refrain from trying to have a conversation about a dead man and his faith as I find it rather rude to speak ill of the dead, rather I had hoped to engage in a much larger question that actually has application to the faith by addressing just war and it’s implications.

  6. If you may have noticed, I did not use the term “just war”, but “biblical war”, when referring to Colson’s letter. He mixes religion with his brand of “just war”. As I said before, religious leaders should butt out of American foreign policy in determining the necessity of war. And they should never write a “cheer letter” to encourage a war, regardless of justness. The bottom line, Iraq was not a just war. Your comment “I did refrain from trying to have a conversation about a dead man and his faith”…
    How about the dead American soldiers sent to die in Iraq or get their legs blown off, for Colson’s definition of just war. And of course, I am sure, as the Land letter said, we minimized the civilian Iraqi casualties??? Right. Guys like Colson have no concept of what war is really like. End of conversation, not because I don’t like you or the subject, but because I have simply said all I have to say. This isn’t a PhD thesis. It’s a blog. Now, if we really want to get into a discussion, we should debate whether Moses wrote the Pentateuch. I say no way. But then again, I have most all the biblical scholars on my side.
    Just kidding, I really don’t want to debate anyone. BTW, I know you were waiting for my to mention this, so I’ll let you talk about dead people. Colson seemed to think Vietnam was just too. A Pentagon papers, and Watergate burglar, convicted of a felony but pardoned by his fellow Republicans. Bombing Cambodia didn’t exactly seem to just, now in retrospect.

  7. And, since Colson was into prison ministry, I wonder how many soldier, especially blacks, who came back from Vietnam, hooked on drugs, ending up in prison, got a pardon from anyone? You pay the price of war in many ways. Some yahoo religious leader spouting about just war needs their mouth washed out with soap.

  8. Look Scott, you are way too sensitive about discussions. I simply said all I had on my mind. Obviously too much. I am not upset about anything you said. Just your opinion. Just like I gave you my opinion. It seems you take this stuff all too seriously. Not everyone is going to agree with you, just like not everyone is going to agree with me. So why this end of world stuff? You are supposed to be refined in fire, not Mr Everyone loves me and agrees with me. You are making a mistake if you give up writing articles or quit responding ( in general, not on one specific subject like this). We pretty much beat this subject to death.

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.