[lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat
- From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 19:22:53 EST
Now that hurts. It really, really does. Pain way down deep. And now I see
the light.
Julie Krueger
========Original Message======== Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: The Strident
Voice of Defeat Date: 1/11/2007 3:35:47 P.M. Central Standard Time From:
_lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx) To:
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Sent on:
Metaphor and symbolism are very much one of my natural modes of
communication. I’m still not convinced that communication is one of your
modes of
communication.
Lawrence
____________________________________
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:21 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat
I see that metaphor and symbolism, not to mention subtext, are not your
natural modes of communication. I'll try to spell it out more clearly and
succinctly tomorrow. In the meantime I happily stand corrected.
Julie Krueger
========Original Message========
Subj:
[lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat
Date:
1/11/2007 3:08:43 P.M. Central Standard Time
From:
_lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
To:
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Sent on:
Well Julie, here is the trouble you can get into by not developing an
argument as I asked you to. The juxtaposition of this hymn with my note
suggests
that you believe that Christians are just as bad as Islamic Fundamentalists,
or that this Hymn shows that Christians are just as warlike as Islamic
Fundamentalists. Perhaps there are others, but these two occur to me first:
that
you intended something hostile to Christianity for reasons known only to
yourself – for they aren’t developed as an argument. Now if you had
something
benign in mind, something that hasn’t occurred to me, you should not blame
me
for not having thought of it. It is your responsibility to be clear.
Who wrote this hymn and what is it about? A British preacher wrote it for
school children.
Baring-Gould wrote about this hymn, “Whit-Mon­day is a great day for
school fes­tiv­als in York­shire. One Whit-Mon­day,
thir­ty
years ago, it was ar­ranged that our school should join forc­es with
that of a neigh­bor­ing vil­lage. I want­ed the
child­ren to sing when march­ing from one vil­lage to another, but
couldn’t
think of any­thing quite suit­a­ble; so I sat up at night,
re­solved that I would write some­thing myself. “Onward,
Christ­ian
Sol­diers” was the re­sult. It was writ­ten in great haste, and I
am
afraid some of the rhymes are faulty. Cer­tain­ly no­thing has
sur­prised me more than its pop­u­lar­i­ty. I don’t
re­mem­ber how it got print­ed first, but I know that very soon it
found
its way into sev­er­al col­lect­ions. I have writ­ten a
few other hymns since then, but only two or three have be­come at all
well-known.” _http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/o/n/onwardcs.htm_
(http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/o/n/onwardcs.htm)
So he wrote it for school children to march to but isn’t it about Militant
Islamic type war as Julie seems to suggest? Any Christian will recognize that
Baring-Gould takes his theme from Ephesians 6. Paul uses warfare as an
analogy for the Christian’s fight against evil. Christian war against evil
and
not against physical forces. “For our struggle is not against flesh and
blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of
this
dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”
Ephesians 6:12
Lawrence
____________________________________
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:25 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat
Onward, Christian Soldiers
Text: Sabine Baring-Gould, 1834-1924
Music: Arthur S. Sullivan, 1842-1900
Tune: ST. GERTRUDE, Meter: 65.65 D with Refrain
____________________________________
1. Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus going on before.
Christ, the royal Master, leads against the foe;
forward into battle see his banners go!
Refrain:
Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus going on before.
2. At the sign of triumph Satan's host doth flee;
on then, Christian soldiers, on to victory!
Hell's foundations quiver at the shout of praise;
brothers, lift your voices, loud your anthems raise.
(Refrain)
3. Like a mighty army moves the church of God;
brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod.
We are not divided, all one body we,
one in hope and doctrine, one in charity.
(Refrain)
4. Crowns and thrones may perish, kingdoms rise and wane,
but the church of Jesus constant will remain.
Gates of hell can never gainst that church prevail;
we have Christ's own promise, and that cannot fail.
(Refrain)
5. Onward then, ye people, join our happy throng,
blend with ours your voices in the triumph song.
Glory, laud, and honor unto Christ the King,
this through countless ages men and angels sing.
(Refrain)
========Original Message========
Subj:
[lit-ideas] The Strident Voice of Defeat
Date:
1/11/2007 1:59:06 P.M. Central Standard Time
From:
_lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
To:
_Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Sent on:
I noticed quite a long time ago in Islamic theology that they believe God
decides who wins a battle or a war. I also noticed that American politicians
were paying little attention to that. During the Bush Sr. & Clinton
Administrations the U.S. gave various Islamic groups reason to claim victory.
Whether it was Al Qaeda or Saddam’s Iraq, they were encouraged and exerted
themselves even more because Allah was on their side. Allah had given them
the
victory. We need to be especially careful of that now in Iraq. As Thomas
Barnett said in the interview Brian posted, if we don’t do it right, we
shall very
likely have to go back.
I’ve been reading the Brian-recommended The Looming Tower, Al-Qaeda and
the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence Wright. Wright provides an excellent example of
how defeat is viewed. On page 38 Wright writes, “. . . The speed and
decisiveness of the Israeli victory in the Six Day War humiliated many Muslims
who
had believed until then that God favored their cause. They had lost not only
their armies and their territories but also faith in their leaders, in their
countries, and in themselves. The profound appeal of Islamic fundamentalism
in Egypt and elsewhere was born in this shocking debacle. A newly strident
voice was heard in the mosques; the voice said that they had been defeated by
a
force far larger than the tiny country of Israel. God had turned against
the Muslims. The only way back to Him was to return to the pure religion.
The
voice answered despair with a simple formulation: Islam is the solution. “
“. . . The primary target of Egyptian Islamists was Nasser’s secular
regime. In the terminology of jihad, the priority was defeating the ‘near
enemy’
– that is, impure Muslim society. The ‘distant enemy’ – the West –
could
wait until Islam had reformed itself. To Zawahiri and his colleagues that
meant, at a minimum, imposing Islamic law in Egypt.
“Zawahiri also sought to restore the caliphate, the rule of Islamic clerics,
which had formally ended in 1924 following the dissolution of the Ottoman
Empire but which had not exercised real power since the thirteenth century.
Once the caliphate was established, Zawahiri believed, Egypt would become a
rallying point for the rest of the Islamic world, leading it in a jihad
against
the West. ‘Then history would make a new turn, God willing,’ Zawahiri
later
wrote, ‘in the opposite direction against the empire of the United States
and the world’s Jewish government.’”
The Schmoos slogan, the more Islamists we kill, the more we create is of
course nonsense. There is nothing like that in Islamic tradition. If we kill
the Militant Islamic enemy and in the process defeat him, then Allah has
somehow allowed this. It is inconceivable to them that Allah would favor
infidels, so there must be some other reason. A variety of other reasons have
been
produced but the one we are most concerned about is the reasoning of Islamic
Fundamentalism. Islamic Fundamentalists argue that the less than orthodox
Muslims who were defeated deserved to be defeated. The way to achieve victory
is to return to pure religion. What we see now in Iraq are many who fancy
they adhere to Pure Religion fighting against us and our protégées in the
new
Iraqi state. Yeah, it’s expensive but we need to tread carefully now. If
when we leave, the Islamic Fundamentalists can declare victory, that is if we
don
’t leave the present Iraqi government in a very strong position, then we
shall be buying trouble for ourselves. As Barnett suggests, we shall probably
have to go back again. We won’t save money by leaving prematurely.
Lawrence
Other related posts:
