News Flash: Arafat Was Evil

May he forever rot in hell.

good article...oh he's too busy burning to rot.

-p

Despite the fact that he most definitely deserves every last second of eternity that he gets, I shudder at my own glee and desensitization at the fact that yet another human being is now in hell. not to mention the fact that, even though I say it and truly believe it, apart from Christ acts and God's Grace I don't quite grasp the fact that I deserve no less than Arafat.

We don't agree on alot Pablo, but THANK you for your self-reflexive shudder. I don't know as much about Arafat as others, and I'm not going to say he was a saint. I don't have problems saying that what he did was evil, nor do I have problems acknowledging that in all likelihood he is in hell.
But those who celebrate as he "rots in hell" aren't reflecting the God who they call on to initiate this rotting. No matter how awful, Arafat was a human being and we should pity the human who perpetuates sin as much as we should pity the one who suffers from it. Pity isn't justification, nor is it an excuse. It's a humble response.
I shudder at the willingness of the self-righteous to inflict eternal damnation on someone else. Bush's response, which the Globe's writer attacked so voraciously, is honest. The paradox of our existence is that we all reflect God's image and yet we are all bastards. We need to constantly keep reminding ourselves of that.

Well said Paul.

While I agree with you, Paul, it is also good to remember that Scripture encourages the saints to rejoice in the destruction of the wicked. Read the Psalms. Read Revelation. Both sorrow for the suffering of humanity and rejoicing for the punishment of evil are required of us. This seems like a perfect time for the latter.

The same Bible says that God takes no pleasure in the death of the ungodly, and neither should we. God is just, but I don't think his justice is license for us to be bloodthirsty. We can rejoice in the punishment of evil, but we have recieved grace and so we should live, breathe, plead, and beg for grace, for ourselves and all of humanity. I'm not throwing out justice. If I am called to be God's instrument of Justice on my fellow human being, I better do it. But I hope I do it with tears in my eyes. That's what Jesus does when he weeps for Jerusalem in Luke 13.

I think we are to rejoice in the destruction of the wicked. However, I can understand why an all mighty God would not rejoice in His creation rejecting Him and having to punish it. However, His perspective has no forbearance on how we should see creation because we are part of that creation. To me it is equivalent of being happy that part of ourselves is being cleansed.

-p

p.s. Paul - where does Jacoby attack Bush voraciously in that article? I can't find that part but it's probably just me please point it out....

Anyone seen this? http://www.fellowship911.com/ It's hysterical. My favorite scene is where Michael Moore interviews the warriors on the frontline at the Battle of Helms Deep about their bloodthirsty hatred of orcs.

Pablo,
He didn't attack Bush, just his statement "God have mercy on [Arafat's] soul."
I think it is precisely because we are part of his creation and not the creator that we should have compassion on those who are punished for evil. And I would not look at it as part of us being cleansed, but as another human whose fate has been sealed, a fate that could have just as easily been ours. I forget who it was, but, when looking at people being led to the gallows, said "There, but by God's grace, go I." That, I believe, is a proper response, not "thank God we're getting rid of THAT lot! They were giving us a bad name."
If the Creator, who is almighty and who is perfectly holy, has compassion, then what right do we have not to have compassion?

God does not delight in the destruction of wicked people. The Scriptures are crystal clear on that point.

Both impreccatory Psalms and Revelation are dealing with a revocation of common grace and eschatological judgement where the world is cleansed of all that has set it wrong, and the oppressed righteous are vindicated. That is a cause for rejoicing.

Paul's (the guy here, not the apostle) justice with tears imagery is most apt, mitigated by the joy of the age to come.

Paul - gocha. I have to say that still I cannot have compassion for anyone in Hell...they had their chance and they blew it. (I'm not getting into a free will vs divine providence issue here) Now, before they die is another story...sometimes.

-p

i may regret this but i'm really sad right now about this discussion, and regardless of the extent of whoever's wickedness (which I don't think it is ANYONE"S place but God's to decide that) why in anyway should we ever rejoice someone burning in hell or rejoice someone dying and going to hell, or rejoice someone dying in the first place. I don't care who they are, if nothing else there were many many people that believed in what arafat was doing in his part of the country, so are they all terrorists for that too? i dont think so, I think they were following someone they trusted and gave them something to believe in, which sounds pretty similar to us following jesus. that doesn't make arafat right, or good. it makes him a man, though, and one that God created at that. Hopefully things will be more peaceful, but I think it is horrible to rejoice anyone going to hell. and pablo, they may not have had whatever "chance" you are talking about. not everyone learns the same things you do.

meg - All men are without excuse. God reveals himself to all of us.
Romans 1:18-21
Psalms 19:1-4
Job 12:7-9

And in response to this quote:
"(which I don't think it is ANYONE"S place but God's to decide that)"

If you read Romans 2 you will see that God warns us not to judge unfairly. I don't think our judgements of Arafat were unfair.

-p

God's natural revelation doesn't excuse you from being a sociopath. It boggles the mind how someone can get so worked up at someone firing bullets at an empty Republican building, then casually state that they have no compassion for countless throngs of people in eternal torment. Maybe someday someone you care about will die apart from the Lord, and maybe that experience will inject some humanity into your sorry excuse for theology.

who got worked up?

The fact that you're even attempting that comparison is what boggles the mind...

I've already have had close people I know die apart form Gods gift and It changes my mind not one iota.

I don't pretend to impart my morality or my notion of right and wrong on God.

I'm not afraid to accept Gods sovereignty over everything.

-p

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

I sleep just fine Phil...juuuuust fine.

:)

-p

Sure. Why wouldn't you? There's nothing to ever get upset about.

I wonder what Jesus will think of your critique of His weeping over Jerusalem's rejection of Him? If only He were as trusting of God's sovereignty as you. Everybody knows a more biblical understanding of the Reformed faith should make you less compassionate.

Phil - c'mon ... you take me way way too seriously.

Of course there is room for compassion in all walks of life. I merely question the sense of having compassion on souls that are already condemned? Doesn't it almost seem that it's questioning a decision that God has made? Imposing ones sense of right and wrong on God? It seems so to me.

Of course I feel bad about people who have rejected God. What Christian wouldn't? Even one as cynical as I. It is our call to go and share with everyone no matter what we might think about them or whether or not we might think they are a "lost cause." To love our neighbor as ourselves...and admittedly I have much to work on here...no doubt, but at least I recognize that.

Stop putting words in my mouth; it isn't socially acceptable face to face or in a blog atmosphere. I never critiqued Jesus' weeping over Jerusalem and their rejection of him. Jesus wept for people, people who were alive and could still make a decision to accept Him. Show me where it says that God regrets castigating those he eternally damns....show me. (notice I did not say regret having to castigate there is a huge difference, because I know the Bible says that he would rather no one reject Him).

Oh I think Jesus was quite accepting of God the Fathers sovereignty far more than any of us, even to the point of having to be condemned himself to pay for you and me and anyone else who accepts the gift.

-p

Pablo, what about Jesus who descended into hell? Shouldn't the fact that Jesus took on all of the punishment of our sin and still does constantly intercede on our behalf mean that he should be another object of you apathy? For everything that you do wrong, that is another moment that Jesus spent in hell for you Pablo. If God himself experienced the torment of hell for you Pablo, I think that you could find in yourself somewhere to stir up the least bit of compassion for those that have gone on before us. The second you start changing the way we talk about the deceased according to their fate, is the second that you have made it your right to decide where each person has gone to. I think that your ability to play God on blogs is just as dangerous in the blog atmosphere as it is face to face. Check yourself before you wreck yourself Pablo, you'll answer to the same God Arafat did.

John that's just silly talk

-p

Sometimes the nature of someone's comments lend them to be taken seriously. If someone started spounting off all kinds of racist rhetoric, I would take them seriously, even if they were just joking. If you're just kidding around about not caring about eternal suffering, then I apologize for misunderstanding you. It didn't sound like you were joking, and I would encourage you perhaps to not joke about that sort of thing.

If you are serious, though, then you have performed a classic rhetorical maneuver. Recognizing correctly that your position is indefensible, you have split a ridiculously slender hair, taken a new side to that split, then accused me of being intellectually dishonest by putting words in your mouth, and demanded a verse that you know full well does not exist since no verse ever addresses the disposition of God (love, hate, or apathy) toward the damned in a post-redemptive context.

Man, what an annoying conversation.

Jesus wept over people who had rejected Him. He specifically says that Israel has rejected Him. He is not holding out evangelistic hope. Israel rejects Him due to the sovereign plan of God, and Jesus weeps for them. Jesus asks God to forgive His unrepentant crucifiers. Jesus weeps when Lazurus dies, rather than taking stoic comfort in God's sovereignty. Jesus is upset when He has to die, despite His trust in God's sovereignty.

In other words, God's sovereignty does not keep Jesus from feeling sorrow for either human suffering or the reprobate. I strongly feel that your "exegesis" is a veneer to excuse your overall lack of genuine Christian affections. Well, welcome to the Young Reformed Theologians Club; I'll teach you the secret handshake, later.

But all that means nothing, since none of that is your new "actual" position. Your actual position is one on which there is no biblical data whatsoever, so I guess that makes you unassailable. Congratulations. You never have to be upset at any human suffering, because it all falls under the category of God's sovereignty.

I think, Phil that I made it pretty clear, or maybe I didn't but the idea of having compassion on those ALREADY damned, that's postmortem, is completely ridiculous.

Ridiculous, a definition: Deserving or inspiring ridicule; absurd, preposterous, or silly.

There’s no sense in it.

Compassion, a definition: Deep awareness of the suffering of another coupled with the wish to relieve it.

You see in my opinion, and I'm trying to make it as humble as I can, to wish to relive the suffering of the damned would mean to disagree with a decision that God has made for that soul. Can you find a basis for which to question Gods decisions? Jesus wasn't angry that he had to die, He, for obvious reasons didn't want to, and asked that if it were possible that the cup pass from him.

But what does he say at the end of that prayer? "Not my will but yours" - A classic example of Christ submitting to God the Fathers Sovereignty (Synonyms: ascendancy, ascendant, dominance, dominion, jurisdiction, kingship, preeminence, prepotency, primacy, supremacy, supreme power)

However, on the matter of those not already dead we have to strive harder, much harder to love them and have compassion on them. We are to live out Christ as an example for them. Yes, I'll take "chief of all sinners" if you'd like I have to work on it as much as I know I have to (I can't really say "as much as anyone else" because I can't know how much everyone else has to work on it, but I have to work on it a lot)

It seems to me that maybe, seeing that there's plenty of compassion lacking amongst ourselves, we have much, much more to strive for than we first think

And I'll rest my case

-p.