Monday, September 9, 2013

Politics and the Psalms - the case against Syria

This is a summary post of other posts on the subject. The consensus seems to be that a limited strike is not possible. There are probably hundreds of articles out there. And I only read a few like this one from the OUP blog.

Because I have surgical strike in my title on the Psalm 90 post, I have 5 times my usual hit rate.  Hah - that should get my ratings up.

This morning I read Herbie O'Driscoll's article on crumbs from the master's table in the Diocesan Post (October not online yet). We might note that the woman is Syrian - Let's have a few crumbs then! A creative response to our parochial interests. I hardly need point out that Jesus gave his life for the life of the world, not for its death. As I noted in the post on Psalm 22 as prayer for Syria, citing Psalm 146, God restores orphan and widow. Obviously, armed conflicts are good ways to create them.

I don't read political arguments and I am sure there are plenty on both sides. I scanned this one on 'the great debate' and this from the cable foreign policy- follow the link at Huff post if you need to to avoid pay-walls and ads. And there's CBS News and the NY Times and Move On. And have we forgotten Egypt?

Who among my blogging friends writes on politics? I don't know. [This just out from James McGrath and here from Dom Crossan.] Google reader had a good search. Feedly wants money. (Forget it.) I haven't seen any Biblical Studies folks that are directly writing, but by implication, this is the worst possible time in the Jewish liturgical year for approving a strike against the innocent bystander. See Rachel's post here on what Jews should be doing at this time of the year.

Well - Jesus didn't have to go to Syria or strike against Syria for the woman's daughter to be healed. He did say - it is not right to give the children's food to dogs.  You know how creative the woman was.  Are we able to be so creative?