What is Eric Rudolph's Basic Theological Problem?

Rudolph is a member of the Christian Identity Movement, a neo-Nazi white supremacist ideology that also includes several heretical elements. They are violent, murderous, racist, vicious, and cruel. Their basic theological mistake is believing the doctrines of men and rejecting the truth of God.

 

More info on this topic:
A brief quote from the Watchman Fellowship Website:

"Christian Identity movement: The belief that the true identity of the ten lost tribes of Israel is the white, Anglo-Saxon race. The belief is similar to but distinct from the doctrine of British Israelism. A number of independent churches and organizations (including some militant racist groups) make up the general movement. Most deny the Trinity. Some teach a form of the Serpent Seed doctrine, believing that Jews are descendants of Eve’s alleged sexual relations with the serpent (Genesis 3) and are thus not fully human. Many also hold that non-Whites are descended from the union of Cain and a woman from a supposed pre-Adamite race.”

For a detailed profile, see:
http://www.watchman.org/profile/Identitypro.htm

 

I find the whole Rudolph story frightening. There are innumerable things going on in this country of ours that I find horrific (abortion) or contrary to the word of God (homosexuality, etc.). However, I do not believe we, as Christians, should be silent about or tolerant of these things. However, I do believe actions of men like Rudolph are as sinful as the things they say they are against.

Whenever we, as Christians, forget we are to love sinners & hate the sin & decide God would approve of violent, pointlessly cruel crimes such as bombing bars or shooting people who do not conform to our standards or who act in ways we feel are offensive to God, we are ourselves opening the door to sin in our own lives.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Let's leave the judging to God.

 

</font>[/QUOTE]I'm not sure whom you're quoting here, Dr. Bob, but there is no such thing as a Christian or a non-Christian race (if indeed "races" as such exist at all, which is debatable). Even if there were a "non-Christian race" it is not at all clear to me who would hold that violence towards its members would be a blessing to them, nor why. Can you clarify?

Haruo

 

Rudolph's basic "theological" problem? I think that's a loaded question, but here is my response(s):

I'm not saying that those Rudolph attacked were all in the faith. But even if they weren't ER has some serious "theological" issues (which unless he repents are the least of his worries). Then again, ER may be once saved always saved.

Russ &lt;&gt;&lt;

 

His problem is basically that he tried to bring about the perfect society, or the kingdom of God on earth, through naturalistic methods. His theology is just consistent. He treats modern America like Israel under the Old Covenant.

It is sad, but people on this board dedicate themselves to "christianizing" america. What a waste of time. It will never happen. Usually, it is the postmills and misguided premills (Larkinists are the most common for some reason).

You shouldn't waste your time polishing brass on a sinking ship.

 

At least 3 things:

1. Letting the ends justify the means. We should work to put abortion doctors and clinics out of business, but not by blowing them up.

2. A zeal not according to knowledge. Rather than being guided by the plain and simple teaching of scripture, his understanding of it had become twisted.

3. An unregenerate heart. I pray that God will grant him true repentance.

 

???

The Bible clearly condemns murder (abortion) and sodomy as sin AND as acts that in a Godly society should result in a civil penalty.

Those who consistently treat "Modern America like Israel under the Old Covenant" are quick to condemn the actions of Eric Rudolph. For it is the governments responsibilty to bear the sword, to punish crime and enforce law, not the individual. I get a little tired of seeing people who aren't pessismist being smeared by associating them with outlaws and nutcases.

 

Hi, I've never heard of that guy, and I think blowing up homosexuals is wrong. However, I have to agree with the following statement:

How can it be any other way? If you saw someone killing someone else, would you shoot them before they could finish the job (if you had a gun on you)? I know I would. Is this unbiblical? I don't think so (though if anyone thinks it is, please say). So isn't that the case with abortion? My problem with blowing up abortion clinics is not that you kill people, but that it can't work. For if you kill the mother, you've killed the child; and if you don't kill the mother, she'll almost certainly go and have her baby killed somewhere else. But still, is the principle of killing those who kill others wrong? If they were taking babies who were already born to abortion clinics, would you try to save the baby, perhaps even by killing the doctor? (that way you could run away with the baby in a way you can't whilst he's still not born)? Or if they were grown men being killed, would you kill the executioner to try to save them? I think I would. I think Moses would. Am I wrong? Or is the difference whether it's being done within the law or not? So what about Auschwitz?

 

We are basically talking about an extreme form of killing. Whether or not killing is ever right is another discussion. However, mass killing, chaotic attempts at destroying lives and things, that is just plain terrorism.

Now I'm not at all in support of ER's actions. However, it SEEMS (don't read too far into my statement) again SEEMS like if there was a way to neutralize an abortion clinic safely, that would ALMOST be acceptable, but not quite. Let me give an example: If i wanted to neutralize an operating room I would make it unsanitary and very hard to clean. Or if I wanted to stop the "executioner" as mentioned before, I would take away his axe. Unfortunately, in this country that means extending your liberty onto someone else's rights.

I'm not at all suggesting we begin a massive campaign against abortion clinics. But it is clear that it is not good that they are in operation. The theological violation here lies in forming a plan of action that goes against basic principles of scripture. The way I see it, the "axe" in this scenario is the doctors who perform the abortions and the members of our governing body who are for it. Forget trying to show how abortion is wrong, that'll never work. Lets focus on reaching these groups for Christ. With conversion will come change.

ER may not have even considered this plan and that is his most grave error.

SoCM

 

Hey, What about it folks? What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? As I read it here I am glad the man isn't going before the BB. Sounds like a hangman's court to me.

Thanks ------Bart

 

Let me make myself clear. I hate the Identity movement Doctrine. I believe it is out of Hell. I do not believe a man should be found guilty on media blitz and governmental released info or what is in his conscience. Let the hard fact evidence do the convicting before a 12 man jury. Do I hear an Amen?

Thanks ----Bart

 

Agreed. I don't think you understand my point. A godly society is not a society that practices capital punishment and stops abortion. They might be more moral, but not godly.

 

Bart, I will give you that "Amen."

I am certainly NOT a supporter of Christian Identity, nor would I support those who would use mindless violence to produce an end, no matter how noble.

Yet in the case of Eric Rudolph, I DO want to presume him innocent until proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. The only thing we know about him is what the media is saying. I would not give much credence to that. Neither would I give much credence to what the government says (cue "X-Files" music here).

Let the evidence be presented, let the defense have its turn, and let a jury of his peers weigh it all for a correct verdict.


mozier

 

Dr. Bob said:

Many people out in the West think of him as misguided but NOT truly criminal.

Probably there are as many out there who think he is a modern-day Phinehas. Your neck of the woods, particularly Montana and Idaho, is a haven for the radical right just as upstate New York and California are for the loony left.

 

He forgot to read God's word about who is in charge. He forgot to read God's word about murder...etc. He basically left God out of it. I don't believe he did it for God...I believe he's using that as a an excuse...because non-Christians would be likely to believe it.

[ June 04, 2003, 05:25 PM: Message edited by: Charlotte Marcel ]