Iraqi War Defined by November 19,2005

The "60 Minutes" episode that aired Sunday, March 18 gave me that sinking feeling in my stomach that speaks of anger, sadness, confusion - all rolled together. I have tried to be virtually silent on my blog about the war, mainly because I know of so many wonderful people whose sons and daughters are in Iraq. I pray for them constantly. However, the "60 minutes" interview from last night sent me over the edge. They interviewed Marine Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterick, who was in charge of the group of Marines at Haditha.

Let me refresh your memory. On November 19, 2005 as a small Marine convoy rolled through the streets of Haditha, an explosive device demolished one of the humvees. The Marine driver was killed immediately and others in the vehicle were wounded. Here is the story (as best we can tell) that happened next.

A white car with 4 Iraqi college students that were returning from school and a taxi driver, happened on the scene of the burning wreckage. They were ordered out of the car, but instead they took off running - they were all shot in the back and killed. A search of the car turned up no evidence of weapons or anything suspicious. Wrong place at the wrong time. Now dead.

Minutes after the explosion, the Marines thought they heard shots being fired. They hustled to the closest house off the street assuming that the shots may have come from there. Staff Sergeant Wuterick gave the command to shoot first and ask questions later. At this house, an elderly man, his wife and children were shot. The Marines were engaged in what they call, "clearing the house".

They moved to a second house because the back door was open in the first house - and they assumed someone may have run out the back. They followed the same procedure at a second house - throwing grenades into the house first, then breaking down the door, shooting whomever is inside. A family including husband, wife and 4 young children were killed in this second house. Then, they move to a third house.

They clear the third house - killing four brothers inside. One of these brothers had a rifle - the only weapon found during this whole episode. And it has not even been determined if that brother with that rifle had even fired it that day.

Total - 24 Iraqis killed that day in Haditha. I wish that the craziness ended there, but it doesn't.

That day, we are told, the Marines dropped 24 bodies, including men, women and children at the Haditha hospital and left with no explanation. The next day a Marine spokesman releases the statement that 1 US Marine and 15 Iraqi civilians were killed in a roadside blast. As the convoy was attacked after the blast, the Marines killed 8 more insurgents. NOT QUITE THE TRUTH. As a matter of fact, if photos had not been discovered almost 2 months later - with the bodies with massive gunshot wounds - this story would have never been challenged...

We later have learned that the Marines have paid families of 15 of the victims $1500-2500. It has also been speculated that fires were started in the houses and air strikes were conducted later to make it difficult to investigate what really has happened.

That is the first part of the story. An equally sad part happened last night as I listened to Marine Staff Sergeant Wuterick, the 26 year old young man, that we put in that position as he talked on "60 Minutes". He is now facing "court marshal" for 15 deaths on that day.

Listen to this carefully - Wuterick said in the interview that he was sorry for the women and children - but that is the way a "house is cleared". He stated under those conditions he would make the same decisions again. His job was to protect the rest of his fellow Marines from dying and they were just doing what it took in that situation. That he said, is the way that we have been trained......

Here is the truth...I don't ultimately blame this young man - it sounds as if he used poor judgement, and he should be held accountable - but the truth is - this is what war does. It puts people in gut wrenching life and death positions. Kill or be killed positions. It turns young men and women into fearful and angry fighters. The irony is that the "higher ups" in the military, who put Wuterick in this position, now get to sit in judgement of him.

Here is a sadder note. I feel that our country has taken this path in a multitude of ways. Whether it is political issues, economic issues, or military ones - it seems our policy now is "take out anyone who is a threat".

Consuming Passion

"Consuming Passion: Why the Killing of Jesus Really Matters" edited by Simon Barrow and Jonathan Bartley is a fascinating book coming from a serious debate within evangelicalism in the UK. Both Barrow and Bartley are part of "Ekklesia" - a theological think-tank in Britain.

This book represents the reconsideration going on in the UK and other parts of the world that is suffering from the cultural meltdown of Christendom. Basically, the majority of the writers in this book attempt to expose the faulty logic of Christendom (the amalgamation of church and politics) and then re-think some of the detours caused by it. More specifically, the writers challenge the penal substitutionary theory of the atonement from Anselm through Luther and popularized by Calvin. Much of evangelicalism is defined by the belief in penal substitution: that God's law is violated by disobedience and He requires a sacrificial payment for sins in order to justify sinners. Hence, God is the one who requires a sacrificial death of His Son as a substitute in order for our sins to be forgiven. This book challenges this way of telling the story of the importance of Jesus' death.

There are several reasons for this challenge:

1. Penal substitution, the writers say, is a late development in Christian theology. As noted above, before Anselm, Luther, and Calvin, the early church spoke of Christ's death and resurrection in terms of victory over the devil's hold on us.

2. Penal substitution arose during the Christendom context, where oppressive rulers required the death of those that dishonored their authority. Some of the articles challenge whether this is the appropriate Biblical view of God and really what was really happening in the death of Jesus.

3. Some of the writers suggest that the view of God suggested by the penal substitution view presents a violent God and that this view has been responsible for some of the Christian violence in the modern era.

This is a very brief review - and it doesn't do justice to many of the fine articles in this book. This is a very readable book - also quite challenging to many evangelicals who have never questioned the penal substitution story of the cross. It requires looking at Christ's death from a different angle, and for that reason alone, I say it is a book that should be read by thinking evangelicals.