What would Jesus pack?

  • News
  • Thread starter mgb_phys
  • Start date
  • #26
drankin
You sit here and deny the problem, while a member from the ME is, in your words, ranting. How do you defend that position? It is, after all, a problem of perception in the first place. What you call politcal correctness, I call, "not being stupid".

Referencing Bible verses is certainly proselytizing. It seems pretty clear that the military was unaware of the problem when they signed the contract.

I am paying for those weapons just like every other taxpayer. Even as person who was raised as a Christian [when push comes to shove I still consider myself a Christian], I am insulted and shocked by this. I am not paying taxes in order to provide free advertising for religious fanatics.

I'm not disagreeing that it shouldn't be on the sites and should be removed from future products but beyond that it's a non-issue unless folks like yourself call attention to it and make it one. It's a gunsight. Not a tool of the "crusaders". What if it the late company owner happened to be a Muslim and put similar coding on the serial number? Would the outrage be the same? I don't think so.
 
  • #28
142
1
It seems pretty clear that the military was unaware of the problem when they signed the contract.

no, it's not clear

Weinstein, an attorney and former Air Force officer, said many members of his group who currently serve in the military have complained about the markings on the sights. He also claims they've told him that commanders have referred to weapons with the sights as "spiritually transformed firearm of Jesus Christ."
 
  • #29
126
0
What if it the late company owner happened to be a Muslim and put similar coding on the serial number? Would the outrage be the same? I don't think so.

I can assure you that had this been the case, the outrage would be many orders of magnitude greater, and that company would find itself under investigation. The military itself would have no choice but to replace them, as units would refuse to use such weapons.

What this says about our society, I don't know.
 
  • #30
234
0
I regard the Gospels as a colllection of legends, meaning, a story widely interpreted as historical although unverifiable. Therefore anything attributed to a saying of Jesus is open to speculation as to authenticity. On the issue of laying down one's swords, there is the contrary injuction from Luke 22, 35-38:

35 And He said to them, “When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?” They said, “No, nothing.” 36 And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. 37 “For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.” 38 They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”

In this case I would tell the manufacturer to repent in light of the Biblical caution against having any graven images before God ... and remove the engravings from their products or don't sell them to the military.
 
  • #31
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
992
no, it's not clear

If so, then those involved were violating an explicit order and are subject to disciplinary action.
 
  • #32
kyleb
You sit here and deny the problem, while a member from the ME is, in your words, ranting. How do you defend that position?
Er, I'm not from the Middle East by any stretch, but rather American from generations of the same. I wasn't rightly ranting either though, just listing off some previously referenced facts drakin seems intent on ignoring.

It's a gunsight. Not a tool of the "crusaders".
Commanders referring to guns using the sights as "spiritually transformed firearm of Jesus Christ" shatters the false dichotomy you constructed there.

striking someone on the right cheek uses the left hand...
Not necessarily, and you are still ignoring the context regardless.

no, it's not clear
What you quoted there speaks of after the scopes had been put into use, not when the contract was signed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #33
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
992
I'm not disagreeing that it shouldn't be on the sites and should be removed from future products but beyond that it's a non-issue unless folks like yourself call attention to it and make it one. It's a gunsight. Not a tool of the "crusaders".

I am bothered by this revelation. It is easy for me to understand how a person from the ME would be outraged. What also bothered me was your lack of understanding of Kyleb's position. Your response to what is clearly a fear-based reacton, is to accuse him/her of ranting? This is in direct contradiction to the motivation for the order in the first place, so your reaction only helps to undermine our true objective of peace.

What if it the late company owner happened to be a Muslim and put similar coding on the serial number? Would the outrage be the same? I don't think so.

You know full well that you would be the first to object. There would be a tidal wave of outrage from the right.

By tomorrow, Rush would be arguing that Obama did it.
 
  • #34
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,842
992
I would add that I am also insulted AS a Christian that weapons would be associated with my religious beliefs.
 
  • #35
drankin
I am bothered by this revelation. It is easy for me to understand how a person from the ME would be outraged. What also bothered me was your lack of understanding of Kyleb's position. Your response to what is clearly a fear-based reacton, is to accuse him/her of ranting? This is in direct contradiction to the motivation for the order in the first place, so your reaction only helps to undermine our true objective of peace.



You know full well that you would be the first to object. There would be a tidal wave of outrage from the right.

By tomorrow, Rush would be arguing that Obama did it.

Yes there would be outrage from the right, but what about the left?
 
  • #36
142
1
Not necessarily, and you are still ignoring the context regardless.

look, we see things a little differently, but if you want to talk context, let's widen that up a bit:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:38-42&version=NIV

what i see from the whole verse is a very active, non-passive sort of interaction with people. a person that acts that way isn't going to be ignored easily, because the person is constantly in your face. some people might even consider it annoying.
 
  • #37
142
1
What you quoted there speaks of after the scopes had been put into use, not when the contract was signed.

it's not clear when they knew it. which is all i pointed out: it's not clear.
 
  • #38
kyleb
What also bothered me was your lack of understanding of Kyleb's position. Your response to what is clearly a fear-based reacton, is to accuse him/her of ranting?
It seems you missed my post shortly before yours where I mentioned that I'm an American. I'm not reacting out of fear either, I'm just not hip to the clash of civilizations mentality some are so fond of. Also, for the sake of possibly saving you a bit of typing in the future, I'm a man.

it's not clear when they knew it. which is all i pointed out: it's not clear.
Well, surely the people mentioned in what you quoted wouldn't have known about it until after the scopes had been delivered. Regardless, I highly doubt the relevance of the markings was known by whoever contracted the manufacture. If it was, I contend they don't deserve the responsibility they have been vested with.
 
  • #39
drankin
Commanders referring to guns using the sights as "spiritually transformed firearm of Jesus Christ" shatters the false dichotomy you constructed there.



Are you familiar with military humor?
 
  • #40
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,819
14
Are you familiar with military humor?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOrgLj9lOwk
 
  • #41
kyleb
look, we see things a little differently, but if you want to talk context, let's widen that up a bit:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:38-42&version=NIV

what i see from the whole verse is a very active, non-passive sort of interaction with people. a person that acts that way isn't going to be ignored easily, because the person is constantly in your face. some people might even consider it annoying.
I over looked this comment previously, but I agree with your interpretation here. However, it seems you have blurred the distinction between passive and pacific.

Are you familiar with military humor?
As an Army brat, quite so. I'm also familiar with commanders engaging in theological derived call and response drills, solders doing things like scrawling "Jesus killed Mohammad" on an APC. Am I to take it you don't see anything wrong with any of that?
 
  • #42
OmCheeto
Gold Member
2,193
2,646
I can't believe no one acknowledged my secret bible/quranic scripts in my post.

Jesus & Mo' are going to shoot me....... :cry:
 
  • #43
PhillisDillar
Marine Corps Concerned About 'Jesus Guns,' Will Meet With Trijicon


Following ABC News Report of Secret Bible Verses on Weapons
Used in Muslim Lands, Marines Will Meet With Maker of Equipment

JOSEPH RHEE and MARK SCHONE
ABC News
Jan. 19, 2010


Following an ABC News report that thousands of gun sights used by the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan are inscribed with secret Bible references, a spokesperson for the Marine Corps said the Corps is 'concerned' and will discuss the matter with the weapons manufacturer.

"We are aware of the issue and are concerned with how this may be perceived," Capt. Geraldine Carey, a spokesperson for the Marine Corps, said in a statement to ABC News. "We will meet with the vendor to discuss future sight procurements." Carey said that when the initial deal was made in 2005 it was the only product that met the Corps needs.

However, a spokesperson for CentCom, the U.S. military's overall command in Iraq and Aghanistan, said he did not understand why the issue was any different from U.S. money with religious inscriptions on it.

"The perfect parallel that I see," said Maj. John Redfield, spokesperson for CentCom, told ABC News, "is between the statement that's on the back of our dollar bills, which is 'In God We Trust,' and we haven't moved away from that."

Said Redfield, "Unless the equipment that's being used that has these inscriptions proved to be less than effective for soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and military folks using it, I wouldn't see why we would stop using that."

A spokesperson for the Army told ABC News that the Army was looking into the procurement "to see if anything is amiss here. We are still checking."

As ABC News reported Monday, the sights are used by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the training of Iraqi and Afghan soldiers. The maker of the sights, Trijicon, has a $660 million multi-year contract to provide up to 800,000 sights to the Marine Corps, and additional contracts to provide sights to the U.S. Army.

U.S. military rules specifically prohibit the proselytizing of any religion in Iraq or Afghanistan and were drawn up in order to prevent criticism that the U.S. was embarked on a religious "Crusade" in its war against al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents.

'This Does Not Constitute Proselytizing'

One of the citations on the gun sights, 2COR4:6, is an apparent reference to Second Corinthians 4:6 of the New Testament, which reads: "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."

Other references include citations from the books of Revelation, Matthew and John dealing with Jesus as "the light of the world." John 8:12, referred to on the gun sights as JN8:12, reads, "Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

Trijicon confirmed to ABCNews.com that it adds the biblical codes to the sights sold to the U.S. military. Tom Munson, director of sales and marketing for Trijicon, which is based in Wixom, Michigan, said the inscriptions "have always been there" and said there was nothing wrong or illegal with adding them.

Munson said the issue was being raised by a group that is "not Christian." The company has said the practice began under its founder, Glyn Bindon, a devout Christian from South Africa who was killed in a 2003 plane crash.

On Monday, spokespeople for the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps both told ABC News their services were unaware of the biblical markings. On Tuesday, Redfield of CentCom told ABC News that the inscriptions did not violate the directive against proselytizing. "This does not constitute proselytizing because this equipment is not issued beyond the U.S. Defense Department personnel. It's not something we're giving away to the local folks."

But ABC News was able to find repeated references to the Biblical citations in on-line discussions of the gun sights. In August 2009, a poster named "Latex Ducky" tells other posters on a forum for firearm enthusiasts called "The Firing Line" about the inscriptions. "Here's something interesting: There should be a reference to a Bible verse on the base of the scope."

Back in 2006, on a self-described "Armageddon Forum," a number of users discuss the Bible references. "Seems there's a different verse on each model," writes Mr45auto. "They chose some whoppers too!"

After the Blotter's report Monday morning, the TPM Muckraker news Web site listed numerous references to the Trijicon Bible codes on-line dating back several years, including a January 2006 thread on a gaming forum that said "DoD contractor puts bible verses on it's (sic) products."

In May of 2006, a poster on Militaryphotos.net began a comment thread by asking, "Has anyone ever noticed the Bible verse on their ACOG sight?" Another user responds, "Yeah I read about that recently, but I didn't know there were than many different verses on all the different optics."

A video on YouTube that discusses the Bible verses had close to 20,000 views. "One of the really cool things that I like about this sight," says the maker of the video, is the Bible verse. "It says JN8:12. What that is is John 8:12."

"I love it. I love it. Yes, Trijicon, those guys are Christians. On all of their different sights they have verses on there."

"For those of you who aren't Christians, well, you know, get over it."

In another video, the same YouTube user notes the reference to Second Corinthians on a Trijicon scope.

'They Should Fix Them All'

"It's wrong, it violates the Constitution, it violates a number of federal laws," said Michael "Mikey" Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group that seeks to preserve the separation of church and state in the military.

Weinstein, an attorney and former Air Force officer, said many members of his group who currently serve in the military have complained about the markings on the sights. He also claims they've told him that commanders have referred to weapons with the sights as "spiritually transformed firearm of Jesus Christ."

Weinstein said coded biblical inscriptions play into the hands of those who call the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan "a Crusade."

Retired Army Major General William Nash, now an ABC News consultant, said he had "no problem" with organizations providing Bibles and other religious tracts to U.S. troops. "But I do have a problem," said Nash, "with military equipment being labeled in a way where it seems like it's our god against their god."

Nash, who commanded the first brigade of the third armored division during Desert Storm in Iraq, said the Pentagon should make Trijicon remove the Bible codes from their sights.

Said Nash, "They should fix them all, they should do a modification on those sights and take off those inscriptions. And if they fail to do that they should be penalized."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/secret-bible-verses-guns-marines-concerned/story?id=9602030


It is not the soldiers, who use the ACOG every day who are complaining about it. I have talked to many of them personally and they think that it is either neat that it is on there, or they do not really care. You know who else uses the ACOG? The IDF. That is Israeli Defense Forces if you did not know. There are many IDF members on militaryphotos.net, and one of them can be quoted saying "it could say mein kampf for all I care and I would still use the ACOG"

Trijicon has been putting these bible verses on their ACOGs since they started making them, most people don't even know they are there. This has been blown way out of proportion, as is everything that has to do with Christianity and seriously needs to stop.
 
  • #44
126
0
My favorite quote of the whole post:

"For those of you who aren't Christians, well, you know, get over it."

That right there is exactly why these things can't be allowed.
 
  • #45
PhillisDillar
My favorite quote of the whole post:



That right there is exactly why these things can't be allowed.

Mind you that is quoted from a youtube video. We all know how educated youtube commentators are. . .
 
  • #46
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,819
14
What a backlash - I'm beginning to have second doubts about the launch of my new line of condoms:
"Altar boy's choice"
 
  • #47
142
1
What a backlash - I'm beginning to have second doubts about the launch of my new line of condoms:
"Altar boy's choice"

would the package codes be a reference to Onan or to Sodom ?
 
  • #48
4,254
1
"It's wrong, it violates the Constitution, it violates a number of federal laws," said Michael "Mikey" Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group that seeks to preserve the separation of church and state in the military."

If this is a correct quote, athiest "Michael "Mikey" Weinstein" is an idiot who does not know the meaning of "The separation of church and state" which should be part of his bivwack as an atheist advocate, nor knows its historical appearance and why, nor probably realizes that the phrase has no legal merit, appearing nonwhere in the Delclaration of Independence nor the Constitution.

Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."

The inverted core of this well memmed modern mythology, within the US, begins with a letter by Thomas Jefferson delived to the congregation of the minority Danbury Baptists Church of Connecticut fearful of the establishment of a state religion. I quote Jefferson as presented by Wikipedia:

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their "legislature" should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

The philosophy of the separation of Church and State was a desire protect organized religion from government interference. Not the inverted idea of protecting government from church as it is so commonly misinterpreted today.
 
Last edited:
  • #49
kyleb
It is not the soldiers, who use the ACOG every day who are complaining about it. I have talked to many of them personally and they think that it is either neat that it is on there, or they do not really care.
Of course the Dominionist Christian types like it, and I'm sure many others don't care either way, but the solders represented by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation are complaining, as noted in the article you pasted above.

You know who else uses the ACOG? The IDF. That is Israeli Defense Forces if you did not know. There are many IDF members on militaryphotos.net, and one of them can be quoted saying "it could say mein kampf for all I care and I would still use the ACOG"
Well they are very well made scopes, but I dislike my tax dollars going towards promoting any institution of religion regardless, both in regard to those we buy for our troops and as part of the billions in weaponry we give Israel every year.

Trijicon has been putting these bible verses on their ACOGs since they started making them, most people don't even know they are there. This has been blown way out of proportion, as is everything that has to do with Christianity and seriously needs to stop.
Am I to take it you are hoping to see the line between church and state erased without those who respect it noticing?

If this is a correct quote, athiest "Michael "Mikey" Weinstein" is an idiot who does not know the meaning of "The separation of church and state"...
I'm pretty sure he knows what he is talking about, the markings on the sights being unconstitutional for the same reason posting the Ten Commandments on a courthouse is. Also, how did you come to the conclusion that he is an atheist?

...protect organized religion from government interference.
That's the bit about "prohibiting the free exercise" of relgion.

....protecting government from church...
And that's part about not "respecting an establishment of religion".

It goes both ways, "building a wall of separation between church and State" as Jefferson put it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #50
OmCheeto
Gold Member
2,193
2,646
I am not paying taxes in order to provide free advertising for religious fanatics.

Yes you are.

1in_god_we_trust.jpg
 

Related Threads on What would Jesus pack?

  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
80
Views
10K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
3K
Z
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
2K
Top