JG-TC.com > Opinion > LETTER: Star Spangled Banner has four verses

TODAY'S HEADLINES

SPECIAL SECTION

ONLINE POLL

ONLINE EXTRAS

SITE TOOLS

OTHER LINKS

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Lee Enterprises

Wednesday, November 14, 2007 12:10 AM CST
LETTER: Star Spangled Banner has four verses

By Jon Vanatta, Charleston

Our national anthem “The Star Spangled Banner” is sung at the beginning of nearly every sporting event in our nation and many government functions. How many know that Francis Scott Key wrote four verses?

I learned that the fourth verse has been sung on some formal occasions. Written in 1814 less than 40 years after our Declaration of Independence and within the lifetimes of many of our founding fathers, it is reflective of the mindset and intent of the people of that time.

It was made our national anthem by a Congressional Resolution on March 3, 1931.The words of the fourth verse are also very appropriate for the time we live in today and mirror the deeply religious and patriotic nature of the composer.

“O thus be it ever when free-men shall stand

Between their lov’d home and the war’s desolation;

Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the heav’n-rescued land

Praise the Pow’r that hath made and preserv’d us a nation!

Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,

And this be our motto: “In God is our trust!“

And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave

O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!”

– Francis Scott Key

Add your comments

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Not already registered?
Then click Here.

Comment policy:

JG-TC.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed. Comments posted on Saturday may not be reviewed until Sunday afternoon.

In order to keep the page a set width, long lines (mostly long links) will be chopped. Try putting spaces in your links or consider using tinyurl.com to make a smaller link that you can include.

We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to remove comments that violate our code of conduct.

No comment may contain:

* Potentially libelous statements; such as accusing somebody of a crime, defamation of character, or statements that can harm somebody's reputation.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment or inciting violence.
* Commercial product promotions.

If you have any questions, please contact our moderator.

shumphreys wrote on Nov 14, 2007 7:54 AM:

" Mr. Vanatta notice that the song does not say in Jesus Christ we trust. God is the generic term, the God of all people, the Brahman of the Hindu and the YHWH of the Jew. God can even be considered to be the Tao of the Tao teh Ching.God can be a personal God in the image of a man or an impersonal greater force. Since the concept is personal it stands to reason that one persons concept is as valid as any other persons concept. "

The Question wrote on Nov 14, 2007 8:05 AM:

" The Constitution doesn't mention God, Vanatta. But it does forbid religion from being used as a test of office in the U.S. The Constitution is the governing document of the U.S., not this song, so drop your misleading, sentimental drivel. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 14, 2007 2:49 PM:

" No Susan god is the generic term for the god all other religions except Judaism. God with a capital "G" is the one and only Lord God Almighty and the creator of all. Jesus is the Son of God and has been with God from before the foundations of the earth were laid. No generic god has or can do anything for anyone. Our founding fathers were well aware of that fact. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 14, 2007 3:15 PM:

" Claiming that God refers to the Christian God is the height of arrogance Mr. Vanatta. Our founding fathers were very aware of the problems that we would face if this was declared a Christian nation and took great steps to keep that from happening.This is not, never has been and I hope to God never will be a Christian nation. "

TommyTutone wrote on Nov 14, 2007 3:18 PM:

" No offense to anyone who's religious, but this verse sucks. Seriously, tie it together with the rest of the song and tell me we should put this steaming pile of verse back in. "

bec wrote on Nov 14, 2007 3:39 PM:

" Thank you for this informative letter. It is a shame that when any mention of God or Christianity is mentioned some people must continually post their hate and paranoia. Nobody is forcing their beliefs on others(how is that really possible anyway), just stating what they believe. But apparently, some think we shouldn't even be able to do that anymore. It is freedom of religion, not freedom to never, ever have to hear about religion the rest of your life. When I read about other religions in the paper, I don't feel threatened. I certaintly don't feel the need to spew mean-spirited comments and continuously criticize. "

The Question wrote on Nov 14, 2007 4:23 PM:

" The truth is, Christianity is just another religion. None of them make much sense. "

father bob wrote on Nov 14, 2007 5:16 PM:

" Wednesday, November 14, 2007 12:10 AM CST LETTER: Star Spangled Banner has four verses ......i have 9 toes "

The Original Truth wrote on Nov 14, 2007 6:23 PM:

" I like to keep a loaded gun (revolver style preferably) in my car for safety sake. I haven't had to use it yet, but when I do I'll bless the good Lord for giving me the foresight to carry a loaded gun. "

The Original Truth wrote on Nov 14, 2007 6:25 PM:

" Tommy Tutone: Do you think if someone like Whitney Houston or Ella Fitzgerald sang the verse that it would be a "steaming pile"? I think not. "

TommyTutone wrote on Nov 14, 2007 7:34 PM:

" You make a good point truth, those songbirds could make a belching contest sound good. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 14, 2007 11:20 PM:

" No Susan it is Judaism and Christianity that only have the true God. There are many Messianic Jews in the world today the first ones were the 12 Apostles, also Jesus’ brother James, Paul of Tarsus, and Barnabas just to mention a few. Christianity is a religion with Jewish roots. These people I mentioned all continued to recognize and honor the traditional Jewish feasts and holidays even as Jesus did. At Antioch in Syria there was a mix of Gentile and Jewish believers in Jesus Christ and it was there that they were first called Christians. Yes it was very arrogant of Jesus to claim to be God. UNLESS HE ACTUALLY IS GOD! The thing of it is though He was able to prove that to be true. John 2:19-22 19Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” 20Then the Jews said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?” 21But He was speaking of the temple of His body. 22Therefore, when He had risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this to them; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said. Now I can live with that arrogance since He really is God He has a right to be and in fact I can die with it too because He loves me so much He died for me. And He died for you too. No god that is only wood stone or clay or that is merely a man has died as a sacrifice for YOU Susan. But when a person continually fights the true God and rejects His sacrifice then that person will receive the wrath of God. John 3:36,"He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 15, 2007 8:09 AM:

" Mr. Vanatta why do you BELIEVE that the Bible is telling you the Truth? Have you ever considered that other religions are right and that you might be the one that is wrong? It really doesn't matter what you believe. You are entitled to believe whatever fantasy you wish. BUT as I said earlier you are not entitled to denigrate the beliefs of others. Doing so shows you to be a hypocrite, racist, and a fool. What was Jesus real message Mr. Vanatta? What was the single most important thing that he said? It's in your Bible. It says love God (not the Christian God) but God and God is the God of all people. It doesn't matter if he or she is called Allah, Brahman, Jehova, the Way, or Great Spirit. I believe that God is intelligent enough to recognize his name in whatever language it is uttered. The second message is love thy neighbor as thy brother. He is not talking about loving others that are just like him but all of his neighbors. You can't love your neighbor if you don't show them respect. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 15, 2007 12:22 PM:

" Susan you have in one thread 1. Blasphemed the God of Heaven, 2. Disgraced the National Anthem, and 3. Betrayed your own group the separation of church and state bunch by revealing that the true agenda of what you want is not separation of church and state but only separation of Jesus Christ and state because you would accept Francis Scott Key’s God if it was any one other than Jesus Christ. Why don’t you write some more to us about how you hate intolerance, hypocrisy, and double standards? "

Dohbaugh wrote on Nov 15, 2007 2:38 PM:

" Susan, you are arguing with a closed mind. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 15, 2007 2:47 PM:

" Mr. Vanatta you had better look up the word blaspheme. I haven't blashphemed God, or even you. I haven't disgraced the national anthem. I haven't betrayed my "group". You don't even know what group I belong to. You are finally getting the point about separating church and state. I am pointing out that the term God, applies to the God of all people. I am not saying that it is right or wrong to use it on our currency, in the national anthem, the pledge of allegiance or anywhere else. That is another debate. Here we are talking about respecting all people. It seems to me that you are saying that the only way to be a Christian is to learn to hate and be fearfull of all of those that are different from you? Tamara65 said that declaring your belief in Jesus is not a "get out of jail free card". God's grace isn't granted to those that pretend to believe in him. The only way he/she knows for sure if you are sincere is by watching your words and deeds, your actions. The most important action is how you treat your fellow man. That is the main message of both old and new testaments and of the writings in ALL the worlds sacred scriptures. If I have to be rude to you in order to get the message across than so be it. That my friend is called "tough love." Even you deserve the opportunity to learn the TRUTH and be enlightened! "

gringa wrote on Nov 15, 2007 3:27 PM:

" Dohbaugh says "Susan, you are arguing with a closed mind." Can't believe you said that, Dohbaugh, and I certainly agree with your statement. It does no good to criticize her though, unless you have ideas for how to help her open her mind. "

HisChild wrote on Nov 15, 2007 4:00 PM:

" shumphreys...Tough Love is not rudely forcing God's love or truth on anyone. Tough love is persevering through in God's love, and being a shining example of His Love regardless how rudely you are treated. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 15, 2007 7:54 PM:

" To His Child, tough love is a counseling method used in the intervention/discipline of problem children. To Gringa, now tell me how being a person that says that ALL people deserve, have the right, to be treated with respect, and equal protection and rights under law, is operating with a closed mind! "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 15, 2007 8:09 PM:

" To Dohbaugh there is always hope that I can "knock" a whole in that closed mind and broaden it out a bit. I firmly believe that any Letter to the Editor that promotes fear or hate, hamstrings children with lies about Science or History, should not be allowed to go unchallenged. If a Christian doesn't want to have his/her beliefs challenged than they should keep those beliefs to themselves and not push them on others in public forums. For those who don't follow the Letters to the Editor closely, I have never initiated a discussion. I have responded to what others have written! "

HisChild wrote on Nov 15, 2007 8:42 PM:

" Shumpreys...having donated eight of the books to a parents group...we brought our children up with 'Tough Love' :-) Thankyou. "

HisChild wrote on Nov 15, 2007 8:44 PM:

" BTW...it's not only for problem children. Do you listen to WBGL? "

TigerRose wrote on Nov 16, 2007 3:31 AM:

" The Star Spangled Banner has a lot more than just 4 verses. There was a verse written for about every war & conflict we have been in. That includes the Vietnam Conflict & the Gulf War too. "

Gail wrote on Nov 16, 2007 7:18 AM:

" I'm not sure where to jump in on this thread! When I first saw Jon Vanatta's letter, my first thought was that I can hardly make it through one verse of "The Star Spangled Banner," let alone all four. I am among those who would prefer a less militaristic song for our National Anthem, such as "America the Beautiful." Oh, Susan, when Jesus talked about God, you can be pretty sure he was referring to the God his audience was familiar with: YHWH, the God of Abraham and Isaac. This is the God of all people, according to the scriptures you're alluding to. More than likely, since Jesus was Jewish and was speaking to Jews, he was not thinking of Allah or Brahman. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 16, 2007 7:48 AM:

" To His Child Tough Love was not a Christian child rearing technique. It first appeared in counseling in the 70's or very early 80's. It doesn't surprise me that Christians have commandeered the concept for their own purposes. I suspect that there are some similarities to the original concept.Thanks for letting me know about the books I will avoid the use of this phrase since it now has multiple meanings. "

HisChild wrote on Nov 16, 2007 10:26 AM:

" There is 'Tough Love' and there is 'Love Must Be Tough' :-) "

Dohbaugh wrote on Nov 16, 2007 12:00 PM:

" Actually, gringa, I wasn't criticising Susan, I was merely stating the obvious, and Susan is well aware that I have always, for the most part, agreed with her messages. "

Dohbaugh wrote on Nov 16, 2007 12:06 PM:

" Actually, gringa, I wasn't criticising Susan, I was merely stating the obvious, and Susan is well aware that I have almost always agreed with her messages. And it wasn't Susan's mind that was being called closed. Susan's a big person and doesn't need any help from me, or anyone else for that matter, she, more than a lot of posters, can take care of herself. Sorry for the misunderstanding. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 16, 2007 4:04 PM:

" To Gail we haven't been talking about what Jesus meant when he used the word God. We have been talking about the use of the word God on our currency, the terms used in the Declaration of Independence, and in a particular song. God by the way was used by Zoroaster long before Abraham appeared. The word belongs to all people not just Christians. It is the height of arrogance for Christians to claim the word as their own. "

gringa wrote on Nov 16, 2007 6:13 PM:

" Dohbaugh, ah, that's funny. Yes, I knew you weren't saying that Susan had a closed mind. I was trying to be funny; you know, create a little levity on here - which, most of the time, is sorely missing in the posts of those who take their opinions entirely too serious, too self-important. Sorry. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 16, 2007 8:14 PM:

" Gail,I agree with you that would be and ordeal if you were the one singing The Star Spangled Banner like before a ball game or something and had to sing all 4 verses. What I think would be neat if sometime someone would just surprise everybody and sing just the 4th verse. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 16, 2007 10:09 PM:

" Susan, we don't claim the word God as our own but we claim that there is only one God just as the Bible says. Yes of course this one God existed at the time of Zoroaster whenever that was because God has always existed. Did Zoroaster acknowledge Him as the one true God? You said Zoroaster used God. Did you mean Zoroaster used God or did God use Zoroaster? I can't imagine anyone using God. I don't know much about Zoroaster except I am pretty sure he was a monotheist. That goes along very well with the Jewish Christian concept of one God. Excuse me Susan but I don’t understand why you would want to use him as a point in your argument that there are many gods? I think he only believed in one God. Enoch lived a long time before Abraham and even before Zoroaster and he believed in only one God. You know Susan the first of the 10 commandments given to Moses God said (in the old KJV), “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” I looked up the Hebrew word ‘al that the English word “before” was translated from and it could also have been translated as “among” or “besides”. The KJV translators made a point in the KJV of that being little g gods. It was of first importance to God that no other gods be recognized as being even among Him. Sorry, poor grammar I know but it was to make the point. When Francis Scott Key wrote his poem he made a point of it being a capital G God in the singular. There are many gods Susan but only one God. And that one God is the creator and sustainer of heaven and earth who has always existed. Please don’t blaspheme Him Susan. I did look up “blaspheme” and that is what you are doing. By the way you can’t blaspheme me I’m not God. I'm not even a god and I don't wanna be. You probably should look up “blaspheme” yourself. "

TigerRose wrote on Nov 16, 2007 10:59 PM:

" You still have not gotten my point, Jon. You still insist that there are only four verses, and you are still WRONG in your assumption. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 17, 2007 8:23 AM:

" Susan, I have noticed in nearly every thread you comment on that you refer to Jesus with respect. I am wondering how you reconcile his teachings (which you seem to appreciate) with his claim to be divine. He did make that assertion, and not only in the Gospel of John. It is obvious that Jesus truly made that claim (not that the biblical authors misrepresented his words) because of his audience's reactions--these, as you can read in all the gospels, ranged from hostility to outright violence. If someone was deluded enough to believe he was equal to God, or able to forgive sins, I probably would not give much credence to anything he or she said. So I do wonder why you refer to Jesus' teachings as much as you do, since you do not believe he was divine (in the sense he was asserting). "

VTucker wrote on Nov 17, 2007 8:30 AM:

" Jon V., I have trouble with, "Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just." It is too easy for people to justify their pet causes and drag God alongside them in the wars they start. Or, as Susan and others have brought up--people during Key's time (and later) believed that getting rid of the Native Americans was a just cause. I am sure many of them quoted Scripture in support of their efforts. "

HisChild wrote on Nov 17, 2007 9:32 AM:

" :-) We like that idea too Jon! God bless everyone! "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 17, 2007 2:09 PM:

" TigerRose, but those verses were not written by Francis Scott Key "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 17, 2007 2:56 PM:

" VTucker, I understand how that is troubling and I know there has been abuse in that regard however if we are Bible believers and in the sovereignty of God we have to know that God even commanded many wars and battles. Think of Joshua and Gideon and what God told them to do. God told Joshua to go into Canaan and exterminate (that is so harsh) all the people residing there including women old people and children. (In our eyes those children were innocent weren’t they?) There are more examples of this if I wanted to go into it more. We have to realize the depths of sin those Canaanites were involved in it even included child sacrifice which was an abomination to God and relating to the 1st commandment the worshipping of other gods another abomination to God. We can relate in our present culture to these things with abortion and people who want to believe that a pagan god can be their salvation just as well as Jesus Christ. But yes I agree there have been abuses in using God as an excuse for killing people. But I still maintain that the people who do those things in the name of Christianity are not Christians. God is God and His ways are not our ways and He is the one who will judge those people. I appreciate the things you said about the Gospel of John. It is so hard for people who are not believers to understand how He is a God of love and yet be a just God who has wrath against sin and those who reject His Son Jesus. I much prefer to receive God’s love then I would to receive His wrath don’t you. God knows we will never be perfect people that is why He provided another way other than being perfect. However we can be perfected though the blood of Jesus. He has told us that the way to do that is to accept the sacrifice and the resurrection of Jesus and trust in Him. Here is some encouragement for you it is what I hang on to. John 14:1-3 (NKJV) 1“Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 17, 2007 3:54 PM:

" Mr. Vanatta I have never said that there are many Gods I have said that God has many names.A subtle but important difference that you missed. Actually Zoraster used the concept God but he wasn't a monotheist in our modern sense of the word.That God, the creator of heaven and earth belongs to all people, has many names. The purpose of the Bible was to tell the story of two groups of people, the Hebrews in the Old Testament and the new Christians in the new. The Upanishads tells the story of another group of people. The Tao teh Ching and the Analects of Confucius of another group. They call God by different names, they see him/her differently, but there is a common thread that ties them all together. That common thread is GOD. The God that Jesus referred to. The Brahman of the Hindus and the Tao of the Tao teh Ching and the Great Spirit of the American Indians. Many names one power. The God term used in the public arena, refers to all of those names. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 17, 2007 4:08 PM:

" Vicky I don't believe in the divinjity of Christ.There are many scholars who assert that Christ nor his immediate followers ever considered him as devine. The assertion of divinity came later and possibly first appeared in the Gospel of John. Each of the gospels is a conglomeration from many sources. The earliest sources used the book of M and Q don't refer to the concept of divinity. References were added to the gospels at later times. I quote from the Bible because for many like Mr. Vanatta that is the only source of information they will accept. I think that the Bible is full of great wisdom but not absolute Truth. Others insist that the Bible is absolute Truth yet it is full of contradictions. I try to point out those contradictions to show that the Bible can be used for good or for evil. It can be used to promote respect for all people or fear and hate. Many people (fortunately) have chosen to use the Bible to improve themselves and make their world a better place for all. Mr. Vanatta hasn't. His fear and hate of all of those that are different from him is the cause of the strife in this world. It is the old tale of the loss of a horseshoe that caused the horse to go lame, and the warrior to miss the battle and the battle was lost. Rooting out evil, stopping the War on Terror, starts at home. Only when every priest and rabbi, minister and mullah stop preaching fear and hate will the world be a safe place for all of us. Learning to respect all people. Is the first step on the road to peace. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 17, 2007 6:45 PM:

" I remember, when I was in high school, a good friend spent nearly a year trying to get me to go to church with her. She could not understand why "The Bible says so" was not enough for me; I had to think it through on my own. I studied other books about the Bible, and I looked into other faiths--much as you have done, Susan. I won't annoy you by trying to change your mind, remembering how that used to bug me, but I will explain (a little) why I believe the way I do. I am familiar with the arguments you mention; I have read them, along with refutations and refutations of the refutations, etc., etc. I would say faith is involved, whichever point of view you decide to go along with. One of the things that swayed me in favor of Christ's divinity was how people reacted to him. This all rings very, very true; I don't at all believe later writers added it in. (I also believe his miracles were real miracles, again due to people's reactions.) He allowed people to worship him. People were enraged when they thought he was usurping the divine; others who previously believed him were enraged when he didn't follow through and zap the Romans (the way they expected). Still others (mainly the comfortable, priestly leadership) saw him as a threat to the status quo. A few believed--or tried to--no matter what. Another thing I could never swallow is that his closest followers were in on some type of plot. These people suffered and died for Christ's cause. I can't imagine they would do that if they didn't think what he said was true. All that being said, I certainly agree that the Bible has been used to promote fear and hate--and a lot of evil and ugliness, besides. Though when I think of fear and hate, I think of Phelps, the Ku Klux Klan, etc. rather than people like Mr. Vanatta and other Christians who are confident in their beliefs. Like the friend I mentioned, their point of view is not that they're being arrogant, but that they're trying to help somebody. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 17, 2007 6:59 PM:

" Jon V., the book of Judges contains a lot of the Old Testament's madness and mayhem, and it is disgusting. But it is an accurate commentary on the human condition at that time. It shows us that God did not have a lot to work with during those years. Yet, somehow he worked his will through all of the carnage that was going on. The writer himself says, "every man did that which was right in his own eyes." I don't think we can use the outrageous acts and events in this book (and similar ones elsewhere) to argue that people were doing the right thing and living the way God wanted them to live. His will was ultimately done, but wasn't it Plan B (or C,D,E) rather than Plan A? God said that all nations would be blessed through his people; I don't think his ideal plan was that all nations would be exterminated by his people. "

TigerRose wrote on Nov 17, 2007 9:40 PM:

" Jon: it doesn't matter that the additional verses were not written by Francis S. Key. What matters is that they ARE still a part of our National Anthem, & no amount of denying them by you will discount that fact. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 18, 2007 8:22 AM:

" Vicky I just posted you a note on the Two letter writers segment. I forgot where I was. I will add to that post that the reason I know what I know is because the Bible, The Upanishads, The Tao teh Ching, The Buddhist Sutras, the writings of many of our American Indian spiritual leaders, the writings of many of our great philosophers and theologians, the books of my childhood, the Chronicles of Narnia, the Ring Trilogy by Tolkien and even the Harry Potter Books ALL tell me so. I will fight verbally and at the ballot box for your right to hold your beliefs because that also guarantees my right to hold mine. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 18, 2007 8:59 PM:

" TigerRose, YOU LISTEN UP, The National Anthem was adopted by congressional act in 1931, these wars you are talking about are after 1931. Unless congress has added these verses they ARE NOT PART OF THE NATIONAL ANTHEM. What are these verses anyway you haven't submitted any verses for our reading. For all I know they might even be good verses but I can guarantee you THEY ARE NOT PART OF THE NATIONAL ANTHEM. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 18, 2007 10:08 PM:

" VTucker, Thanks for the answer to my post. I don’t believe I said that all nations should be exterminated by His people. I said we have those examples where God told Joshua and others to exterminate those peoples who had sunk so low in the depths of sin and disobeying God and I pointed out what the particular things were that were such an abomination; child sacrifice and worshipping other gods for example. And idols many people have idols, which are anything they put into a higher position in their lives than God. The people were doing the right thing though when they obeyed God and carried out his orders to exterminate those people. God punished even His people when they disobeyed Him and did not do it. Read 1 Samuel 15. Are you thinking it is always wrong to go to war? Was it wrong for us to go to war with Germany, Japan? Was it wrong to eliminate Saddam Hussein? What I see as really wrong is sending our young people to war and then not supporting them. Treating them like criminals when they come home. We have congressmen who are filing charges for soldiers for doing their duties they were trained and commanded to do. We have a multitude of people who would prefer to lose the war in Iraq just because they hate Bush so much. When our cause it is just means just that. When the cause is just we should conquer. But I can also agree that not all causes have been just like the American Indians but I think it is unfair to lay all the blame on Christians. Man will never eliminate wars. God the Son Jesus Christ will end all wars. Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that He is Lord. It’s no wonder that people who look at God’s Word as only an allegory are so frustrated because they have no hope. But then it is true if they only see Jesus as just a good man they have no hope. A good man is not a liar. If He is not God He is a liar. You and I know He said He was God in many more places than just in the Gospel of John. Even in the OT He is named Immanuel which means God with us. It’s hard to write a short post! "

Gail wrote on Nov 18, 2007 10:12 PM:

" I did a search for additional verses but didn't find any. What are these mystery verses? "

VTucker wrote on Nov 19, 2007 7:41 AM:

" Jon V., those Old Testament passages of destruction aren't as black & white as you're making them out to be. Women from at least 2 idol-worshiping nations are in Jesus' genealogy. Even in these passages, it's clear the Israelites weren't told to destroy all the "evildoers" or spread their beliefs to all the countries around them. Yes, I think it was wrong for us to invade Iraq. Why do you believe otherwise? Our action in Iraq is very different from that of defending ourselves in W.W. II. Do you feel we're supposed to spread righteousness through war? Are you possibly confusing Christianity with nationalism? I don't see where it's helped even our national interests to fight this war. All the lives lost, the money wasted in this effort--diplomacy and improving our own security could have done so much more. And don't fall into that trap of equating being against the war with not supporting our troops. I believe they should be honored for serving their country. I don't really want to debate this issue, though, which is why I never post on the political threads. Anyway, back to Saddam. He was evil, but he kept his country stable. Toppling him has actually harmed the Christians in Iraq. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 19, 2007 8:24 AM:

" Jon, one other thing about the O.T. accounts of Israelites destroying the Canaanites: The main reason this was done was not because the native people worshiped idols, sacrificed their children, etc., but because they would influence the Israelites to do the same. The Israelites were not told to go out to distant lands and conquer people because of their idolatry, nor were they told to go elsewhere and forcibly convert others to their way of thinking. "

TigerRose wrote on Nov 19, 2007 9:17 AM:

" The verses ARE part of our National Anthem, Jon. Just as The Civil War, World War 1, World War 2, the Korean Conflict, the Vietnam Conflict, & the Gulf War were all part of our doings. That is why there ARE the verses for them in our Anthem...DUH! Just because you are too UnAmerican to recognize the verses, it is only your own fault. That is my last comment on this topic.... I refuse to discuss our National Anthem any further, with an author who doesn't even know all the words to it. "

Gail wrote on Nov 19, 2007 11:19 AM:

" TigerRose, are you trying to pull someone's leg here? If there are other verses to the National Anthem, post them here or else give us a link so we can look at them. Inquiring minds want to know! "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 20, 2007 6:53 PM:

" VTucker, Vicky which part of the Bible do you believe and how do you decide which part is true and which part is not true? I would love to know what your criteria for that is. If you want to be a Christian why not be one that is hot for Jesus Christ and put your whole heart and your whole trust in Him and His Word. You have already alluded that you believe He is divine so why not honor Him as though you really believe that. We have good authority for that attitude of being coming from none other than the resurrected Jesus. He wrote to the church at Laodicea, “So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of my mouth.” That kind of an approach to Christianity makes Jesus just sick of His stomach. Trying to say, “I support the troops but not the war just makes me sick of my stomach”. Saying that gives comfort to the enemy and is discouragement to our people fighting the war. If that is a trap who set the trap? The war in Iraq is just and it was right to go in there. Vicky I cannot believe you said that it is ok to be evil if you keep your country stable!!! Where does that thinking come from? Saddam Hussein murdered many thousands of his own people. Saddam's Iraq is a rebuke to anyone who may doubt that absolute evil dwells among us. No one has put it better than Mr. Sweeney, the BBC reporter. "When I hear the word Iraq, I hear a tortured child screaming." (Now tell me we shouldn't have gone in there) He murdered thousands of Kurds and Shi'ites by using poison gas and he used poison gas in the Iran war. Now tell me he didn’t have WMDs. Do you really think he was done with those atrocities and with the development of WMDs? This was anything but a stable nation unless you have a really twisted idea of what stability is. Books have been written about his atrocities but you say his stable country justifies his evil. The saving of Rahab is a picture of the grace of God because she said, “for the LORD your God, He is God in heaven above and on earth beneath.” (Joshua 2:11) She became a believer in God and was saved by the grace of God. (Hebrews 11:31) “By faith the harlot Rahab did not perish with those who did not believe, when she had received the spies with peace.” 21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, ox and sheep and donkey, with the edge of the sword. Yes Vicky it is black and white. You put your faith in God you are saved. You reject God you are lost. In the NT we can put our faith in God only through acceptance of God the Son Jesus Christ. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 20, 2007 6:54 PM:

" VTucker, tell me why you think WW2 was a more just war. Germany had not directly attacked us but the Nazis were committing atrocities upon European countries and especially racial and religious atrocities against the Jews. Japan had not attacked our homeland but Hawaii. Is it because you think they were a potential threat to our homeland? Do you think the atrocities of Sadaam Hussein were not as bad or what? We were attacked in our homeland by Islamic terrorists. There are even pictures of these terrorists training in Iraq. We went to war in Iraq for all the right reasons but have not fought the war in the right way. Francis Scott Key was writing about this very thing when he wrote, “Then conquer we must when our cause it is just”. The war is just but we should be fighting the war to win and to conquer just like we did in WW2. This is the futility of a war of appeasement. Instead of fighting to win we are just going in and stirring things up. I fault Bush for this too, but I fault more the majority of congressmen who are more concerned about their political careers and their reelectability than they are about the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan or even our country. Our fathers did not fight a war of appeasement in WW2 we fought to win and we did and as a result of that we don’t have to fight Nazism again, (except for the radical skinheads). If we don’t win the war in the Middle East our children will be dying in our homeland. I think this is even a more serious situation than it was in WW2. Don’t fall into the trap of thinking this is just a war against terror. This is a war against Islamofascists. All the terrorists are connected to Islam. Their intentions are to dominate the world starting with Israel and then the USA. They are following the teaching and the tenets of the Koran. When Christians are blamed for the atrocities of the crusades and such those Christians in name only were not following the teachings of Jesus. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 20, 2007 8:59 PM:

" Jon V., do you believe that the screams of Iraqi children who are dying because of the war are less significant than those of the children who died because of S. Hussein? I don't. I oppose the war because of my Christian beliefs. It sounds as if you are saying that I must agree the Iraq war is a just cause, else I am not honoring Christ. There are many Christians who cannot agree with you on this issue, Mr. Vanetta. You may have some personal involvement with this war; I respect that and your point of view--at the same time, I strongly disagree with it. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 21, 2007 7:30 AM:

" Susan, if you're still reading posts on this thread, check this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumphalism, especially the definitions at the end. This attitude is prevalent among extremists of all faiths. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 21, 2007 8:10 AM:

" Jon V., you said, "The war is just but we should be fighting the war to win and to conquer....This is the futility of a war of appeasement. Instead of fighting to win we are just going in and stirring things up." I assume you mean that we need to kill enough people, civilians included, to drive the enemy to surrender. If so, there is a moral disconnect in your thinking. It makes no sense for you to complain about the people Saddam Hussein killed; you're advocating that we do the same thing. Your thinking isn't all that different from that of people who fly planes into buildings. They, too, thought their cause was just and that God was on their side. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 21, 2007 1:14 PM:

" Mr. Vanatta the world is full of men that aren't very nice. Where was/is the United States in Darfour and Somalia, and Boznia. Those are/were all governed by "evil" men. Is it the job of the United States to remove them all? Or are we only to get involved when it is "islamofascism" and oil at stake? What the Islamic extremeists are doing is not based on the Koran. Fanatics of all stripes including Christian fanatics, twist and pervert the teachings of their religion for their personal gain. In World War II we were forced into a war not of our own choosing. In Iraq we started a war with a nation on false pretenses. That is immoral in my opinion. Any way you look at it all wars are bad, a failure of humanity, and a sign of the failure of religions. If religions are to help people be better people Christianity, Judaism and Islam are in serious trouble.You are a good example of that. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 21, 2007 1:36 PM:

" To Vicky I checked out the wikipedia site. That exactly what I have been talking about. Triumphalism is a great word. I just finished a great book by Karen Armstrong, The Great Transformation. It is the history of India, China, the Middle East and Greece that led to the development of the worlds great religions. It is interesting seeing how they developed their ideas during the same time frame in such diverse areas and the commonalities they all share. It is fanatacism that is the problem not Christianity, Islam, Judaism or any other religion or lack of religion. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 22, 2007 1:18 PM:

" I checked the website also. Just and excerpt from it, “However, those who believe in their own group’s superiority or inevitable ascendancy do not typically claim the label ‘triumphalist.’ Instead, the term usually has a negative connotation and is used by those who do not accept the superiority of the belief or group in question, or by those who are warning against the effects of over-confidence and hubris within their own group.” It is Jesus who claims the superiority of Christianity. And He also claims to be God. He has proved that He is. Susan you have a complaint with Christians who want to tell others of the saving Grace of Jesus Christ, why? It is the very essence of Christianity to do that. It is the “Great Commision” given by Jesus to all Christians. Matt. 28:18-20 (NKJV) 18And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” The Greek word translated nations is “ethnos" meaning Gentile, heathen, nation, people. It is not a work that saves us but a work of following Him. All people need to know how they can be saved. Susan you say you quote from your version of the Bible but I only recall you just saying what you think it means. Have you ever quoted? I recall that in this thread Vicky asked you, “So I do wonder why you refer to Jesus' teachings as much as you do, since you do not believe he was divine (in the sense he was asserting).” I believe you sidestepped that question. Jesus said He was God. He makes that claim not only in the Gospel of John but also in Matthew, Luke, Mark, Revelation; it says it in Isaiah (His name shall be called Emanuel which means God with us). How do you claim Jesus was a good man when if He is not God He is a liar? "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 22, 2007 1:19 PM:

" Vicky, I am still waiting for your answer of how the evil of Sadaam is justified by the supposed stability of Iraq. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 22, 2007 1:39 PM:

" Vicky and Susan, since we seem to be the only ones still posting in this thread I just wanted to say I hope you are not so tied up with the Christian atrocities that you can't take time to thank God for our blessings today. Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday. I hope you have a happy Thanksgiving. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 22, 2007 7:32 PM:

" Happy Thanksgiving to you as well, Jon. We're having a great one, with a couple of our son's friends--one from China, the other from Japan. Not all that many years ago, this could not have happened. I am thankful for peace among our peoples, that I can listen to the laughter of all these young adults as they play a card game together. We told these girls the story of our ancestors, how they would have died without the help of the Native peoples. We then thanked God for all that he has given us. Oh, BTW, I never said that Saddam's evil was justified by the stability in Iraq; that was your interpretation of what I wrote. We are not responsible for another nation's behavior--only our own. As Susan asked, do you think we should (and could) stop all the bad guys in the world? Peace and Blessings to you! "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 23, 2007 9:02 AM:

" First Jesus never claimed the superiority of Christianity. Christianity wasn't developed untill after he died. Jesus was a Jew, and a very devout Jew at that. There are questions about what he meant when he said that he was a son of God. I told you what I think he meant, that we are all sons and daughters of God. I came to that conclusion by reading the worlds other sacred scriptures and the texts that were left out of the Bible. BUT the Bible is still full of great wisdom eventhough it is not any more devinely inspired than the works of great artists or other writers. In many of my letters and posts I have given direct quotes, not just my opinions. I refered you to Matthew and Leviticus several times, I assume you have a Bible and can read the sections yourself. All people need to know how to find enlightenment. But I don't feel that I have to force my understanding on others. Those who believe that they must spread their beliefs to others are simply afraid that their beliefs are wrong and the only way to prove that they are right is to make everyone believe what they believe. Somehow by getting others to believe what you believe it confirms your beliefs. Chew that around a bit. People don't need to be saved from anything except their own base desires and needs. Jesus dying on the cross wasn't for our salvation, he didn't atone for our sins. I suggest you look up the archaic definition of atonement. That whole doctrine was designed to explain why he choose death. Jesus didn't arise and go to heaven in a physical sense. His body was moved to another tomb. If you don't like these thoughts than don't push your misguided, superstitious beliefs as truth on those who have greater wisdom than you. In the end it doesn't matter what you believe, all that matters are your actions, how you treat your fellow man. Believing in Christ is not a "get out of jail free" card as Tamarra65 pointed out. The Bible as I said is full of proof to support this as are the worlds other sacred scriptures. Your actions not your beliefs are all that matter. "

VTucker wrote on Nov 23, 2007 10:06 AM:

" When faith is seen with nationalism, that's when it seems to take a downward turn. That is something I find threatening about a few things you have posted here, Jon V. I can't see where you separate your faith in Christ from your faith in our country. I see a "Christian Crusader" mentality emerging in this country. When I first encountered it, I thought No Way, not in this day and age. But more and more, I hear this propaganda of "Islamofacism." Then, I read about Erik Prince of Blackwater USA and his affiliation with the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a Christian militia formed long ago with the mission of defending territories that the Crusaders had captured from the Moslems. I can't imagine that the Islamic peoples in the Middle East have not heard of this association, and I do wonder how they perceive it. Maybe the "Islamofascists" see us as the terrorists; after all, we (the U.S.) have been meddling in their affairs for many years now and are currently stationed in their land. "

Jon Vanatta wrote on Nov 23, 2007 2:41 PM:

" Susan, who do you think moved His body to another tomb? And what would have been their reason? If His disciples did that would they have died for a lie? He appeard over a period of 40 days to many different people and made it clear that He was not just a spirit. I understand you do not believe the Bible but do not misquote it. The Bible doesn't say a son of God and Jesus never said He was a son of God but rather it says and He said, "The Son of God" there is a lot of difference. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 24, 2007 7:47 AM:

" Actually Jesus refers to God as his father in many places. That contradicts your concept that he considers himself "THE son of God". Because the term my father can be read as being metaphorical not literal. That is why the Lords Prayer says "our father". Everyone understands the context in which it is used. The Bible is full of contradictions and those are what proves that the Bible is not absolute Truth. Accept the Bible as it is, don't try to make it something that it isn't and was never meant to be. Read the Bible in the context of the times in which it was written, and read it with an understanding of what each of the writers intended. Then you will beging to "know" the Bible. Free yourself from fear and superstition that is what "gnosis" is all about. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 24, 2007 7:54 AM:

" Mr. Vanatta don't you ever watch TV? There are plenty of reasons why someone would move a body. Use your imagination. The TV shows should give you lots of food for thought. Even a look at history should give you possible reasons why some would move the body--to keep it from being despoiled, to keep the resting place secret so it wouldn't become a place of worship, to make it seem that he had risen from the dead. Those who have lost loved ones often hear and see the loved one, in their minds eye. I have no doubts that the children of Lourdes saw the Virgin Mary, in their minds eye. I don't believe that they or any of Jesus followers saw what they claimed to see since others never saw what they saw, and it goes against the laws of the universe. Death is death, we all return to that primordial stewpot from whence we all came. Wishing otherwise doesn't make it so. "

The Question wrote on Nov 24, 2007 12:11 PM:

" People believe in religion because of wish fulfillment, and because they see that many other people believe in religion. That’s it. There’s nothing else there — no gods, no devils, no angels, no souls, no saviors, no miracles, no magic, no Eden, no heaven, no hell. The reason all those things remain invisible is because they aren’t there. The universe is before us, open to human reason, unbound by dogma and superstition and vile, primitive religious bigotry. Ethics and morality are there before us, too, grounded in empathy and human nature and not in contradictory supernatural dictates. But people still cling desperately to their belief in religion, barricading themselves in their ancient books of myths and fables. They are desperate precisely because they always know, on some level, that the basis of their faith is so groundless and absurd. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 24, 2007 3:58 PM:

" To The Question, just to play devils advocate and to help you make a better argument. We can't see gravity or the wind, or tastes or smells, but we know they are there by the affect they have on other things. So claiming that God doesn't exist or angels or anything else, because we can't see them doesn't hold water. So think of a better argument. "

The Question wrote on Nov 25, 2007 10:31 AM:

" Susan, unlike the wind or gravity, we're talking about invisible, inaudible, intangible entities who never appear in public or give any sign of their existence and who supposedly dwell in undetectable, unknown lands in some unspecified and inaccessible locations. And Christians want me to prove they DON'T exist? LOL. "

The Question wrote on Nov 26, 2007 7:43 AM:

" Sinclair Lewis wrote, "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." It's here, and it is. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 26, 2007 8:32 AM:

" To The Question your pontificating is just as foolish as a Christian claiming that there is a God. Exactly like wind and gravity God is an invisible entity, inaudible? many claim that he isn't, many claim that there are many signs of Gods existence and the prime example is creation. Which is what the fuss over evolution and creationism is partly about. So if you don't want to sound as foolish and self-righteous as the Christians you need to come up with a better argument. AND frankly there aren't any arguments to prove one way or another that God does or doesn't exist in the heart and mind of people. Therefor in my opinion, it should hold that any one persons concept of God is just as valid as any other persons concept of God. But don't take my word for it read the work of St. Augustine, Locke and Hume,even Einstein. Then develop a reasonable, and rational argument. "

The Question wrote on Nov 26, 2007 9:38 AM:

" AND frankly there aren't any arguments to prove one way or another that God does or doesn't exist in the heart and mind of people. **** AND frankly there aren't any arguments to prove one way or another that Zeus and Odin and the Flying Spaghetti Monster do or don't exist. So you'd better start worshipping them, I guess, according to your "logic." Of course you cannot "disprove" the existence of something that doesn't exist. The burden of proof will necessarily be on those who assert that the universe is ruled by omnipotent, invisible, inaudible, intangible entities who never appear in public or take any discernible action. "

The Question wrote on Nov 26, 2007 9:41 AM:

" Oh, and I do agree with Einstein, Susan: “It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.” Albert Einstein, in a letter March 24, 1954; from Albert Einstein the Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1981, p. 43. "

The Question wrote on Nov 26, 2007 9:53 AM:

" Any one persons concept of God is just as valid as any other persons concept of God. **** Frankly, Susan, that is a vapid, intellectually empty, "feel-good" point of view. People are free to believe whatever they wish, and I remain free to understand that what they believe is nonsense. "

shumphreys wrote on Nov 26, 2007 11:44 AM:

" To The question I didn't say that Einsteing was a religious person in the Judaeo/Christian sense of the term. He was however a "spiritual" person, well aware, and appreciative of the wonders of the universe. Don't get so hot under the collar. If you are going to dish out criticism of Christians and their arguments than you have to take criticism of your own. You don't make arguments you just pontificate. Whether you like it or not, religion is a serious subject, one that should not be trivialized as you attempt to do, nor should it be ignored. For better and worse it has been and is a major force that has shaped our world and is shaping it today. Actually the concept that one person's concept of God is as valid is any other persons isn't vapid or intellectually empty, unless you consider the thoughts of some of our most famous theologians and philosophers, vapid and intellectually empty? "

HowardScottPearlman wrote on May 28, 2008 9:03 PM:

" Howard Scott Pearlman

New - Star Spangled Banner - 4th Verse lyrics

Oh thus be it ever when all men shall stand

Between our loved homes and war's desolation

Blessed with beauty and peace may our heavenly lands

See the light up above and become more than nations

But if struggle we must for the cause that is just

May we choose as standards those that all men can trust

Then the Star Spangled Banner in honor shall wave

Among the lands of the free and the home of the brave

Francis Scott Key
And
Howard Scott Pearlman

Copyright 1989 Pearlman "