Really compelling breakdown of how biblical principles actualy intersect with immigration policy. The distinction you draw between the church's duty and the government's duty is something I havent seen articulated this clearly before. I've been in a lot of conversations where people collapse those two spheres completely and it just creates confusion. The point about weaponized empathy being used to shortcircuit critical thinking really hits home.
Thanks for a reasoned, biblical approach to our current events. I can imagine Abraham Lincoln saying, "Amen." He navigated us through a civil war to preserve "government of the people, by the people, for the people." These days, the drumbeat seems to be people vs. the government.
My concern is that I see the government, via ICE, not following our own laws.
This latest shooting is very troubling. More videos might come out, however, it sure looks like they shot this man without cause. He was carrying a gun legally and I have seen no evidence they he ever drew the gun. Videoing the police is totally legal and I think we need people doing so to keep the LEOs honest.Peaceful protest is also legal.
Yes, citizens should obey the law! But government officials must also.
We need calm voices trying to de-escalate these situations. From the top down.
I didn't see him(Alex Pretti)"fighting" with ICE..maybe verbally, but is that kind of protest against the law? I know they have to do an investigation, but it looked as though ICE was being too aggressive with him. I'm glad now that the govt. is looking for ways to deescalate and use some different tactics, but it's so sad that this had to happen first. A former head of ICE said that many of the agents in Border Patrol and ICE were trained to be very aggressive with drug cartels and border crossers at the southern border, but they shouldn't use those same tactics with a crowd of protesters in a city. I agree with you that there are a lot of people in a crowd who will throw rocks at ICE , etc. If I went to a protest I certainly wouldn't do anything like that ( hopefully not!) but peaceful protest I think is ok. I think that many people had just hit the breaking point with some of the government's immigrantion enforcement tactics. My opinon.
Sorry, but I disagree. This just sounds like you're blaming law enforcement for defending themselves while performing their duties. Those people should not have been there. That was not legal protest.
It's becoming increasingly obvious that this sort of violence is instigated on purpose by paid entities for political and power reasons. A majority of Americans support the effort to enforce our laws. In cities and states were there isn't massive corruption to cover up and where local and state authorities act in the best interest of American citizens we do not see these issues.
The summer of 2020 should be enough, at this point, for people to see the truth. Current situations like that in Minnie are just more of the same playbook.
I don't mean to be short with anyone, but I'm tired of pretending like this is anything but political theater.
I hear what you're saying. I support efforts to enforce our laws. I'm saying in the situation of Alex Pretti, it didn't look like they were defending themselves. Alex Pretti wasn't attacking them. I don't know about with Renee Goode, but to me it looked like she was turning her car to leave. And why did the govt. jump to conclusions and say Alex was brandishing a weapon, and was a domestic terrorist and trying to kill as many agents as he could? That doesn't seem to be true. I guess someone might say I'm being rebellious. I don't feel I am. I'm glad Trump is trying to get illegals out of the country I just don't like to see citizens who are not criminals being shot in cold blood.
I'm not sure we have a right to watch video in super slow motion after the fact and declare that law enforcement officers weren't defending themselves. There should be an investigation and there will be.
But the man clearly inserted himself into a situation that didn't involve him, interfered with an agent or officer who was tussling with someone, and then fought back when he was being subdued.
I do not for a moment think any one of those agents or offices woke up that morning hoping or thinking they might get a chance to shoot someone to death. And they wouldn't have if Alex Pretti had not been there making the choices he made. He carried a weapon to a "protest" which is illegal in Minnesota and he interfered with a lawful police action. Those are crimes.
You can argue it's a tragedy, that it shouldn't have happened, and mistakes were possibly made, but nothing about that is shooting someone "in cold blood."
Ok, I agree..not in "cold blood". I agree the officers didn't wake up that morning wanting to shoot someone that day ( hope not anyway!). It is a tragedy that shouldn't have happened. We don't know all the minute details. People say Alex Pretti was trying to help the woman who the agent had pushed down. I imagine, being the ICU nurse he was, that he was probably trying to do that. It just made me terribly sad and heart-broken. I'm glad there will be an investigation anyway. I guess we can pray for all involved and for those in leadership , as the Bible tells us to. That's all I'll say. God bless.
I hear what you're saying. But the key issue for me is why he (or anyone not directly involved) was right there in the middle of an active federal enforcement operation at all.
These were lawful immigration arrests amid high-tension protests where crowds were actively confronting and impeding agents. Pretti had reportedly clashed with agents just a week earlier while "observing" their operations, resulting in a broken rib. Being present in that volatile spot, even "just to video" or assist, inherently adds to the confusion, risk, and potential for things to spiral making it more dangerous very everyone. If people had stayed clear and let trained officers do their jobs without interference, this tragedy likely wouldn't have happened. It was avoidable, and the root cause traces back to people choosing to insert themselves into a dangerous, ongoing law enforcement action.
I don't think shifting blame to the agents helps. They're put in impossible situations enforcing laws in hostile environments, often facing crowds that escalate tensions. Blaming them when bad outcomes occur only makes their job harder and discourages good people from serving. And the response is always the same. People insert themselves into these situations and make them dangerous then rush to blame law enforcement when something bad happens and use that as an indictment against law enforcement or policy.
Of course, it's harder to know when you are not there.
There are two sides to each story, and we have to learn to be patient until all facts come out.
But I also know that, in general, we have problems with law enforcement in this country. I've seen and read too much. And also, listen to the language that some of these officers use with the public!
Unprofessional and ungodly. Doesn't give me confidence that they are acting in a proper manner.
There's an element here that's being overlooked...
This is not a normal protest. They are not people assembling on the lawn of the capitol in hopes of swaying a vote, or some other advocacy.
These are being staged in the middle of law enforcement exercises. Essentially, they are wandering in to the middle of crime scenes. That is not normal. The minute they show up, it's not a protest but an obstruction.
From what we know of these anti-ICE activist groups, that is their aim. People who are showing up to interfere with lawful law enforcement activity are not legitimate, peaceful protesters, and therefore do not have the rights of legitimate, peaceful protesters.
I agree Somali's should be in Somalia. Illegals in any nationality should be deported. I don't make this statement in regard to Minnesota but to all of America. Law enforcement are to quick to resort to the gun. Less than lethal force should be first response All in all I'm in agreement with your article.
I suppose I'd say the languages marked his initial division, and from there people's settling and reproduction would start to naturally give geographical lines to it and would further refine things.
You may have looked at it before, but the theme of 70 nations in Genesis 10 continuing on into the Scriptures is interesting. See the paragraph starting with "Second, it is important..."
I don't pretend to know exactly how or when but originally man was one race and now there are many. When our time began at the fall and God cursed the ground until now was only a few thousand years. Not enough time for races to form by natural selection. Also the "world that then was" was governed in part by miracles.
A miraculous genetics event at some point is plausible.
Gen 11:6 And the LORD said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do.
If Adam was Chinese and Eve a Latino where did blacks come from? I prefer to believe in miracles during that time.
It is plausible that Adam and Eve had the necessary diversity in their genetic makeup from the beginning. I suppose "one people in Gen. 11:6 could have referred to one in purpose.
Gen 10:19 - And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; then as you go toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha.
That is before the Tower of Babel so it was before there would be different languages to set boundaries by.
.
How He set them is for Him, if it was important then He would have included it in the Bible.
During the time one of the sons of Eber (son of Shelah, son of Arphaxad, son of Sham) - Peleg - is when the Word says that the division happened. I think that was 5 generations after the flood.
The sons of Canaan, son of Ham, make up the Canaanite clans and borders that are mentioned in 10:18-19 but those sons would only be 3rd generation after the flood - or am I missing something?
5th generation is just the grandsons of the 3rd generation, and with their longer lifespans they would overlap even more. If it happened when Peleg was born (which makes sense, as he was named for the event), it follows that the 3rd generation post-flood would be the settlers.
If you would like to continue, great! You asked for others thoughts.
I gave them.
That was part of the conversation. Then if you have something to add or say differently, then you reply (as you did to my first comment).
That is how a conversation goes.
Not saying it is not a conversation worth having. In fact I did not say anything about it being finished or not worthwhile or telling you you are wrong in your thinking or asking.
I am giving my thoughts (as asked for) backed up by scripture in some cases, my opinion in others.
Have a wonderful day.
Read the Bible. Preach the Gospel. Everything else is chaff.
Illegal immigration is wrong. Not because it is immigration, but it is illegal. A president enriching himself through his office of president is both illegal and wrong. Lying (you name it, and the current occupant of the White House has lied about it) is wrong.
Looking at the evidence of the killing of a civilian who was GENTLY and CLEARLY following the order of the ICE agent (Leave; driver makes sharp right turn, barely moving) and be killed is murder. Lying about the person is also wrong.
Disarming a legally armed person and, when disarmed, shoot him in the back - TEN TIMES - is called murder.
I am an immigrant. It took a long time of separation before I received permission to actually move into the US. So I am very familiar with the laws and processes. As stated, illegal immigration is wrong. I could have taken that step. Go beyond the time allotted in my visa.
I look like the average American - white. When I see what the current government is doing (picking up anyone who does not look like the average American - white) is discrimination.
Sending people to detention centers without due process is wrong. Previous presidents have removed more immigrants during their tenure than the current president. His predecessors did it without violence, but with due process.
Kidnapping the president of another country is wrong. Killing about 100 people in the process is wrong. Lying about the reason for shooting boats out of the water and killing more than 100 people in the process is wrong. Lying about the reason (OIL rather than drugs) is wrong.
Threatening to invade and take over Greenland with the excuse of national security when it is about rare minerals and materials is wrong.
None of these wrongs make illegal immigration right. I fully support removing illegal immigrants. HOWEVER: The US is signatory to the process set up for those seeking asylum. Asylum is a long and arduous process. "They mistreated me in my home country for any one or more of the five reasons..." is difficult to check. Investigations take time. But as a nation, "We" have promised to honor that specific treaty. The US is still a signatory - hence, still bound to follow the agreed-to processes.
Arresting those immigrants who are going through this process is - you guessed it - wrong. Let your yes be yes... As the US claims to be a "Christian Nation," it is bound to follow that command. Not only when it suits us!
There is no such thing as a "Christian nation." There never has been such a thing as a "Christian Nation." And even if, even if, the US is such a thing? "We" are doing a horrifying job of it! Hate and hateful behavior has no place in a Christian Nation. When it spouts forth of the man with the most heard voice such as the president? That makes it even more horrifying...
So well said. Unfortunately, the people who need to see this are so far from reality, they will continue in their insanity and insist you are wrong. They do not honor God, but God promises that all will be revealed. They ought to be afraid of that.
Really compelling breakdown of how biblical principles actualy intersect with immigration policy. The distinction you draw between the church's duty and the government's duty is something I havent seen articulated this clearly before. I've been in a lot of conversations where people collapse those two spheres completely and it just creates confusion. The point about weaponized empathy being used to shortcircuit critical thinking really hits home.
Thank you. And yes, Clary's point on weaponized empathy was perfect.
Thanks for a reasoned, biblical approach to our current events. I can imagine Abraham Lincoln saying, "Amen." He navigated us through a civil war to preserve "government of the people, by the people, for the people." These days, the drumbeat seems to be people vs. the government.
I don't think we'll have to have our own Civil War to sort it out, but until one side definitively comes out on top, we can expect more of the same.
You make a lot of good points.
My concern is that I see the government, via ICE, not following our own laws.
This latest shooting is very troubling. More videos might come out, however, it sure looks like they shot this man without cause. He was carrying a gun legally and I have seen no evidence they he ever drew the gun. Videoing the police is totally legal and I think we need people doing so to keep the LEOs honest.Peaceful protest is also legal.
Yes, citizens should obey the law! But government officials must also.
We need calm voices trying to de-escalate these situations. From the top down.
Why was that man there, fighting with ICE? Interfering in a legal law enforcement act?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, but if you want to blame the people who shot him we must ask what the circumstances were that led to the event.
I didn't see him(Alex Pretti)"fighting" with ICE..maybe verbally, but is that kind of protest against the law? I know they have to do an investigation, but it looked as though ICE was being too aggressive with him. I'm glad now that the govt. is looking for ways to deescalate and use some different tactics, but it's so sad that this had to happen first. A former head of ICE said that many of the agents in Border Patrol and ICE were trained to be very aggressive with drug cartels and border crossers at the southern border, but they shouldn't use those same tactics with a crowd of protesters in a city. I agree with you that there are a lot of people in a crowd who will throw rocks at ICE , etc. If I went to a protest I certainly wouldn't do anything like that ( hopefully not!) but peaceful protest I think is ok. I think that many people had just hit the breaking point with some of the government's immigrantion enforcement tactics. My opinon.
Sorry, but I disagree. This just sounds like you're blaming law enforcement for defending themselves while performing their duties. Those people should not have been there. That was not legal protest.
It's becoming increasingly obvious that this sort of violence is instigated on purpose by paid entities for political and power reasons. A majority of Americans support the effort to enforce our laws. In cities and states were there isn't massive corruption to cover up and where local and state authorities act in the best interest of American citizens we do not see these issues.
The summer of 2020 should be enough, at this point, for people to see the truth. Current situations like that in Minnie are just more of the same playbook.
I don't mean to be short with anyone, but I'm tired of pretending like this is anything but political theater.
I hear what you're saying. I support efforts to enforce our laws. I'm saying in the situation of Alex Pretti, it didn't look like they were defending themselves. Alex Pretti wasn't attacking them. I don't know about with Renee Goode, but to me it looked like she was turning her car to leave. And why did the govt. jump to conclusions and say Alex was brandishing a weapon, and was a domestic terrorist and trying to kill as many agents as he could? That doesn't seem to be true. I guess someone might say I'm being rebellious. I don't feel I am. I'm glad Trump is trying to get illegals out of the country I just don't like to see citizens who are not criminals being shot in cold blood.
I'm not sure we have a right to watch video in super slow motion after the fact and declare that law enforcement officers weren't defending themselves. There should be an investigation and there will be.
But the man clearly inserted himself into a situation that didn't involve him, interfered with an agent or officer who was tussling with someone, and then fought back when he was being subdued.
I do not for a moment think any one of those agents or offices woke up that morning hoping or thinking they might get a chance to shoot someone to death. And they wouldn't have if Alex Pretti had not been there making the choices he made. He carried a weapon to a "protest" which is illegal in Minnesota and he interfered with a lawful police action. Those are crimes.
You can argue it's a tragedy, that it shouldn't have happened, and mistakes were possibly made, but nothing about that is shooting someone "in cold blood."
Ok, I agree..not in "cold blood". I agree the officers didn't wake up that morning wanting to shoot someone that day ( hope not anyway!). It is a tragedy that shouldn't have happened. We don't know all the minute details. People say Alex Pretti was trying to help the woman who the agent had pushed down. I imagine, being the ICU nurse he was, that he was probably trying to do that. It just made me terribly sad and heart-broken. I'm glad there will be an investigation anyway. I guess we can pray for all involved and for those in leadership , as the Bible tells us to. That's all I'll say. God bless.
But how was he interfering? He was videoing and he was helping a woman who he saw pushed down .
Maybe he was doing other things. I don't know.
Granted, tensions are high.
That's why we need officials on both sides of the issue de escalating and trying to calm the situation down.
All I am advocating is that we hold law enforcement accountable for their actions.
I hear what you're saying. But the key issue for me is why he (or anyone not directly involved) was right there in the middle of an active federal enforcement operation at all.
These were lawful immigration arrests amid high-tension protests where crowds were actively confronting and impeding agents. Pretti had reportedly clashed with agents just a week earlier while "observing" their operations, resulting in a broken rib. Being present in that volatile spot, even "just to video" or assist, inherently adds to the confusion, risk, and potential for things to spiral making it more dangerous very everyone. If people had stayed clear and let trained officers do their jobs without interference, this tragedy likely wouldn't have happened. It was avoidable, and the root cause traces back to people choosing to insert themselves into a dangerous, ongoing law enforcement action.
I don't think shifting blame to the agents helps. They're put in impossible situations enforcing laws in hostile environments, often facing crowds that escalate tensions. Blaming them when bad outcomes occur only makes their job harder and discourages good people from serving. And the response is always the same. People insert themselves into these situations and make them dangerous then rush to blame law enforcement when something bad happens and use that as an indictment against law enforcement or policy.
I agree with Jason. We are watching slo-mo freeze frames of these situations, but in the middle of it it's not nearly that simple.
Of course, it's harder to know when you are not there.
There are two sides to each story, and we have to learn to be patient until all facts come out.
But I also know that, in general, we have problems with law enforcement in this country. I've seen and read too much. And also, listen to the language that some of these officers use with the public!
Unprofessional and ungodly. Doesn't give me confidence that they are acting in a proper manner.
There's an element here that's being overlooked...
This is not a normal protest. They are not people assembling on the lawn of the capitol in hopes of swaying a vote, or some other advocacy.
These are being staged in the middle of law enforcement exercises. Essentially, they are wandering in to the middle of crime scenes. That is not normal. The minute they show up, it's not a protest but an obstruction.
From what we know of these anti-ICE activist groups, that is their aim. People who are showing up to interfere with lawful law enforcement activity are not legitimate, peaceful protesters, and therefore do not have the rights of legitimate, peaceful protesters.
I agree Somali's should be in Somalia. Illegals in any nationality should be deported. I don't make this statement in regard to Minnesota but to all of America. Law enforcement are to quick to resort to the gun. Less than lethal force should be first response All in all I'm in agreement with your article.
Have you ever thought about exactly how God set the dividing lines of a nation?
I have and I can only settle on language. God set the boundaries of nations at the Tower of Babel. There are some reasons I think this.
I’d be interested in other’s thoughts.
That's an interesting question.
I suppose I'd say the languages marked his initial division, and from there people's settling and reproduction would start to naturally give geographical lines to it and would further refine things.
You may have looked at it before, but the theme of 70 nations in Genesis 10 continuing on into the Scriptures is interesting. See the paragraph starting with "Second, it is important..."
https://alastairadversaria.com/2005/10/17/pentecost-part-1/
I tend to think more than just language was altered. Man was of one race. Miraculously at some point genetics were altered.
Well, genetics don’t have to be miraculously changed. Environmental reaction over generations takes care of that.
I don't pretend to know exactly how or when but originally man was one race and now there are many. When our time began at the fall and God cursed the ground until now was only a few thousand years. Not enough time for races to form by natural selection. Also the "world that then was" was governed in part by miracles.
A miraculous genetics event at some point is plausible.
Gen 11:6 And the LORD said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do.
If Adam was Chinese and Eve a Latino where did blacks come from? I prefer to believe in miracles during that time.
Punnett squares explains that one well enough, especially if Noah and his sons had wives of different origins.
It is plausible that Adam and Eve had the necessary diversity in their genetic makeup from the beginning. I suppose "one people in Gen. 11:6 could have referred to one in purpose.
Genesis 15:18-20
Numbers 34:1-12
Joshua 1:4
That’s when he declared them set. How is the question.
Gen 10:19 - And the border of the Canaanites was from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; then as you go toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha.
That is before the Tower of Babel so it was before there would be different languages to set boundaries by.
.
How He set them is for Him, if it was important then He would have included it in the Bible.
As Isaiah 55:8-9 says:
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways My ways,” says the Lord.
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are My ways higher than your ways,
And My thoughts than your thoughts."
I don't believe 10:19 was pre-Babel. 10:25 indicates the division happened in the midst of these genealogies.
During the time one of the sons of Eber (son of Shelah, son of Arphaxad, son of Sham) - Peleg - is when the Word says that the division happened. I think that was 5 generations after the flood.
The sons of Canaan, son of Ham, make up the Canaanite clans and borders that are mentioned in 10:18-19 but those sons would only be 3rd generation after the flood - or am I missing something?
5th generation is just the grandsons of the 3rd generation, and with their longer lifespans they would overlap even more. If it happened when Peleg was born (which makes sense, as he was named for the event), it follows that the 3rd generation post-flood would be the settlers.
Ok, so it’s not a conversation worth having. Appreciated.
If you would like to continue, great! You asked for others thoughts.
I gave them.
That was part of the conversation. Then if you have something to add or say differently, then you reply (as you did to my first comment).
That is how a conversation goes.
Not saying it is not a conversation worth having. In fact I did not say anything about it being finished or not worthwhile or telling you you are wrong in your thinking or asking.
I am giving my thoughts (as asked for) backed up by scripture in some cases, my opinion in others.
Have a wonderful day.
Read the Bible. Preach the Gospel. Everything else is chaff.
Again, my apologies. It didn’t feel like a conversation. It felt like a one way admonition. God bless my apologies. I don’t want to continue.
Charity dictates I chalk up the dog whistles and overall buffonery as unintentional and out of ignorance.
buffoonery*
Illegal immigration is wrong. Not because it is immigration, but it is illegal. A president enriching himself through his office of president is both illegal and wrong. Lying (you name it, and the current occupant of the White House has lied about it) is wrong.
Looking at the evidence of the killing of a civilian who was GENTLY and CLEARLY following the order of the ICE agent (Leave; driver makes sharp right turn, barely moving) and be killed is murder. Lying about the person is also wrong.
Disarming a legally armed person and, when disarmed, shoot him in the back - TEN TIMES - is called murder.
I am an immigrant. It took a long time of separation before I received permission to actually move into the US. So I am very familiar with the laws and processes. As stated, illegal immigration is wrong. I could have taken that step. Go beyond the time allotted in my visa.
I look like the average American - white. When I see what the current government is doing (picking up anyone who does not look like the average American - white) is discrimination.
Sending people to detention centers without due process is wrong. Previous presidents have removed more immigrants during their tenure than the current president. His predecessors did it without violence, but with due process.
Kidnapping the president of another country is wrong. Killing about 100 people in the process is wrong. Lying about the reason for shooting boats out of the water and killing more than 100 people in the process is wrong. Lying about the reason (OIL rather than drugs) is wrong.
Threatening to invade and take over Greenland with the excuse of national security when it is about rare minerals and materials is wrong.
None of these wrongs make illegal immigration right. I fully support removing illegal immigrants. HOWEVER: The US is signatory to the process set up for those seeking asylum. Asylum is a long and arduous process. "They mistreated me in my home country for any one or more of the five reasons..." is difficult to check. Investigations take time. But as a nation, "We" have promised to honor that specific treaty. The US is still a signatory - hence, still bound to follow the agreed-to processes.
Arresting those immigrants who are going through this process is - you guessed it - wrong. Let your yes be yes... As the US claims to be a "Christian Nation," it is bound to follow that command. Not only when it suits us!
There is no such thing as a "Christian nation." There never has been such a thing as a "Christian Nation." And even if, even if, the US is such a thing? "We" are doing a horrifying job of it! Hate and hateful behavior has no place in a Christian Nation. When it spouts forth of the man with the most heard voice such as the president? That makes it even more horrifying...
So well said. Unfortunately, the people who need to see this are so far from reality, they will continue in their insanity and insist you are wrong. They do not honor God, but God promises that all will be revealed. They ought to be afraid of that.