War

Superhero Sam said:

Is the war in Iraq a just war?

Click to expand...

I would agree that "in a fallen world, war is inevitable." In a fallen world, all kinds of sin are inevitable--that's why it's a fallen world. There are lots of sins inevitable in the fallen world that Christians need not be part of.

I will say again: A virtuous man must seek out that which is just, which means if war can be just, virtuous men must seek out such wars and wage them...continually.

But in fact, no war is "just."

RDKirk said:

I would agree that "in a fallen world, war is inevitable." In a fallen world, all kinds of sin are inevitable--that's why it's a fallen world. There are lots of sins inevitable in the fallen world that Christians need not be part of.

I will say again: A virtuous man must seek out that which is just, which means if war can be just, virtuous men must seek out such wars and wage them...continually.

But in fact, no war is "just."

Click to expand...

What about David conquering land for Israel-sinful?

W2L said:

Forgive me if if i'm in the wrong forum with this. If i am please let me know and i'll have staff move it. Thank you.

This thread addresses the morality of war. How can we support war? Shouldn't we be praying instead of bombing people?

Click to expand...

Adolph Hitler would have exterminated some of the races and enslaved the rest. Was this the will of the Lord? We could pray to the Lord that he not let such things happen and his reply might be, "Stand up and fight - I will be with you."

dreadnought said:

Adolph Hitler would have exterminated some of the races and enslaved the rest. Was this the will of the Lord? We could pray to the Lord that he not let such things happen and his reply might be, "Stand up and fight - I will be with you."

Click to expand...

War took away salvation chances from the unsaved who died in it-like conscripted Germans.

Superhero Sam said:

War took away salvation chances from the unsaved who died in it-like conscripted Germans.

Click to expand...

I don't know. A lot of things can happen in the last few seconds of a person's life.

Superhero Sam said:

What about David conquering land for Israel-sinful?

Click to expand...

Yes, it was because, "It was not that way in the beginning."

Why did God allow Satan to tempt Eve?

Why did God even plant the tree of life in the first place?

RDKirk said:

Yes, it was because, "It was not that way in the beginning."

Why did God allow Satan to tempt Eve?

Why did God even plant the tree of life in the first place?

Click to expand...

That's like asking me to understand a Bible written in japanese-even with our writing system it's not our language. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/57843176435146633/?lp=true

But to a japanese person it makes perfect sense.

Open Heart said:

What do you think the swords were for? Wall decorations? They were for self defense in case anyone messed with them after Jesus' arrest.

Click to expand...

Jesus said to his disciples to go and to buy swords with their money. When they returned and said they had bought two swords, Jesus replied and said..."that will do".

It is clear that the two swords against the multitude of Pharisee's guards who carried weapons, was by no means an attempt by Jesus to use the swords in a "just war" as you claimed, to kill and to maim them. In fact, those who had the two swords would be sent on a suicide mission, if they went against the Pharisees and their entourage.

Jesus by asking his disciples to take arms, was solely a symbolic gesture, that is a stance against the Pharisaical establishment and by doing so, he would be numbered with the transgressors in fulfilling prophesy.

This is what Jesus said.....

It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’ ; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.” (Luke 22:37)

It is a case where Jesus made his intentions clear by this gesture, that is he would give the impression, that he was pushing for a revolution against the church establishment and by doing so, was finally considered by the Pharisees as a revolutionary. To this very day, unbelieving Jews still label Jesus and his disciples as revolutionaries who wanted to route the establishment. What really happened, is that the Pharisees played into Jesus hands and made a fatal move, by making a pact to execute him and his disciples and this would explain why Jesus would say to Peter.....

“I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me.” (Luke 22:34)

Peter was according to the establishment, a transgressor along with Jesus and that is why he would disassociate himself from Jesus when he was being recognized.

Jesus clearly is not going to use two swords to overthrow the Pharisees, rather he makes a symbolic stance in fulfilling prophesy and by doing so, he would rebuke the companion who reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear, when he responded as follows......

“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?” (Matthew 26:52)

There is no just war in using instruments of war to kill and to maim others. Jesus would be against those who advocate violence and war, regardless of cause. In fact Jesus clearly states that when you see the abomination of desolation, you are to run away and not to turn back. This is clear cut, that we are to run away from trouble and not to confront violence with violence and evil with evil.

The Times said:

Jesus said to his disciples to go and to buy swords with their money. When they returned and said they had bought two swords, Jesus replied and said..."that will do".

Click to expand...

But this was not merely a symbolic gesture as you say. What good would that have done? This was for self protection. During the time of Jesus' trial and crucifixion, the Disciples themselves were under threat of attack. Should that occur, the swords were for protection.

Open Heart said:

But this was not merely a symbolic gesture as you say. What good would that have done? This was for self protection. During the time of Jesus' trial and crucifixion, the Disciples themselves were under threat of attack. Should that occur, the swords were for protection.

Click to expand...

A simple short reply to you would be a........NO!

A more succinct reply would be......

Jesus dismisses the need for the sword, for the purpose of protection when.......

Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. 51With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.

52“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?” (Matthew 26:50-54)

Dealing in facts dismisses any notion that there exists a “just war”, as far as Jesus is concerned.

If anyone makes war, they are making war with Jesus, regardless of which side they are fighting for.

Ambassadors of peace do not part take in “just wars”, for only the carnal minded do mind the concerns of the flesh.

5Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God. (Romans 8:5-8)

The Times said:

A more succinct reply would be......

Click to expand...

It's not comparable, because defending Jesus would have prevented him from being the sacrifice for our sins. Not so with self defense for the apostles.

Open Heart said:

But this was not merely a symbolic gesture as you say. What good would that have done? This was for self protection. During the time of Jesus' trial and crucifixion, the Disciples themselves were under threat of attack. Should that occur, the swords were for protection.

Click to expand...

And yet, when did they ever? Did James use the sword to defend himself? Did Peter or John? In the times they were taken, when did they ever use the sword?

Superhero Sam said:

War took away salvation chances from the unsaved who died in it-like conscripted Germans.

Click to expand...

That's kind of a round-about logic. War took away the chances for every kind of outcome, both good and bad, both salvation and apostasy. It took away the Germans' chance to take away the chance of salvation from other peoples of other nations. In truth, it was death that ended their continued chance of salvation, and not war in particular, and death comes to everyone.

Like I always say, war is a sin for both sides, but pacifism for one can be the far greater sin in the face of a truly wicked enemy.

Open Heart said:

It's not comparable, because defending Jesus would have prevented him from being the sacrifice for our sins. Not so with self defense for the apostles.

Click to expand...

I do not totally believe you. Please explain why it is not comparible?

After all it is you, who claimed that when Jesus requested his disciples to purchase swords, that it was for a just war, to defend themselves. Now you have suddenly changed your tune, to that of .......

Open Heart said:

because defending Jesus would have prevented him from being the sacrifice for our sins. Not so with self defense for the apostles.

Click to expand...

Where did Jesus ever instruct his disciples to use swords to defend themselves and or to have swords on that particular day for defensive measure?

You are stuck in a muddy quagmire!

If you truly meant what you claimed originally, it would at least show you to be consistent. Since you are found to be inconsistent with your previous posts, then your original claim must be dismissed.

It is what it is!

Your post #428 original claim....

"Jesus told his disciples to go and get swords. How many righteous wars are there in the OT? There are such things as just wars. If the barbarians are riding over the hills to kill you, rape your wife and your daughters, and carry your sons away as slaves, it would be immoral not to fight back."

@Open Heart
Let me prophesy onto you my dear friend....

When the enemies of earthly Israel come to surround her, no one will come to her defense, you can mark my words.

The Christians who fed and clothed her, will not come to her rescue, contrary to Mr Benjamin Netanyahu's claim that America will come to Israel's rescue, as it has done so many times historically.

It is The Times of Jacob's Trouble and a time where they will abandon their nationalistic Messianic reign and come to realise that their reign is not on earth, but in Heaven with Jesus Christ. This is The Times where many sons of Jacob will turn by faith to Jesus and declare an outcry to "Die for your Lord".

The Christian march to the cross of Christ, is one of denying thyself and physically dying for him. Christians don't pick up swords, nor will they fight for earthly Israel.

It is how it will go down.

Have I answered your heart's true intention of why you support "just wars"?

nonaeroterraqueous said:

That's kind of a round-about logic. War took away the chances for every kind of outcome, both good and bad, both salvation and apostasy. It took away the Germans' chance to take away the chance of salvation from other peoples of other nations. In truth, it was death that ended their continued chance of salvation, and not war in particular, and death comes to everyone.

Like I always say, war is a sin for both sides, but pacifism for one can be the far greater sin in the face of a truly wicked enemy.

Click to expand...

We never know what would have happened if they had died later.

How can those both be true? 1 truth not 2 tuths.

The Times said:

Let me prophesy onto you my dear friend....

Click to expand...

How do *I* know you have the gift of prophecy? Am I just supposed to take your word for it? For all I know you are just speaking intuitively.

The Times said:

I do not totally believe you. Please explain why it is not comparible?

Click to expand...

Jesus was not supposed to be defended -- he was voluntarily going to his suffering and death. This was not the same for the disciples. This is why it was not to defend Jesus, but to defend themselves.

RDKirk said:

And yet, when did they ever? Did James use the sword to defend himself? Did Peter or John? In the times they were taken, when did they ever use the sword?

Click to expand...

It was very fortunate that they didn't need them. Perhaps it was simply Jesus intent to teach them that it was appropriate to take measures to defend themselves.

Open Heart said:

How do *I* know you have the gift of prophecy? Am I just supposed to take your word for it? For all I know you are just speaking intuitively.

Click to expand...

Just mark it in your future calander and wait and see if it comes exactly as I have prophesied onto you.