Born to Watch
Newbie
get out a dvd called Machine gun preacher and see what you make of that. It supposedly based on a true story
Challenging
Challenging
Upvote
0
Tenebrae
A follower of The Way
- Sep 30, 2005
- 14,288
- 1,998
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Private
So, if protecting someone from certain death either involves killing or being killed, we should just simply turn up our heals and be killed
I honour their sacrifice
I remember, in the hope that if we remember what they went through, we can stop the atrocities ever occuring again
As for honouring what our vets did. I find it slightly more honest, than dealing with christians who want to talk about how wrong war is, yet seem to have no problems with the killing and atrocities that have happened in the name of god and advancing the christian faith.
Upvote
0
It's amazing how many people around here claiming to be Christian can try and squeeze their misguided opinion about war and general and present it as if that's the way Jesus would have thought about it.
In your minds, you're probably the same type that thinks Jesus had long blonde hair, blue eyes, and had a garland of flowers around his neck wherever he walked around with a peace sign on his hand. He was no pacifist. Just because Jesus never "killed" anyone this automatically means war is wrong? Where is the logic in that?
Your entire line of reasoning is made void in the fact that most of the Bible's events and themes happen in the realm of war, whether it's spiritual or physical. God even guides people to war! Unless you want to create a false dichotomy between Jesus and God the Father, then I suggest you stop trying to interpret the Bible with your own narrow-minded views. It's amazing how so many people can read the same book and come up with two entirely different opinions.
War is inevitable, a military force is a must. Jesus NEVER said anything contrary to the military. If you want his opinion about the military, here it is:
"...some soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?" He told them, "Be satisfied with your pay, and never use threats or blackmail to get money from anyone.""
This case is pretty much closed, it seems like he recognised the need for a military and it was a legitimate job. What he probably wouldn't be satisfied is with the lack of reading comprehension skills present in this thread. No one likes war (or rather most don't), that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a military or we shouldn't honour the fallen.
In your minds, you're probably the same type that thinks Jesus had long blonde hair, blue eyes, and had a garland of flowers around his neck wherever he walked around with a peace sign on his hand. He was no pacifist. Just because Jesus never "killed" anyone this automatically means war is wrong? Where is the logic in that?
Your entire line of reasoning is made void in the fact that most of the Bible's events and themes happen in the realm of war, whether it's spiritual or physical. God even guides people to war! Unless you want to create a false dichotomy between Jesus and God the Father, then I suggest you stop trying to interpret the Bible with your own narrow-minded views. It's amazing how so many people can read the same book and come up with two entirely different opinions.
War is inevitable, a military force is a must. Jesus NEVER said anything contrary to the military. If you want his opinion about the military, here it is:
"...some soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?" He told them, "Be satisfied with your pay, and never use threats or blackmail to get money from anyone.""
This case is pretty much closed, it seems like he recognised the need for a military and it was a legitimate job. What he probably wouldn't be satisfied is with the lack of reading comprehension skills present in this thread. No one likes war (or rather most don't), that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a military or we shouldn't honour the fallen.
Upvote
0
Born to Watch
Newbie
Was he addressing Christians. How can a Christian pull a trigger while turning the other cheek/
Its not black and white.
Gods grace is sufficient.
Upvote
0
H
HakeemSupreme
Guest
Using threats to get money is pretty much one of the core foundations of any military, so...
Upvote
0
What are you talking about? You are touching 3 different points that have absolutely no bearing on one another.
He wasn't addressing Christians, neither were there any "Christians" when he was alive, because they were all Jews and Romans. They Old Testament laws were not broken, and he was a typical Jewish male with Jewish followers. The first "Christians" in light of what we know now are people who followed him well after his death after Jerusalem was overrun, but never mind a history lesson in semantics. So your sentence is null and void.
Even if we were to analyse your nonsensical statement, we would immediately find your line of reasoning concludes that Jesus set up two types of morality, one for Christians and one for non-Christians? Complete rubbish.
Reading the Bible is all well and good, but when people can make such ridiculous conclusions, one must wonder what exactly they have been reading to be able to conjecture such nonsense.
I'm done here. There's no point even arguing something when a person can't actually stick to one point; turning the other cheek is related to revenge and vengeance. Defence of a country has nothing, or very little to do with it.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
there are several things Jesus never talked about yet I am sure you would agree is wrong. And no I am not talking about things that did not exist in Jesus time on earth. So please tell me why you think slavery is ok. using the exact same argument you have used here then you believe slavery is perfectly acceptable. To believe otherwise would be to hold contradicting views. I predict an answer of denial most likely via a method of saying I'm being silly.
The generally accepted view is that Jesus had a mission here on earth. it was not to set up a earthly kingdom. it was not to make everything on earth perfect. That is why he did not speak to abolish slavery.
Upvote
0
i never suggested you were using a double entendre. it is amusing that you tell me to get some comprehension skills yet have failed at this yourself. I said context of the conversation helps determine the meaning. Seem as the context of the conversation was a certain topic to which you replied that is how your response should be understood. That is basic comprehension.
To demonstrate my point. if we were talking about plane accidents caused by old & faulty parts and I said unsafe planes should be grounded. i obviously would not be arguing every single plane in the world should be grounded as planes are unsafe. no rather i would be saying planes that are not properly maintained or are old and have parts frequently failing should not be allowed to fly. Your argument if applied to this example would be arguing I was making the former argument rather than the latter.
Upvote
0
I congratulate for constructing a strawman out of what I said, attacking the strawman and rambling on in a nonsensical rampage about what exactly? I do not know.
You're predicting answers are you? Your astute observations are divine, why are you fumbling around here with us common people when you can put your heavy duty analytics to use elsewhere?
To put it shortly, I have absolutely no idea what you're babbling about. I don't think I mentioned slavery anywhere on this thread. Unless you're making some reference to the fact that Roman soldiers had slaves and somehow trying to create a false link in the attempts to pigeonhole me, I do not know, I can't answer you until I know what you're talking about. Don't be upset, I respond in the same manner to people who are rude enough to
1) Not stick to the point, going in a little neighbourhood around the original thread is fine, but to completely miss the point is not.
2) Link multiple points into one without elaborating (remember just because it makes sense in your mind doesn't mean to everyone else)
3) Linking multiple points in the first place without an explicitly stated premise and conclusion with a logical link between the two so people can make heads or tails out of what you're saying.
You babble, I'll babble. Capiche?
Upvote
0
Since the bible teaches that slavery is OK aren't you showing how it's modern Christians who are changing interpretation of the bible to suit their needs?
Upvote
0
I'm sorry you don't understand what really is a simple point.
you argued that because Jesus did not specifically say military is wrong then he must condone it.
i took that argument and applied it to slavery to demonstrate how the argument does not make sense.
So the argument is Jesus did not speak against slavery so therefore it must be ok.
I then claimed you must condone slavery if your opinions on slavery and the military are not to be contradicting.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I served in the Army for 6years deploying to Timor, Iraq & Afghanistan. I take the occasion to remember those who have served, currently serve and will serve their country. For me I am not glorifying war but I think honouring people who have made the ultimate sacrifice.
It would be utopia if we did not have war. During the entire history of humans there has never been a time when at least somewhere on the planet we have not had war. We human beings can be uncontrollable especially with greed over land, food, precious minerals etc.
It would be utopia if we did not have war. During the entire history of humans there has never been a time when at least somewhere on the planet we have not had war. We human beings can be uncontrollable especially with greed over land, food, precious minerals etc.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I probably didn't understand your simple point because you rambled here and there initially.
You can equally apply that line of thinking to prostitution, would Jesus have told Mary Magdalene to be happy with her wages? Highly unlikely, in fact. No.
If Jesus told the Roman soldier to be happy with his wages, he is either condoning the military job or rather neutral to it. If he was against it, you have to think of a scenario of something else he might be against. Prostitution is one, how about hired hitmen? Would he have told hired hitmen to be happy with their wages? Again, highly unlikely.
You did construct a strawman, because what you said there makes it seem like I said "because Jesus said nothing about it, therefore it must be correct" - which is absolutely not what I said. I said that Jesus told the Roman soldier to be happy with his wages, and therefore his job in Jesus' perspective was probably not immoral.
Hence why your subsequent rant about slavery doesn't really make any sense, because the argument you think I made, does not exist! i.e, I didn't say it nor think it.
You don't even need to bring a Christian perspective into this, for the most part, this is a common sense issue. Who are the 3 nations currently that possess the capability for long-range sustained military attacks? USA, China, India. Those are the only 3 that definitely have the manpower and the logistic support to sustain such a high-level attack. Russia might do, but given their economy it's unlikely.
China being the most unpredictable nation out of the three, regularly displays its military might and intention, if Australia did not have a military, you can be assured Indonesia and China would be at our shores given the chance. Resources and Land are invaluable, we have plenty of that and only a complete fool would not have a contingency plan and be crazy enough to think that simply having faith in God is going to stop an attack. It might do, but God gave us the power to reason and the ability to do. Faith and Action is the merit, not faith whilst doing nothing. It's up to us to defend what is ours, and if you have trouble coming to grips with this idea, go back to the old testament and revisit the ideas of territories which God ordained.
It's all fun and games having a dialectical battle with someone on the internet about the illegitimacy of a military, but your theories falls flat on its face when faced with the prospect of the sheer practicality of it. In other words, following your line of reasoning we'd have about 50 battalions of Chinese infantry here overnight given the chance.
This is not just a Christian issue, but a secular one. You maybe Christian, but you live in a world filled with people of various beliefs and ideas and fortunately for you, you live in a country that possess the ability to defend itself from foreign ideology so you can practice what you want. If you want an example of a country that can't maintain military standards and see what happens to its people, religious or not, go take a look at some of the African countries.
Upvote
0
Born to Watch
Newbie
Make no mistake they all have bearing on your comment.
Jesus was not instructing Christians is my point, well done, you understood it, shame you used it out of context.
Turn the other cheek is an instruction relating to revenge. Well isnt going to war about revenge
and YES there are two types of morality
The Law that Jesus said was still in effect and grace that Christians are in through Jesus.
Think the Sermon on the mount. One based on love and one is law.
Upvote
0
I think all this confusion can be avoided if people knew general definitions for things:
No, war isn't about revenge necessarily. Surely you can't seriously think that can you? And even if it were, it's not as clear cut as you present it.
Most wars are started for reasons completely other than revenge. Some wars like the Rwandan genocide for e.g. started due to revenge and hate within the people, but most wars do not start for that at all.
What if a country was invaded, like Poland was by Germany in 1939, so people defending themselves is revenge is it?
I'm sorry what exactly does the sermon on the Mount have to do with two types of morality? Morality based on love and morality based on law? Oh yea, that! How could I have missed it! No...I don't know what you're on about. If this is some unorthodox theological revelation you've derived after you read the Bible, I don't want to hear about it. If it isn't, elaborate.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
joey_downunder
big sister
Same for my husband. He went to East Timor and Bouganville. Like you say Australians recognize the people who died serving their nation. Hubby went to the dawn service for the first time as a civvie today. He seemed a little down when he mentioned there weren't many people wearing suits and medals - well we do now live in a little non-defence town after all.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
