Is it right to kill another human even in war?

porcupine · Jan 5, 2005

mesz said:
Borealis, God may judge and punish the wicked, that is his job. You as another human being may not.

"14Revenge not yourselves, my dearly beloved; but give place unto wrath, for it is written: Revenge is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord." Romans 12:14

Read Romans 13.

bolinstephen · Jan 5, 2005

Well, lets take a look.

Does God ever tell us to do something is wrong? No. God always tells us to do what is right.

Does God ever tell us to go to war? Yes. Therefore there are some circumstances where war is justified.

Does God ever tell us to kill another human being? Yes. Therefor there are some circumstances where killing is justified.

Borealis · Jan 5, 2005

mesz said:
Borealis, God may judge and punish the wicked, that is his job. You as another human being may not.

"14Revenge not yourselves, my dearly beloved; but give place unto wrath, for it is written: Revenge is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord." Romans 12:14

God also uses humans as his instruments, both for peace and for war.

mesz · Jan 6, 2005

There maybe examples in the Old Testament of God using people as his instrument of punishment, but I do not see any modern examples of it. No modern day leader can claim that God specifically asked him to use war as punishment (unless they are delusional of course). Actually, Jesus changed the rules of war by telling us to love our enemies. Ancient Israel was God's instrument to punish some people, but WE ARE NOT!

mesz · Jan 6, 2005

What if a Christian IS a civil magistrate?

If being a Civil Magistrate means disobeying Jesus' words on loving enemies, than a Christian may not be a civil magistrate. God's people are supposed to be separate from the world, so yes, a Christian should not do as others would. It is a matter of standards; we are called to higher standards of behavior.

porcupine · Jan 6, 2005

mesz said:
If being a Civil Magistrate means disobeying Jesus' words on loving enemies, than a Christian may not be a civil magistrate. God's people are supposed to be separate from the world, so yes, a Christian should not do as others would. It is a matter of standards; we are called to higher standards of behavior.

So God has two standards of what is sin? It is sin for the believer, but the God-given duty (and not sin) for the unbeliever?

[BTW, Jesus did not decry the death penalty when He was on the cross -- either for Himself or the two beside Him.]

mesz · Jan 6, 2005

Unbelievers are already in sin anyways.

Secondly, silence does not equal approval. Just because Jesus' did not give a speech against cruxifiction while he was on the cross does not mean he approved it.
Plus, he already sufficiently adressed that matter with "
38You have heard that it hath been said: An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. 39But I say to you not to resist evil: but if one strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other: "

mesz · Jan 6, 2005

And by the way, when the OT talked about "eye for an eye" it was talking about capital punishment (and also about other forms of retributive justice).

porcupine · Jan 6, 2005

mesz said:
And by the way, when the OT talked about "eye for an eye" it was talking about capital punishment (and also about other forms of retributive justice).

That was true, but that was a standard of measure to insure that the punisment was commensurate to the crime. IOW it insured you didn't take a life for an eye. However, the way the Jews of Jesus' time used it, it was the excuse for PERSONAL vengeance, not judicial response. This is what he was addressing. The duities Gpod gives the government are different than those of the individual. Romans 12 and 13 show that one is not to take personal vengeance, but leave place to God's revenger (the word used there) -- namely, the state.

So, it is your opinion that God's Word tells governments that they may sinfully kill people because they are going to sin anyway and makes the presumption that no believer will ever be in a place of civil leadership? You're going to need a lot more than "turn the other cheek" to prove that.

The other question I would have is how God, who does not change, COMMANDED capital punishment and war by His own people and did not deem it sin, yet somehow changed His mind after Jesus came. Did Jesus convert the Father from being a meanie God to being a nice God?

mesz · Jan 6, 2005

Did God change when he abolished the Law? Did God change when he issued a new covenant to Noah?
God doesn't change, but the way he deals with us does.

It also isn't true that "turn the other cheek" only refers to personal vengence. First of all, personal vengeance was already prohibited in the OT. Furthermore, when Jesus describes what burdens we have to bear in order not to resist an evildoer, he also states that "41And whosoever will force thee one mile, go with him other two." This refers to the Roman army's practice of forcing a defeated nation to carry their gear for a mile in order to humiliate them. With this Jesus teaches that even when you are persecuted severly by an army that illegally invaded you, you may not fight back!

porcupine · Jan 6, 2005

mesz said:
Did God change when he abolished the Law? Did God change when he issued a new covenant to Noah?
God doesn't change, but the way he deals with us does.

It also isn't true that "turn the other cheek" only refers to personal vengence. First of all, personal vengeance was already prohibited in the OT. Furthermore, when Jesus describes what burdens we have to bear in order not to resist an evildoer, he also states that "41And whosoever will force thee one mile, go with him other two." This refers to the Roman army's practice of forcing a defeated nation to carry their gear for a mile in order to humiliate them. With this Jesus teaches that even when you are persecuted severly by an army that illegally invaded you, you may not fight back!

God's character does not change -- nor does his moral law. If all killing is murder in the NT, it would have been in the OT as well. More than that, if all killing is murder in the NT, then He could not commend the government to do so.

mesz · Jan 6, 2005

Then, if eating pork is a sin in the OT, shouldn't it be a sin in the NT?

mesz · Jan 6, 2005

That is where your reasoning falls apart. God has established new covenants with people over time. You cannot use something from the OT to justify something that has been clearly condemned in the NT.
God's moral law does change in some aspects from covenant to covenant.
Examples:
1) In the OT divorce was allowed, in the NT it is not
2) Eating certain foods was illegal in the OT, it is not in the NT
and also,
In the OT all killing was not murder, in the NT it is!

porcupine · Jan 6, 2005

mesz said:
Then, if eating pork is a sin in the OT, shouldn't it be a sin in the NT?

You will notice I specified the moral law, not the separation code or the ceremonial laws. Big difference, friend.

porcupine · Jan 6, 2005

mesz said:
That is where your reasoning falls apart. God has established new covenants with people over time. You cannot use something from the OT to justify something that has been clearly condemned in the NT.
God's moral law does change in some aspects from covenant to covenant.
Examples:
1) In the OT divorce was allowed, in the NT it is not
2) Eating certain foods was illegal in the OT, it is not in the NT
and also,
In the OT all killing was not murder, in the NT it is!

The NT does not "clearly" prohibit defense of others, war, or capital punishment. It "clearly" prohibits private retaliation.

shataytay · Jan 7, 2005

mesz · Jan 7, 2005

Was the change in laws regarding divorce a change in ceremonial law?
Furthermore, it is not so much about change but fullfillment. Jesus fulfilled the law that prohibited murder in the OT to include all people, including wicked ones.

bolinstephen · Jan 14, 2005

mesz said:
There maybe examples in the Old Testament of God using people as his instrument of punishment, but I do not see any modern examples of it. No modern day leader can claim that God specifically asked him to use war as punishment (unless they are delusional of course). Actually, Jesus changed the rules of war by telling us to love our enemies. Ancient Israel was God's instrument to punish some people, but WE ARE NOT!

OK, lets look at this.

Lets have a hypothetical situation. Japan, becomes a milatary superpower, invades other contries, throws their babies in the air and uses them as target practice, rapes all their enimys woman, and are invading other contries.

We are called to love our emimy, however we are also called to love our friend. I would say we have a moral responsibility to go in there and break up Japan's rampage. If not we are passivlly approving Japans actions. We are not showing any love by not protecting Japan's victim. The Act of not acting would have been the wrong decision.

Now how are we showing love to the Japanize, we are ending their life so God cannot hold them responsible for any other crimes.

BTW, that hypothetical situation, it happened. That was World War 2.

Is it right to kill another human even in war?

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Catholic Homeschool Dad

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency