-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Is it right to kill another human even in war?
- Thread starter Johnboy60
- Start date
- Status
bolinstephen
Active Member
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.
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.
Upvote
0
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!
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
mesz said:
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.]
Upvote
0
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: "
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: "
Upvote
0
mesz said:
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?
Upvote
0
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 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!
Upvote
0
mesz said:
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.
Upvote
0
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!
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!
Upvote
0
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.
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.
Upvote
0
bolinstephen
Active Member
mesz said:
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.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
