Isn't war evil?

[† Soldier Of Christ †]

Ecclesiastes 3


A Time for Everything

1 There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven:
2 a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
3 a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
4 a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
5 a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain,
6 a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
7 a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.

 

[inquisitor_11]

So is hate ok?

 

[† Soldier Of Christ †]

So is hate ok?

Yes in a way.

Posted by inquisitor_11

If you are a Christian, yes. We "love" what the Lord loves, and "hate" what the Lord "hates" (i.e. Proverbs 6:16-19). We love what is good and hate what is evil. Certainly, we are always to "hate" sin (our own and others) ... but not the sinner.

 

[GenemZ]

To see and hear christians advocate vilonce just make me sick! Another reason why I shoud.nt become a christian. Yeah the great president (record in death penalties) (war monger) Bush is also a "born-again-christian" a testemony to the world just how sick that kind of christianity is.

How come, I get this distinct feeling from your post, that you would just love to kill off all those Christians who advocate violence?

Jesus was a real effeminate gentle whimp. Right? Always in need of red blood cells. Right? "Love, love, love!" Right?


"In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father's house into a market!" John 2:14-16 niv

Jesus was a powerful man physically. To turn over those tables is a feat for a weight lifter. These were heavy tables. And, the last time I checked, coins in abundance are quite heavy. Not only that! Jesus made his own whip! Made his own! He refused to even support union labor and buy one instead!

"Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves." Matthew 21:12 niv

Jesus not only drove these money changers out violently, he bodily blocked merchants from coming in!

"On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts." Mark 11:15-16 niv

Imagine that? Gentle Jesus could get quite violent in the face of wrong doing. Did you know this? Matter of fact, in the future he will command his angels to absolutely slaughter the enemies of his chosen people, Israel! Slaughter them in a way that would leave Steven Spielberg scrambling to find a way to recreate the scene with special effects!

"They were trampled in the winepress outside the city, and blood flowed out of the press, rising as high as the horses' bridles for a distance of 1,600 stadia ( about 180 miles -about 300 kilometers)." Revelation 14:20 niv

As bad as that may seem to certain frightened and timid ones...Thank God, that God is not really a woman! (Imagine how much worse it would be if Jesus was a woman having her period?)

Now, why don't you just line up all those nasty Christians and shoot them because they are violent! That's how you end violence once and for all! Kill off anyone who is violent! Then, you'll have no more violence.

"You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places." Matthew 24:6-7 niv

Grace and Truth..... GeneZ

 

[inquisitor_11]

I don't remember the writer of ecclesiasties making that distinction.

 

[daidhaid]

Inquisitor
you are a good person. Questions don't freak you out or threaten you.
However; when people who have only answers but never any questions garb themselves in religion bad things happen.
Fanatics and fundementalists of all faiths are disproportionately violent. They will imbue themselves with holy wrath and act as they please all in Gods name .
When people come to love war nothing short of the full experience is going to give them pause to consider.
Truthfully many who experience war will be inured to it, some will even glory in it.
Religion is not a positive force for them.
When a person can envision Jesus of Nazareth physicaly killing, especially in a Nationalistic scenario, they are warping and remaking the message of Jesus.
All the twisting and funny doctrines to advance the idea that war is good not evil will not be seriously questioned.
Give that guy a bible, a concordance, a weapon, and you'll get Jihad for whatever he believes in.

 

[† Soldier Of Christ †]

genez,

I don't have the answers to all of your questians. how about you repost your post in a section that other christians can help you.

 

[inquisitor_11]

Daidhaid: Cheers mate.

Yeah I was kinda living in the hope that there might be some deeper discussion of the issue...

 

[GenemZ]

genez,

I don't have the answers to all of your questians. how about you repost your post in a section that other christians can help you.

Sorry...since you offered no quote of which post you are referring to, I really can not know what you speaking of..

Grace in peace, GeneZ

 

[GenemZ]

How come Christ showed no interest in overthrowing the brutal Roman occupation of the Jews when He knew that they would destroy Jerusalem a few decades hence?

Because the Lord decreed their destruction!

God is no respecter of persons. He shows no favoritism. The Jews in Jerusalem were rejecting the Christian way of life and were returning to the very life that had him crucified.

"When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul: "You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law." Acts 21:20

It was God who detemined that Jerusalem be destroyed in 70AD. Men did not. If the Jewish believers were faithful, they would have been "salt of the earth" and Jerusalem would have stood, and been blessed.

Prior to that, the land of the Jews had been wiped out by God's judgement more than several times. The very fact that Israel was occupied by Rome at that time revealed that the Jews were not right with God to begin with.

Nor that there is ever any exhortation to use armed resistance to persecuters in the New Testament?

Not true! Jesus, himself.... said:

"But if I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come to you. "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe." Luke 11:20-21 niv

As I said... one must be careful abandoning clear biblical principles to embracing abstract conglomerates such as 'just war' - especially if they violate those principles that ARE clear.

So how do you reconcile these?

By knowing what the complete Word of God, says. Not just the snippits you cling to.

" Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? " 1 Corinthians 14:8 niv

When Jesus spoke of "turnin the other cheek", he was not speaking of typical conflicts. Jews were not in habit of slapping fellow Jews. Israel was under occupation of Rome. Jews were getting themselves killed by resisting Roman arrogance. Jesus was teaching them how to stay alive and out of harm with the occupying force.

When he told them to go the extra mile, he was not telling them to help a friend out. Romans would demand instant induction into service of those they occupied. "You! You! You! Come with me! We have a job to do!" If the Jews refused? They could end up getting killed. Jesus was not teaching passivism! He was telling them not to be proud and stupid in resistance, getting themselves killed.

Jews did not demand other Jews to give them their coats! Romans did that! "Turn your other cheek," is survival instructions for an occupied people when the occupier is ruthless and corrupt! It has nothing to do to a free people under attack from an enemy threatening them!

Can you make sense of the evils of the world?

Yes... but that's another thread.

This is manifestly incorrect. Didn't you realise that Christianity thrives under persecution? I'm not saying persecution is good, but it has never eliminated Christianity anywhere, to my knowledge.

Christianity does not thrive under persecution where it has no chance to start. Christianity does not thrive today in nations that instantly persecute believers when they pop up. The reason Christianity thrived in Rome was that there was no laws to stop its spread until later on. It had a base to work off of already laid. In Communist Russia and China, Christianity did not thrive.

There are plenty of Iraqi Christians that have spent their entire lives in Iraq - we should be praying for them and supporting them in other ways, confident that the LORD controls their circumstances completely.

The quality of their Christianity is poor, at best. Saddam's Deputy Prime Minister, Tareq Aziz (remember lying, Bagdad Bob?) was a part of the so called Iraqi Christian community. Christianity can not thrive without sound teaching. Without it, its like planting seeds and giving them no water. Christianity only thrives where there is freedom. If no freedom, then only when sound doctrine is taught and accepted. Which is rare these days.

"Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers." 1 Timothy 4:16 niv

For example, sound doctrine is what explains correctly what was meant by, "turn your other cheek." It prevents erroneous passivism which ends up getting the misinformed killed by an enemy they should have defended themselves against.

Grace in peace, GeneZ

 

[Mi Zai]

I completely oppose war in any way, shape, or form, but still i must express compassion for those forced into it.

With love,

Mi Zai

 

[gnine]

"In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. To those who sold doves he said, "Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father's house into a market!" John 2:14-16 niv

Gotta be careful about reading too much into this incident.

Firstly: only John mentions anything about a whip, and only John mentions cattle and sheep. The other gospels talk about doves.

Now it actually makes far more sense to me that Jesus used the whip on the cattle - because cows are big and hard to move - also that it says "both sheep and cattle" immediately after. i.e. Christ didn't use the whip on men or the doves.

Secondly: What do you think the temple was like a day after Christ had finished? I bet that it returned to exactly the way it was before Christ caused a minor disruption to the course of business. Cleansing the temple? More like a symbolic fulfilment of a prophesy. Christ didn't lead a commando raid of disciples into the temple to "kill em all and sort 'em out later".

Probably the disciples were embarrassed.


Thirdly: There is no evidence that Christ used physical violence on men - overturning tables and scattering coins doesn't qualify and is not the same as shooting people or blowing them to pieces.


Mysterious passages such as

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/...age=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

John 7:30
At this they tried to seize him, but no one laid a hand on him, because his time had not yet come.
(Whole Chapter: John 7 In context: John 7:29-31)

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/...age=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=onhttp://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/...age=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on


http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/...age=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

John 8:20
He spoke these words while teaching in the temple area near the place where the offerings were put. Yet no one seized him, because his time had not yet come.

http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/...age=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=onhttp://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/...age=english&version=NIV&showfn=on&showxref=on

When Christ was being physically threatened suggest that Christ/God had control of the situation at all times - including control over those who were threatening Him. And no violence was necessary against them to do this.

and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts.

Once again, you can't be sure that Christ did anything other than stand in their way. Because he was revered as a prophet (at that stage), they were probably frightened to raise a hand against him.


As for Ecclesiastes- be careful again. Ecclesiastes refers to most things as "under the sun". If you read Ecclesiastes as a rulebook for the Christian life, then you will come away thinking

Ecclesiastes 10:19
A feast is made for laughter, and wine makes life merry, but money is the answer for everything.

I'm quite happy to accept that Christ is the Judge of the world, and that when he does judge it will be violent and bloody. But until then, Christ stopped His reading of Isaiah 61 just before he got to:

and the day of vengeance of our God,

Until then

Matthew 5
44But I tell you: Love your enemies[1] and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?

PRAY for those who persecute you, and love them too.


and

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Mat.5:9

 

[GenemZ]

Thirdly: There is no evidence that Christ used physical violence on men - overturning tables and scattering coins doesn't qualify and is not the same as shooting people or blowing them to pieces.

If Jesus was on a battlefield, then he would have commanded such a thing. For when he returns he will slay the enemies of Israel. Blood will be as high as a horses bridle for about 180 miles. But, other than that, Jesus was a whimpish, bifocaled, Ghandi type. Right?

"When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe. But when someone stronger attacks and overpowers him, he takes away the armor in which the man trusted and divides up the spoils." Luke 11:21-22 niv

What was Jesus advocating there?

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

"Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword." Matthew 26:51-52 niv

Note: Jesus did not tell Peter to thrwo the sword away. He told him to put it back in its holder. Jesus was warning against misues (criminal use) of the sword. For Peter was going contrary to God's Word.

Romans 13:1-4 niv

"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing."

Jesus never commanded Peter to get rid of his sword. He only condemned unlawful use of the sword.

Luke 22:35-36 niv

"Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"
"Nothing," they answered.
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. "

Jesus was telling them to sell something, and then use the money to buy a Smith and Wesson of the day.

Hava nice day Grace in peace, Gene

 

[gnine]

"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing."

I agree - government does have the right to bear the sword to restrain evil. However, the government is not equal to the individual christian and operates under the rules of this world. A government is the Romans, the Communists, Nazis, the Persians, the US of A and yet, even Saddam (in the past). You can see the contrast between some of those governments and the way we should operates as christians?

"Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"
"Nothing," they answered.
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. "

Jesus was telling them to sell something, and then use the money to buy a Smith and Wesson of the day.

And then he says

Luke 22:38
The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied.

enough what?

Either its a rebuke for the disciples being stupid, or thats enough swords.

If its the former, then it speaks for itself. If the latter, then there is a problem. Let me explain:

* 2 swords amongst 12 men - thats hardly enough even for self defence. Maybe for the 2 who have the sword, but what about the other 10?

* The word for "sword" is "small sword" - not much good agaist a large sword.

But more seriously, immediately afterwards Christ went to the garden and was arrested,

* Peter used one of those swords and was rebuked for using it

* and then Christ says:

"for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.

seems fairly plain to me. Or did Christ contradict Himself?

Note: Jesus did not tell Peter to thrwo the sword away. He told him to put it back in its holder. Jesus was warning against misues (criminal use) of the sword. For Peter was going contrary to God's Word.

What use is a sword if you can't draw it? And you've just said that using it to defend others is a criminal act - that doesn't make sense to me - as that undermines your whole position.


* and then undoes the work of the sword.

* And then of course, not once in the entire New Testament was this "command" to carry a sword for "self defence" ever carried out. If it was as you said - how come Paul didn't fight back when they were coming for him? How come Paul never urged his flock to also arm themselves for self defence?

I think its got more to do with the context of when Christ said this confusing statement:

36He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'[2] ; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment."

Immediately afterwards, he talks about being numbered with the transgressors - i.e. criminals. And like criminals, it is an ironic or even mournful stab at the fact that criminals carry swords, purses and even bags to carry loot. As an oblique prophesy, it was certainly true, as tradition holds that all of the disciples were executed.

I'm not going to go to the cross on that interpretation, but at least it doesn't fly in the face of the rest of the NT and make all the rest of the apostles look like false teachers.

If Jesus was on a battlefield, then he would have commanded such a thing. For when he returns he will slay the enemies of Israel. Blood will be as high as a horses bridle for about 180 miles. But, other than that, Jesus was a whimpish, bifocaled, Ghandi type. Right?

As you admit, thats a strawman of my position. However, what would have been easier for Christ to do? Call a legion of angels to save Himself? Or die for you?

Which is being the whimpish type? Which is braver?

 

[inquisitor_11]

"Why did you want to fight in Vietnam?"

"I wanted to meet an ancient and interesting people... and kill them."

 

[GenemZ]

I agree - government does have the right to bear the sword to restrain evil. However, the government is not equal to the individual christian and operates under the rules of this world. A government is the Romans, the Communists, Nazis, the Persians, the US of A and yet, even Saddam (in the past). You can see the contrast between some of those governments and the way we should operates as christians?





And then he says



enough what?

Either its a rebuke for the disciples being stupid, or thats enough swords.

If its the former, then it speaks for itself. If the latter, then there is a problem. Let me explain:

* 2 swords amongst 12 men - thats hardly enough even for self defence. Maybe for the 2 who have the sword, but what about the other 10?

* The word for "sword" is "small sword" - not much good agaist a large sword.

But more seriously, immediately afterwards Christ went to the garden and was arrested,

* Peter used one of those swords and was rebuked for using it

* and then Christ says:



seems fairly plain to me. Or did Christ contradict Himself?




What use is a sword if you can't draw it? And you've just said that using it to defend others is a criminal act - that doesn't make sense to me - as that undermines your whole position.


* and then undoes the work of the sword.

* And then of course, not once in the entire New Testament was this "command" to carry a sword for "self defence" ever carried out. If it was as you said - how come Paul didn't fight back when they were coming for him? How come Paul never urged his flock to also arm themselves for self defence?

I think its got more to do with the context of when Christ said this confusing statement:



Immediately afterwards, he talks about being numbered with the transgressors - i.e. criminals. And like criminals, it is an ironic or even mournful stab at the fact that criminals carry swords, purses and even bags to carry loot. As an oblique prophesy, it was certainly true, as tradition holds that all of the disciples were executed.

I'm not going to go to the cross on that interpretation, but at least it doesn't fly in the face of the rest of the NT and make all the rest of the apostles look like false teachers.


As you admit, thats a strawman of my position. However, what would have been easier for Christ to do? Call a legion of angels to save Himself? Or die for you?

Which is being the whimpish type? Which is braver?

You are not worth answering.

 

[daidhaid]

You are not worth answering.

funny I decided the same about you

 

[GenemZ]

funny I decided the same about you

First off, to show your ignorance. The Romans all used a short sword they were famous for. But, you said so confidently....

* The word for "sword" is "small sword" - not much good agaist a large sword.

They did not use large swords! The conquered the world with their short sword!

And, the rest of your post was filled with similar opinionated erroneous blather. You just wish to be divisive. Not truthful. To tear down, not build up. So why bother? You consistently get it all wrong. So, why present what you will continue to get wrong?

Other than explain with this post why you are not worth answering (for the sake of others) you serve no purpose in revealing truth, other than to set up another to bring forth truth by always needing to correct your agendized garbage you wish to swallow, because you simply have this instinctive drive to oppose what is right. And, you will always bring up the closed minded fundamentalists as your justification for what you think, but you are only the other side of the same coin! You have no idea what Christianity is about.

Unbelievers are simply the animated dead. Generic lives, in a generic existance. Yet, knowing better than everyone else when it comes to spiritual matters.

When you die? Will you live?
GZ

 

[gnine]

Other than explain with this post why you are not worth answering (for the sake of others) you serve no purpose in revealing truth, other than to set up another to bring forth truth by always needing to correct your agendized garbage you wish to swallow, because you simply have this instinctive drive to oppose what is right. And, you will always bring up the closed minded fundamentalists as your justification for what you think, but you are only the other side of the same coin! You have no idea what Christianity is about.

I think your being unfair, but regardless - go in peace, brother. I am sorry I've upset you.

I've given you 100 of my blessings.

 

[GenemZ]

I think your being unfair, but regardless - go in peace, brother. I am sorry I've upset you.

I've given you 100 of my blessings.

Your post is filled with inaccuracies and can mislead. That upsets me. As for you? I have no idea who you are. But, if you are saved, the Lord will be upset with you, if anyone is to be upset. Not me. You're his servant. Not mine.

On the other hand, Daidhaid is who I was responding to in that way. He is the divisive one. I am not even sure he should be posting here if it is a Christian only section. Deists are not Christians.

GeneZ