Justifyable War?

[razzelflabben]

It's an example a highly respected man committing human sacrifice and this thread's about brutality.

there is much speculation that the "human sacrifice" you speak of was in fact, an issue of virginity and not human sacrifice at all, in fact, it would not have been consistant with God's commands and what He did for the people for it to have been othewise. So what we are talking about here, is that he pledged his daughter to be a virgin the rest of her life. In addition, this act was not reveared as being Godly, however, the Heb. 11 passage you note is quite interesting to this discussion. Note vs. 33 Who, through faith, subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, became valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the the aliens.

Note that their faith allowed them to succeed at acts of violence. So how then can something that is sinful, that being violence as described by some here, be honored by God as faith? How can acts of subdueing kingdomes and fighting be wrong if God himself upholds them as great acts of faith?

 

[SonOfSophroniscus]

What about the soldier who approached Jesus, asking him to heal his servant at home? This 'servant' was a horrendous mistranslation of the word 'catamite', which is a male homosexual prostitute.

Now, homosexuality is condemned as sinful in the Bible, yet the 'servant' was healed by Jesus.

Ive been trying and trying and trying to think of or find one time in which God/Jesus upheld an evil to show how to be Godly, I can't do it. So if we are going to take this arguement seriously, please provide one instance where something that is considered sinful is upheld as a Godly example. Otherwise, I think the arguement can be dismissed without purpose or substance.

edit: I'm not speaking to you personally amor, just anyone who wants to pursue the arguement, your post was convienient, from the sounds of it, you agree that this is a fruitless arguement.

 

[SonOfSophroniscus]

Oh, and usury being condemned more than 60 times in the testaments; homosexuality? Less than half a dozen.

 

[Smileyill]

I mixed up the threads, this thread is about war. whoops.

As for He 11, I'll draw an anology. In the OT, God allowed poligamy. He doesn't now. He allowed war then too. However, he didn't explicitly condemn it in the NT, he just alluded to it.

 

[razzelflabben]

What about the soldier who approached Jesus, asking him to heal his servant at home? This 'servant' was a horrendous mistranslation of the word 'catamite', which is a male homosexual prostitute.

Now, homosexuality is condemned as sinful in the Bible, yet the 'servant' was healed by Jesus.

I don't have a clue in all this world how you are using this to address my question of one time in which an evil was upheld as an example of Godliness. Nothing about this upholds any evil as Godly. Please connect the dots.

 

[razzelflabben]

Oh, and usury being condemned more than 60 times in the testaments; homosexuality? Less than half a dozen.

When did this become a discussion about homosexuality? What are you talking about and how does it fit the discussion?

 

[razzelflabben]

I mixed up the threads, this thread is about war. whoops.

As for He 11, I'll draw an anology. In the OT, God allowed poligamy. He doesn't now. He allowed war then too. However, he didn't explicitly condemn it in the NT, he just alluded to it.

and God is the same yesterday, today and forever, so do we need to discuss what if anything has changed?

 

[razzelflabben]

What about the soldier who approached Jesus, asking him to heal his servant at home? This 'servant' was a horrendous mistranslation of the word 'catamite', which is a male homosexual prostitute.

Now, homosexuality is condemned as sinful in the Bible, yet the 'servant' was healed by Jesus.

I only could find one obsure site, wanting to make a mockery out of the bible in which this view is taken, I wonder if you could (on a seperate topic) show us the evidence that this servant was a catamite, in fact, the greek words I can find do not use this idea, so I really must question your sources. You can pm me if you like since this is off topic.

 

[KTatis]

When did this become a discussion about homosexuality? What are you talking about and how does it fit the discussion?

Lol. That is a very good question. I was just reading through the post and here it is.

 

[Smileyill]

and God is the same yesterday, today and forever, so do we need to discuss what if anything has changed?

True, but He changed the rules.

 

[KTatis]

Why would he do that?

 

[razzelflabben]

True, but He changed the rules.

Did He change the rules or fulfil them?

 

[Smileyill]

Point, but same difference and still doesn't answer this thread's question. The question still remains: Does the OT justify the "Just War Doctrine." Besides, the way the Hebrews conducted war back then clearly violates the current doctrine; so using the OT to justify current violence is tenuous, if not out-right absurd.

 

[razzelflabben]

Say what?

Point, but same difference and still doesn't answer this thread's question.

Not the same difference at all. Two very different things with huge implications.

The question still remains: Does the OT justify the "Just War Doctrine."

Many times now I have addressed this and if even one person talked about it, I missed it. The OT wars were always about cleansing. About removing the evil that could and would infect the people and turn them away from God. This then would be our criteria for a just war. Note just war not being the same thing as all other military involvement is evil, but only dealing right now with the issue of just war. Now here is where the difference between a change in the law and a fulfillment of the law comes in. If the law changed, then the OT can be disregarded as nothing more than history. But if the law was fulfilled by Christ as the bible indicates, then the law has not changed at all, and instead, the law is adapted to our modern lives. Thus a just war does not necessarily mean go out and blow up anyone who is evil, but rather that we need to guard ourselves against those that could poison us against God, being harsh where we need to be. Let's see, church disipline is a great example, we go through the "rules of order" and if the issue is not resolved, we treat them as unbelievers. The idea of just war thus intact.

Besides, the way the Hebrews conducted war back then clearly violates the current doctrine;

In what way?

so using the OT to justify current violence is tenuous, if not out-right absurd.

Now what I don't understand is that I think it pretty clear that justifyable war and political wars are not necessarily the same thing, though they might be. So why insist that they be lumped together like a badge of correctness that war is wrong. The Christian is always in a war, a war with old self (man) and well as evil. Thus even in the NT we see this concept of war. There can be no other understanding that I can fathom other than a justifyable war when we are told in the NT that we are in a war.
Acts 4:17

New International Version (NIV) Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society


17But to stop this thing from spreading any further among the people, we must warn these men to speak no longer to anyone in this name."



Romans 7:21-25
21So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.

2 Corinthians 10:3

New International Version (NIV) Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society


3For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does.

1 Peter 2:11

New International Version (NIV) Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society



11Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul.


Revelation 12:17

New International Version (NIV) Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society


17Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to make war against the rest of her offspring—those who obey God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus.


Revelation 19:11

New International Version (NIV) Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

11I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war.


Ephesians 6:12

King James Version (KJV) Public Domain



12For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places

That's just a beginning.

 

[Smileyill]

Hebrews killed civilians - committed genocide...come on, that clearly violates the current Just War Doctrine. They were told to, so I don't condemn them for it, but you see my point?

It seems you mix spiritual and physical war. Except Rev., those verses apply to spritual war. Rev. is another deal altogether.

The money changers is your best argument and it doesn't apply to war.

 

[razzelflabben]

Hebrews killed civilians - committed genocide...come on, that clearly violates the current Just War Doctrine. They were told to, so I don't condemn them for it, but you see my point?

what is the current just war doctrine? I didn't know we had one, in fact, I thought that is part of what this disussion was about, what is a just war? My viewpoint is that a just war is one in which cleansing occurs. End oppression as it were, this can be anything from the physical to the spiritual or emotional. I see nothing in scripture that says we are to allow the evil doers to overtake us to the point of condeming us to eternity apart from God. Thus justifyable war. And btw, Rev. is part of the NT and so applies.

Now war in general is a different discussion, that what a justifyable war is, at least from my standpoint. So in order for our discussion to continue we need for you to tell us what the current just war doctrine is, or we need to talk about the just war doctrine I presented.

It seems you mix spiritual and physical war. Except Rev., those verses apply to spritual war. Rev. is another deal altogether.

No, no confusion, both can and are just wars because a just war is one whose purpose is to keep us close to God as well as the others around us.

The money changers is your best argument and it doesn't apply to war.

And yet no one has talked about the money changers and the violent act of the one who supposedly told us to never use violence. Are we ready to talk about that double standard, that contridictory lie of Christ's yet? I personally don't accept that Jesus is a lier, so there must be another explaination in my mind, and a quick study of the Greek explains it completely and consistantly.

 

[Smileyill]

We already stated the doctrine in this thread. I do like your definition though.

But how exaclty does an unbeliever ever have the power to condemn us to eternity apart from God? And Rev doesn't apply because it's an different era that hasn't happened yet.

Go ahead and explain the money changers.

 

[razzelflabben]

We already stated the doctrine in this thread. I do like your definition though.

Okay, I missed the doctrine so if you could review it, or point me to the post I would appreciate it. Summary is fine, I usually catch on pretty quick. Not always, but usually.

But how exaclty does an unbeliever ever have the power to condemn us to eternity apart from God? And Rev doesn't apply because it's an different era that hasn't happened yet.

an unbeliever doesn't condemn us to eternity apart from God, but thier influence can draw us away from God. That is the problem, consider the teen who gets in with the "wrong crowd" idea, peer pressure can conpell them to do thing they normally wouldn't. This is also true of unbelievers who are allowed to influence our lives without check. It was this influence that God was against, and still is. Now this is not to say that every unbeliever should be executed, that is crazy, but it is to say, that unbelievers can and often do sway us from the truth. It is this that we should guard against.

Rev. applies because it is NT. If we disregard the OT at the will of some here, and we disregard the book of Rev. at the will of some here, then we are only picking and choosing what we want to accept, and not dealing with the bible and the God of that bible. The God of the bible paints a picture of a people who fight, but do not use vengance. It paints a picture of just and unjust wars. Just wars being won by God and His power and unjust wars being fought and won by man's power. And the bottom line of it all, is that if we want to understand God and what He wants for His people, we can't pick and choose what we accept for discussion and dismiss all we don't like, but rather, we need to discuss and accept all and allow it all to paint a picture for us of who God really is and what He really wants and expects from and for His people. That look, and that picture includes but is not limited to the OT and Rev.

Go ahead and explain the money changers.

I don't know what to explain. The same Jesus who said that we should turn the other cheek, did not do so with the money changers, but instead, used violence. So we are left with a couple of options.
1. Jesus was a lier (I personally would use this as a last resort, in that I would use calling anyone a lier as a last resort, especially someone who is held so highly by many including various religions)
2. We don't understand the command (the first I would look at because quite frankly, we are many many times removed from the lang. and culture of the time the command was written.)
or 3. God changed, making Him either non existant, or changing, this would invalidate the entire religion which has servived for so long, which seems unlikely, but also has the problem of dismissing much evidence to the contrary. Now for some this isnt a problem because they don't accept the evidence or refuse to see it as evidence, but for me this is a big problem because I have seen convincing evidence and so that is up to the individual to make sense out of it.

So if we start with the most obvious, 2 above, and research, we find that the Greek is using the word for vengance, and not violence in general, which gives consistancy to the word and actions, and thus romoves at least for this discussion the other two possibles.

 

[Smileyill]

Okay, I missed the doctrine so if you could review it, or point me to the post I would appreciate it. Summary is fine, I usually catch on pretty quick.

Just war doctrine

Google is a wonderful thing you know? You could do a little research.

Not always, but usually. an unbeliever doesn't condemn us to eternity apart from God, but thier influence can draw us away from God. That is the problem, consider the teen who gets in with the "wrong crowd" idea, peer pressure can conpell them to do thing they normally wouldn't. This is also true of unbelievers who are allowed to influence our lives without check. It was this influence that God was against, and still is. Now this is not to say that every unbeliever should be executed, that is crazy, but it is to say, that unbelievers can and often do sway us from the truth. It is this that we should guard against.

Ro: 8:38-9, that's over.

Rev. applies because it is NT. If we disregard the OT at the will of some here, and we disregard the book of Rev. at the will of some here, then we are only picking and choosing what we want to accept, and not dealing with the bible and the God of that bible. The God of the bible paints a picture of a people who fight, but do not use vengance. It paints a picture of just and unjust wars. Just wars being won by God and His power and unjust wars being fought and won by man's power. And the bottom line of it all, is that if we want to understand God and what He wants for His people, we can't pick and choose what we accept for discussion and dismiss all we don't like, but rather, we need to discuss and accept all and allow it all to paint a picture for us of who God really is and what He really wants and expects from and for His people. That look, and that picture includes but is not limited to the OT and Rev.I don't know what to explain. The same Jesus who said that we should turn the other cheek, did not do so with the money changers, but instead, used violence. So we are left with a couple of options.

I don't disregard any scripture, but some apply to this topic and some don't. The OT reasons for war are over, and the reasons for war in Rev. have not yet begun and it's such a hard symbolic book that understanding what's physical and spiritual is tenuous at best. It'd be like asking the Jews to understand that David's permanent Kingdom was spiritual through Christ.

1. Jesus was a lier (I personally would use this as a last resort, in that I would use calling anyone a lier as a last resort, especially someone who is held so highly by many including various religions)
2. We don't understand the command (the first I would look at because quite frankly, we are many many times removed from the lang. and culture of the time the command was written.)
or 3. God changed, making Him either non existant, or changing, this would invalidate the entire religion which has servived for so long, which seems unlikely, but also has the problem of dismissing much evidence to the contrary. Now for some this isnt a problem because they don't accept the evidence or refuse to see it as evidence, but for me this is a big problem because I have seen convincing evidence and so that is up to the individual to make sense out of it.

So if we start with the most obvious, 2 above, and research, we find that the Greek is using the word for vengance, and not violence in general, which gives consistancy to the word and actions, and thus romoves at least for this discussion the other two possibles.

And what does the scripture state? "Vengeance is mine" Ro 12. God explains why he can take vengeance on the money changers and not us.

 

[razzelflabben]

Just war doctrine

Google is a wonderful thing you know? You could do a little research.

I appologize, I didn't know this was a catholic thread, I thought that just war doctrine was just thrown out for discussion and not an accepted doctrine for all. I missed the translation somewhere along the way, in fact, I vaguely recall someone else commenting about why we should be required to accept a catholic docrine but I didn't recall any reason and so I assumed that docrine was reserved for the catholics and that this being a chrstian phil. and ethics thread, would include all different christian just war doctrines. Boy did I blow it, sorry. Should I just leave the discussion since I am not catholic? There should be a warning somewhere. Can we add the word Catholic somewhere on this thread so we don't confuse anyone else? So are we then suppose to discuss the catholic doctrine of Just war? the biblical doctrine of just war? the personal doctrine of just war? or something else, I really am confused. I thought it was about the biblical doctrine of just war that we were discussing. Man I am so confused! My mind is spinning trying to figure out how I missed it so bad. No, I am not mocking anyone, I am really confused.

Ro: 8:38-9, that's over.

notice nothing there about our own selfish desires. It is ourselves giving into sin that seperates us from God. And, unfortunately, it is much easier to give into those evil desires when we fellowship with evil doers. But then again, many don't like to hear that message of God, and refuse all the scriptures resented persented that talk about the old man and his evil ways.

I don't disregard any scripture, but some apply to this topic and some don't. The OT reasons for war are over, and the reasons for war in Rev. have not yet begun and it's such a hard symbolic book that understanding what's physical and spiritual is tenuous at best. It'd be like asking the Jews to understand that David's permanent Kingdom was spiritual through Christ.

Okay, so what books apply to us today then. We dismiss the ot because it is history, we disreguard Rev. because it is future, we disreguard the gospels because they deal with Jesus and as was already stated, He can do whatever He wants and that doesn't affect us at all. Now I don't know what else is left because the rest of the bible was about the early church and teachings of the church and that also is history, so what scriptures are valid for this discussion? What is left. It sounds to me like we can dismiss everything but the one passage you want to hold up as truth. But God tells me that all, I repeat ALL scripture is given, not just those you or I want to find an excuse to keep.

In addition, you have not said anything about the Greek words used, when do we get to talk about that.

And what does the scripture state? "Vengeance is mine" Ro 12. God explains why he can take vengeance on the money changers and not us.

But vengeance is what the Matt passage is talking about according to the greek, so that would be consistant with the idea of vengence and I see no problems at all, nothing about vengence is dealing with the military or war and so there is no scripture at all presented to support or invalidate war, only examples of how the military shows us a Godly life and not to use vengence. So what then do you base your case on?

Well, unless I am told that I somehow belong on this thread that I didn't know was catholic, I will just be reading your posts, though I would love to continue the discussion, I don't wish to offend anyone, I really don't know how I could have known, but so be it. If I am okay to be here discussing the bible and not the doctrine of a specific religion, please let me know so that I can stay. If I can't discuss the bible, please forgive the intrusion and please make it clearer so that this infringement doesn't occur again. Thanks I do so love the word of God and the God who gave it to us!