War

[The Times]

How easily you've switched from talking about "War" and "Bombs" to...

..."picking up a sword" during a dispute between two men.


Shall we now discuss the morality of fistfights instead of Air Force bombing raids?


That's sophistry. No, it does not amount to guilt by association in any way.

Indeed, it's completely within Christ's instructions to pray for those who are NOT doing what you consider right. You said so yourself.

A sword is a term for any weapon. In the days of Christ they didn't have bombs or machine guns or airforce, they had swords, which were the main instruments of war and death. So Jesus would say if you kill by the sword, you shall be killed by the sword. You can quiet easily substitute the word war in place of sword, that is if you kill by war, then you will die in war, which holds true as well. This is what Jesus instructed and I don't understand why you can't put one and one together.

Praying for governments or airforce to bomb people that results in death, is the same as killing with a sword/war. Praying for someone to punch another in the face, is the same as supporting violence against another human being, who has been created by the same Holy hand of God. Jesus says to pray for your enemies, not to pray for someone to obliterate your enemies. It seems lunacy to think that putting your mind and heart on another party to do the killing or violence pardons you from any association to the crimes. Jesus would say if you even lust after a women, you have already sinned in your mind. In this situation not only are your thoughts behind the airforce in killing others, but your also actually praying for them. It don't make any sense to me friend. Really have I not tried to explain it to you to understand that no warmongers can enter the Kingdom of Heaven. When we pray for bombing, that is implicitly warmongering through another party. It is like watching and supporting someone get beat up to death.

I can't think like you do, neither can I pray for the obliteration of another human being. It doesn't square with Christ and I assure you there is absolutely no justification for it biblically or even none biblically.

 

[Albion]

A sword is a term for any weapon.

Yeh, I understand that, but you cited a particular example, so that is what I responded to, not just to the expression.

In the days of Christ they didn't have bombs or machine guns or airforce, they had swords, which were the main instruments of war and death. So Jesus would say if you kill by the sword, you shall be killed by the sword. You can quiet easily substitute the word war in place of sword, that is if you kill by war, then you will die in war, which holds true as well. This is what Jesus instructed and I don't understand why you can't put one and one together.

Perhaps it's because I did get two when I put them together and not what you came up with.

The point remains that Christ did not teach against 'war,' but against PERSONAL behavior. And the Roman legions, even without machine guns, were more than capable of inflicting massive casualties in the tens of thousands upon their enemies.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

What you are really asking is, is it alright to sometimes disobey the Lord? The answer is no. We are to return good for evil and to never resist an evil person; so under what circumstances may a Christian disobey these commands? The first three hundred years of Christianity lived out the answer to your question, the Apostles all died obeying these commands, and Christ was the ultimate answer to all such questions.

not returning evil for evil would have to do with acts of vengeance, retribution, and retaliation. we're not to try to get even with those who do us wrong.

this would have nothing to with defending oneself from harm.

 

[The Times]

Yeh, I understand that, but you cited a particular example, so that is what I responded to, not just to the expression.


Perhaps it's because I did get two when I put them together and not what you came up with.

The point remains that Christ did not teach against 'war,' but against PERSONAL behavior. And the Roman legions, even without machine guns, were more than capable of inflicting massive casualties in the tens of thousands upon their enemies.

War is never the solution and God knows. We need to try in peace, failure is not an option.

 

[The Times]

Jesus invites us to drink from his cup. Christianity is a call to carry our crosses and to come die with Christ.
Our defense or escape or whatever you want to call it is death, for there is no greater love than to give your life for Jesus.

If we support war, we are not carrying our cross and wanting to preserve our lives and Jesus said "for whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it". We are called to die for our Lord, that is the Christian motto.

We can find ourself in the world, but we will loose Jesus. Politics and war have no place in the faith of Christ.

 

[The Times]

There is no love greater than to give your life to Jesus Christ

6For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. 7I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

 

[Monna]

Is there some reason we can't do both?

(Pray and bomb)

I would have thought that bombing your enemy was inconsistent and incompatible with "loving your enemy."

 

[Albion]

(Pray and bomb)

I would have thought that bombing your enemy was inconsistent and incompatible with "loving your enemy."

If you do go forth with your own air force or battleship and rain down bombs upon another nation, I'd be inclined to agree with you.

To date, I don't know anybody around here who does this.

The point AGAIN, is that war is a function of nations, not stray individuals; and Christ did not speak against the use of the warmaking powers of government.

 

[devin553344]

You completely misunderstand me. '

I already said im not promoting lawless anarchy. I believe God will protect us, and if for some reason we should die, then thats ok because our faith is strong in the Lord. Right? Why mourn over death, as if it has power. Christ has robbed death and the grave. I know i sound extreme, but if we read the NT, well see plenty of extreme stuff. Right? I often ask myself if i would be a coward if faced with death. I guess life has worn me down, and i dont love this world as much any more. I tell myself that real faith has no fear. He who fears is not made perfect in love.

1 Corinthians 15:55

That doctrine may be OK if you've forsaken your family, wife children and so on and you're ministering alone. But when you have a peoples to protect I think your doctrine might be construed as choosing a terrible fate for others who might not want that fate? I really suggest for you reviewing Moses' discussions with God (we learn in the old testament that God kills and makes alive and there is non other beside him) and yet Moses was given to slay the 3000 to protect their God. That they had a proper God and not idols to worship. You're view sounds more like some cults that I have reviewed. I think you'll learn as time goes on and come around to a better doctrine for the people that surround you publicly.

 

[Monna]

The point AGAIN, is that war is a function of nations, not stray individuals

And nations (as well as governments) are made up of individuals responsible to and before God for their decisions. In a democracy citizens have the right and responsibility to choose their decision-making politicians, and are able to influence their decisions. All combatants are individuals accountable to God for their actions. When anyone joins a military force s/he doesn't give up that accountabiliy. Thinking combatants know that they are going to face the choice to kill another person made in the image of God, and are responsible/ accountable to God for the decision they make. "I was ordered to kill" is not going to cut any ice with God, any more than "I was told to commit adultery." Early Christians died because they refused to join the armed forces and kill.

The State is the archtypical example of the "principalities and powers" (spoken of in the scriptures) and like all human organisations are as "fallen" as human beings, operating under the morality of death. (Read Stringfellow, "An ethic for Christians and other aliens in a strange land."). It is states/national governments that give themselves the right to kill and apply other forms of "death", both on their own citizens and those of other countries. Individuals in governments (and their militaries) dehumanise themselves by creating rules ("laws") then hiding behind these laws to avoid accountability. Through the law comes death, not because of the law itself but because we have consistently shown ourselves as humans unable to apply the positive and constructive spirit of the law (love and respsect for one another) and have used it only to punish and dehumanise. Power corrupts - and absolute power, the power over life - corrupts absolutely. War has never been a solution, only a perpetuator of strife. Don't quote me nazism and WWII etc - the evils that caused those ideologies and wars still exist today. "Victory" was superficial and temporary.

 

[Albion]

And nations (as well as governments) are made up of individuals responsible to and before God for their decisions.

Then I'd side with you in thinking that individuals should not make war on enemy nations. Governments are not just a lot of individuals together.

 

[devin553344]

I think we should also take the advise of Michael the Arch Angel and Jude:

{1:7} Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. {1:8} Likewise also these [filthy] dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. {1:9} Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

And also 2 Peter:

{2:9} The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the
unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: {2:10} But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous [are they,] selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. {2:11} Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. {2:12} But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;

So while we as Christians should not kill anything other than animals, we should also not despise our dominion or governments. And our dominions and governments are sending our people to die to protect our rights to worship openly as Christians and more rapidly convert and share that Christianity with all. I can't think of a better government and dominion for Christians and yet it is spoken of as despised in this thread? That is strange to me. Anyways, God Bless all in this thread, we are all along some journey thru Christianity, and should be allowed to learn and grow in our morality.

[edit] personally I think it's not dignified to NOT represent your country to defend its freedom with your brothers and sisters who die in defending it.And I think we as Christians would lose the respect of the people that way.

To clarify: I think brute beast of those related scriptures is referring to Terrorists, murderers and people who beat children and so on.

God went to his cross, but he also kills and makes alive, wounds and heals, and gave up his own life upon the cross, killed himself and made himself alive. If we are to truly follow Christ and God then we must do the same and do as Moses did perhaps Military and police may kill to protect us and the doctors may heal and make alive, then perhaps we are following after God. God killed and made alive to get out of that cross persecution area himself.

When we watch the nature channel we see an animal defending its young or group and think that's almost human of that animal. A higher morality and brain function. Then should we as Christians do any different from a predator?

 

[Monna]

Governments are not just a lot of individuals together.

What more are they, Albion? Are there non-terrestrials, animals or what more? Demonic and angelic powers perhaps?

Yes, they are "enabled" by legislation - i.e. rules. But those rules were formulated and approved by individuals (politicians with non-political staff) working together within the frameworks of organisations whose own operational legislation was formulated by inidividuals before them. You will ALWAYS come back ultimately to people, i.e. individuals.

 

[Monna]

we should also not despise our dominion or governments

I don't. I pray for them. We are specifically told to do so.

And because I know very well the pressures on them to hide behind laws. And very often when doing so, they make decisions that are diametrically opposite to the original intent of those laws. I have been there and I know how dehumanising it can be.

 

[Albion]

What more are they, Albion? Are there non-terrestrials, animals or what more? Demonic and angelic powers perhaps?

What are you talking about? I made a clear distinction between individual persons and governments. What applies to one of these doesn't always apply to the other. I don't see why that is proving to be so difficult to understood.

 

[FatalHeart]

You do realize in all of the scriptures, there isn't one time that it preaches against war. You are taking individual accounts of how we're supposed to treat each other and individual situations that relate to other values and using them and those stories to say war is ultimately evil. Yet not one new testament document has a speaker addressing soldiers and telling them to put their arms down and go home. But because it talks about love, you seem to wish to take the view of what you think that looks like and abuse those who would defend their families and lands. People like you must exist to balance out those who would take an extreme view of destroying everything they oppose with war, but this maligning of God and the OT needs to stop. The only thing that has changed is the law because of the new priesthood. Jesus had a specific task to do and life to live. I don't know when people decided to only follow the parts they like and create doctrine on it and teach others to follow it, but when you have to skin out 60% of the book, that's a personal issue and not one that bodes well to the soul.

 

[PollyJetix]

If we want to get old testament on folks, sure. Im just going to be plain and honest. I cannot find in the NT where we are taught that we bomb people. We are taught to pray. I hear a lot of stuff on CF about the power of God. If we can trust God with our finances, our health, food and clothing, then why not trust him to protect us? Isn't the answer prayer? Isnt that sound doctrine? Sure we can quote Romans 13, but God never taught us to bear arms,. but to pray and turn the other cheek.

Sure, we trust Him to provide, but we do our part. We don't just sit and expect Him to do it all, do we?
And we trust Him to heal our bodies, but do we only pray, and not use modern medicine?
And if we expect God to provide food, we still raise gardens and go to grocery stores.

Expecting God to provide does not mean we don't do our best in each of those areas.

There is no basis in the New Testament, for throwing out the Old Testament code of morality.
In fact, the New Testament definition of sin is this:
"Sin is the transgression of the law."
And Paul said, "I could not have known sin, but by the Law."

The idea that "Thou shalt not kill" means killing in war... makes no sense at all.
After all, God gave that command while commanding the Israelites to go to war!

Yes, Jesus said to love our enemies.
But God said that in the Old Testament, too.
Jesus' audience would have understood what He said, in the context of His introduction to the Sermon on the Mount: "Until heaven and earth pass, not one jot or one tittle shall pass from the Law!"

He also said he did not come to destroy the Law.
Now, if it is wrong to go to war against evil, in order to protect the weak and defenseless, then He destroyed that part of the moral code.

Which the Psalms said was perfect, enduring forever.
And which Paul said was "holy, just, and good."
But you would say Israel's war was "unholy, unjust, and evil."

God's nature does not change.
What was once evil, will forever be evil.
And what was once righteous and holy, will forever be that way, to Him.

 

[W2L]

As for me, i hear paul teaching us that we should put on the whole Armour of God. He teaches that we dont wrestle against flesh and blood. I must follow what i believe.

 

[W2L]

I conclude that Prayer is the answer. I cannot compare dropping bombs with being good Samaritan, or getting a Job and feeding myself.

 

[381465]

Obviously several camps on the subject here...

Some feel that service men and women, police officers, politicians and those who support them cannot be Christians.

How does that not apply to every American? How could any American be a Christian?

A portion of taxes go to funding military, police, abortion supporting entities, etc.
If, via taxes, we are supporting any cause that is anti-Christian...how can any claim to be Christians and be right?

All American citizens benefit from a strong military and police. Is it hypocritical to live in freedom in a country that went to war and used weapons to create itself and call yourself Christian and determine who else is not?

I remember a book I would read to my children, I think it was "The Little Red Hen". A hen was making bread and was looking for help from the other farm animals. None would contribute to making the bread, but all lined up to share in it when it was done. They did not dare contribute to the end result, but chose to benefit from the effort of another.

How deep is our conviction to what we interpret is right, wrong, Christian or evil?