ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Is Killing In A War Wrong

Abortion is much in the news today with the emphasis that it is killing a human being and that is wrong. At the same time our country is killing many human beings in Iraq and the church supports this. What is the difference? How can Christians sanction the one and condemn the other?

Join Our Free Singles and Take The Abortion Bible Quiz
 ---homer on 10/14/05
     Helpful Blog Vote (15)

Post a New Blog



scott - I believe that you have persuaded me that the early church did not approve of warfare as they taught that would involve them too much into the world system.

However, history does record that there were Christian soldiers early in the first 2 centuries. Whether they enlisted being Christians or became converts is unknown.
---Lee1538 on 8/28/08


Lee1538

Re 'acknowledgment of Caesar as god.' You're arguing, not with me, but history.

"We who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons, our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage." Justin Martyr, c. 200 C.E., Dialogue With Trypho, Vol. I, p. 254

"I banish from us the military life." Tertullian, 200 C.E., The Chaplet,The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1957, Vol. III, pp. 99, 100.

"The Christians...shrank from public office and military service." Persecution of the Christians in Gaul,177, Guizot, The Great Events by Famous Historians, R.Johnson, 1905, Vol. III, p. 246
---scott on 8/25/08


Lee1538,

With respect, I understand how challenging it is for Christians today to take an honest look at the evolution of the "Christian" of involvement in physical warfare.

It has changed in a monumental way since the time of Christ and 1st and 2nd century disciples.

You can disregard the information as meaningless if you wish. At least now you know.

"Those who take the sword will perish by the sword." Mt 26:52

"The weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses." 2 Cor 10:4
---scott on 8/25/08


Scott: That's the point. A good father is on both sides. The details of their petty squabbles are not important. You love them both unconditionally. So it is with God.
---jerry6593 on 8/25/08


Scott - *While 'Looking back into history' you avoid the period of time critical to this discussion- 1st century, original, primitive Christianity:

And you totally avoid that fact that the early church was a persecuted church and anyone joining the Roman military had to acknowledge Caesar as a god.

In any case, to what extend can you base your belief today solely what some believed in the early church?

No place in scripture is there anything that forbids being a soldier, in fact some soldiers became Christians.
---Lee1538 on 8/25/08




Jerry6593,
Yes I am a father. However, while there have some pretty good arguments between my children, none of them have been left maimed, crippled or dead as a result.

If that were the case, even though I love them all, it would be easy for me to decide "which side" I would be on.

But maybe that's just me.
---scott on 8/25/08


Lee1538,
While 'Looking back into history' you avoid the period of time critical to this discussion- 1st century, original, primitive Christianity:

"Until the time of Marcus Aurelius [121-180C.E.], no Christian became a soldier, and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service." The Rise of Christianity, 1947

"The behavior of the Christians was very different from that of the Romans...Since Christ had preached peace, they refused to become soldiers." Our World Through the Ages, Platt and Drummond, 1961

"First Christians thought it was wrong to fight, and would not serve in the army even when the Empire needed soldiers." New Worlds Foundations, W.M. West, 1929, p. 131
---scott on 8/25/08


Scott: Are you a father? When your children fight, which side are you on?
---jerry6593 on 8/23/08


Looking back into history has made me believe that God is also the god of history and often permits war as a means of fulfilling His will.

For instance, did God sanction the US Revolutionary War, or were the fathers of our country disobedient to His will? Our country has done the most of all others countries in spreading the gospel message.

The current wars in Islamic countries may very well create democracies in which the gospel message will be able to spread among its people. One writer in Lamplighter magazine depicts the increase in Christianity in some Islamic countries. And that certainly is the will of God.

In short, the pacificist can often be an odds with the will of God.
---Lee1538 on 8/23/08


Scott..In answer to your question, it depends whose cause is just...not what denomination the participants are. It is possible neither side is right...then God would not be on either side.

Of course, there are countless causes not worth waging war, and innumerable conflicts that can be settled by other means. But, occasionally, for self defense or extreme oppression of the powerless, war becomes the only option.
---Donna66 on 8/23/08




Donna66,
The question to you is:

When Baptists, Methodists or Catholics, etc. on one side of the planet are fighting against Baptists, Methodists, Catholics etc. on the other side of the planet...

...which side is God on?
---scott on 8/22/08


Scott -- I'm not the one who said that Christs early followers used swords or went to war. That was somebody else.

My contention is merely that war waged for a righteous cause is not wrong and not condemned by God.

"All those who take the sword will perish by the sword."- is pretty much an observable fact.

As for abortion, it is murder for personal convenience.
War is convenient for no one, but it may "set captives free" from evil and oppressive regimes.
---Donna66 on 8/21/08


Scott- Your "obvious" connection is not obvious to me. It is clear, however, that God no longer requires ANYONE to be ceremonially pure, in the Old Testament sense, for ANY purpose.

IMHO, saying that God no longer directs warfare is selling God short.

Luk 4:18 "The Spirit of the LORD [is] upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to [the] poor, He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to [ captives And recovery of sight to [the] blind, [To] set at liberty those who are oppressed,

I believe God is still in control and His purposes remain. History abounds with examples where "setting at liberty those who are oppressed" required warfare, sacrifice and bloodshed.
---Donna66 on 8/21/08


Donna66 Re "None, except Jews living before the destruction of the last temple. To my knowledge Christians are never bound by Jewish ceremonial law."

Exactly, so the obvious connection to God's will and purpose and the OT battles that He was intrinsically involved in no longer exist.

When Baptists, Methodists or Catholics, etc. on one side of the planet are fighting against Baptists, Methodists, Catholics etc. on the other side of the planet...


...which side is God on?
---scott on 8/21/08


Donna66,
While there are a number of reasons swords were customarily carried in the 1st century, to say that Christ's disciples used them either defensively or offensively, particularly in a military capacity, is unfounded in scripture as well as in history. Site one verse that suggests otherwise.

If Christ did encourage such a thing, how do you explain his words"All those who take the sword will perish by the sword."- Matthew 26:36, 47-56, Luke 22:36-38, 49-51.

While it may be of no interest to you, the so called "Church Fathers" that lived shortly after the apostles, some during, offer valuable insight into the practices of early Christianity, before it became in some respects altered by secularization.
---scott on 8/21/08


scott asks- where in scripture did Christ encourage the opposite...the use of weaponry, wholesale or otherwise?

Luk 22:36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take [it], and likewise [his] scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

I say, Find me a scripture where Christ said being a soldier was not an honerable profession.

Tetullian? He wrote in the 2nd or 3rd century. I don't explain him nor consult him for guidance.

In which battle did soldiers, on either side of the battle, follow the strict ceremonial requirements?

None, except Jews living before the destruction of the last temple. To my knowledge Christians are never bound by Jewish ceremonial law.
---Donna66 on 8/20/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


homer-WHAT church supports this? You gotta remember, the church of Jesus Christ is different from your modern day pop-evangelist, watered down word church that you THINK may be the church.

The Church that Jesus is coming back for is a remmant that has purified themselves and have gone through the process of sanctification where holiness and God's word RULES and REIGNS in their lives. It's a church without spot or wrinkle (Ephesians says so).

So when you say "the church supports this" you must be talking about a different church than that of Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Savior and God Our Father and His Holy Spirit.
---donna8365 on 8/20/08


Scott, the rebuke from me a little strong? It was pointed out to me once, that the "Sheep" as Is ra el was called were not typically of the attack variety. I apologize, in remembrance of the sheepier sheep. Red neck? Thank you very much. You might look up the meaning of Adam sometime.
Scripture:
Here are some we don't think of often, but the man after GOD's own heart did.
Psalm 5:4-6Thou hast also given me the necks of mine enemies, that I might destroy them that hate me.
Psalm 18:39-41 Do not I hate them, O LORD, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?
Psalm 139:20-22...
---Trav on 8/20/08


Donna 66

God had strict instructions when the Israelites engaged in battle. The soldiers were:

"Sanctified" (Hosea 3:5, Jer 51:27,28) and "Ceremonially Clean." (deut 29:9-14), etc.

The Israelite's victory was dependent on strict obedience to God's laws because it was really HIS battle.
1 sam 17:47"Jehovah saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is Jehovah's" ASV

QUESTION: Which of the wars AFTER Christ did God personally oversee and direct? And in which battle did soldiers, on either side of the battle, follow the strict ceremonial requirements that were needed for God's backing?
---scott on 8/20/08


Donna,
If as you say "Jesus' rebuke of Peter who lopped off the guard's ear was no wholesale condemnation of weaponry."

Then where in scripture did Christ encourage the opposite...the use of weaponry, wholesale or otherwise?

Note Tertullian:

Discussing "whether warfare is proper for Christians," he sited the unlawfulness of a military life, concluding, "I banish from us the military life."-The Chaplet, c. 200 C.E. The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1957, Vol. III, pp. 99, 100.

How do you explain that?
---scott on 8/20/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


Lee1538,
There is no scriptural indication that converted soldiers continued as soldiers.

"A careful review...shows that until the time of Marcus Aurelius [121-180C.E.], no Christian became a soldier, and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service." The Rise of Christianity, Barnes, 1947, p. 333

"The behavior of the Christians was very different from that of the Romans...Since Christ had preached peace, they refused to become soldiers." Our World Through the Ages, by Platt and Drummond, 1961, p. 125

"First Christians thought it was wrong to fight, and would not serve in the army even when the Empire needed soldiers." New Worlds Foundations, W.M. West, 1929, p. 131
---scott on 8/20/08


scott - *1st and 2nd century christians were not soldiers.

Some soldiers even in Caesar's household became converts.

Even those in charge of guarding Paul became converts according to legend.

So I rather doubt that your comment that early christians were not soldiers is true.
---Lee1538 on 8/19/08


Jerry 6593, Jesus' rebuke of Peter who lopped off the guard's ear was no wholesale condemnation of weaponry. This rebuke was for a very specific reason. Peter was, although unknowingly, trying to interfere with God's plan to save mankind through the death of Jesus on the cross.

What God speaks to an individual is NOT always meant to be obeyed by every person for the rest of history. He also commanded Peter to walk on the water, but I've yet to see a cult of "water walkers" (...however, I'm sure there are plenty of cults I've never heard of)
---Donna66 on 8/19/08


Trav,

Ouch.

Apparently it's the gun they'll have to pry from your cold, dead fingers and not God's word. Nice use of the bible to make your compelling point.

Don't they let Rednecks have bibles?
---scott on 8/19/08


Send a Free Good Morning Ecard


Jerry...it's not clear to me that Paul was not referring to physical weapons.

Hbr 11:32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and [of] Barak, and [of] Samson, and [of] Jephthae, [of] David also, and Samuel, and [of] the prophets:
Hbr 11:33 Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions,
Hbr 11:34 Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens.

It's a fact that those who take up the sword most often die by the sword. And spiritual warfare (II Cor 10:4) requires spiritual, not physical weapons.
---Donna66 on 8/19/08


Lee, if it is any consolation...I'm creeped out by girlie boys, that would keep using the word creepy and would not or could not protect anything even theirselves. Knowing your in some neighborhood makes me proud to be Christian American. We obviously make this a safer place for those people to be able to voice their opinions. You know some history and scripture. Which you wield pretty well also.
Thanks, see ya at a gun show sometime. I'd rather go with a sword in my hand than waving a little finger saying no...no..no...thats too creepy for me.
---Trav on 8/19/08


Jerry6593

While there are a number of reasons swords were customarily carried in the 1st century, to say that Christ's disciples used them either defensively or offensively, particularly in a military capacity, is unfounded in scripture as well as in history.

Site one verse where a Christian, particularly with the vicious persecution they encountered, resorted to the use of a sword or any weapon for self preservation.

When Peter used his sword to defend Jesus, he was strongly rebuked for doing so. And Jesus undid the damage through miraculous healing.

"All those who take the sword will perish by the sword."- Matthew 26:36, 47-56, Luke 22:36-38, 49-51.
---scott on 8/17/08


It is my belief that in this fallen world that we live in, if a government does not stand up to evil, they will be overcome by it. The same was taught in the Old Test.
---gayla on 8/17/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Affiliate Program


scott:

Luk 22:36 Then said he [Jesus] unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Carrying a weapon for self-defense was commanded by Jesus!
---jerry6593 on 8/16/08


How about the "purse" and the "scrip"? Luke 22:35: "And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. 36: Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." We must consider the whole of the command. One thing of "men of arms" under a Lord is that the Lord calls for the "fire" as well as for the "cease fire". "Lord, shall we smite with the sword?" they asked but were not authorized. It remains, swords are not the tools of farming, sheperding or carpentry either...
---Nana on 8/16/08


Donna,
Paul clearly was not talking about weapons or warfare in the 11th chapter of Hebrews. He's referring to examples of faith.

That's a remarkable misapplication of scripture.

Paul also said "The weapons of our warfare are NOT OF THE FLESH, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses." 2 Cor 10:4 NSB

1st and 2nd century christians were not soldiers.
---scott on 8/15/08


The difference is this.
The commandments were directed toward individuals. Thou shall honor thy father and mother... thou shall not commit adultery... thou shall not kill (the word means murder).
And Jesus when he speaks of loving your neighbor, addresses his disciples, not a nation.

Jesus never repremanded a soldier for his profession. He says in
Mat 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth:... but a sword." He knew He would be the cause strife between people.
In Hbrews, Paul describes heros of the faith.. "Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions.."

There is no Biblical reason not to fight for a righteous cause.
---Donna66 on 8/15/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Abortion Facts


Just be fair. Protestants in England, view on Slavery were the driving force behind passing laws that prohibited slavery.---Lee1538

Not the Protestants in England, but in the Southern States.

The French, Spanish and RCC parts of America were must better. Treatment was better towards the Slaves. Slaves had a higher chance to buy their freedom.
Free Black people were kidnapped from Florida into the other Southern States.

Have you heard "I'll sell you down the river."? These were Masters in Louisiana by the French and RCC Midnorth threating to sell them to the Protestant Slave Owners in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and others.
This statement was saying life is better here as a Slave than with the Protestants.
---Nicole on 8/14/08


Nicole - *Among the organizations praising the Holy Father at the time of his death were the World Jewish Congress, the Anti-Defamation League, the Synagogue Council of America, the Rabbinical Council of America, the American Jewish Congress,... and the National Council of Jewish Women.

And did they rescind their criticisms of that pope? Probably not, but attended in order to influence the next pope to be more charitable toward them and even enlist his support in establishing the Jewish state.

While I may not have been there, I have attended the funerals of many that did not agree with my religious convictions but have not permitted my religious beliefs to preclude any act of charity toward those that were still living.
---Lee1538 on 8/14/08


Lee1538,
You failed to address why Jesus' disciples were instructed NOT to take up the sword.

"The weapons of our warfare are NOT OF THE FLESH, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses." 2 Cor 10:4 NSB

"The first Christians thought it was wrong to fight, and would not serve in the army even when the Empire needed soldiers. (The New Worlds Foundations in the Old, by R.and W.M. West, 1929, p. 131)

"The Christians...shrank from public office and military service." (Persecution of the Christians in Gaul, A.D. 177, Guizot, 1905, Vol. III, p. 246)

A Christian with a "small arsenal of guns"...creepier & creepier. My only hope is that you don't live in my neighborhood.
---scott on 8/14/08


Just be fair. Protestants in England, view on Slavery were the driving force behind passing laws that prohibited slavery. Roman Catholicism on the other hand, were never social reformers but always sought to maintain the status quo except where they attempted to overthrow the governments that would not serve their own agenda.
---Lee1538 on 8/14/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Acne Treatment


Apparently you have failed to notice that I NEVER suggested, that the Protestant churches faired any better during WWII.--Scott

Thank you.
Just be fair. Protestants, view on Slavery in the South was the worst than any country or denomination.

No attempts to elevate the RCC.
I only correct the false statements, different from elevating.

Have you ever seen me first make a statement about the RCC? No.

I speak after someone else makes a false statement. But, I defend with love and the truth.
You are mad because I love the RCC so much.
Why? Everyone needs to love their Church just as much. If not, leave your Church.

I will defend the Church Jesus started with the upmost pride.
---Nicole on 8/13/08


Lee1538,

Among the organizations praising the Holy Father at the time of his death were the World Jewish Congress, the Anti-Defamation League, the Synagogue Council of America, the Rabbinical Council of America, the American Jewish Congress, the New York Board of Rabbis, the American Jewish Committee, the Central Conference of American Rabbis, the National Conference of Christians and Jews, and the National Council of Jewish Women.-Catholic Answers

You were not there, they were!

So, am I to believe that one Jewish person or all the hundreds of Jewish people speaking at the funeral. He is dead. They didn't have to speak on the matter.
---Nicole on 8/13/08


scott - Re your comment: "I own instead a small arsenal of guns." Very high on the creepiness scale.

Yes, and even more creepy to you is that we lock our doors at night or when we go out. You fail to see that crime in our society is increasing and even homes are being invaded.

As Christ is lord of history He determines events such as when a war will start and between whom. In the end times He will come riding on a white horse with the armies of heaven behind Him. His will will be done.
---Lee1538 on 8/13/08


Mt 10:34 Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword.

And the sword implies war, not peace.

Jesus does not sound like one that advocates peace and as the Lord of history actually mandates war. If He did not and we recognize that then we did wrong in our rebellion against British rule in 1776 and those that signed the Declaration of Independence truly went again Christ.

And Christ is sometimes identified as a warrior in Scripture.

Re 19:11 Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war.
---Lee1538 on 8/13/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Bad Credit Loans


Nana,
With all due respect, one angry Catholic is about all I'm up for right now.
---scott on 8/13/08


Lee1538,
Jesus rejected armed resistance. True, he instructed his apostles to carry two swords to the garden of Gethsemane, the place where he would be arrested. But why? Having weapons, yet not using them, powerfully demonstrated that Jesus followers should not resort to carnal weapons. It is noteworthy that having a weapon available, Peter impetuously used it. Jesus strongly rebuked him for this with the words: "All those who take the sword will perish by the sword."- Matthew 26:36, 47-56, Luke 22:36-38, 49-51.

You'll have to explain to me how this account reflects "Jesus view of the military."

Re your comment: "I own instead a small arsenal of guns."
Very high on the creepiness scale.
---scott on 8/13/08


Nicole - Pius XII was a mere politician that went out of his way not to offend Hitler or his catholic supporters.

"In October 1941, the Assistant Chief of the U.S. delegation to the Vatican, Harold Tittman, asked the Pope to condemn the atrocities. The response came that the Holy See wanted to remain "neutral," and that condemning the atrocities would have a negative influence on Catholics in German-held lands".

- Jewish Virtual Library by Shira Schoenberg
---Lee1538 on 8/13/08


Nicole,

Apparently you have failed to notice that I NEVER suggested, that the Protestant churches faired any better during WWII.

But your attempt to elevate the RCC to some kind of moral high-ground during that time flies in the face of history.

On July 20, 1933 Cardinal Pacelli (who later became Pope PiusXII) signed a concordat in Rome between the Vatican and Nazi Germany. Von Papen signed the document as Hitlers representative.

"The Concordat was a great victory for Hitler. It gave him the first moral support he had received from the outer world, and this from the most exalted source...Vatican support had become a major factor in Hitlers push for world domination." Tibor Koeves
---scott on 8/13/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


scott,
Could you recomend any book on how the RCC was responsible for the Civil War in the US?
---Nana on 8/13/08


Because the "beginning" is where Christians practiced the faith established by Jesus Christ
(also being killed by others daily)

If not I could recommend a couple of good history books.---scott

Oh no, Scott, you don't play fair.
You got answers, but, refuse to answer.

Forget the books.
I'm still waiting my answer to my last question.

Tell me a Protestant Leader during WWII that stood up for the Jewish People!

If you can't find one person, then leave Pope Pius XII alone. He saved 1/2 million, and spoke out unlike any other Religious Leader.

People living in Glass home shouldn't throw stones.
Drop the stones.
---Nicole on 8/12/08


scott - the story of Roman soldiers being condemned to death on a frozen lake was prior to the time of Constantine. You may not know history, but Rome occupied much of Great Britain prior to the time of Christ.

If you want to know what Jesus' position was on the military view Luke 22:36

He said to them, But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.

But I would consider swords to be a little outdated so I own instead a small arsenal of guns.
---Lee1538 on 8/12/08


Nicole, Re"You kept bringing up Christians not fighting in the beginning."

Because the "beginning" is where Christians practiced the faith established by Jesus Christ before it became adulterated and influenced by the Roman state and its political motivations.

As someone continually trying to make a defense for the violence and bloodshed of the RCC, I think you are well aware of the gradual change from the purity of early Christian political and military neutrality to what you now feel obligated to defend. If not I could recommend a couple of good history books.
---scott on 8/11/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


Scott, you kept bringing up Christians not fighting in the beginning.
They were hiding and dying because everyone was killing them!

Christians today still do not get into civil administrations.
At least not the RCC.

Donna is right. Muslims have been fighting since Muhammed's grandson and his family were fighting against the other Muslims who was taking over. They killed the grandson and his whole family over 1400 years ago. They have plays reinacting this every year.
Iran is sending men into Irag causing the civil war.

Why aren't you mad at the Iranians?
90% of the killings in Irag is from Muslims killing Muslims.

Suicide Bombers are Muslims not Christians.
---Nicole on 8/11/08


Lee1538,

1. Re Soldiers in Britain:
My point is about the original, primitive, 1st and 2nd century Christianity. Great Britain was essentially formed in 1706-07. Many so called "Christians" were deeply involved in warfare long before that time. Crusades 1095, etc. That violent justification for "Christian" involvement in war would have been unacceptable and in fact shocking to 1st century Christians.

2. You site Lk. 3:14 as an example that "Christ Himself never condemned one for being a soldier and what do soldiers do but kill an enemy if necessary?"

That's actually John the Baptist speaking, and he's speaking to Jewish soldiers, not Christians.
---scott on 8/11/08


Scott - did early christian refuse to fight in wars?

There is that story of Roman soldiers in Britian that refused to denounce their faith in Christ and as a result were left out on a frozen lake to freeze to death.

Christ Himself never condemned one for being a soldier and what do soldiers do but kill an enemy if necessary?

Lk. 3:14 NKJV Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, "And what shall we do?" So he said to them, "Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages."

As I stated before, if soldiers cannot do their jobs, we and our children would sooner or later be reading the Koran, not the Bible.
---Lee1538 on 8/10/08


If 1st and 2nd century Christians didn't fight in wars, then participating in them today is in fact a deviation from the original pure Christian faith.

"They refused to take any active part in the civil administration or the military defence of the empire...it was impossible that the Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes."History of Christianity (New York, 1891), Edward Gibbon, pp. 162, 163.
---scott on 8/7/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Counseling


Donna - while there were internal struggles for power after the US conquered Iraq, violence is way down and the Iraq government is now composed of all national & religious groups.

Those that flew to other countries and coming back and their oil fields are pumping around 2.5 million barrels of oil per day.

Much of the infrastructure has been re-built and once the revenues from oil(most of it goes to Europe) is realized the Iraqi people will become one of the richest in the world. For that they will thank the United States.
---Lee1538 on 7/28/08


Jerry - I can only agree with you that many are not familiar with the facts regarding Iraq and simply toot for some political candidate.

As to killing of certain types of people such was even commanded of God Himself throughout the Old Testament. He never did tell anyone in Israel to sit down and negotiate with enemies.

And I can agree that abortion is a moral wrong and does cause mental health problems for women.
---Lee1538 on 7/28/08


>Before the US ignited a bloody civil war, that was not happening in Iraq<. WHAT wasn't happening?

No civil unrest? Conflicts between sects of Islam has a long history.Thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women and children were killed en masse by Saadam. Shi'ite Muslims and others were having their tongues cut out, their heads cut off, women and children raped before their loved ones...then murdered..by Sadaam and his Baathist regime.

Whether or not we should have become involved, I can't help but believe that the Iraqi people are immeasurably better off now than they were then. They are anxious for us to leave, as they should be. They have a new representative government to take over.
---Donna on 7/28/08


Obewan you know that wasn't what I wrote. My comment was directed ONLY at the angst expresed here against the killing of terrorists while little if any comment is raised against the killing of far more, and innocent, unborn children.

What this has to do with Democrats, Republicans or belly-dancers is beyond my comprehension.

You think the US started this mess? Think again terrorism has been an integral part of Islam since its inception. It is an invading religion which converts by the sword or slaughters. Islamic terrorism was being carried out long before the US became involved. Study history!
---Warwick on 7/27/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


Lee: My heartfelt thanks to your son for his service to our country.

Obewan's comment about Iraqi civil war "that was not happening in Iraq" apparently discounts the ~300,000 Kurds and Shias killed by Hussein prior to our arrival.
---jerry6593 on 7/26/08


Obewan - was Iraq really in a civil war? If so, between whom and who won? As to the deaths of untold innocent people, I believe WW2 has that honor. What really upsets the liberals is the fact that the surge worked and American troops are now leaving Iraq - my son tells me most of his units are already gone. No matter who will be elected President in the upcoming election, our troops will be out of there shortly.

Yes, abortions are still performed in this country and no anti-abortion president will be able to deny that procedure to women as any law must pass our congress.
---Lee1538 on 7/25/08


"---There is all this angst about fighting Islamic terrorists who kill untold numbers of innocent people each year.---"

You just made my point. Before the US ignited a bloody civil war, that was not happening in Iraq.

You ignored my other point. The abortions still happen with Republicans in power. BTW two pro life democrats were just elected in two states, so we can't paint them all with the same broad brush.
---obewan on 7/25/08


Jerry made a good point. There is all this angst about fighting Islamic terrorists who kill untold numbers of innocent people each year. Terrorists of a religion which is committed to world domination. At the same time people seem happy to ignore the fact that millions of defenceless, totally innocent unborn children, are killed each year. Most die for convenience and have attacked no one.

Such unbalanced thinking.
---Warwick on 7/24/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


*Christians have voted for Bush, and we STILL have millions of free access abortions each year COMBINED with tens if not hundreds of thousands of ADDITIONAL dead in what has been shown to be an unjust and unncessary war.

You do not take into account that Bush is not a dictator, that he is governed by our Constitution and the laws made by Congress.

All any president is permitted to do is to recommend legislation but Congress has to vote on it before it can be passed into law.

He does have some executive powers but even that is limited by Congress.

It would be very interesting to determine what you consider to be a just & necessary war. What criteria do you have that would justify any war?
---Lee1538 on 7/24/08


---How can Christians sanction the one and condemn the other?---

I don't think Christians who vote democratic are 'sanctioning' abortion. That is putting words in their mouth that were never there. Christians have voted for Bush, and we STILL have millions of free access abortions each year COMBINED with tens if not hundreds of thousands of ADDITIONAL dead in what has been shown to be an unjust and unncessary war.
---obewan on 7/24/08


Is it possible for a rational mind to oppose as morally wrong the just defense of one's nation by killing its enemies in war, while at the same time finding nothing morally wrong with the deliberate killing of their own unborn children?
---jerry6593 on 7/24/08


I disagree with any form of violence which means taking from others to make ones self rich and others poor.

Having said that For the sake of God related Wars such as written in the bible.

If you could hold your hands up to us fighting with the right to be Christian then I'd agree with Wars from the western world prospective, but as it is the countries are barely existing based on christian principles but because there are still God fearing people living and yet to be born there does need to be a Godlike principle for dispelling extreme rule from Foreign beliefs such as Islam and other religions regimes.
---Carla5754 on 7/24/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


* But the cost in blood and treasure is more than we could bear, and we should question if we can or be the lone policeman to the world.

The problem is not whether we should be or not be the world's policeman, the problem is that ours as well as others make up the world's economy. And what threatens us also threatens other nations. Our guidance as to the Iraq wars was through the United Nations whose mandates Saddam ignored.

Again, the book to read as to why we invaded Iraq is 'War & Decision' by Douglas J. Feith. Basically we felt threaten by what Saddam may or could do, so decided to invade Iraq. True that some of our intel was bad.
---Lee1538 on 7/23/08


Thou shalt not kill. Exodus 20:13
It is never ok to kill another being that God has placed on this Earth for a reason.
Think about it
---Scott on 7/23/08


Lee,

Some perspective is needed here. Hussein did gas his own people. He did it with gas that was originally prepared for the Iranians and used on them. But the important thing is that the materials for making that gas were supplied by ourselves.

Hussein was a terrbile man. There are plenty of terrible men in the world. I wish that we could do something about them all. But the cost in blood and treasure is more than we could bear, and we should question if we can or be the lone policeman to the world.

WMD's was the first excuse. Hussein was a bad man, was the second. Oil, and the delusion that spreading democracy in Arabia would be like giving out ice cream to children are the real reasons.
---atheist on 7/23/08


Haha I know this is kinda late but I just found this blog page and wow. Back to the bottom of the page of blogs but alan of UK, I could not agree with you more. Those were good examples of "non existent attacks". Haha that makes me laugh how one could have such a limited mind as to say that all 20th century wars began by nonexistent attacks. I applaud you
---Scott on 7/23/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


Matthew *However, their bravery and sacrifice does not change the fact that we were mislead into this war,

We were also mislead into WW1 by the British.

There is always some negatives as well as positives in any war. One should not look only at the negatives that got us into the war.

While I agree partially that some accusations against Iraq were not entirely true - they did not possess WNDs (beyond poisonous gasses and they had a prior nuclear program), in hindsight the war was nonetheless justified in view of the fact that Saddam Hussein & company were guilty of mass atrocities and violated over 16 UN mandates.

Should we have become isolationists, get out of the UN and build fortress America?
---Lee1538 on 7/23/08


Matthew - While Al Queda was not prominent in Iraq prior to the war, they were the ones that picked the battlefield and if not Iraq, then elsewhere as radical Islam has their agenda to destroy us & our way of life.

However, as apparently the surge was successful and the Iraqis themselves did not side with them but against them, they are no longer much of a factor in Iraq.

We are and will be fighting them in Afghanistan, hopefully they will be defeated eventually.

It is best to examine both sides before deciding against US policies promoted by politicians who seek political office and will tell us anything to get elected. Read War & Decision by Douglas Feith - reasons why we got into the war.
---Lee1538 on 7/23/08


---Most Iraq oil prior to the 2 wars went to Europe...

While big SUVs are truly wasteful, the price of oil has more to do with futures market investments---

1.) May have been true before the war, but Dick Cheney has been quoted numerous times as having proposed funding the Iraq war with oil revenues.
2.) Futures markets are very tied to supply and demand. Just look at what happened when hurricane Katrina wrecked supply. Every time a terrorist threat changes supply the futures market goes crazy. SUV WASTE currently accounts for 6% of total world demand in a world where there is currently a 3% shortage. I would say that supply has affected the futures market, which has affected price but I would put the emphasis on supply.
---obewan on 7/23/08


Lee,

Please understand that I have no disrepect for you son or any of the other brave Americans fighting in Iraq. I have nothing but admiration for them.

However, their bravery and sacrifice does not change the fact that we were mislead into this war, that the terrorists we are fighting there now, came to kill our soldiers, and they weren't there before, that by killing Hussein, we unleashed a civil war, that hundreds of thousands of Christians, who were allowed to worship under Hussein, have fled the country or been murdered, that our presence has incited more hatred and created more terrorists.

We respect our soldiers, but not by altering history to justify a course that has not helped us or others.
---matthew on 7/23/08


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


obewan - *most Christians have fled Iraq, and those few who remain face intense persecution and even death...

It really depends upon whose statistics you want to believe. According to Lamplighter July-August "There were only a handful of Muslim converts to Christianity in 1979 when Saddam Hussein took control of the country. Today, there are more than 70,000 believers who were former Muslims." And most Iraqis are returning.

*1.) Our way of life is about big SUVs and a cheap Middle East oil supply.

Most Iraq oil prior to the 2 wars went to Europe, not the USA.

While big SUVs are truly wasteful, the price of oil has more to do with futures market investments than with supply & demand.
---Lee1538 on 7/23/08


---if you want freedom to live our way of life.

If he did not do their jobs, you would be reading the Koran instead of the Holy Bible.---

Lee: No disrespect intended for our Marines, but there are important things pro war people dont like to admit.

1.) Our way of life is about big SUVs and a cheap Middle East oil supply.

2.) Before the Iraq war, there were many Christians who lived with religious freedom in Iraq. Now, most Christians have fled Iraq, and those few who remain face intense persecution and even death. I dont think pre-war Iraq was pushing the Koran on anyone, and they had nothing to do with 9/11. Now, they are an Al-Qaida stronghold that hates us. We have attempted to put out a fire with gasoline.
---obewan on 7/23/08


Is killing in a war wrong?
Apparently not if you want the freedom to live our way of life.

My son operates a 50 caliber machine gun while in the vehicle and a SAW when on foot for the US Marine Corps - Fallujah, Iraq.

If he and others like him did not do their jobs, you would be reading the Koran instead of the Holy Bible.
---Lee1538 on 7/22/08


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.