| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Is war ever justified?; Excerpt from Hal Lindsey book | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Aug 28 2008, 01:19 PM (485 Views) | |
| kgreen20 | Aug 28 2008, 01:19 PM Post #1 |
Advanced Member
  ![]](http://209.85.122.85/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
CRISIS OF MILITARY WEAKNESS Military power is such a critical area for the United States that it needs more discussion here, even though it has been dealt with in previous chapters. I want to start by looking at warfare in light of what the Bible says. A Christian View of War In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew chapter 5), Jesus made many statements which have been jerked out of context and used to justify pacifism under any and all circumstances. Though some sincere people with earnest motives have been honestly confused by this passage, I have run into many who confuse the issue for other motives. Many of these people don’t know or believe the rest of the Bible. But they cling to a few statements which they distort to justify their cause. To understand this sermon, we must first know why Jesus preached it. The religious leaders of his day, called Pharisees, had distorted the true meaning of the Law of Moses by adding their own traditions to it. So Jesus had to show them the original meaning of the law. Thou Shalt Not Kill Remember, though, Jesus did not change the law, He restored its original meaning. To have changed the meaning would have been saying that God had made a mistake, which is impossible because of His nature. With that in mind, let’s look at the passages in dispute. Jesus said, “You have heard that the ancients were told (referring to the religious tradition), ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court’” (Matthew 5:21 NASB). Both the original Hebrew in the Old Testament and the Greek in the New Testament says, “You shall not murder.” But it is obvious that the Bible didn’t mean all killing is wrong. After all, God commanded the Hebrews to stone a murderer to death. In this part of the sermon, Jesus takes murder back to the motive and shows that even to call someone a fool, in the future kingdom of God will be considered grounds for capital punishment. So, far from saying there should be no killing under any circumstances, He was making capital punishment applicable to motives as well as action. An Eye for an Eye Jesus later said, “You have heard that it was an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But I say to you, do not resist him who is evil; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:38-39 NASB). In this case, Jesus was citing the false application of a commandment of God by the religious leaders. “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” comes from Exodus 21:22-25. That passage gave instructions to civil court judges on how to judge equitably—how to make the punishment fit the crime. The religious leaders took this order and made it a principle of inter-personal relationships; they used it to justify revenge. They also neatly circumvented the most important of God’s commandments—“You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Instruction to Soldiers When John the Baptist preached repentance, some soldiers asked him how they should live to remain consistent with their new faith. John said, “Do not take money from anyone by force, or accuse anyone falsely, and be content with your wages” (Luke 3:14 NASB). At that time, Roman soldiers were known for supplementing their incomes by robbing people and taking bribes. John condemns that—not using force in the line of duty. He did not say, “You must quit being soldiers in order to come into the faith.” Instructions About Legitimate Authority God said through Paul the Apostle: “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God…for rulers are not a cause for fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil” (Romans 13:1-4, NASB). There are several important principles here. First, God ordained governments to keep order and peace and protect the property and person of their citizens. Second, God ordained the officer with the sword (or a gun today) to enforce the law—to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. From this belief comes a larger application. If a nation (or an individual) seeks to take away the life, liberty, and property of another, then that government or person is to be punished. If a police officer chasing a criminal were to “turn the other cheek,” he would have his head blown off. If a nation turned the other cheek for a Hitler or a Brezhnev, it would be conquered. And freedom for all men would die. In a world of fallen men, peace, security, and freedom can only be maintained by power strong enough to discourage those bent upon conquest. The stronger a nation’s military, the less likely it is that it will ever have to fight. That’s why I believe that the Bible supports building a powerful military force. And the Bible is telling the U.S. to become strong again. A weak military will encourage the Soviet Union to start an all-out war. (pp. 146-49, Chapter 10: “What About the U.S.?” The 1980s: Countdown to Armageddon, by Hal Lindsey ©1980) Edited by kgreen20, Aug 28 2008, 01:39 PM.
|
 |
 
|
| jewel4Christ | Aug 28 2008, 02:47 PM Post #2 |
|
jewel4Christ
|
Hi Kathy, I disagree with this article. I usually don't like to get into debates about this, as I suggested in the chat. I will just suffice it to say this....
This is not what I believe. The law has been changed. The bible itself tells us that. Hebrews 7:11-28 [ Verse 12 in Original: Greek ] [ Read Chapter | Discuss these Verses ] 11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. The old covenant law was not sufficient. It only worked wrath, God added love and mercy, and, wrote those things on our hearts. If you live by them, love teaches you to not harm or hurt your neighbor. These are the basic teachings of Jesus...and, the difference between the old and new covenants. A lifechange. A life led by love, love your enemies as yourself...and, many are led astray to the ways of the past...through false teachings, in mho. I will not debate this, but bear it out, that I also must give an answer for my own conscience. peace jewel. Edited by jewel4Christ, Aug 28 2008, 02:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
| kgreen20 | Aug 28 2008, 02:49 PM Post #3 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Go back and look at what Paul posted in Romans, though, Jewel4Christ. That was in the New Covenant, not the old one. I don't believe that the New Testament preaches pacificism. Apparently, you do, so we will have to agree to disagree. As I said to Annon in the chat box below, as long as we live in a fallen world, "peace at any price" is not an option. God is not a peacenik, nor has He called us to be peaceniks. We have to be prepared to wage war when the necessity arises, if freedom and security are to be maintained in this world. That is where I stand on this issue. That is why I support McCain's stand on this issue, and not Obama's. Edited by kgreen20, Aug 28 2008, 02:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
| jewel4Christ | Aug 28 2008, 02:53 PM Post #4 |
|
jewel4Christ
|
There is nothing in romans that contradicts what is written in hebrews. Yes, we will have to agree to disagree.....I can only hear HIS VOICE, which tells me to not return evil with more evil, and to love my enemies as myself. I am not apt to go to war with myself, lol. So, agreeing to disagree with respect to you. jewel |
|
|
|
| jewel4Christ | Aug 28 2008, 02:55 PM Post #5 |
|
jewel4Christ
|
That's fine, Kathy...I respect your point of view. I just do not agree with it. Jesus said, "if His kingdom was of this world, His servants would fight for it"..(this world.) I see it that I am not of this world. I will not fight for it. It was destined to fall from the beginning. That's all. Have a good day... ;) jewel |
|
|
|
| kgreen20 | Aug 28 2008, 02:56 PM Post #6 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Yes. We will have to. All I can say is, I hope you are never put in a position where you have to defend your family against someone bent on harming them, or you will be forced to choose between letting your family die or be brutally assaulted, and betraying your principles about pacifism. But that is all I will say on that subject. So, on that note, I guess we're both clear on where we stand, then. Edited by kgreen20, Aug 28 2008, 03:02 PM.
|
|
|
|
| jewel4Christ | Aug 28 2008, 03:09 PM Post #7 |
|
jewel4Christ
|
Jesus is the keeper of my family... If He cannot keep them, it is most likely that it is not His will for them to be kept...that is how I look at it, just to be clear. He has intervened too many times for me to doubt Him. It is not up to me to decide who of my family is used of God in such a way. The bible says, "he whom tries to save his life will lose it", anyway. We have different foundations on what this life is about, I think. I don't intend to try to save mine, nor my families. That lies in God's hands...I am sure there are others whom would have your perspective, and that is fine...we all should do as our own conscience dictates, I think. jewel |
|
|
|
| MichaelInHisService | Aug 28 2008, 03:25 PM Post #8 |
Advanced Member
|
kgreen - i would put my life and the lives of my family in the hands of God versus any protection in the flesh.. when Peter tried to protect Jesus - Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. —Matthew 26:52 In Messiah, Michael |
|
Isaiah 26:9 At night my soul longs for You, Indeed, my spirit within me seeks You diligently; For when the earth experiences Your judgments The inhabitants of the world learn righteousness. | |
|
|
| kgreen20 | Aug 28 2008, 03:38 PM Post #9 |
|
Advanced Member
|
So you all believe, then, that Jesus is against self-defense or the defense of your loved ones. You believe that no action should be taken against evildoers. You believe that Jesus is a pacifist. You forget that Jesus was facing the cross when He said that. He could not allow Peter to defend Him, for He had to face mankind's punishment through what the Jewish leaders and the Roman soldiers were going to do to Him. However, He also told them to get a sword, before they went out to the Garden of Gethsemane. We know He didn't tell them to get a sword to serve as a house decoration, don't we? The purpose of a sword is to fight. To defend one's self. We will never agree on this issue, so perhaps now is a good time to end the debate. I believe that the Bible does call us to fight when the cause is just. I don't believe He calls us to stand by and do nothing when innocent people are being harmed. Just standing there praying won't do the trick; God will not send a lightning bolt or an angel with a flaming sword to stop that person who's bent on harming others. More likely, He will act through people, but people have to be willing to act. Edited by kgreen20, Aug 28 2008, 03:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
| kgreen20 | Aug 28 2008, 03:52 PM Post #10 |
|
Advanced Member
|
I just want to add one more thing, and then we'll call it quits. According to what you say, no use of force or ending of life is ever justified. Therefore, we should disband our whole armed forces. We should also disband our police and sheriff's departments, and tell them to go home. We should simply pray when criminals break into homes, rob stores and banks, kidnap, rape, and murder people, or create riots, etc., and hope that God will come to our rescue. Likewise, we should also just pray when an invading army comes to our shores to conquer our nation, perhaps to force us all to convert to Islam on pain of death. I can tell you right now what would happen if America and its citizens actually adopted such a policy: in short order, we would be forced to adopt a fortress mentality. As I stated above, God is not going to stop the criminals for us, whether they're local or international, by sending them lightning bolts or avenging angels. He expects us to act to stop them, and if we refuse to, the evildoers will win. They will create a reign of terror that few of us would survive. We would never be able to go anywhere, lest a criminal come after us. We would be forced to keep rifles and shotguns in our homes, to ward off the criminals bent on entering our homes and doing us harm. We would have to meet every person at our door with a gun aimed at his forehead, to make sure he's there on a peaceful errand instead of intending to harm us. And the same goes for evil countries bent on our harm. An Islamic country conquering the U.S. would force us to decide between Islam and death or slavery. Our women would be raped, mutilated, oppressed, you name it. All because we were not willing to use force to stop a country bent on destroying ours. You think that if we just lay down our arms, God will act on our behalf and make it unnecessary to fight. Sometimes, in Old Testament times, He did do that, but at other times, He required the Israelite armies to fight to the death. He will probably call on us to be willing and prepared to do the same. Jesus' death on the cross does not do away with the need to protect ourselves, our families, and our nation; as long as we live in a fallen world, we have to be prepared to do those things. Turning the other cheek does not mean we simply become doormats and allow evil to destroy us. Edited by kgreen20, Aug 28 2008, 03:56 PM.
|
|
|
|
| MichaelInHisService | Aug 28 2008, 04:03 PM Post #11 |
|
Advanced Member
|
kgreen - Maybe Hal Lindsey is working for the defense contractors now as he is pushing for more weapons. I agree that the President has an obligation to defend this nation, IF ATTACKED, and he has even taken an oath to that affect. Do you have children yourself? If you do, are you so anxious to see them die in a war like Iraq? When we personally take up arms then the words of Jesus about living/dying by the sword ring true and will come to pass. In Messiah, Michael |
|
Isaiah 26:9 At night my soul longs for You, Indeed, my spirit within me seeks You diligently; For when the earth experiences Your judgments The inhabitants of the world learn righteousness. | |
|
|
|
| jewel4Christ | Aug 28 2008, 04:05 PM Post #12 |
|
jewel4Christ
|
Hi Kathy, God uses fleshly nations to fight other fleshly nations. Just like He used the fleshly nation of Israel in the old covenant. His nation, however that is not of this world, is led of love. There is a change in the law, for us...as I view it. I have expressed that. All this mixing the ways of the world with the ways of the new spiritual law, is very much what is causing the confusion on this, in mho. I personally do not believe that any nation is grander or more righteouss than another. The bible tells me that they are all wicked. One is not more evil than another, as God counts sin. When you break one rule, He counts it that you are just as guilty as if you broke everyone, so that no man can boast. I see alot of boasting on the news, men saying, things like..."the evil empire", etc..needs to be defeated, all the while, they themselves are the servants of sin, for they do not even understand the very basics of the gospel message wherein God is not a respector of persons, He does not exchange evil for more evil..etc. I have explained my point of view. WE are to come out of the world, and the world is very much IN the church, in mho. I don't want any part of that mindset. I hope you can see where I am coming from. I am not going back to that mindset. End of my posts in this thread. jewel |
|
|
|
| autoimmune | Aug 28 2008, 04:14 PM Post #13 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Hal Lindsey is just repeating what Augustine first formulated in the forth century after the church became entwined with Roman political power--an argument for Christian self-country defense in the face of evil: the Just War Theory. Power must be defended through war to remain in power. This is not what Jesus taught and, in fact, contradicts the Way He told us to walk if we choose the Kingdom of God over earthly power and kingdoms. As for the Sermon on the Mount, I have a different take on it. What was Jesus trying to tell us? Was He giving us more rules and regulations about marriage and economic wealth and war and prayer? I believe Jesus was explaining to us the difference between belief in static rules (the letter of the law) and God’s living, breathing commands written on our souls (the spirit of the law). And, like any living thing, the Law matures, or more correctly, our understanding of it does. The law itself does not change, but our understanding of it should. . The Sermon is broken down into several sections. In each Jesus explains how the Jewish people first understood the law about that particular social issue (swearing, anger, adultery, prayer etc.) in light of what they had heard from God to that point. Then He explains how His coming gives a more mature understanding of that law--the complete FULLNESS of it, in fact. He made a point of emphasizing that not a jot or tittle of the Law changes, only our human understanding of it does as we glimpse the Spirit behind that law. This is natural and as it should be. People mature and grow. Society matures, evolves, changes . . . as do the laws that govern those societies. Christians always have to refer back to the unchanging Law that under girds each social issue, but we should expect that our spiritual understanding of that Law will mature as we mature in Christ. For example, the law of retribution, “lex talionis.” Jesus explains that the underlying law *isn’t* about retribution at all. The underlying law which cannot or will never change is the Law of JUSTICE. Before Moses tribes took revenge indiscriminately. God, through Moses, taught the people that they could exact only as much harm in retribution as was done to them. An eye for an eye, limb for a limb . . . this much, but no more than was done to you Jesus moved it one step ahead so that they might clearly see the true Law that guided them—God’s Justice, which is not about revenge or self-defense, but about His Mercy. If they wished to more closely adhere to God’s Law of Justice, then they should offer no resistance to injury (pray for their persecutors and love their enemies) . . . because God’s justice is tempered with His mercy, and so should our need for retribution and self-protection be tempered with that same mercy. He was telling His followers that they have the natural human right to self-defense (the letter of the Law), but, if they chose to follow Him they would have to give up that natural right in favor of God's Justice, which is executed through Mercy, not sacrifice, to become His Love. We do as humans have the right to self-defense and defense of the country/kingdom we are part of. Jesus is asking us if we will voluntarily give it up to FULFILL the Law. As for telling the disciples to take swords with them. They had two and He said that was "sufficient." For what? To keep the Romans and Temple guards from arresting Him in a fight? Hardly likely or possible. Or to show--as Peter did when he cut of the servant's ear--that "those who live by the sword will die by the sword" . . . and that He was about to show them by example how Justice executed with Mercy becomes Love. Like Jewel, I won't argue with others here, but I do believe we are called to do as Jesus did--stand to the Truth in Love. There is a big difference between dying for those we love and killing for those we love. Mary Ellen |
|
|
|
| autoimmune | Aug 28 2008, 05:00 PM Post #14 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Depends on how you define the word. Standing to Truth in Love is not the "do-nothing" pacifism you understand it to be. It is an active defense of Truth that comes at a very high cost--the willingness to lay down our lives FOR that truth, while refusing to harm others because we trust God's mercy, for both us and the ones harming us. The motive is LOVE for the other doing wrong, the desire to change Him by our own love of God. This is the "pacifism" that Jesus lived and modeled for His followers. The goal is not peace, but conversion of the "enemy" to the Truth of God's Love for us all, who is Jesus. One of the early church Fathers, Tertullian, said that "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of Christianity." The early Christians' lack of fear when they faced death, when all they had to do was sprinkle incense in allegiance to Caesar and the world's system, seemed ridiculous to them. But the force of truth behind those deaths acted as a catalyst for millions to come to belief themselves. It's understandable why the 4th century church opted for peace with Rome after 3 centuries of the blood of Christians being spilled, but just war theory did not exist until then. There was no need for it. Christians understood the true hope and promise of Resurrection; death was simply the doorway to it. Not an idea they gave lip service to, but a belief they willingly laid their lives down to prove as true. If we truly believe we will rise in Christ, death is not a fearful thing to be avoided at all cost, as it is for those in and of the world. I find the correlations between belief in just war theory, pre-trib rapture, and fear-based/milk-fed Christianity interesting. I pray that all members of the Body come to understand the meatier truths in the Gospel through the eyes of Christ's love for us all, but I also realize this is not the Father's plan. Unless they ask for the grace to humbly be shown what they cannot as yet see, their eyes will remain closed to anything that does not "pacify" their human fears. In the end, fear-based Christians can (and many will) overcome, but only by finally facing their own fears. My 2 cents on the topic and, having expressed my opinion, I too will bow out of the conversation as well. This is something each Christian has to take to God in humble prayer. Mary Ellen [/quote] |
|
|
|
| Ruth | Aug 28 2008, 05:50 PM Post #15 |
|
Advanced Member
|
after reading the above discussion, I pray that if I am ever in harms way of a criminal attack, kgreen20 will be there to help protect me and not Jewwlforchrist, Micheal or autiommune! |
|
|
|
| kgreen20 | Aug 28 2008, 05:56 PM Post #16 |
|
Advanced Member
|
LOL! Thanks, but you'd better pray that someone who's been trained is there to protect you. I've never been trained as a fighter or in handling a gun. If anything, I'd need someone willing and able to protect me! Kathy G. Edited by kgreen20, Aug 28 2008, 06:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Ruth | Aug 28 2008, 06:16 PM Post #17 |
|
Advanced Member
|
a couple of years ago I was vacationing in Florida with my in laws. I was watching Oprah with my mother-in-law (she is not a believer), the show was all about self defense, I watched enough to know a few strategies for my own defense. I told my mother-in-law I was bored and went for a bike ride. While on my ride a young man pulled his car in front of me as to make me stop riding. He asked me for directions to distract me, then pulled me from my bike and started dragging me to his. I was screaming and fighting but could not get away. The defense strategies were buzzy through my mind but he had my hands pinned. He pushed me in his car and released my hands, at that instant a vision appeared before my eyes of my 3 boys, and I looked at him and said "you will not take me from my boys!", and then proceeded to claw his eyes out. So was I wrong to protect myself, should I have asked him over for pie, and discussed with him why he wanted to do evil to me? I know the vision was of God, I know my watching the Oprah show was not a coincidence, but it was God preparing me for what was to come. |
|
|
|
| domino | Aug 28 2008, 06:29 PM Post #18 |
Advanced Member
|
Wow, Ruth, thank goodness you got away! I would have been so scared it probably would have rendered me unable to even think. But like you I feel times like these could be just around the corner. And we all need to prepare ourselves for our responses. I've been reading this thread with much interest, because I have also been struggling with this same question - to defend or not defend, and if so how much? I am not sure yet what the Lord is saying to me about this, I need to pray a lot about it. One thing I am beginning to see though, mercy is of utmost importance in our walk, and the least amount of harm we can do to another, in defense of ourselves or our families, is the merciful option. But then I have not yet been in your position Ruth, and who knows what I might do in the heat of the moment! So please let us all pray about this, it is really an important subject. Thank you everyone for your input. Susan |
| Domino | |
|
|
|
| kgreen20 | Aug 28 2008, 06:46 PM Post #19 |
|
Advanced Member
|
It is indeed something to pray about, Susan, and I hope you'll never be faced with that situation. Ruth, I'm so thankful you were able to escape your would-be assailant. Just standing there praying would not have done the trick; by the time you were done praying, he would have been done kidnapping, raping, and possibly murdering you, in that order. Reasoning with him definitely would not have worked; a man like that is beyond reasoning with. The same principle applies to our nation. If a man like Putin or Hussein attacks us or another nation, we don't just stand there and pray, nor do we try to reason with them; they are beyond reasoning with. We pray, yes, but we also get ready to fight. Edited by kgreen20, Aug 28 2008, 06:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
| day late | Aug 29 2008, 10:06 AM Post #20 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Kathy, we have our points of disagreement. But on this one, we are most certainly on the same page. I've known people that are pacifists. I've heard all of their arguements. But they never seem to be able to get around this; 1Ti 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. Surely providing for your family includes defending them, with deadly force, if necessary. As you have pointed out, Jesus said He didn't come to change the law. Gods' law provides for the right of self defense. When in comes to the matter of Melchisedec, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he show up before the law was ever given to Moses? If so, then changes to the law before Mount Sinai do not apply. On the matter of going to war, I ask which is more God honoring? Do you defend your family, city,and/or nation? Or do you allow those who serve satan to have their way with your loved ones? I know which one I chose. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Bible Discussions · Next Topic » |
5:28 PM Jan 8