»
Discussion
»
Philosophy 101
»
God and War
| Philosophy 101 |
|
God and War |
|
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Does God agree with people going to war? |
||
| © Copyright 2006 Essorant - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Maybe on Mars.  |
||
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Does God agree with people going to war? I think any satisfying answer would be more complex than the answer your question allows, as a simple "yes" or "no". But that's okay. Some questions have to be expressed in such simple terms, just to open the dialogue. If you're asking if there is an ethical / moral problem involved with the whole concept and methodology of war, and whether that problem is expressed Biblically (from God's perspective) ... I would answer "yes" on both counts. And we'll take it from there. This is actually a subject that I've given much thought to. Karen, It took me a few minutes to catch your humor there (the reference to a Roman deity). Slow, me. But I have to give it to you ... that's genuinely funny.  Stephen. |
||
|
JesusChristPose Senior Member
since 2005-06-21
Posts 777Pittsburgh, Pa |
No. Jesus taught us to love our enemies and pray for those who abuse us. Yahweh stated that thou shall not kill. It amazes me that christians believe it is okay to go to war. Why not just call on God to provide protection? Where is the faith? "Melvin, the best thing you got going for you is your willingness to humiliate yourself." |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
JCP: quote: Then why do angry skeptics always point out that God ordered the Israelites to war (at certain times) in the Old Testament? "Thou shalt not kill" seemed to be a command against citizens taking vengeance upon another ... not the prohibition of war, or of capital punishment. The evidence? Both war and capital punishment were a part of the Israelite government endorsed and given by God. I'm not saying that I disagree with your view of the New Testament (concerning what Jesus taught) ... But I think it's a little more complicated than saying "no", if you're going to account for all of the biblical data we have, and not just bits and pieces. I disagree with their conclusion, but there IS a reason that some skeptics can even say that the Biblical God is a warmonger, and therefore morally flawed. There is a possible synthesis of Old Testament bellicosity and the dove-like-ness of the New Testament ... or at least a good explanation of how both approaches could be approved of by God, at different times, and for different reasons. Stephen. |
||
|
JesusChristPose Senior Member
since 2005-06-21
Posts 777Pittsburgh, Pa |
"Then why do angry skeptics always point out that God ordered the Israelites to war (at certain times) in the Old Testament?" ~ You answered it yourself. God ordered it. Now, I don't know about you, but I am sure Bush has not heard God's voice, literally, ordering him to invade Iraq. ""Thou shalt not kill" seemed to be a command against citizens taking vengeance upon another ..." ~ And that is the danger of interpretation of passages when using what we think it means. "not the prohibition of war, or of capital punishment. The evidence? Both war and capital punishment were a part of the Israelite government endorsed and given by God." ~ The NT changed all that, didn't it? |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
JCP: quote: No, I never said that. As far as I know this is not a discussion about whether or not Bush heard from God, or whether or not the war in Iraq is a just war. I was only trying to expand your simple answer "no" when you were asked whether or not God was for war. You also mentioned the Old Testament 6th commandment, rather than just the New Testament. So, if you concede that God commanded war at times, I'm wondering how you reconcile that with your view that the OT prohibits war. At least by acknowledging that God commanded war in certain instances, might you agree with me that it's not such a simple answer? quote: First of all, I've never heard anyone interpret a bible passage (or any other passage) without using what they "think it means". Secondly, if context is important, then other passages of scripture can throw light upon meanings. Are you sure the Hebrew word for "kill" (as used in the 6th commandment) applied to war, as acts of government? And if you are so sure, how do you explain the inconsistency of God commanding war. Would God command the breaking of his own commandment? I think a larger danger is interpreting scripture in absolute isolation, rather than considering the field in which it has been sown. quote: Yes it did. But I think many might wonder why. I'll try to share (with my next post) as to what I have seen, after pondering that very question. BTW, I'm not really disagreeing with your views of war. I am a pacifist, to tell you the truth. I'm just trying to bring out a fuller picture than a pat "yay" or "nay". Not saying that "nay" won't be the final answer, because I'm quite sure that it is. I'm just wanting to explore the path to it, and the apologetic / theonomic aspects of the question that tend to be on people's minds when discussing God and war, especially seeing the scriptural tension surrounding the issue. Stephen. |
||
|
JesusChristPose Senior Member
since 2005-06-21
Posts 777Pittsburgh, Pa |
~ One of the points I am trying to get across here is the fact at one time, the Israelites needed to only call on God to fight their battles and God would oblige. I believe it wasn't until Kings that the Israelites asked God to let them fight their own battles. ~ In this day and age, if Christianity is the true religion, why doesn't its leaders, who are in political power, just put their faith in God to fight any battles? If they are truly God's people, He must answer and save His people. "Melvin, the best thing you got going for you is your willingness to humiliate yourself." |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
No time on this now ... I'm working long shifts this weekend. I would rather wait than to give short trite answers. Will try to get back to it next week. Stephen. [This message has been edited by Stephanos (11-18-2006 01:11 AM).] |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Thanks for sharing your thought; Mine is still in a naught |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
My personal opinion is that god does not exist and so can have no preference either way. However if I were to suspend my disbelief and imagine that god did exist I'd have to say yes, god does agree with men going to war. If he\she\it didn't he\she\it would have intervened before now to stop men going to war. Of course that opinion relies on a god that gives a hoot or two about mortal men, an indifferent or hootless god might disagree completely with mans warring ways but simply can't be bothered enough to intercede. So either god doesn't exist, in which case he\she\it doesn't have an opinion and going to war is a decision by mortals or god exists and agrees with war, which leaves the decision with mortals. Or he\she\it doesn't agree with men going to war but isn't interested enough to stop them which leaves the decision to mortals. There's at least one additional option I can think of, that god doesn't agree with war but is suspending punishment for any transgressors until a later date. This last option would probably be the most popular choice for most religious people but would require a very callous god. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Couldn't that be said about any tragedy? |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: I once rewarded my four-year-old son by telling him he could choose what we would have at our next family meal. I didn't enjoy eating Fruity Pebbles for dinner that night, and I certainly didn't approve, but neither did I complain overmuch. In the grand scheme of things, I felt that keeping my word to him was more important than a little malnutrition, which was, after all, a very temporal thing. Free will isn't callous, Grinch. Not when you consider the alternative. |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
I think the best way to describe it for me is thus: God is just and merciful. And since there is (or may be) an element of justice involved in war, there is also something about it which may be approved of God. However, since war is not expressive of mercy, it is provisional and imperfect in its purposes. That's why from God's perspective, the greatest glory is when the world's nations "... shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks ... Neither shall they learn war anymore." (Micah 4:3). And such a marvel is promised to war-weary eyes at the restoration of all things. Some may wonder why the Old Testament approach seemed so much more bellicose than the New Testament. The Jewish Patriot seems so at odds with the Christian Martyr. And the God who commanded Israel to war against the Canaanites, so very different than the Jesus who scolded Peter for taking up his sword against the Romans. I really like Ron's explanation of God's allowance of war, as a preservation of his gift of human freewill. (a freewill which God-blamers also partake of and enjoy, and would never want rescinded for themselves). But that really only explains God's passive allowance of war, rather than his active commands and endorsements of war that we sometimes see in the Old Testament. Only the concept of “Just War” as a possibility would explain God’s association with war. (This doesn’t mean that all wars are just, only that they may be) The Old Testament, we are told, is itself a partial revelation and incomplete. The book of Hebrews calls the entire Old Covenant as something which is “... obsolete and aging and soon to disappear”. And Paul in the book of Romans told us that in light of grace, the Jewish system of Law is “weak”. Revelation of God’s character is progressive, and was partial in the Old Testament. Holiness and justice were the attributes of God which were focused upon. Mercy was more peripheral until it came to the forefront in Jesus Christ. One of the reasons I believe that Justice was such a focus in the Old Testament dispensation, is that it offered us not only a revelation of a very important aspect of God’s Character (Justice), but also a self-revelation of our own sinfulness and need. A premature revelation of mercy would have only helped to bring about an unhumbled theology of humanism, rather than a true understanding of ourselves and God. So, as long as mankind is under the “law”, war is a part of God’s dispensation, and an instrument of judgement. When man is under grace, we find a whole different prescription. There is much more talk of loving one’s enemy and turning the other cheek. What happens though, when all do not come under the “grace” of the gospel? War is still active and is still a part of God’s judgement in this world. The death and destruction seen in this world due to war (and other things) are a part of being under the law in a sinful communal existence. That’s why Paul says in the book of Romans that the State is “given the sword” by God. He is talking about worldly powers and governments. However, he makes a clear distinction between the worldly government and the Church. Christians are to pray for their enemies ... to love their enemies even. Governments will do what they feel they have to do in this present age, using hellish weapons of destruction, but Christians are called to a priestly role of intercession and mercy? Why? Because they have seen a side of God, unseen under the law of the Old covenant ... overbounding mercy. But just as Mercy was peripheral in the Old Testament, Justice is not forsaken in the New. Justice is fulfilled for those under grace through the cross of Jesus Christ, and for those who remain under the law, through a continuation of the Law's judgements. To summarize: 1) God is perfect justice and mercy 2) War involves an element of justice, but lacks mercy, and is therefore imperfect and provisional. 4) The only way to receive that which is perfect, is through the gospel of grace . 5) The world apart from Christ, is still under the imperfect and provisional system of law 6) Therefore war is still an instrument of judgement in the world, under a dispensation of law. 7) God’s promise is that the imperfect will pass away, and thus war along with it. If anyone would reply that God must be cruel to utilize war as judgement, they should remember that war is enacted by humanity out of their own passions. Therefore even the judgement is passive on God’s part, only giving us what we ourselves have chosen. But the ulitmate truth, and will of God, is to banish war from Earth forever, along with the heart-condition which gave rise to such wars. Not a simple "yes or no" answer from the perspective of the Bible. We all know that complexity can be a sure sign of sophistry, but it can also be true to life by avoiding the too-simple. Stephen. |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Grinch: quote: Callous? The devastation of war, is only a result of a chosen path, whereby we wanted the ability to arbitrate "good and evil" for ourselves. I think therefore we (in general) are much more open to the charge of being callous than God is. Secondly, "punishment" is not all suspended until a future Judgement Day. The fruit of war is it's own punishment. That the (presumably) innocent suffer seems to me a very sad thing. But a God who manifested himself in Christ who suffered innocently at the hands of wicked men, hardly strikes me as unfeeling, or detached from our plight. And he was truly innocent. Our "innocence" is more circumstantial than having to do with any internal goodness of character. And though we're permitted, (even encouraged) to directly inquire as to why this omni-benevolent God would even tolerate such things, and why his deliverence does not come expediently ... those kinds of questions (prayers?) are usually best made as appeals to God's good character, not as attacks against it. Stephen. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
The responses seem to revolve around the God of the New Testament. The Old Testament God had no problem aiding wars of conquest, nor does the God of the Koran have much trouble. |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
quote: I think it's a mistake to say that the "God of the Old Testament" is not the same God of the New. Differences of policy and dispensation can be explained if some aspects of revelation are so large, as to need the span of generations to find adequate expression. Only men who understood justice as a reality, could ever tire of its rigor without rejecting its truth, and so give a proper welcome to mercy. To us God seems different at different periods, but only because we are "in Time". And though the incarnation is eternal from God's perspective, as the "lamb slain before the foundation of the world" ... we must still experience the pre and the post, the before and the after. Something like that is afoot when you see the New Testament take a significant turn on something like war. Though I can also show you hints and intimations of the change even in the Old Testament. War wasn't sitting in the divine scheme quite as comfortably as you might suppose. David was not permitted to build the Temple because he "had blood on his hands" and was "a man of war". The wars in question were divinely sanctioned, and yet there was something in the task of high worship, from which David was separated because of warfare. As to the Muslim religion ... It's not hard to understand that they would adopt a hyper-Old-Testament view of war, seeing that they reject Jesus as the supreme revelation of God. Either you soften altogether, or get hardened in the Kiln. Stephen. |
||
|
JesusChristPose Senior Member
since 2005-06-21
Posts 777Pittsburgh, Pa |
So, Stephanos, do you believe that Muslims are doomed to suffer forever in the Lake of Fire because they do not accept Jesus as God? |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
What does that have to do with this thread? We've talked about the doctrine of Hell a thousand times. But I don't see any point in steering yet another thread into that contention. Stephen. |
||
|
JesusChristPose Senior Member
since 2005-06-21
Posts 777Pittsburgh, Pa |
With a reply that includes getting "hardened in a kiln," I don't see any problem with asking the question I asked you. A simple yes or no would suffice. Unless, you would like to explain the "kiln" comment as it relates to the "rejection." "Melvin, the best thing you got going for you is your willingness to humiliate yourself." |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
quote: It was metaphor. What I meant was, that in rejecting Jesus Christ as the supreme revelation of God, while holding to Old-Testament-style monotheism, it is a natural tendency to become more war-like rather than less. Hell has nothing to do with the metaphor, other than the fact that war is a hellish thing. Stephen. |
||
|
Arnold M Member
since 2004-09-05
Posts 195 |
Hi Stephen. Why don't you point out to JCP that the correct wording is "Thou shalt not murder." "Kill" is a different Hebrew word. To me, that makes a lot of difference. Cheers, Armold |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
Arnold- I was just coming to make that point. It was God who instructed the Isrialites to go into the promised land and take it from the Philistines - so I would say justifiable war he would agree with. Iraq? Who knows. CS |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
“In this day and age, if Christianity is the true religion, why doesn't its leaders, who are in political power, just put their faith in God to fight any battles? If they are truly God's people, He must answer and save His people.” Like he does with cancer and AIDS. Where was he with the Black Plaque, (actually from then and for a couple centuries the human population was in decline because of diseases)? Were and are these not wars? Perhaps you can not speak about wars without using adjectives. If one man makes war on another whether it be with a rifle or with hands around the throat is the truly faithful to do nothing but wait for God to act? What then is the brain for? The body fights for life even in a man’s unconsciousness; is that drive indicative of a value? |
||
|
ChristianSpeaks Member
since 2006-05-18
Posts 396Iowa, USA |
Well Jesus did say that "faith without works is dead." And, concurrently, works without faith yields the same end. It would be the same if one had AIDS or cancer and just expected God to save them without taking the necessary precautions to battle the disease. Okay here in a minute we are going to get to the "if God is all powerful and all knowing, and is everywhere, why do bad things happen to good people" bit. No Christian is going to have an airtight response. The usual response is "because there is sin in the world." Something cannot be perfect if there is something imperfect intrensic in its makeup. However, the acceptance of that answer demands that one believes in an absolute. But, in this postmodern world, people have a problem with that. The question comes up "what if what you think is wrong is not wrong for me?" At this point you will get into a verbal shoving match where one person will say that there is an universal right and wrong and another will say that you can't tell me what to do, insults will fly, mothers will be disrespected, etc. That is why people who do not have the exact same belief system, and some times those that do, cannot agree on this fully. It is the same reason why churches split, denominations crack, and Catholics are so messed up. I don't think that you will ever get a clear answer to this question. CS |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. Why lift the hand to bring the spoon to your mouth, if God is on the hook for the human condition? Face it, JC was wrong on that score. Anyone who has watched sparrows know the birds toil not to starve. . |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
John, Jesus didn't fail to mention the obvious fact that sparrows "fall to the ground". But that isn't the point. His counsel was not for us to do nothing, but rather to seek to have faith in God as an antidote to strife and incessant worry. Even a precursory comparison of sparrows and humans reveals a notable difference. There's a reason that naturalists have tended to idealize nature, and yet doubt mankind. Though the effects of the fall are seen upon animal-nature sure enough, its most prominent mark is stamped upon Cain don't you think? Unless you want to show me a "Sparrow World War" in the annals of the little birdies? Besides that, Jesus wasn't being naive about human nature. He chose to go to the cross with full resolve, to pay for the sins of his people. That doesn't sound like someone who is romanticizing our condition at all. He could speak of vultures as well as of sparrows, and serpents as well as doves. I dunno, sounds like balance to me. Stephen. |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
I just wanted to clarify something. In light of what I posted before, it might sound as if I held a low view of humanity and was elevating animal nature to equality with us. But no, the kind of depravity I'm speaking of is itself proof of man's greatness. Corrupt Kings are far worse than dishonest slaves. If you'll excuse the cliche'; The taller they are, the harder they fall. I was just making the case that if the bibical account of humanity is true (as being at once inconceivably great and wretched), then Jesus' idealizing sparrows as a lower form of nature which exhibits some strength where we are most apt to fail, is understandable. Also one must recognize the poetry in his words. Being pedantic about it, would miss the point entirely. Stephen. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
"Sparrow World War" Ever watch 'em go after a crow? Like Spitfires on a Heinkel. V |
||
|
Interloper
since 2000-11-06
Posts 8369Deep in the heart |
Who among us pretends to know God's mind? |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
Who among us pretends that God is unable to make his mind known? Stephen. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Stephen, Which so far as we're concerned He hasn't bothered to do . . . And please do not answer with a story two thousand years old. John |
||
|
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
John, As far as we're concerned? Who is "we"? I have a story of God's grace all my own, as do many others, that is anything but 2000 years old. And yet, without that all-important story of Bethlehem and Calvary, none of us have any hope. If one had once spied their lover, and yet in the present could only seem to grasp a letter, I'll bet that letter would be of great importance. It's the mystery of love, John. And since neither of us can impose our own perspective upon the other ... where else can we go in discussion? I can at least point out that your mind seems to be preoccupied with the prospect of eternal love, else why keep bringing up God? If you're simply telling us that we're all going to die and face oblivion, and that religion is just a denial, then why? Why would that truth be so important in a universe in which truth could only be a specter. It seems obvious to me you're not really comfortable with that. But the Biblical view is the one which makes sense of why you're not. Why would fish know they're wet? Why would dark-dwellers dream of light, or wish for eyes? Stephen. [This message has been edited by Stephanos (12-28-2006 12:25 AM).] |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Stephen, Anyone raised Roman Catholic can’t escape such questions. As to the prospect of oblivion, I no longer personally fear it, because having lived a full life, I’ve accepted it; I only ask there be no long period of pain and bad company before to make me afraid. Yet I wish there was something or Someone for those I’ve known and still care for who weren’t as fortunate as I to live as well. It’s that hope that motivates the search. John |
||
|
Kitherion Member
since 2006-08-01
Posts 181Johannesburg |
Stephanos... How can you imply that God allows/wants people to commit war? How can you imply such a misdirection? NOt only does tthe bible say that " they will beat their swords into plowing shears and their swords into pruning shears " but hey... sorry I don't know how to quote properly but still. I think that I have made my point. I agree though, with the idea that the Isrealites went to war becuase God said so, and that he is perfect in justice... but to justify it, you forget the fact that the Isrealites were surrounded by the "Heathen" nations of the time. So, to use that logic, as you were, and bring it for today are you then saying that George Bush was doing God's will when destroying the Iraqi soliders. Or when the American's destroyed much of Japan, many of whom were so called christians of the time? |
||
|
Angel4aKing Senior Member
since 2006-09-27
Posts 1372USA |
there has always been wars amongst the Angels yet angels have no sin..Correct? Accounts in the bible tell of messages from angels or God warning of war...and of taking up arms and defenses etc...I am no expert however on the bible. ~~~kingsangel~~~ |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
