Having issues with some of this...
Mar. 5th, 2007 07:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
readingredheadSo I was on www.bible.com because I was looking through Song of Solomon (since the Walcott poem mentions it, and we're supposed to look up those allusions). But I saw this link that I had to click: "What does the Bible say about...war?" http://www.bible.com/bibleanswers_result.php?id=219
"God hates war; however, it is necessary to maintain order in the earth and overcome those who would like to destroy good."
To me this seems slightly oxymoronic. Not quite sure exactly why...but it does.
"Some Christians are having difficulty with the actions of our government in the area of war as the heart of Christianity is to love our enemies, not destroy them. How do we reconcile this as Christians? We must understand that the Bible deals with the role of government differently than that of an individual Christian. Throughout the Bible, the main role of governments was to protect its people from threatening invaders and to maintain law and order within its borders. This was done by maintaining a military force. Those who would argue against our country's military position, must also ask what our nation would be like without policemen and prisons."
I think it's a question more people should ask -- what would a warless society be like? (I'll give you a hint -- it's not a bad picture.) And so what if government has a different role than the individual Christian -- the government is composed of individuals; it's no higher than we are. It's just as sinful. Why does it get the ability to decide?
"We must understand that God instituted civil authorities to maintain order in the earth. God uses them to restrain evil and they should be obeyed for this purpose."
I have a problem with this. Maybe I'm a teen and just like disobeying things, but such blind loyalty to a group of people that's really just a group of people? Questionable.
Romans 13:1-3 (RSV):
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.
Okay, if you interpret this literally, then you have to obey Hitler and Stalin. Also regarding Stalin -- if this verse is true, in the most literal of senses, then Stalin's purges were only a "terror" to bad conduct...despite the fact that he wiped out millions of innocent people.
"You may wonder if God said "do not kill," why He would then decree that governments could send men to war to kill other men. The reason is that the Hebrew meaning of the word translated as "kill" actually means "murder" or "to slay someone in a violent manner unjustly." So, in the Ten Commandments God is saying, "Thou shalt not murder." Unjust premeditated killing with the wrong motives of hatred, vengeance, greed, jealousy, etc. is murder. Killing in self defense to protect oneself is not murder nor is executing condemned killers."
Wait a minute -- so it's murder if it's premeditated, undertaken for vengeance. Um, how else can you explain capital punishment??? Also, if abortion is wrong because it is the taking of a life...then how is capital punishment not also wrong, because it's the taking of a life?
"Women are also by nature more emotional than men and should not be exposed to the rigors of military life. Certainly women can serve in supportive roles in the military (i.e., nurses, office personnel, technicians, managers, overseers, etc.) However, combat should be reserved for males only, as I can find no place in scripture that women ever served as combat soldiers."
Funny. I also find no place in scripture that said women could own property, go to school, gain high-paying jobs, or eat ice cream -- and yet, we still do!
"As to the extermination of foes, Israel had to remember that punitive war was in the interests of religion and morality and therefore her soldiers were to act, not as murderers, but as God-appointed executioners of divine judgment upon gross idolatry and iniquity. War was to be viewed as divine surgery for the cutting off of evil wickedness that would defile the rest of the world."
Can someone tell me the difference between murderers and executioners? Also, since when is it moral to be punitive? Isn't God a God of mercy? (And if he isn't, why are people still following him?)
"God will bless any nation who has a majority of Bible believing Christians as its citizens. God blessed Great Britain for many years because she was a Christian nation who sent missionaries all over the world. However, when her sins were multiplied and she became a proud nation, she lost the standing she once enjoyed as a great world power."
For some reason, I just find this hilarious. Sorry, Churchill, and all the other great British leaders: your nation's success had nothing to do with your free will.
To me this seems slightly oxymoronic. Not quite sure exactly why...but it does.
"Some Christians are having difficulty with the actions of our government in the area of war as the heart of Christianity is to love our enemies, not destroy them. How do we reconcile this as Christians? We must understand that the Bible deals with the role of government differently than that of an individual Christian. Throughout the Bible, the main role of governments was to protect its people from threatening invaders and to maintain law and order within its borders. This was done by maintaining a military force. Those who would argue against our country's military position, must also ask what our nation would be like without policemen and prisons."
I think it's a question more people should ask -- what would a warless society be like? (I'll give you a hint -- it's not a bad picture.) And so what if government has a different role than the individual Christian -- the government is composed of individuals; it's no higher than we are. It's just as sinful. Why does it get the ability to decide?
"We must understand that God instituted civil authorities to maintain order in the earth. God uses them to restrain evil and they should be obeyed for this purpose."
I have a problem with this. Maybe I'm a teen and just like disobeying things, but such blind loyalty to a group of people that's really just a group of people? Questionable.
Romans 13:1-3 (RSV):
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.
Okay, if you interpret this literally, then you have to obey Hitler and Stalin. Also regarding Stalin -- if this verse is true, in the most literal of senses, then Stalin's purges were only a "terror" to bad conduct...despite the fact that he wiped out millions of innocent people.
"You may wonder if God said "do not kill," why He would then decree that governments could send men to war to kill other men. The reason is that the Hebrew meaning of the word translated as "kill" actually means "murder" or "to slay someone in a violent manner unjustly." So, in the Ten Commandments God is saying, "Thou shalt not murder." Unjust premeditated killing with the wrong motives of hatred, vengeance, greed, jealousy, etc. is murder. Killing in self defense to protect oneself is not murder nor is executing condemned killers."
Wait a minute -- so it's murder if it's premeditated, undertaken for vengeance. Um, how else can you explain capital punishment??? Also, if abortion is wrong because it is the taking of a life...then how is capital punishment not also wrong, because it's the taking of a life?
"Women are also by nature more emotional than men and should not be exposed to the rigors of military life. Certainly women can serve in supportive roles in the military (i.e., nurses, office personnel, technicians, managers, overseers, etc.) However, combat should be reserved for males only, as I can find no place in scripture that women ever served as combat soldiers."
Funny. I also find no place in scripture that said women could own property, go to school, gain high-paying jobs, or eat ice cream -- and yet, we still do!
"As to the extermination of foes, Israel had to remember that punitive war was in the interests of religion and morality and therefore her soldiers were to act, not as murderers, but as God-appointed executioners of divine judgment upon gross idolatry and iniquity. War was to be viewed as divine surgery for the cutting off of evil wickedness that would defile the rest of the world."
Can someone tell me the difference between murderers and executioners? Also, since when is it moral to be punitive? Isn't God a God of mercy? (And if he isn't, why are people still following him?)
"God will bless any nation who has a majority of Bible believing Christians as its citizens. God blessed Great Britain for many years because she was a Christian nation who sent missionaries all over the world. However, when her sins were multiplied and she became a proud nation, she lost the standing she once enjoyed as a great world power."
For some reason, I just find this hilarious. Sorry, Churchill, and all the other great British leaders: your nation's success had nothing to do with your free will.
So there's that rant. I realize that (except for the one Bible verse) all this stuff is just one person's interpretation of scripture, and I'm obviously not trying to ridicule Christianity -- seems pretty pointless for a Christian to do. I just think these interpretations are a little...off. Missing the point. And for some reason I needed to write about it. You've been warned, don't read if you don't want to.
I have definitely just wasted time that I really can't afford to waste, especially if I'm just going to go and waste more time watching X-Files, which I really want to do. So probably I will, since tonight's the last night this week when I don't have ridiculous amounts of homework.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-06 06:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-07 01:04 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-06 10:00 pm (UTC)Basically.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-07 01:05 am (UTC)Granted, the same site was talking about how yoga is devil-worship because it derives from eastern religion...go figure. "If you'd like to be saved from yoga, say a prayer to Jesus in your heart and He'll help you!" Am I the only person who can't say that with a straight face?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-07 01:32 am (UTC)Assuming he means Dharmic religion when he says Eastern religion in a lumpy Western-headed way, he is again wrong about devil worship, since many followers of Dharmic religions are non-theists. That is, they don't believe in deities or demons. The goal of Dharmic religions is to decrease the suffering of all living things while/through separating themselves from the games and illusions of the world. Hm...
The Hindus certainly are not more inclined to hurt anyone because they believe in gods. In fact, Zoroastrianism (the first so-called Abrahamic religion and a theological predecessor to Judaism) takes some of its teachings from the Vedas, a proto-Dharmic religion. Judeo-Christian thought take many concepts from Zorastrianism, including monotheism, angels, the concept of good and evil forces (as in Christianity, the Zoroastrian figure for evil is not a god in the traditional sense though he possesses supernatural powers), and the Zoroastrian god of good, Ahura Mazda, HAS A SINGLE SON.
Lastly, religions in the traditional organised sense derive from two sources: (1) a spiritual pouring-through of the collective unconscious (which is the same no matter what you believe or not) and (2) a neat way for governments to control their citizens. Second reason is why I disengage from organised religion, but whatever floats your boat is cool (this is something America is founded on, you guys).
Why am I ranting at you when I mean to send this to the guy who made some crazy comments?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-03-07 03:26 am (UTC)