Eight Years of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act

I don't believe I ever said that you said the great commission. I am relatively sure you didn't.

You love to argue by using hyperbole.

He didn't advocate warfare against Rome because he was the one who would tell Paul to obey the laws of Rome (Romans 13). Which is the same reason he didn't advocate terror tactics against Rome.

No one has ever said that Jesus wanted people to hate their enemies. But he never commanded pacifism. He practiced the Biblical use of violence when he fashioned a whip and drove the money changers out of the temple.

Paul was clear about the power of the state to bear the sword. This is not just a reference to capitol punishment but also the state's ability to make war.

Jesus would not have been against war since He was the one who commanded the nation of Israel to wage war against the pagans in the Palestine. He certainly would not have been against war since at the end of time he will wage war against the enemies of God.

 

People, individuals, make up society, so he was instructing society how it should behave. Are you saying that if the majority of individuals think something is right, then it is all right to do that thing they agree to?

Remember Revelation is all metaphor and symbols, not to be taken literally. It was written in a code that Christians at that time would understand easily. It is not so easy for us.

If he shows us how to live then we should make our decisions to do or not do something in accordance to that which he desires.

 

Remember Revelation is all metaphor and symbols, not to be taken literally. It was written in a code that Christians at that time would understand easily. It is not so easy for us.

So, all of Revelation is metaphor and symbols? And, I guess you have the exclusive interpretation to these metaphos and symbols? If all of Revelation is metaphor and symbols then I guess we could say the same for the rest of the Bible. Jesus's didn't really die on the cross and rise again on the third day. That's just symbolic. And, the government being given the sword to maintain order; well that's just a metaphor. Now, I can twist the Bible to make it say whatever I want it too.

 

I do not know the meanings of the metaphors and symbols of Revelation, and no one really does. There are many interpretations and theories and many of them make sense. But no one really knows for sure.

Your comment on the rest of the bible is very sophomoric and you should know better than to make such an illogical leap of logic.

Where does Christ say the government is given the sword to maintain order?

 

First of all, you'll notice I said that was an image of Christ. However, it is a very clear image. It is the image of a warrior King going forth to battle His enemies. It is unmistakable. It isn't the image of a pacifist weakling trying to negotiate peace with His enemies. It is the image of a warrior destroying His enemies. It goes against your little notion of who Jesus is.

People always try to put Jesus in a box. Some want to make Him a liberal, some a conservative. Some want to make Him in favor or war, some against it. The fact is, you cannot throw the Son of God into your little box and use Him as support of your ideology. He is the Son in whom the Father is well pleased, so hear ye Him. He never said one single word telling a governmental body to either engage in war or to be totally neutral and never engage in war. He didn't tell a governmental body to tax its citizens or to not tax them. In the latter case the only instruction He gave was to the individual (what a shocker) and the instruction was to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God that which is God's. People in His day continually tried to put Him into some sort of box, just like men today. A crowd whom He had just fed wanted to make Him king, whether He consented or not. What was His response? He went into a mountain apart. He left. People tried to accuse Him of this, get Him to agree to that. We should simply take the Son of God for what He is and mold our lives to His example rather than trying to twist Him and His words to fit our agenda.

 

So if Christ doesn't say it and Paul does, they are not to be given equal weight? Are you saying that the Words of Christ are more inspired and without error than the words of Paul?

 

Even Paul did not equate all his words to Jesus. He said plainly at time that this is me speaking and not the Lord.

If there was a topic that both Paul and Jesus spoke on and there seemed to be a problem between the two quotes I would always side with Jesus. My faith will always rest in Jesus.

 

Thank you. You have now cleared up for me the problem of understanding where you are coming from. I tremble at the fact that you are working in a seminary that is teaching young believers not to trust all the Word of God.

There is no contradiction except in the minds of those who want to create them.

 

Oh, CTB trusts God's word...as long as it lines up with his pre-conceptions.

Sad, isn't it?

I get tickled at how in this thread CTB is critical of dependence on government...but then in any & every political thread he types...it's all about "government is the answer."

 

I trust the word of God completely. However, I do not trust every interpretation, especially those who try to make Christ a militarist, or who try to say that Christ did not mean that we are to be peace makers in this world. That is a perversion of his message.

I am completely open to changing my mind when God shows me that I am wrong in a particular area. I am not open to changing my beliefs just because they do not fit your world view. I have changed as years have gone by and I have discovered where I was in error. My faith in following him wherever he leads is now stronger than ever. If a door opens and I firmly that he opened the door I will walk through it.

As I have ask before. Show me where Christ taught that we should go to war against others.

Answer why he did not teach his disciples to rebel against the Romans?

Why did he not preach war against Rome?

Why did Christ say, "Turn the other cheek," instead of "Hit him harder than he hit you?"

Why did Jesus say, "Love your enemies" instead of "hate your enemies?'

Far too many who call themselves Christian refuse to follow Christ's hard teachings in this area.

It is not the Bible that is the problem. Rather it is those who refuse to accept Christ's teachings in this area.

Do not fear those who can take your creature comforts away. Fear those who can kill you spiritually.

 

Passivism is one of the worst and ungodly teachings to hit Christianity. This thread is a case in point of the way scripture is twisted. They would sell us out to any third rate petty dictator that came along in the name of Jesus. Thank God the vast majority of Christians don't fall for thier bleeding heart agenda.

 

You seem to only see two options. Either Christ is a militarist or a pacifist. The truth is, Christ is neither. He never advocated war, nor condemned it. He stayed out of that issue because He did not come to instruct governmental bodies. He wasn't concerned with that. He was concerned with instructing and providing an example for individuals.

Christ never told a government to turn the other cheek. He told His disciples to do this. He never told government to love their enemies. He told His disciples to do this.

The world hates Jesus Christ. They will not follow His teachings. He didn't come to instruct them. He came to instruct His people on an individual basis. He is talking to you and I and He is telling us how to conduct ourselves.

I find it funny that the same people that argue for this vision of Jesus as the pacifist telling the government to turn the other cheek and love our enemies also like to use passages like Romans 13 to argue that we shouldn't be critical of our rulers and such like things. Romans 13 says that our rulers are set up by God to "execute wrath upon him that doeth evil" and is a "terror to the evil" and that they "beareth not the sword in vain." Apparently God didn't set up or intend government to be a bunch of pacifists.

People who use Jesus to either argue for war or against war are all wrong. They are misusing the Son of God and His personal teachings. They need to stop immediately.

 

I don't think CTB is a pacifist. Maybe he could clarify. My position is that there is such a thing as a just war, but it is a rare thing. Therefore, I am not a pacifist. I don't believe Scripture requires pacifism, and I don't see it as a very realistic option.

 

>Even Paul did not equate all his words to Jesus. He said plainly at time that this is me speaking and not the Lord.

Those statements of paul can be ignored? <G>

 

You are right. I am not a total pacifist. For instance I believe WW II was a just war. I am not so sure about Korea and Vietnam. Iraq was/is a totally unjust war, IMHO. As you said, just wars are very few and far between.

When I was young I was much more of a hawk. But as time has passed I have gradually moved in my thinking, primarily because the Bible and God's Holy Spirit slowly showed me the error of my earlier thinking.

Also, as time has passed I have become much more radical in my belief in Jesus' teachings and in following him. This is not understood by many and has brought about much criticism ... especially on this board. But that is all right. I do believe there are some who pervert Jesus' teachings, but do not realize they are doing so. I do not and will not accept those interpretations that I believe are in error. I expect most here on the board feel the same way about their beliefs.

But, and it is a big but, all of us must always be open to new teachings from the Holy Spirit.

 

I like how he challenges us to find where Jesus advocated any war, and then he tells us WWII was just.

This has been a great biblical discussion. Topics like this really seperate the wheat from the chaff.....

 

I'm very sorry Crabby that the rest of us haven't attained to the spiritual level that you have reached. Can anyone say "elitist?"

 

We are all on a spiritual journey SAG. And, as on a journey, there are new discoveries to be made, new insights to become aware of ... and these discoveries may well mean we have to give up what we once believed were truths.

 

Precisely. CTB basically condemns all soldiers, then in the next post justifies their existence.


Crabby: Pick a view, and stick with it, fer crying out loud!

 

Being as Crabby's getting pummelled on this issue, I forecase about a 90% chance of an immenent CTB departure from this thread.