1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Preemptive Nuclear War vs. Christianity

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by Rufus_1611, Jun 25, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think we should attack a nation that hasn't done anything. That was not the topic of conversation. You asked if a preemptive strike was compatible with a just war. I said yes because a "just war" has legitimate cause. Striking a nation who hasn't done anything is, as I see it, not a legitimate cause.
     
  2. James_Newman

    James_Newman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    We're discussing killing the man before he buys the gun.
     
  3. James_Newman

    James_Newman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thats kinda the definition of preemptive.
    From dictionary.com
    2.taken as a measure against something possible, anticipated, or feared; preventive; deterrent: a preemptive tactic against a ruthless business rival.
     
  4. Rufus_1611

    Rufus_1611 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    I desire consistency. Nuclear weapons do not kill people, nations who use nuclear weapons do. If we're going to preemptively attack nations that are threats to us, because they might have a nuclear weapon. Then we might oughta be taking out China, Russia, Pakistan, India etc. who have nuclear weapons, plural. Then we can have one big nuclear holocaust...woo hoo.

    You've added a gun that I did not include in the hypothetical. Iran doesn't have a gun pointed at the USA, they are threatening to manufacture one.

    What is it that you are saying here? I desire that people not abort babies and I desire that countries not nuke people and somehow that is an inconsistent pro-life position?
     
    #24 Rufus_1611, Jun 25, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 25, 2007
  5. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It would if any of the candidates had done so, but they haven't.
     
  6. Rufus_1611

    Rufus_1611 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    For clarity purposes, you are saying no candidate would consider a preemptive nuclear strike on Iran?
     
  7. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You stated it as a fact. If you had stated it as a belief, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

    So I take it this is your official retraction of the lie posted in the OP and you are stating it is just your opinion that 9 out of 10 of the candidates "are in favor of launching a preemptive nuclear attack on the sovereign nation of Iran." ?

    Even though none of them has said so.
     
  8. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I clearly said what I meant. Any spin you put on it is your own.
     
  9. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    “We” are not. But that's not really the point.


    In the context of war, “preemptive” usually means “before they strike you.” It does not mean “Before they do anything.” I think you are confusing yourself here.

    There is certainly something to be said for taking out those nations nuclear capacity before they can use it.
    But the point still stands. Even now, the police are authorized to prevent someone from buying a gun if they think it will be used to harm others.
    I am saying that some are prolife when it comes to American babies, but not the lives of Iraqis that were being murdered by Saddam Hussein. Somehow, those lives were not worth fighting for. That is an inconsistent prolife position.
     
  10. Rufus_1611

    Rufus_1611 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    I see the problem now...here's what you missed...

    "It would seem that 9 out of 10 Republican candidates for president..."​
     
  11. James_Newman

    James_Newman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is much to be said for taking out nations that try to have weapons, I just don't think it matches anything said in the bible. Thats the supposition this thread started with. If you think the bible somehow endorses this preemptive use of military force and/or nuclear weapons, where did you get this idea? You are a pastor, aren't you? Do you have any scripture to go with that viewpoint?
     
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is a long pattern of OT teaching of preemptive war, and a complete absence of biblical prohibition of it. I am not sure what else we need. It is hard to go to the Bible and a get prohibition of a nation going to war preemptively to protect lives and people for legitimate causes. In fact, it is past hard; it is impossible.

    Take for instance, Ron Paul's use of "Blessed are the peacemakers." That is a command given to individuals as individuals. It is not give to nations pursuing just action against legitimate threats.

    This abuse of the Bible in the name of Christianity has to stop.
     
  13. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    No sir. that is untrue. This thread began with a lie your leader told, here it is again:

    "Some of the strongest supporters of the war declare that we are a Christian nation, yet use their religious beliefs to justify the war. They claim it is our Christian duty to remake the Middle East and attack the Muslim infidels. Evidently I have been reading from a different Bible. I remember something about “Blessed are the peacemakers.”-Ron Paul

    This again is not true of anyone I know in office. What it is is an intentional mischaracterization born out of a lack of intellectual integrity for the purpose of demonizing those with whom he disagrees with and to create a false sense of victimization.

    Since the op of this thread is a lie and quotes continue to be given out of context it has no credibility.
     
  14. James_Newman

    James_Newman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is a nation not composed of individuals? I understand that a nation is not an individual, but the rulers of a nation are just as answerable to scripture as we the people. If it is a Christian virtue to preemptively strike a nation, there ought to be a better answer than 'well the bible doesn't say we can't do it.' You mention OT teachings on preemptive war, what are they?
     
  15. James_Newman

    James_Newman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Duly noted, thanks for your input.
     
  16. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But it doesn't "seem" so at all. Except in your opinion.
     
  17. Rufus_1611

    Rufus_1611 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fine...can we move on now?
     
  18. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    Why is Iran a threat to the USofA?
     
  19. Rufus_1611

    Rufus_1611 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's not.

    .........
     
  20. Rufus_1611

    Rufus_1611 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    What I suspect is confusing you is the use of a dictionary when it is so much easier to make up your own definitions.

    Every gun ever made has the potential of harming others. Are you one of those pro-gun control liberal types? If you are, your argument fits.

    That would be the Janet Reno child protection policy. Save the children by killing the children eh?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...