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!

The "Unjust War" Claims Debunked

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by Bible-boy, Oct 21, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The American Baptists and the WBA are all liberal and it is not surprising nor is it impressive that they exaggerated the efforts to handle Saddam by making fallacious claims of a "rush" to war.
     
  2. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    Agreed.:thumbs:




    Proportionality (point 5) is the biblical principle derived from Christ's teaching on neighbor love. We must defend our helpless neighbor against powerful aggressors while at the same time neighbor love also compels us to use only what force is necessary to stop the aggressor. We cannot set out to utterly destroy the aggressor because he is after all also our neighbor.

    Saul and the nation of Israel were ordered specifically by God not to leave anyone or any animal alive as a judgment of God upon those people for their wickedness and rejection of God. Likewise, it was to protect Israel from falling into their worship of false idols. In warfare today we are acting on the principle of neighbor love not on or as instruments of God's judgment. So I think the points you have raised here regarding Saul and his actions do not apply to Just War criteria.


    The exit strategy has always been to leave victorious. What you mean is that you want to see the leadership give you a timeline of when the US troops will be pulled out. Such a public announcment would only serve to aid the enemy. All they would have to do is sit back and wait until our announced pull out date. Then the country would explode in violence because we did not remove the hidden insurgency and leave an Iraqi government in place with police and defense forces capable of defending its own national security. Just because specific pull out dates and criteria have not been made public does not mean that "no one had an exit strategy." It just means that the US and Iraqi leadership are not foolish enough to give the general public and the enemy at large information that would hurt the cause and aid the enimy.

    With respect to the President's statement to the crew of the aircraft carrier (and its task force) he was dead on correct. Their mission was accomplished and they are headed back to their home port, end of story. If you watch his entire speach (and not focus on a two word sound bite) it is clear that he was not trying to say that the war was finished.

    Wrong. We did follow points 5 & 6. However, you are failing to acknowledge the presence and persistance of a determined insurgent terrorist enemy that is trying to take over Iraq before the ideals of democracy can be established.
     
    #42 Bible-boy, Oct 25, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 25, 2008
  3. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    Sorry, I edited my earlier reply, but you had already responded with a quote of it in this post. So I'll add what I said there here.

    First, you are falling into the formal fallacy of Appeal to Emotion: Argument Ad Populum, or literally "to the people." You claim that their stated positions are the "real position of the Christian church in America." It may be true that they said these things. However, who is to say that they are absolutely correct in their statements?

    To continue that thought, making such appeals "is the device of every propagandist and demagogue" (Copi & Cohen, Introduction to Logic, 10th ed., 1994, pg. 169). Furthermore, you are equivocating my position by trying to make it appear that because I and the SBC leaders hold a differing view that we are somehow claiming a monopoly on truth, the "true gospel," and are questioning the salvation of other denominations. No one has said such a things. I (we) have only pointed out where I (we) see error in their thinking, logic, reasoning, and/or hermeneutics and interpretation of Scripture.

    When you resort to such fallicious methods of argument your entire line of argumentation is called into question.

    Besides you have already acknowledged that when we speak of Just War you and I are talking about different things (while using the same terms) because your ultimate source of authority on the subject is your personal experience and feelings and I appeal to the Scriptures as the ultimate source of authority. As such we will just continue to argue past one another and never come to any conclusion or agreement on the subjsct.
     
    #43 Bible-boy, Oct 25, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 25, 2008
  4. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    Poncho,

    When you open your argument by painting me as some raving Nazi, mischaracterize my intentions and motives, and dump all this Bush hating CT stuff at my doorstep you reveal that there can be no rational discussion with you. I'll not be responding further to your posts (if any) in this thread.
     
  5. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, I agree with your statement in that we are not talking about "hermeneutics and interpretation of Scripture" in general. We're only talking about the judgment of the major American Christian denominations concerning whether or not the Iraq war was just. As I said in my earlier posts, I believe that this judgment must be made by individuals not President's of conventions or Theological Seminaries. You seemed to think this view showed that I was overriding Biblical study in deference to my own judgment by saying this. Actually, the Bible has had a major impact on this decision of mine which has been developed over a period of 40 years. However, I posted the positions of the major denominations to show that I wasn't alone in this view.
     
  6. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    So why did you attempt to use their statements regarding the War in Iraq, that disagree with mine and those of a SBC leader and a SBC Seminary professor, to make it appear that we are claiming to have a monopoly on the "true gospel" and doubting other's salvation? It was an underhanded debate tactic.

    I say that because your ultimate conclusion regarding what is Just War, according to your own words is based upon your personal experience, how you feel about a particular war, over and above what the full counsel of the Bible has to say about war period. I am arguing that we must submit our personal experiences and feelings solely to the authority of God's Word; rather than, attempting to force God's Word to submit to our personal experience and feelings regarding any subject.


    You may not be alone in you views. However, the simple majority holding the same view does not mean that the view being held is correct. That is why such an appeal to the authority of the majority is a Formal Fallacy and invalidates the entire line of argumentation.
     
  7. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0

    What else can I say other than Bible study has had a major impact on my position. All I can say is you're just one of Mahler's biased students who, as typical, are unwilling to consider any position other than the politically correct Republican bias.
     
  8. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    I don't even know who this Mahler that you are talking about is and when you resort to name calling and ad hominen attacks you have lost all credibility in the debate. Like poncho I'll not be responding to you further in this thread.
     
  9. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    2
    Your points are well thought out. We just look at things different. Because of the points I made above, and because of events in my life some decades back, I very strongly believe if a war is to be waged (which I did not disagree with you about), then it is to be won swiftly and decisively, with an exit plan. That does not mean a time line. An exit strategy means not lingering without a clue for years.
     
  10. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1


    Thanks, I've spent a great deal of time researching the topic, thinking through the issues, and allowing the Scripture to have final authority over my conclusions. When my thoughts/conclusions did not line up with the clear teaching of the Word it was my thoughts/conclusions that had to change (not the other way around).

    I understand the desire to have a quick and decisive end to war. However, you must admit that the enemy also has something to say, some input per say, as to just now quick and decisive that outcome can be. Before, you can definitively make the claim that we have "lingered without a clue for years" in the War in Iraq you will first have to establish that this is indeed the case. Have mistakes been made in Iraq since the initial ground war concluded and the Saddam regime fell? Yes. Have our military leaders been totally clueless? I don't thinks so.
     
    #50 Bible-boy, Oct 25, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 25, 2008
  11. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr.
     
  12. JustChristian

    JustChristian New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0

    It turns out that ALL major Christian denominations other than the SBC opposed this unjust war. I guess they're all "liberal."
     
  13. sag38

    sag38 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,395
    Likes Received:
    2
    Can you be more specific about who these "major Christians denominations are?
     
  14. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It certainly doesn't make them right. And they are most likely all liberal.
     
  15. saturneptune

    saturneptune New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yep, all but yours. No doubt you are in the only true denomination, even though ours is not a true denomination, since we have autonomous churches. Speaking of that, you are probably at the one true and faithful church in the world.

    You never did answer the previous two questions. What did you do to serve this country, and what is your concept of how the founding fathers established this nation?
     
  16. poncho

    poncho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Likes Received:
    128
    You want a "rational discussion"? :laugh: Then try discussing something based in reality instead of neocon scaremongering fantasies and Machiavellian misinformation.

    When you open your argument with the "Goering factor" and try to paint anyone who disagrees with you and the great leader as "unpatriotic pacifists who are putting the country in greater danger" then you should expect to be reminded of who's words and propaganda you are using.

    I see you don't like it much though. Too bad. Truth hurts sometimes and your reaction is fully expected and understandable. Your only defense is to run away from it and try to paint me as a liberal a pacifist or a kook on the way to your secure little hiding place. Just as Mr. Goering himself would do. Good job soldier.

    I knew you were all for using long established debate techniques but I didn't think you were talking about Goering and Goebbel's debate techniques. My mistake I guess.

    If you ever decide to start a thread that actually deals with reality instead of Pentagon propaganda and corporate misinformation let me know I'll be around. In the mean time read some of Brzezinski's books you might learn something you can use in an actual debate based on reality. :smilewinkgrin:

    BTW, I believe in giving credit where it's due so,...you did do a great job "debunking" another strawman. Give yourself a slap on the back!

    :applause:

    HAIL VICTORY! (over truth)
     
    #56 poncho, Oct 26, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 26, 2008
  17. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    Their quotes and denominational affiliations are listed in posts 36 and 40 made by BaptistBeliever on page 4 of this thread.
     
    #57 Bible-boy, Oct 26, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 26, 2008
  18. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    For the record, I have never had a class with Al Mohler as the professor and I have never attended Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in KY (or by distance education classes). Likewise, I don't think that any professors that I have sat under were former students of Dr. Mohler either...
     
  19. Analgesic

    Analgesic New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh boy... A topic right up my alley and I'm not even going to touch this one, other than to say that:

    1. Bible-boy's initial definition of the Jus ad Bellum theory is accurate.
    2. The theory itself is certainly debatable.
    3. Even granting it as a framework for discussion, however, I find the idea that the Iraq war met the criteria ridiculous.
     
  20. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thanks for your acknowledgmnet in point 1.
    You are certainly entitled to your opinion(s) in points 2 and 3.
    Regarding point 3 why is it ridiculous within the framework of Jus ad Bellum?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...