Should Christians serve in the military?

[jasoncran]

My simple mind is telling me once again you are sayig the military forces that liberated the concentration camps were agents of evil.



I would think the best use of the minds God gave us would be to be ready to defend what ever needs to be defended... A strong army while hoping it is never used....

When i read what you post i think why have a police force? Why have an army?
Would you protect your home/family? If you would and if you want a police force some training is a good idea...I know we have been up and down this road before.... I dont like circle talking so i will stay away for a while..

Our jason is not an agent of evil... nor my son and grandson... dad uncles grandpa

they dont know what i have seen.some here couldnt handle WHAT God protected me from. i HAD ptsd and god told me that i had it and would take it from me.

i showed mercy to muslims where few americans would. i know that made in impact. i never fired a shot or even raised my weapon at the enemy. they never attacked us directly.

i prefer it to be that way but its not always the case. i have seen the mild side of that country the time i was there and was blessed. for that im thankful.

 

[Tri Unity]

The earliest account of their martyrdom according to the public letter of Eucherius, bishop of Lyons (c. 434 – 450

This letter is highly suspect. The known historians of the 4th and 5th centuries who wrote on the martyrs exhaustively were completely silent of this event. Later historians give a completely different version of the events; saying that these soldiers were not Christians; they were simply Roman soldiers who would not kill Christians on the order of the Emperor. The version of the story told by Eucherius is not supported by Eusebius, or Sozimus, or Theodoret, or Scholasticus or Philostorgius, who were all historians of the 4th and 5th centuries. Eucherius used this "legend" to gain financial benifet as a tourist enterprise.

 

[jasoncran]

It was not a sin for a Hebrew to have a slave. God had ordained Israel to be slaves (in Egypt); and for Abraham to populate a race through his slave:

“Remember that you were slaves in the land of Egypt; therefore, I am commanding you to do all this.†(Deut 24:22)

“For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.†(Gal 4:22)

That you have dodged my question shows you concede that there is no scriptural support for your argument. This is no surprise.

Regarding the rape you mentioned: I sympathize with you greatly. I have been through the same struggles. I do not condemn self-defense at all. My wife and my sister were raped. I was beaten to a whisper of death trying to prevent a rape. It took me years to recover, as I was beaten in the head several times with a steal pole, piecing my eye and cracking my skull. I was blind for about 1 year, as my eye would not heal, for the scab kept falling off my cornea; rendering me in too much pain to be able to open my eyes. Rape victims go through even worse. God’s people are not alien to pain and trauma; we are birthed in it. God has His reasons for allowing such things. I now praise God for jolting me with this wake-up call; as I was spiritually lost at the time. Traumas do not justify becoming militant or of joining forces with the governments to wipe out crime. That is not why we (Christians) are here. This is my opinion.

God Bless
Tri

i havent dodged it all then its not a sin for me to go to morroco to buy a slave and live there in secret as a believer.

now then to the nitty gritty.

so then you would tell your daughter or son not to run when they are being raped , yell praises when he is raping you.

what did jesus say to zacheus the tax collector(dont pay taxes and see what the romans did?)

zacheus

luke 19
19 And Jesus entered and passed through Jericho.
2 And, behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus, which was the chief among the publicans, and he was rich.
3 And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and could not for the press, because he was little of stature.
4 And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree to see him: for he was to pass that way.
5 And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to day I must abide at thy house.
6 And he made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully.
7 And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying, That he was gone to be guest with a man that is a sinner.
8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.
9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.
10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

seems to me jesus didnt get your memo of not being in any form of goverment, he worked for that beast!

no call to leave,surely jesus would have warned him.

nor did he tell this man, surely to the jews that would mean that ROMANS were evil as they hated them!
matthew 8

8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.
9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.
10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

now then i want you tell me why jesus ordered peter to sin?

 

[Drew]

We ought to obey God rather than men.

This text certainly does not necessarily mean we are to abstain from involvement in government. It is simply a way of saying that God is our true and ultimate king.

But this certainly does not justify choosing to concede the domain of government to those who have no interest whatsoever in promoting kingdom of God values.

 

[Tri Unity]

they dont know what i have seen.

Everyone has horror stories. I have family serving in the military right now. I do not think he is evil. It is a question of whether or not fighting in wars, fighting for nations, fighting for money, fighting for ideology... is prohibited for Christians.

Christians are not to be involved with two masters, or fighting at all, let alone for ideologies that are contrary to Christianity. Some things all governments do are right. That is true even of North Korea, which has virtually no crime, drug or sex problems that the west have. In every place the west invades we export our vices under the guise of freedom. This hypocrasy is what makes God's Kingdom stand out in contrast. This is why we cannot serve two masters.

 

[Drew]

I am not calling you a "heretic". I do not believe you are. I think you are tainted by heretical ideologies.

Fair enough, but even so, this is not an appropriate way to conduct this discussion - what really matters is the relevant texts and how they read. |I could just as easily turn this claim around and assert that your thinking is tainted. Where does that get us? It is really a dressed-up form of name-calling.

This is not true in the sense that you mean it. Psalms 110:1 says,

"The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."

Indeed. And how, exactly does this text undermine the assertion that Jesus is a presently seated king over all creation.

Well, as promised, I begin the list of Biblical arguments that Jesus is already enthroned as a presently seated king over all nations:

From Acts 4:

On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them. 24When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. "Sovereign Lord," they said, "you made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything in them. 25You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:
"'Why do the nations rage
and the peoples plot in vain?
26The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the Lord
and against his Anointed One

Peter and John pray in response to the actions of the religious leaders. The prayer quotes directly from Psalm 2, verses 1 and 2 - not a co-incidence:

Why do the nations conspire
and the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the LORD and against his Anointed One.

And what does Psalm 2 go on to say a few breaths later in respect to this "annointed one"?:

I have installed my King
on Zion, my holy hill

Assuming that Peter and John know their scriptures, they know that Psalm 2 describes rebellion against a sitting King. And more to the point, the Acts text shows that He is a king over nations – so this is not the “heavenly” kingdom so many imagine, it is a kingdom of this present world.

Do you really believe that the Holy Spirit would inspire the writer of Acts to record this prayer, which exactly echoes the Psalm 2 account of rebellion against a sitting political King, and not expect us to draw the obvious conclusion – Jesus is indeed that very King, already installed, just as Psalm 2 declares?

Even though (obviously) we do not have Jesus with us in person, his Kingship has been established.

Now: what is your response? What is the flaw in my reasoning here?

 

[Tri Unity]

so then you would tell your daughter or son not to run when they are being raped , yell praises when he is raping you.

If you had read my earlier post you would know that this is ridiculous.

 

[Tri Unity]

We ought to obey God rather than men... This text certainly does not necessarily mean we are to abstain from involvement in government.

You have taken what I said out of context.

 

[jasoncran]

Everyone has horror stories. I have family serving in the military right now. I do not think he is evil. It is a question of whether or not fighting in wars, fighting for nations, fighting for money, fighting for ideology... is prohibited for Christians.

Christians are not to be involved with two masters, or fighting at all, let alone for ideologies that are contrary to Christianity. Some things all governments do are right. That is true even of North Korea, which has virtually no crime, drug or sex problems that the west have. In every place the west invades we export our vices under the guise of freedom. This hypocrasy is what makes God's Kingdom stand out in contrast. This is why we cannot serve two masters.

so
therefore neither pay nor collect social security as one cant serve that two masters?

really, yeah right those honest n.koreans those same that axed a soldier in america to death for simply crossing their border to cut a tree to observe the dmz. or when they also dig tunnels in to invade s.korea.

so you have heard of babies the very age of my granddaughter being burned alive for simply doing what a baby always does explore. seen that fact afterwords all to often. we taught them not to do that.

 

[Drew]

Are you implying that NATO, America and the UN are subjugating all nations, forcing them into democracy, and after that Christ has been victorious through their means? Sorry, but I think that is dillusional! Why would the wrath of God be poured out onto the Kingdom of the Beast if the Beast is actually the militant arm of Christ working to enforce democracy?

I have no idea what you mean by this. Please clarify. Note that the Biblical truth that Jesus is a presently seated king does not mean that we should expect all the world's problems to be solved. In fact, both Jesus and Paul are quite clear that we should expect the kingdom of God to contain suffering, evil, and death,....for a time.

In the parable of the wheat and the tares, Jesus makes precisely this point.

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul says "He must reign until all his enemies are defeated"

This clearly means that there will be a period during His reign in which some enemies are not fully defeated.

So the state of the world today - with all its troubles - does not in any way challenge the proposition that Jesus is a presently seated king.

 

[Tri Unity]

Now: what is your response? What is the flaw in my reasoning here?

Firstly, I didn't mean any offense. I believe many false things have crept into the Church. Most people believe this, otherwise we would all be Catholics.

Secondly, your reasoning on the scriptures does not prove anything. We all know Christ is the King of Kings, Lord of Lords. Making these assertions proves nothing. It does nothing for your argument that it provides us excuse to meddle into politics. That view is a complete hyper-jump. Where are there ANY NT examples of the Apostles, or any Christian, being involved with politics. Your premise has zero supporting evidence. Not even a fraction. The only thing you can lean on is to "deduce" things, which as I have stated is a trait used by less desirable groups. This is not evidence, it is a hypothesis with reasoning alone to support it.

 

[jasoncran]

god used babylon to judge isreal, he used rome to that as well. that same empire was also the same nation where the bible was written and put together. before that was the roman catholic church! the rcc claims the saints then but they were just plain catholics which means simply universal.

constatine was the man who asked the bible to be put together, i hope you dont read nor use the kjv as that too was commisioned by the beast and goverment.

 

[jasoncran]

If you had read my earlier post you would know that this is ridiculous.

so what you do you do to get them not to even resist since offering any resistance is a sin. one cant always run from a fight.

 

[Drew]

All of your opinion are "deduced" from false reasoning.

This is easy to say, but where is your evidence? What specific element of my argument is "false reasoning"?

This is not the way the bible was intended to be read and understood. This is similar reasoning the cults use to justify their own beliefs. As I said, a heretical ideology is observed by the manipulation of scriptures to assert the opposite of what is stated. This is now officially a circular argument. You have no scriptural evidence, you simply have faulty deductions which you keep returning to as your evidence.

1. You are engaging in rhetoric - asserting that I manipulate the scriptures. But where is your argument? What specifically have I manipulated?

2. Trust me, you will soon be swimming in Biblical arguments to support the proposition that Jesus is a presently seated king over all the nations.

Here is one more to add to the Acts 4 / Psalm 2 argument I just posted:

Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. 26 If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand? 27 And if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. 28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I drive out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you

There it is - a clear statement that the kingdom of God has come upon his listeners. That was 2000 years ago. Now, are you going to tell me that this is not a "real kingdom".

Let's be clear: I have already already that the "my kingdom is not of this world" is effectively a mistranslation.

Now: please show me where that argument fails.

 

[Tri Unity]

constatine was the man who asked the bible to be put together.

Not true. Canons of the bible existed in the 2nd century.

i hope you dont read nor use the kjv as that too was commisioned by the beast and goverment.

I personally prefer the Septuagint, which is the same bible used by Jesus and the Apostles. My least favourite bible is the KJV, but I have no problem using it. Government services are not a conflict for us; such as using roads or health care. That is why we pay our taxes; to get the benefit of these government services - even of soldiers and police. These services, I REPEAT, are not evil. God had commissioned them for us. Paying taxes pays for these services. War is not all "evil" either; it is just not intended for Christians.

 

[Drew]

We all know Christ is the King of Kings, Lord of Lords. Making these assertions proves nothing. It does nothing for your argument that it provides us excuse to meddle into politics. That view is a complete hyper-jump.

It is not a hyper-jump.

From John 16:

Now I am going to him who sent me, yet none of you asks me, 'Where are you going?' 6Because I have said these things, you are filled with grief. 7But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: 9in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; 10in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; 11and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned.

Jesus is teaching that it is specifically through the gift of the Holy Spirit that the world will be convicted. Who is the Spirit given to? All people? No. The Spirit is given solely to the church. Who is "the world" that will be convicted by it? Is it just "other sinners as individuals"?

Not likely. Jesus must certainly include the very institutions and systems that men have constructed - that is, the institutions of governance. After all, Jesus has spent the better part of His ministry announcing the kingdom of God is here. How odd would it be for Jesus to announce a kingdom whose authority did not include the very institutions that govern society. How is that a kingdom?

One of the roles of the church is to challenge the world, including its institutions, with the gospel. And the gospel, despite widespread misunderstanding, is not "you can be saved by faith in Jesus". It is a proclamation of a new King just as Paul says in Romans 1:3-4. Jesus is now enthroned over all - not just our "inner lives" but all.

The Holy Spirit is given to the church. And the church then is the vehicle by which the world is convicted. So while it is of course the job of the church to “win soulsâ€, it is no less the job of the church to call implement the kingdom – to advocate for the enshrinement of kingdom of God values in government.

 

[jasoncran]

Not true. Canons of the bible existed in the 2nd century.



I personally prefer the Septuagint, which is the same bible used by Jesus and the Apostles. My least favourite bible is the KJV, but I have no problem using it. Government services are not a conflict for us; such as using roads or health care. That is why we pay our taxes; to get the benefit of these government services - even of soldiers and police. These services, I REPEAT, are not evil. God had commissioned them for us. Paying taxes pays for these services. War is not all "evil" either; it is just not intended for Christians. You are missing the point completely.

list said cannons as ours are based on the nicean council not the septuagaint which a JEWISH bible, the tanach which i have is a different order of the books

the nt wasnt cannonised until the nicean council, st agustine and jerome did this work. the vulgate is where it all comes from.

they used that apochrya as well. which the lxx you like. miss the point? really? god cant use men to do his work and christians in office? i prefer christian rule and rule of law that the puritians started and others improved. perhaps i should walk you throw some facts on roman war practice and why jesus condemned the pharissees

the laws of isreal were based on god and he had them as a theocracy so when it said you die for adultery you died if caught. they were under roman law and likely henpicked to be there. jesus dealt with them for corrupting the law and being hyprocrites but he didnt say that they shouldnt be under roman yoke and not be in power. if they ruled and accepted him they might have still been around. but god know and planned that wouldnt happen. ordained for his good will. jesus had to be rejected.

daniel worked for one of the beasts. see daniels vision. and one them was the bear and other the iron man with clay feet. hmm take that lol

 

[Tri Unity]

list said cannons

The Muratorian Canon is dated to 170 AD. The Apostolic Constitutions also have a canon almost identical to the current canon. The Apostolic Constitutions are variously dated between the 1st - 4th century. Most likely they are authentically 1st century, as they were listed as evidence in the Church councils for the books now existing within our canon.

as ours are based on the nicean council not the septuagaint which a JEWISH bible

The Nicene council WAS based on the Septuagint. Constantine had 50 copies of the Septuagint ordered to be copied for the churches in Constantinople. The Septuagint was not "the Jewish Bible". The Jews had banned the Septuagint in about 100 AD; it was the Christians alone who used the Septuagint. It was the most popular canon because Christ and the Apostles quoted almost exclusively from the Septuagint.

the nt wasnt cannonised until the nicean council, st agustine and jerome did this work.

Not true, as above. Augustine and Jerome were not even alive at the time of Nicaea.

the vulgate is where it all comes from.

Jerome was commissioned by pope Damasus to translate the Bible into Latin. Jerome was a Judaizer, and he used the Jewish text for his work. This was the first time that the Septuagint stopped being used exclusively. It took several hundreds of years before it was completely replaced, but the Orthodox churches never stopped using the Septuagint.

they used that apochrya as well.

Almost all early Christians used the Apocrypha. The earliest (oldest) complete bibles in existence contain the Apocrypha in them. The Dead Sea Scrolls also maintain the Apocrypha. Several Apocrypha books are quoted by Jesus and the Apostles.

god cant use men to do his work and christians in office?

I didn't say God cannot use them. He is using them. He used the Sanhedrin and the Pharisees too; that did not mean they were teaching the truth.

i prefer christian rule and rule of law that the puritians started and others improved.

Good for you.

perhaps i should walk you throw some facts on roman war practice and why jesus condemned the pharissees.

Almost everything you have thus far said has been incorrect; how are you going to walk me through anything?

daniel worked for one of the beasts. see daniels vision. and one them was the bear and other the iron man with clay feet. hmm take that.

Joseph was also the prime minister of Egypt. Esther was the queen of Persia. Zerubbabel was a governor of the Persian Province of Judah (Hag 1:1). God "ordains" the governments of the world, and his people are sometimes used to bring about political conditions that were foretold. By way of extention; the Catholic Church was "ordained". The Muslims, as children of Abraham to the slave women, were also "ordained". Just because Daniel worked for Babylon, or Joseph for Egypt, that did not prevent those governments from being labelled "beasts", and they were destroyed for their evil ways. Again, this is why we cannot have two masters. Daniel, Joseph, Esther and Zerrubabel understood this. They were not giving sanction for involvement in politics. This was never understood to be the case. If you think I am wrong, show me some/any evidence of this.

God Bless
Tri

 

[jasoncran]

The Muratorian Canon is dated to 170 AD. The Apostolic Constitutions also have a canon almost identical to the current canon. The Apostolic Constitutions are variously dated between the 1st - 4th century. Most likely they are authentically 1st century, as they were listed as evidence in the Church councils for the books now existing within our canon.



The Nicene council WAS based on the Septuagint. Constantine had 50 copies of the Septuagint ordered to be copied for the churches in Constantinople. The Septuagint was not "the Jewish Bible". The Jews had banned the Septuagint in about 100 AD; it was the Christians alone who used the Septuagint. It was the most popular canon because Christ and the Apostles quoted almost exclusively from the Septuagint.



Not true, as above. Augustine and Jerome were not even at the time of Nicea.



Jerome was commissioned by pope Damasus to translate the Bible into Latin. Jerome was a Judaizer, and he used the Jewish text for his work. This was the first time that the Septuagint stopped being used exclusively. It took several hundreds of years before it was completely replaced, but the Orthodox churches never stopped using the Septuagint.



Yes, I miss the point. Almost all early Christians used the Apocrypha. The earliest )oldest) complete bibles in existence contain the Apocrypha in them. The Dead Sea Scrolls also maintain the Apocrypha. Several Apocrypha books are quoted by Jesus and the Apostles.



I didn't say God cannot use them. He is using them. He used the Sanhedran and the Pharisees too; that did not mean they were teaching the truth.



Good for you.



Almost every thing you have thus far said has been incorrect; how are you going to walk me through anything?



Joseph was also the prime minister of Egypt. Esther was the queen of Persia. God "ordains" the governments of the world, and his people are sometimes used to bring about political conditions that were foretold.

God Bless
Tri

ah yes . i shuld live in isolation and not be on ssi and await the beast to come, you make a ton of sense considering that you are here on the net which too is controlled by the beast.

are you greater then paul who rejoiced when he suffered.?

i used to be pre tribber and none of them save YOU even say what you say. its more likely according to them when the church is gone there wont be any christians to stop satan.

 

[Tri Unity]

i used to be pre tribber and none of them save YOU even say what you say. its more likely according to them when the church is gone there wont be any christians to stop satan.

Interesting.