Are Faith & War Compatible?

[Hitch]

You can define it that way if you like

well how else is this man whose wife is off indian descent(seminole) is too take this? surely your are aware of the unjust past that the americans did too the indians. ie take their land, the spaniards wiped the ocala tribe out. general custer would raid and kill indians(not the warriors) but the woman and children. i do understand that back then there wasnt a rule of law for war. but even then if you ponder that.. it was wrong.

if i'm going to die for my country and serve, its best that i really know what it stands for. i dont serve for the rich here btw, nor the politicians. i do it so that others dont have to be killed.

self-defense is one thing. one could take that anyway which one could. perhaps a clarification would be in order. which you didnt do.

YOU DIDNT ASK FOR CLARIFICATION BUT SINCE YOU'RE A moderator if I jump to the conclusion that since you are military you like to kill babies ,and demand you respond I will get in trouble, and I cant put you on ignore .

list these 'just wars" of american history..

some werent so just after all if we are honest. i do think that some indian tribes were justifiable self-defense but didnt we not say its manifest destiny


Manifest Destiny was a phrase which invoked the idea of divine sanction for the territorial expansion of the United States. It first appeared in print in 1845, in the July-August issue of the United States Magazine and Democratic Review. The anonymous author, thought to be its editor John L. O'Sullivan, proclaimed "our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our multiplying millions."
The specific context of the article was the annexation of Texas, which had taken place not long before. Other <nobr>applications</nobr> of the notion of manifest destiny were soon found. It was used to promote the annexations of Mexican territory acquired in the War with Mexico, of territory in Oregon gained through negotiations with the British, and the seizure (not carried out) of Cuba from the Spanish during the 1850's.
The philosophical support for manifest destiny was based on the idea that America was destined to expand democratic institutions in North America, which gave the nation a superior moral right to govern areas where other interests would not respect this goal. This was particularly clear with respect to Texas, and the alternative of a Mexican dictatorship, but it was also applied in the Oregon territory. Britain itself might be democratic, but that was not its purpose in Oregon.
Manifest destiny was a popular and easily understood phrase, which was adopted by successive political parties. Originally the position of the Democratic Party, it was absorbed into the platforms of the Whig and later Republican parties. Even the Alaska <nobr>Purchase</nobr> of 1867 and acquisitions outside the continent, such as Guam and Hawaii, were promoted as examples of manifest destiny in action. Gradually, the phrase has been seen as a cover for imperialism and political support has died out.

Off-site search results for "Manifest Destiny"...

Manifest Destiny
... Greatest Export Origins Of Manifest DestinyThe original use of the term "Manifest Destiny", first used publically in a New York newspaper editorial in the 1800's, revealed a desire "to overspread the continent allotted by ProvidManifest Destiny", first used publically in a New York newspaper editorial in the 1800's, revealed a desire "to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the ...
^{American History}
Manifest Destiny
Ohio Historical Society, 2005, "Manifest Destiny", Ohio History Central: An Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History. Search Visit Other Ohio Historical Society Sites Ohio History Ohio Kids Ohio Teachers Ohio Pix Ohio <nobr>Memory</nobr> ChooManifest Destiny", Ohio History Central: An Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History. Search Visit Other Ohio Historical Society Sites Ohio History Ohio Kids Ohio Teachers Ohio Pix Ohio Memory Choose your text ...
^{Manifest Destiny - Ohio History Central - A product of the Ohio Historical Society}
Manifest Destiny
O'Sullivan on Manifest Destiny, 1839 The American people having derived their origin from many other nations, and the Declaration of National Independence being entirely based on the great principle of human equality, these facts deManifest Destiny, 1839 The American people having derived their origin from many other nations, and the Declaration of National Independence being entirely based on the great principle of human equality, these facts demonstrate at ...
^{http://www.civics-online.org/library/formatted/texts/manifest_destiny. ...}

so then is that a christian thing that we should send our soldiers to do?

i was taught this in history class in grade school and also college.

for the record i may love my country, but i am not ignorant of her sins. i dont hide them if i know of them.

that was the point i made by that statement. to maintain qualility of life? so a war for oil alone is justifiable? while i see that is a possibility. but that would have to be a self-defense deal where we are drilling and one country is taking oil from us to be acceptable to me. i dont see the need to attack canada(second on the list were we get oil from).[/QUOTE]

 

[jasoncran]

You're the baby killer you tell me.

your words not mine. did i serve in nam? nope born when they left country.

btw i have been called that here before. and wait a sec i have an hundred yr old authenticated history book from 1898.

that stops when andrew johnson takes the presidency.at quick glance i dont find any reference to the indian wars.

but i see this has went south, you win.

 

[WIP]

I think that I would have an issue killing someone who was planning to murder me or even my family. I think if I got the drop on them I'd shoot them, but not to kill just debilitate to the point where they were no longer a violent threat.

Good luck with that! Under circumstances of duress even the most highly trained can have a hard time pulling this off.

Another is when Judas Iscariot came with other people to the Mount of Olives to arrest Jesus Christ. One of the Apostles (I can't remember if it was Peter or one of the others) took out his sword and cut off one of the mens ears. Jesus told him to put his sword away.

EDIT: Now that I look at the exampe, why did Jesus Christ permit his disciples to carry a sword, if not for defending the innocent and themselves.

I wonder if maybe you're taking Christ's response out of context. Christ's purpose was not to engage the local authorities in battle. His purpose required that he be arrested, convicted, humiliated, bruised, beaten, tortured, scourged, and put to death. He asked God to take that cup away but only if it was His will. Otherwise he asked that God's will be done. If he had allowed his disciples to fight, they may have prevented Him from fulfilling his destiny. Thank God they listened to Him!

 

[WIP]

You're the baby killer you tell me.

Wow! That seems a bit uncalled for.

 

[Hitch]

your words not mine. did i serve in nam? nope born when they left country.

btw i have been called that here before. and wait a sec i have an hundred yr old authenticated history book from 1898.

that stops when andrew johnson takes the presidency.at quick glance i dont find any reference to the indian wars.

but i see this has went south, you win.

Sure did right here;


so the murder of the indians by president andrew jackson in the trail of tears so that "christian' farmers could farm land was ok? or how about when we took their land by force. funny john winthrop was very much agaisnt that when he was governor of mass.

 

[Hitch]

Wow! That seems a bit uncalled for.

I chided Jason earlier for jumping to far out conclusions and yet he chose to continue, and sad as it may be ,there are times when giving back some of the same is useful. Every thing I'd posted here up to this point is copied below in red.

For that jason strongly implied that I condoned murder. (in bold post #25)

Originally Posted by Hitch
So long as it is appropriate for Christians to live in the benefits awarded to the victors is will be appropriate for Christians to be involved in the actions necessary.

Re: Are Faith & War Compatible?

Originally Posted by Drew
I am not sure what your point is here. I trust you are not suggesting that it is acceptable to engage in war in order to get a better quality of life.



​

You can define it that way if you like.

 

[Hitch]

Good move.

 

[jasoncran]

Sure did right here;


so the murder of the indians by president andrew jackson in the trail of tears so that "christian' farmers could farm land was ok? or how about when we took their land by force. funny john winthrop was very much agaisnt that when he was governor of mass.

so what did you mean by if a christian is to benefit from the victories..

care to clarify. what wars we shouldnt fight in? so when i swear by a contract that i pledge to my death, whether the war is right or wrong. or do you honestly believe that wars we are told to fight are right?

well lets see here. vietnam. 60k dead for what?
in hindsight we thought we did the right thing but where is nam now? a communist state.

korea. forced into by the u.n. the 38 th parallel still a hot zone, and no permanent peace.

ww2 nuff said with that
ww1 we got involve becuase of the fact that we americans were attacked by the germans and we wanted to be neutral.
America and World War One

war of 1898 a mistake in that the maine was thought to be bombed by the spanish when in fact it wasnt.

and theres a good statement entering wars is seldom black and white. amen to that.

having a dad that is a history buff on the civil war. he taught me that the north and the south were wrong on the treatment of the pows. i'm sure that you are aware that the germans got the idea of the death camps from that war.


so if you know that the war we fought in in unjust ie just for lusts and none else sees it and would you hitch, fight in this war?

in short is war always the right thing? sometimes we dont know, but other times its clear looking back they were wrong and the soldiers must themselves decide if they can commit to any and all actions with no questions asked. so who will ensure that we arent decieved and vote no to the war hawks in power. albeit democrats or republicans.

i hope my fellow americans learn and look at history and ask and hold the politician to the task . these days i dont see america as imperliast but we have made some mistakes with the country of iraq.

 

[Sparkey]

Athena was the goddess of wisdom and war.