killing in war is jewish, but NOT christian

in the old covenant, war was an acceptable practise. BUT now in the new covenant, lovers of god are told to love even their enemies. NO WHERE in the new covenant are people instructed to kill in war.

Originally posted by dunetwo
in the old covenant, war was an acceptable practise. BUT now in the new covenant, lovers of god are told to love even their enemies. NO WHERE in the new covenant are people instructed to kill in war.

Bye!

Originally posted by dunetwo
in the old covenant, war was an acceptable practise. BUT now in the new covenant, lovers of god are told to love even their enemies. NO WHERE in the new covenant are people instructed to kill in war.

Are you going to play any chess?

Originally posted by dunetwo
in the old covenant, war was an acceptable practise. BUT now in the new covenant, lovers of god are told to love even their enemies. NO WHERE in the new covenant are people instructed to kill in war.

Could you let your fellow Christians in on that before they join up with the Jews and kill a bunch of Iranians?

Originally posted by dunetwo
in the old covenant, war was an acceptable practise. BUT now in the new covenant, lovers of god are told to love even their enemies. NO WHERE in the new covenant are people instructed to kill in war.

No were does the new covenant instruct people not to kill in war either. Jesus told his disciples to buy weapons, if they did not have one. Why?

And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
(Luke 22:36 NASB)

Originally posted by RJHinds
No were does the new covenant instruct people not to kill in war either. Jesus told his disciples to buy weapons, if they did not have one. Why?

And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and [b]whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
(Luke 22:36 NASB)[/b]

why dont you quote the full passage ,

(Luke 22:35-38) He also said to them: “When I sent you forth without purse and
food pouch and sandals, you did not want for anything, did you ?” They said: “No!”
 Then he said to them: “But now let the one that has a purse take it up, likewise also
a food pouch; and let the one having no sword sell his outer garment and buy one.
 For I tell you that this which is written must be accomplished in me, namely, ‘And he
was reckoned with lawless ones.’ For that which concerns me is having an
accomplishment.”  Then they said: “Lord, look! here are two swords.” He said to
them: “It is enough.”

the only reason why Christ permitted swords was so that on the night of his betrayal
it could provide an object lesson, namely, that warfare was not permitted, or have
you never read

(Matthew 26:52) Then Jesus said to him: “Return your sword to its place, for all
those who take the sword will perish by the sword.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
why dont you quote the full passage ,

(Luke 22:35-38) He also said to them: “When I sent you forth without purse and
food pouch and sandals, you did not want for anything, did you ?” They said: “No!”
 Then he said to them: “But now let the one that has a purse take it up, likewise also
a food pouch; and let the one having no sword sell his ...[text shortened]... m: “Return your sword to its place, for all
those who take the sword will perish by the sword.

Ridiculous. The purpose was obviously for human defense, just as the money purse and bag was also to provide for subsistence and needs. The important lesson had already been taught, before when they went out without anything as commanded and God provided for their needs. But now, they would be required to provide for their own needs, including defense. God is not going to give them any more free food and protection. They are going to be required to do it themselves. Don't be stupid.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Ridiculous. The purpose was obviously for human defense, just as the money purse and bag was also to provide for subsistence and needs. The important lesson had already been taught, before when they went out without anything as commanded and God provided for their needs. But now, they would be required to provide for their own needs, including defense. G ...[text shortened]... free food and protection. They are going to be required to do it themselves. Don't be stupid.

you just ridiculed the man you claim to worship. the only defense for a christian is faith in the father and christ. there is no warfare for a christian. a christian is forbidden to kill under any circumstances. they are to love their enemies, turn the other cheek and die if necessary, for their faith.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
you just ridiculed the man you claim to worship. the only defense for a christian is faith in the father and christ. there is no warfare for a christian. a christian is forbidden to kill under any circumstances. they are to love their enemies, turn the other cheek and die if necessary, for their faith.

Well, except when they're on a crusade, or punishing "witches", or separating the gullible from their coin and medicine (faith healing), or securing Middle Eastern oil assets, or ...

Originally posted by RJHinds
[b]whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
(Luke 22:36 NASB)[/b]

This is obviously a fashion statement.

Remember what a hit his shroud was in the first Turin Fashion Show?

We should not underestimate Jesus' impact on the Middle Eastern Fashion
scene. Bedsheets remained "de rigueur" years after his death - such was his
legacy.

Originally posted by Agerg
Well, except when they're on a crusade, or punishing "witches", or separating the gullible from their coin and medicine (faith healing), or securing Middle Eastern oil assets, or ...

Not to mention Cortez and the Aztecs, Pizzaro and the Inca's and the Australian aborigines forced conversion, and forced conversion of Amarinds in the USA.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Ridiculous. The purpose was obviously for human defense, just as the money purse and bag was also to provide for subsistence and needs. The important lesson had already been taught, before when they went out without anything as commanded and God provided for their needs. But now, they would be required to provide for their own needs, including defense. G ...[text shortened]... free food and protection. They are going to be required to do it themselves. Don't be stupid.

no it wasn't, Christ stated that two swords were enough when speaking prophetically of
his betrayal and capture, you ignostic, you know nothing, how was two swords enough
to protect Christ and the twelve disciples against a mob intent on arresting him? Once
again the scriptures refute your ludicrous claims!

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
you just ridiculed the man you claim to worship. the only defense for a christian is faith in the father and christ. there is no warfare for a christian. a christian is forbidden to kill under any circumstances. they are to love their enemies, turn the other cheek and die if necessary, for their faith.

Not so. Christians are not to turn the other cheek in times of war or when being attacked. He are commanded to have a ready defense for the faith we hold. And that also means the right to bear arms if necessary. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
Not so. Christians are not to turn the other cheek in times of war or when being attacked. He are commanded to have a ready defense for the faith we hold. And that also means the right to bear arms if necessary. 🙄

you're making stuff up to ignore christ and embrace your nationalistic war-mongering ideologies.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no it wasn't, Christ stated that two swords were enough when speaking prophetically of
his betrayal and capture, you ignostic, you know nothing, how was two swords enough
to protect Christ and the twelve disciples against a mob intent on arresting him? Once
again the scriptures refute your ludicrous claims!

As I've said many times Robbie, he says he a Christian but only until his other god, his country tells him differently.
This is where the Bible says that "many will call on his name but prove false to it's power".
He has not ever learned what it really means to be a Christian. He knows the surface of some things, but has never grasped the deeper meanings.
Jesus never faught and in fact told his followers not to.
But yet such a simple fact he cannot see.