killing in war is jewish, but NOT christian

Originally posted by RJHinds
You would make a good JW. There were no guns or rifles to mention then. Weapons were mentioned, however. The sword was commonly used as a weapon in those days by individuals. The gun or rifle is the choice of individuals of today for a weapon. Therefore, the rifle can be used to replace the sword of yesterday. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Not everyone's first choice. Many turn to reason, negotiation and the rule of law established democratically. Words you know - as in "In the beginning was the word" and the word is mightier than the sword.

There are weapons for fighting and weapons for putting a stop to fighting. It's always a choice.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes I have already mentioned the reason to the JWs. However, the watchtower has already indoctrinated them with another reason that supports their theology.

if you already had a conversation with the jws on this, then they must have already corrected you and you continue to have no clue. that's okay, you don't have a clue in general.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
if you already had a conversation with the jws on this, then they must have already corrected you and you continue to have no clue. that's okay, you don't have a clue in general.

Yes, but I still disagree with them and you. Go join them if that is your belief.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, but I still disagree with them and you. Go join them if that is your belief.

you also disagree with jesus christ.

Originally posted by finnegan
http://www.cathar.info/120504_guzman.htm

This account of the crusade against the Cathars might be topical: it bears reading to the end. Just thinking about the history of how christianity was spread around Europe.

Maybe you are all missing the relevance of the Cathars to our dicussions. The linked article is well written but let me spell this out a bit.

The Cathars were Gnostics and displayed an intense religious faith, lived very exemplary moral lives and were loyal subjects to the Catholic aristocrats who had political and military control in the Languedoc region. The Papacy decided that it did not want to have such a large population in its territory that were not conforming to the Catholic faith and set about their conversion.

The local (Catholic) rulers were not supportive. They saw nothing to object to.

The Church arranged a public debate in which their leaders would seek to overthorw the arguments of the Cathar leaders. Their arrogant behaviour and their unacceptable arguments instead resulted in a humiliating refutation of the Catholic position.

Then Dominic tried to emulate the methods of the old Celtic monks, living among the Cathars as a humble and holy man. They were very nice to him but nobody was converted.

The Catholics decided that this lot were incapable of being converted and were consequently in league with the very devil. They organised a crusade, drew fighters from around Europe with the promise of indulgences, and systematically massacred the Cathars. Dominic took a full part and at the same time was authorised to establish the Inquisition with all its well know techniques of persuasion. The process was horrific even for its own age but sadly not unusual for Christian methods of conversion. Dominic was sanctified in the same year he died and has remained a saint to this day.

Today we see similar processes at work. Nice holy men try to convert Muslims (say) by their example. Arrogant lordly theologians try to browbeat them with forensic criticism of their beliefs. Finally, they are categorized as incorrigibly evil, beyond persuasion, and dehumanised to the point where it is okay to start bombing them into submission.

Christianity - the iron fist in a velvet glove?

Originally posted by RJHinds
You would make a good JW. There were no guns or rifles to mention then. Weapons were mentioned, however. The sword was commonly used as a weapon in those days by individuals. The gun or rifle is the choice of individuals of today for a weapon. Therefore, the rifle can be used to replace the sword of yesterday. 😏

HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!

technology has moved on from the simple gun. could you ask god for me if it would be okay if i had a chemical and biological ballistic missile system set up in my garden?

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

I am trying, thanks for the encouragement!

Originally posted by finnegan
Maybe you are all missing the relevance of the Cathars to our dicussions. The linked article is well written but let me spell this out a bit.

The Cathars were Gnostics and displayed an intense religious faith, lived very exemplary moral lives and were loyal subjects to the Catholic aristocrats who had political and military control in the Languedoc regi ...[text shortened]... okay to start bombing them into submission.

Christianity - the iron fist in a velvet glove?

There are those who use Christianity as a political tool, as we can even see by what Hinds has been saying. Most of them have their own material interests at heart, and they are not interested in the love of God as Jesus explained, so are they really Christians? The Crusaders defiantly were not following Jesus' commands!

Originally posted by divegeester
Let's look at the facts shall we:

Jehovah led the people of Israel into the promised land through serveral wars/battles and copious slaughter of the enemies of God. In numerous places throughout the OT Jehovah says [b]"I am the lord and I change not".

How do you reconcile your position as a pacifist with Jehovah's position on war?[/b]

God has not changed, but HE HAS CLEARLY GIVEN us INSTRUCTION in the pages of the New Testament on how to love. If you choose to disobey, you are choosing to be God's enemy.

Originally posted by RJHinds
[b]I spread the truth of the gospel by telling it like I see it. 😏

Why do you refuse to look at the passages about love in the New Testament?

Originally posted by RJHinds
No were does the new covenant instruct people not to kill in war either.

Do you think you can love someone, and then kill them with a weapon just because your government has told you to go and kill?

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.

It's what happens when you don't have sword control and don't require citizens to register them.

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.

What has the old covenant got to do with being Jewish?