Originally posted by RJHindsActually as a Jehovahs Witness it would have meany the same thing for me as for the
I would guess you are a young guy by your comment. But it seems
like you would have learned something from your history teachers
about how important it it was for the USA to enter World War II to
help save Europe from Hitler and the Nazis. If the Japanese had
not attacked the USA when they did we may not have entered that
war. I wonder what would of happened to England, France, and the
other democratic countries in Europe then.
witnesses in Germany, concentration camps, which we chose to submit to rather than
kill another human being, your remarks in my case hold no weight whatsoever, was it
not Ghandhi who stated and which sums up our position, “I am prepared to die, but
there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill.”
Originally posted by robbie carrobiePeople will argue over the justifiability of the atomic bombing of Japan for as long as it is remembered and it will be remembered as long as they argue. And that argument should go on.
sooo dropping two huge atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki killing civilians was morally justifiable from your stance, After all it was a
demonstration of your willingness and ability to defeat your enemy? what about
Napalm bombs, were they also morally justifiable? It has nothing to do with the Holy
Spirit, unless ...[text shortened]... urse you wish that I prove such contemptible and fiendish acts to be
opposed to its operation.
I will be recommending a video series that among other topics, discusses war and conscription.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMahatma Gandhi also volunteered to serve in the British military.
Actually as a Jehovahs Witness it would have meany the same thing for me as for the
witnesses in Germany, concentration camps, which we chose to submit to rather than
kill another human being, your remarks in my case hold no weight whatsoever, was it
not Ghandhi who stated and which sums up our position, “I am prepared to die, but
there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill.”
He served in the Boer War and the Zulu rebellion in South Africa.
The following is a quote from the wikipedia article on him:
In April 1918, during the latter part of World War I, the Viceroy invited Gandhi to a War Conference in Delhi[27] Perhaps to show his support for the Empire and help his case for India's independence,[28] Gandhi agreed to actively recruit Indians for the war effort.[29] In contrast to the Zulu War of 1906 and the outbreak of World War I in 1914, when he recruited volunteers for the Ambulance Corps, this time Gandhi attempted to recruit combatants. In a June 1918 leaflet entitled "Appeal for Enlistment", Gandhi wrote "To bring about such a state of things we should have the ability to defend ourselves, that is, the ability to bear arms and to use them...If we want to learn the use of arms with the greatest possible despatch, it is our duty to enlist ourselves in the army."[30] He did however stipulate in a letter to the Viceroy's private secretary that he "personally will not kill or injure anybody, friend or foe."[31] Gandhi's war recruitment campaign brought into question his consistency on nonviolence as his friend Charlie Andrews confirms, "Personally I have never been able to reconcile this with his own conduct in other respects, and it is one of the points where I have found myself in painful disagreement."[32] Gandhi's private secretary also acknowledges that "The question of the consistency between his creed of 'Ahimsa' (non-violence) and his recruiting campaign was raised not only then but has been discussed ever since."[29]
Originally posted by RJHindsso what, his statement in essence describes our position, irrespective of what Ghandis thoughts or actions were, yet you have still to tell the forum why the Japanese should be thankful that you bombed their cities killing thousands of civilians, or whether this act would meet with the Christ's approval.
Mahatma Gandhi also volunteered to serve in the British military.
He served in the Boer War and the Zulu rebellion in South Africa.
The following is a quote from the wikipedia article on him:
In April 1918, during the latter part of World War I, the Viceroy invited Gandhi to a War Conference in Delhi[27] Perhaps to show his support for the Empire and he ...[text shortened]... uiting campaign was raised not only then but has been discussed ever since."[29]
Originally posted by JS357that's fine for those who may try to justify these things, to us the issue has been settled.
People will argue over the justifiability of the atomic bombing of Japan for as long as it is remembered and it will be remembered as long as they argue. And that argument should go on.
I will be recommending a video series that among other topics, discusses war and conscription.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMahatma Gandhi was not a Christian so his postion has no
so what, his statement in essence describes our position, irrespective of what Ghandis thoughts or actions were, yet you have still to tell the forum why the Japanese should be thankful that you bombed their cities killing thousands of civilians, or whether this act would meet with the Christ's approval.
relevance to what Christians believe.
Originally posted by RJHindsthat is the biggest piece of garbage i think i have read on these forums, indeed, as
Mahatma Gandhi was not a Christian so his postion has no
relevance to what Christians believe.
Gandhi himself stated, 'I love the Christ, but I despise Christians for they do not live
like the Christ', which i think is a very astute observation and just about sums up
nominal Christians.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThis is what Jesus the Christ said about the sixth commandment from God:
that is the biggest piece of garbage i think i have read on these forums, indeed, as
Gandhi himself stated, 'I love the Christ, but I despise Christians for they do not live
like the Christ', which i think is a very astute observation and just about sums up
nominal Christians.
"You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder,
and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.'
"But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause
shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother,
'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!'
shall be in danger of hell fire."
(Matthew 5:21-22 New King James Versio
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsyes i have read the scripture many times, what is your point? that Gandhi despises
This is what Jesus the Christ said about the sixth commandment from God:
"You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder,
and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.'
"But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause
shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother,
'Raca! u fool!'
shall be in danger of hell fire."
(Matthew 5:21-22 New King James Versio
Christians, so what? He's not a Christian is he and by your own reasoning the
principles of Matthew do not apply. I merely produced the quotation to demonstrate a
point, which has nothing to do with Ghandis character. I like him.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe point is that even though Gandhi was not a Christian He believed
yes i have read the scripture many times, what is your point? that Gandhi despises
Christians, so what? He's not a Christian is he and by your own reasoning the
principles of Matthew do not apply. I merely produced the quotation to demonstrate a
point, which has nothing to do with Ghandis character. I like him.
in non-violent protests and demonstatations; but also, he believed a
nation had the right to defend itself and a military force was necessary
to do that. Both he and Jesus were against murder, which is what Cain
did to Abel when he killed Abel with malice. This is the reason for the
sixth commandment. It was not meant to prevent killing of animals
for sacrifice to God or for food or to prevent killing in war or any act
of self defense. It was meant to prevent killing due to hatred toward
your fellow man. This is what Jesus was saying in those verses. Did
not the God of the Old Testament direct the Israelites to kill in battle?
Originally posted by RJHindsso what, what is the difference between murdering persons through the dropping of an
The point is that even though Gandhi was not a Christian He believed
in non-violent protests and demonstatations; but also, he believed a
nation had the right to defend itself and a military force was necessary
to do that. Both he and Jesus were against murder, which is what Cain
did to Abel when he killed Abel with malice. This is the reason for the
...[text shortened]... in those verses. Did
not the God of the Old Testament direct the Israelites to kill in battle?
atomic bomb and murdering them with a sword. You have also yet again failed to
state if Jesus would condone the use of indiscriminate killing against civilians, for while
you justified it morally, you as a Christian must have some thought on whether Jesus
would have approved.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe difference is that in response to there attack on our homeland
so what, what is the difference between murdering persons through the dropping of an
atomic bomb and murdering them with a sword. You have also yet again failed to
state if Jesus would condone the use of indiscriminate killing against civilians, for while
you justified it morally, you as a Christian must have some thought on whether Jesus
would have approved.
we declared war on the Japanese. Therefore, after we had declared
war on them. In due time, it became necessary, as part of the war
effort, to drop those bombs to end the war with the Japanese and
prevent future deaths. So it was not an act of murder but of war,
that is the difference.
Originally posted by RJHindsNo your still not seeing the big picture and yes murder was commited. Are you not aware that even in the cruelist nations of the world that cause problems for other countries, are not by any means backed up and supported by all it's citizens?
The difference is that in response to there attack on our homeland
we declared war on the Japanese. Therefore, after we had declared
war on them. In due time, it became necessary, as part of the war
effort, to drop those bombs to end the war with the Japanese and
prevent future deaths. So it was not an act of murder but of war,
that is the difference.
There is no way in the world that everyone including the children that died that horrible death hated the citizens of the US or as for as that goes even were old enough to have a clue of the outside world.
You might have an arguement my friend if that entire population of those cities were soldiers and were making weapons there to attack us here. But not even close to that situation and it was all civilians that died that day with maybe a scattering of military.
So do you still feel good about that?
Originally posted by RJHindswould Jesus condone the use of weapons of destruction like napalm and nuclear
The difference is that in response to there attack on our homeland
we declared war on the Japanese. Therefore, after we had declared
war on them. In due time, it became necessary, as part of the war
effort, to drop those bombs to end the war with the Japanese and
prevent future deaths. So it was not an act of murder but of war,
that is the difference.
weapons? why then do Christians?