1. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    93543
    10 Feb '12 16:54
    my very basic knowledge of the bible tells me to turn the other cheek and that "thou shalt not kill" how do christians justify going to war. both bush and blair were christians. what about the death penalty? it seems to be more popular in the more god fearing states of america. isnt this in direct conflict with the commandment?

    ive got a feeling somebody is going to tell me im lazy and should have read george 3:12" thou can kill with as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"
  2. Standard memberRajk999
    Enjoying
    On the Beach
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    170571
    10 Feb '12 17:09
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    my very basic knowledge of the bible tells me to turn the other cheek and that "thou shalt not kill" how do christians justify going to war. both bush and blair were christians. what about the death penalty? it seems to be more popular in the more god fearing states of america. isnt this in direct conflict with the commandment?

    ive got a feeling some ...[text shortened]... have read george 3:12" thou can kill with as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"
    You need to get some professional help. You have the thread-starting virus.
  3. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    10 Feb '12 17:11
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    my very basic knowledge of the bible tells me to turn the other cheek and that "thou shalt not kill" how do christians justify going to war. both bush and blair were christians. what about the death penalty? it seems to be more popular in the more god fearing states of america. isnt this in direct conflict with the commandment?

    ive got a feeling some ...[text shortened]... have read george 3:12" thou can kill with as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"
    I would say there are more Christian pacifists than secular ones. The Amish and Mennonites for example.
  4. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    10 Feb '12 17:121 edit
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    my very basic knowledge of the bible tells me to turn the other cheek and that "thou shalt not kill" how do christians justify going to war. both bush and blair were christians. what about the death penalty? it seems to be more popular in the more god fearing states of america. isnt this in direct conflict with the commandment?

    ive got a feeling some ...[text shortened]... have read george 3:12" thou can kill with as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"
    Well, I think you may be a bit lazy and should go read george 3:12" thou can kill, as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"

    Next discussion ?
  5. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    93543
    10 Feb '12 17:22
    Originally posted by Rajk999
    You need to get some professional help. You have the thread-starting virus.
    where do you suggest?

    ive got a lot of questions, if you dont want to answer or talk about them then eff off matey.

    (would that be a god given virus?(rhetorical question))
  6. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    10 Feb '12 17:23
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    my very basic knowledge of the bible tells me to turn the other cheek and that "thou shalt not kill" how do christians justify going to war. both bush and blair were christians. what about the death penalty? it seems to be more popular in the more god fearing states of america. isnt this in direct conflict with the commandment?

    ive got a feeling some ...[text shortened]... have read george 3:12" thou can kill with as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"
    They'll say that it should be translated 'thou shall not murder' instead of 'kill' - which allows them to perform all sorts of state-sanctioned forms of killing.

    Look at the rest of the Old Testament. God gave those commandments to the Israelites, and he later tells the Israelites to kill many people in the promised land [and on the way] and take it over.
  7. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    93543
    10 Feb '12 17:241 edit
    Originally posted by jaywill
    Well, I think you may be a bit lazy and should go read george 3:12" thou can kill, as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"

    Next discussion ?
    aww man i cant belive you just shot me down like that!!!

    with all this heckling im starting to understand how the crazy old bible basher on his soapbox in the town center feels.
  8. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    10 Feb '12 17:33
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    Look at the rest of the Old Testament. God gave those commandments to the Israelites, and he later tells the Israelites to kill many people in the promised land [and on the way] and take it over.
    Not to mention the death penalty being prescribed for many crimes.
  9. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    93543
    10 Feb '12 17:39
    Originally posted by rwingett
    I would say there are more Christian pacifists than secular ones. The Amish and Mennonites for example.
    i do like the amish especially kelly mcgillis. i wouldnt disagree that there are lots of pacifist christians. the questions aimed at the ones who think war is acceptable.
  10. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    10 Feb '12 18:12
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    my very basic knowledge of the bible tells me to turn the other cheek and that "thou shalt not kill" how do christians justify going to war. both bush and blair were christians. what about the death penalty? it seems to be more popular in the more god fearing states of america. isnt this in direct conflict with the commandment?

    ive got a feeling some ...[text shortened]... have read george 3:12" thou can kill with as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"
    You will not find a more intelligent Christian explanation than is here:

    http://www.catholic.com/documents/just-war-doctrine

    Partial quote:

    "The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

    the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
    all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
    there must be serious prospects of success;
    the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

    These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine. The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

    unquote.

    I am not arguing for or against the position taken. Jut trying to shed light, not heat.
  11. Joined
    10 Jun '11
    Moves
    3829
    10 Feb '12 18:13
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    my very basic knowledge of the bible tells me to turn the other cheek and that "thou shalt not kill" how do christians justify going to war. both bush and blair were christians. what about the death penalty? it seems to be more popular in the more god fearing states of america. isnt this in direct conflict with the commandment?

    ive got a feeling some ...[text shortened]... have read george 3:12" thou can kill with as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"
    the problem is that you're expecting rational behavior from people who have embraced irrationality.
  12. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    10 Feb '12 18:271 edit
    Originally posted by JS357
    You will not find a more intelligent Christian explanation than is here:

    http://www.catholic.com/documents/just-war-doctrine

    Partial quote:

    "The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time: e.

    I am not arguing for or against the position taken. Jut trying to shed light, not heat.
    No moral justification for war, violence foments more violence
  13. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    West Coast Rioter
    tinyurl.com/y7loem9q
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    10 Feb '12 18:46
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    my very basic knowledge of the bible tells me to turn the other cheek and that "thou shalt not kill" how do christians justify going to war. both bush and blair were christians. what about the death penalty? it seems to be more popular in the more god fearing states of america. isnt this in direct conflict with the commandment?

    ive got a feeling some ...[text shortened]... have read george 3:12" thou can kill with as long as you have an m16 and a gung-ho attitude"
    "Thou shalt not kill" is not a good translation. "Thou shalt not murder" is more accurate.
  14. Standard memberRajk999
    Enjoying
    On the Beach
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    170571
    10 Feb '12 19:27
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    where do you suggest?

    ive got a lot of questions, if you dont want to answer or talk about them then eff off matey.

    (would that be a god given virus?(rhetorical question))
    I suggest that you go get yourself a life.
  15. Joined
    22 Dec '11
    Moves
    18468
    10 Feb '12 19:33
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    "Thou shalt not kill" is not a good translation. "Thou shalt not murder" is more accurate.
    swissgambit problemist said you would say that. can you explain the difference?
Back to Top