Posted on 06/29/2006 12:17:31 PM PDT by rface
Dear Editor, the Tribune:
As a veteran and Marine parent, I ignore his ilk. But as a pastor, I sometimes find it necessary to respond to those who flagrantly misuse the Bible to support their biases.
Conservative Bible scholars view Jesus as an eternally co-existent member of the Trinity. Therefore, Jesus participated in destroying Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19 and threatened Nineveh with the same in Jonah 3.
King David, a soldier acclaimed for killing tens of thousands, wrote, "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for You are with me." As a warrior, he experienced the shadowy valley of death frequently.
Jesus honored a Roman soldier in Matthew 8:10 as having greater faith than even his own disciples, rather than recommending he lay down his sword, as you do.
Fortunately for you and me, this same Jesus is a loving God who "is not willing that any perish, but that all come to repentance." Therefore, it’s highly unlikely Jesus will bomb you, and thanks to our brave men and women in uniform, neither will Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and our enemies.
"The purpose of all wars ... is peace."
- Saint Augustine
Philip Dooley, pastor
Open Door Church
Highway 63 South
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.
That's probably the way I heard it too, and forgot.....I'm good at that.
bttt
Inasmuch as they put their lives on the line for low pay, they are veritable Gods compared to the station I hold. :)
That's going to leave a mark. :P
Yeah, except, not really. The Church has never been certain of the provenance of the Gospels, and the Vatican assigned them the names Matthew, Luke, Mark and John arbitrarily. The Talmud is attributed to Moses, and the books of Peter are attributed to him, but the source of the Gospels is pretty much up in the air.
Jesus did warfare against the Romans, the Temple and others who set themselves up as God. His warfare was bloody and brutal. He put himself in harms way and became martyred by the forces of evil that surrounded him.
The sacrifice of his life was not an act of pacifism. It was in-your-face conflict. He encountered evil directly with the most powerful tool available, his life. His murder could never be construed as other than murder with evil intent. This is not the action of someone trying to avoid conflict. In fact Jesus forced conflict. He sought it out and demanded that evil show its hand.
So it is with armies of liberation. They force evil into the open. The war in Iraq is in the tradition of Christ and his war against evil. We have forced the evil doers onto the field by creating an environment of liberation from their tyranny that they cannot tolerate. Our troops bring light into the darkness of Islamofascism. If these fascists were men of peace they would lay down their arms and celebrate the liberation of their people. Their bloodthirsty rampage proves their evil and we seek them out to encounter and destroy them.
We are God's army, bringing justice and freedom where before there was murder and mayhem. Our soldiers march under the rubric of the cross of Christ. There is no more powerful or profound tradition opposing evil.
The Bible also tells us that... "the man who fails to provide for his family is worse than an infidel..." To mean that includes all provision, shelter, food, clothing, and physical safety.
I think this is where comes the saying..."God takes care of those who take care of themselves".
"We make war that we may live in peace." ~ Aristotle.
I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.
-- John Adams
It was if someone takes you to court and gets your stuff......
MATTHEW 5:
39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
As you said, we must take Jesus in full context:
John 18:
10Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his right ear. (The servant's name was Malchus.)
11Jesus commanded Peter, "Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?"
Jesus was telling Peter to put away the sword because Peter was trying to stop something from happening that was pre-ordained to happen. It was not an admonition of using force...........
Read on down for the source.........
I know there are some that believe this B.S. - but the historical evidence supports the traditional attributions to the Gospels....and this is why the Gospels are attributed to Math. Mark Luke and John.....because of the evidence. To claim that they are arbitrary is rediculous
There are some pretty good reasons to think that a couple of the other books are attributed wrongly, but it is only the fringe that seems eager to dispute the Gospels authors.....and the motives of this fringe movement is evident in their commentaries
His sacrifice was not an act of pacifism, nor was it an act of aggression or self defense. He actually made the choice to make no defense to his accusers and refuse to be aggresive againt the Romans - even when pressed to do so by those Jews who wished to be free of the yoke of Roman oppression.
Jesus never worked to avoid conflict, but the way he enter conflict never involved physical force - except the time he forced the money-lenders from the Temple.
That ye resist not evil:
_______________
Note Jesus is talking about responding to evil. Turning the other cheek and giving away your coat are not acts of kindness, they are assaultive and condemnatory. He is discussing means of overcoming acts of violence by demonstrating the evil intent of the evildoer.
Turning the othe cheek is not an act of pacifism. It is a judgement. It is an act of defiance. It corners the perpetrator and demands that he confront his own evil actions.
Yes............
the historical evidence supports the traditional attributions to the Gospels...
_______________-
Absolutely correct. We have more evidence as to the actual authorship of the Gospels than we have for the writer of Shakespeare's plays and sonnets. Biblical scholars have long been able to document with extreme precision the actual dates and authors of the Gospels and most of the letters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.