Anyone who calls themselves a Christian and supports or takes part in carnal combat/War is Not a Christian at all. On the day of judgment they will be calling out Lord Lord and He will say I never knew you.I disagree with this blanket statement. I do agree "war is hell" but isn't it important what is in the hearts and souls of those who fight in wars? While some may fight for profit, many fight to end tyranny and oppression, to stop the extermination of others.
Is the New testament this clear on war, that support for any combat for any reason is un-Christian?
God blessed many soldiers/warriors/kings throughout the entire Bible. In the NT we have Cornelius and several other soldiers (centurions) who were blessed by God.
So ya have to ask... why would God bless a soldier and then deny this same soldier during judgment?
My career in the military improved and was blessed once God showed me and led me to understand that my path was to be a warrior. Not all are led to this path and service for the Lord but for the ones who are not to be warriors, to judge us is wrong.
Not, thou shalt not kill.
The Old Testament was full of war, it was necessary.
That's an unfortunate blanket statement.
What was his scriptural basis for his conclusion?
I looked through recent posts and didn't see anything on war, but now I see the thread you are talking about. AmazedGrace21 had a good summary.
God bless you for your service. I was not called to be a warrior but I believe some are. My grandfather was a chaplain in the trenches of WW-I, and lived to tell the tale. I have the utmost respect for those who will put their life on the line for the greater good.
I'm about to post in my blog on this topic. It may help you out.
Ultimately God is moving towards a world where they will be no war, so if you are engaging in war in the here and now, I would suggest that you are fighting against the day when there will truly be peace.
Can we, however, stop war? This gets into the idea of whether a war is just, and this is whole other discussion. Perhaps you should start another thread on a how the Bible defines a "just war."
I disagree with this blanket statement. I do agree "war is hell" but isn't it important what is in the hearts and souls of those who fight in wars? While some may fight for profit, many fight to end tyranny and oppression, to stop the extermination of others.
As clear as heat upon herbs, and a cloud of dew in the heat of harvest.
^ the Gospel of Christ does not mince words, but lines up the witnesses, so that we should make no mistake what grace we are are called to. The one hope of our calling makes it so that our warfare is not carnal.
Christian brother being called by the Lord Jesus Christ to serve in the military? Contradiction of interests, compared to ALL that is written. I suppose one being in the military may be capable of recieving his calling to the grace of God (which might involve a LAWFUL maintaining of position until the Lord grants leave), but, I do not believe the Lord is calling any man with a hope of his calling other than that which is written.
Christian brother being called by the Lord Jesus Christ to serve in the military? Contradiction of interests, compared to ALL that is written. I suppose one being in the military may be capable of recieving his calling to the grace of God (which might involve a LAWFUL maintaining of position until the Lord grants leave), but, I do not believe the Lord is calling any man with a hope of his calling other than that which is written.Whelp, if I read this right... you say NO. Thank you.
So, Jesus would never want to have one of His servants as a righteous example in the military. All the men and woman who serve are to be non-Christians?
Governments are to execute their authority given to them by God without any people who have faith in God? Governments are authorized by God to crush evil doers so, as ironic as this may sound, ALL soldiers already SERVE God just by joining. They may not have faith in God but they all serve God whether they like it or not.
It would be better for those soldiers who serve God to also have faith in Him as well.
What happens when a soldier on the battlefield asks about God and then who is to answer? When a soldier on the battlefield wants to give their heart over to Jesus, who is gonna be there to lead them?
All questions are answered sharply, and backed with multiple reasons and cross references throughout Scripture: how readest thou? This is first assuming that you know the word well. You are now having this conversation, as you said, once again, and as you said, are a career military personel: if a man lacks wisdom, it is not good, and, he should enquire of the Lord.
Even many non-believers have this much awareness, that the Holy Bible calls believers to non-violent means. It is hard to be an example of believers if we do not keep what is obvious even to children.
Christians indeed despise war. But we live in a real world with very real evil people and sometimes violence is a necessary reality. I do not see where military personnel or law enforcement personnel are in any way condemned. Nor do I see any evidence that self-defense, even with lethal means, is never justified. "Turn the other cheek" does not mean stand idly by while your children are being murdered. Jesus and the apostles had several opportunities to tell Centurions to drop their profession, but that is not what they are told.
War is also a constant theme of the Old Testament, and God does not change. Many of those in the Hall of Faith [Hebrews 11] were warriors. God trained David's hands for war and his fingers for battle [Ps. 144:1].
. All the men and woman who serve are to be non-Christians?
I ask you to show me one scripture that says serving in the military is wrong if you are a christian.
Not a scripture that refers to those who are sent specifically to preach the gospel, as were the disciples. But a scripture that makes this whole service in the military a sin, plain and evident.
Somebody's gotta defend the nation when there is war, who better than those who have God to be their moral guide?
.. I have waited for one of you to make sense and now I grow tired of your blanket statements. You say you are standing on "obvious" scripture and yet you give not one address.
.. The very most interesting point in this matter is the fact that there is one God and He is constant and never changes. (Num. 23:19, 1Sam. 15:29, Psa. 122:6, Mal. 3:6, 2Tim. 2:13,Heb. 6:17-18, Jam. 1:17 and my favorite, Jon. 1:1-5) It is the same God today that sent the Israelites into war to purify the Promised Land that walks with us today. There are point after point where we are instructed to fear "nothing" for the spirit of fear is not of God and yet these New World Order and One World Religion folks want us to shut up and walk in the fear that resides in cowardice.
.. Revolvr, if you feel led to serve then I'll pray God's blessing and His wisdom for you. Like Slug, I am a vet, a Christian veteran. Without us these foolish people will have no platform to teach their heresy from, their kind are exterminated in most other lands. The greatest benifit of refusing to allow fear to rule your life will be what I often experience now that I'm old and only display my medals, badges and wings twice a year, some of the sweetest young people in the world embarrass their moms and dads by walking right up to me, often tug my pants leg and looking up at me ask, "Are you a real hero?" There are not many willing to be a model for the young'uns today and they are so very hungry for the real thing. You go enlist and do what is right, you'll never be sorry for following God and you'll never be sorry for serving your nation.
.. I'm not telling you that the world will love you, they will not. I'm one of the most despised Vietnam Vets that survived that conflict. I'm one of the Original Killer Spades and even my Granddaughter has had to come ask me to tell her the truth because her teacher was teaching on how evil we were in Vietnam. After you serve, always stand proud and throughout the entire span of your life, discard the words of man and hold precious the truths of God.
Just tonight I was talking with some friends and said that of all the Christians that speak out against Christians being soldiers forget that the greatest warrior is God and all the warriors that He set on a path of warfare not only were great warriors for all time but Glorified God in their victories as they slaughtered the enemies before them.
Some of the best Psalms written by David are of giving thanks to God for victories and for God's protection. Today, these Psalms are such inspiration and such comfort to us soldiers that read, pray, and even memorize specific Psalms and they are said before or even during every battle, every patrol, every morning while on the front lines.
This is the God we all worship, who never changes and still puts servants on a path to be warriors where a righteous and faithful servant of God can be in a place where no Christian will ever be, unless they to are warriors.
NUM 32:22 And all the land be brought under him, then shall you be blameless before the Lord and before Israel, and you shall obtain the countries that you desire, before the Lord.
NUM 32:23 But if you do not what you say, no man can doubt but you sin against God: and know ye, that your sin shall overtake you.
Not one response to praise here. Between perverting and wrestling the word of God, and being flat out false witnesses, I wait for the Lord to show it in his bright light.
The Lord is my defence, my rock, my sheild, my sun, my refuge: and, cursed is the man that trusts in the flesh.
Revolvr: you said Christians despise war, but.......BUT WHAT? Which is it again? You are openly standing between two opinions. Is the Lord's hand short that it cannot save? or is it our weapons that will save us?
You got it, you blind guide. Though I doubt you can hear it based on the frightful perversions of my will to forbear from such judgment already found on this thread.
Come near, ye nations, to hear; and hearken, ye people: let the earth hear, and all that is therein; the world, and all things that come forth of it. (2) For the indignation of the LORD is upon all nations, and his fury upon all their armies: he hath utterly destroyed them, he hath delivered them to the slaughter.
We ought to obey the gospel of Christ, especially since the end of all things is at hand, when arms shall stand on the part of the King of the North, and the people shall say "Who can make war with the beast" while he causes all (except the sealed) to recieve the damnable mark of the beast.
RhymnRzn2Zion, can you post scripture supporting your view?
And please, may I ask, that you do so respectfully.
I just finished a dialog with Shirley Phelps and while I was silent with her concerning her constant accusations against my character, I would prefer not to have to 'put up' with it here.
And really, you're disrespecting two men in this thread who made and are making great sacrifices so you can sit there and preach to everyone about how war is horrible.
It sounds ignorant, and I don't apologize for saying so.
^I didn't even know that I was disrespecting anybody. The commandment for all men is to honour all men, and, blessed is the man that is not offended for Jesus' namesake.
Everybody is going to speak what they believe, out of the abundance of their own hearts, no? And, no matter what the workers of iniquity manage to pull off, the words of the Most High will never be bound, or in vain.
I started this thread, and one called "The Judgmental Christian" based on words from another Christian very much like RhymnRzn2Zion. There are some Christians who believe that "there are no Christian warriors or Christian law enforcers." because Christians can never do violence of any kind for any reason. God will provide for us instead. These same Christians also tend to preach hellfire and brimstone, believe that only they are right, and absolutely will not listen to others. I was told because my views are different that I am "a false prophet" and I will most likely burn in hell.
RhymnRzn2Zion, if God will protect you always, do you ever seek medical attention? Do you wear a seat belt? Do you have insurance? If you do any of these things to protect yourself, are you not a hypocrite?
RhymnRzn2Zion, I am curious, what church do you go to? Where did you learn your beliefs? And please don't just say "the Bible" for someone has taught you.
This other person I am talking to preaches this along with her hellfire and brimstone at an atheist site. She admits the others think she is foolish, but she makes the Word of God sound foolish. She is not helping the cause. I try and try to get her to come here to talk with other Christians but she refuses.
You got it, you blind guide.Mr. Rhymn, please review the rules of the board and this forum, and leave off with this type of stuff. Discuss the topic, but do so with respect.
Never mind. I should not be participating in these types of discussions, especially not now.
There are some Christians who believe that "there are no Christian warriors or Christian law enforcers." because Christians can never do violence of any kind for any reason.
IF it actually is the Lord's will (who delights in mercy and truth) to send wrath upon the wicked by the hands of men, to minister a carnal sword, that does not in and of itself justify those officers, either: for it is written, that no man is justified by the law, but, if a man keeps the law, he is not condemned for that thing, yeah if a man keeps the law he shall live in them.
Whereas the HIGH calling, and the ministering of the sword of the Spirit (the word of God by the Holy Ghost) is that which concerns justification, living works (not dead works), and the abundant life. THAT my brother, is how to effectually battle Satan, as opposed to beating the air.
I'm kind of surprised that no one has mentioned Gideon in the book of Judges. The Hall of Faith Chapter mentioned by Revolvr includes him, but one would have to look into why he was in this chapter.
Gideon was a farmer in a time of great oppression by the Midianites. When the time came to deliver the Israelites from this tyranny, God changed Gideon from a farmer into a Military leader, and an expert in guerrilla warfare. Using Gideon, and 300 men, cut down from 32,000, the Midianites were defeated. God could just as easily done this with only Gideon, but also with the 32,000 as well. But to understand the reason for the cut from 32,000 to 300, explains why God didn't just use Gideon.
So I ask this, if God used Gideon and 300 men to defeat the Midianites, why is a Christian Soldier such a bad thing?
"14 You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven."
He has lit that fire within us for a purpose... To give His light to the whole world. (V. 15).
We are to "shine" where ever we find ourselves.So then the question is obvious: Where does Christ not want His light (through Christians) to shine??
In fact, are we not to go into "the highways and byways"?
Praise God for Christian Soldiers!
.......and put down the explosives, and combat gear, and every man stretch forth his hand to the closest jawbone you can find.
If during a power outage, I stand outside my house at night with the drapes drawn, and light for example a coleman lantern...that light will not penetrate into my living room....The fact that I can see does nothing to benefit my wife and children who are in the darkness. Yet if I open the front door and enter, then the lantern that I have lit will give light inside the house.
In much the same way, how will light penetrate any profession if we do not enter that profession?
To include the profession of arms.
You have not provided any scriptural backing for your claim.
And yes! You are being quite. . . controversial, to put it lightly.
I'm not asking for some double truthed, Aristotilianism train of thought.
I think it's quite a ridiculous claim to say that Jesus' isn't going to offend people.
So please, show me your hermeneutic.
Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot . . .
6 million, next to kin?
War is an ugly thing, but righteous war isn't condemned.
When John the Baptist encountered some soldiers on a road he didn't say 'put down your arms!' He told them to do their job justly and fairly.
When John the Baptist encountered some soldiers on a road he didn't say 'put down your arms!' He told them to do their job justly and fairly.Amen!
Jesus also supported this by blessing soldiers He met with. Never did he say, "Don't listen to what John said". How could Jesus reward or bless a soldier if what he was doing as a soldier was wrong?
Same as it is today many years later, soldiers are being blessed while they serve. It would be hypocritical to bless a soldier who is sinning simply for BEING a soldier.
First off, I reject your claim that I am bringing doctrine from my own head, as opposed to scripture. My posts are thouroughly quoting scripture: did you need me to show you everytime with a chapter and verse?
Then, your mention of the dictators, who are now dead: they should have been reputed as already dead when they were yet living, without so much as one American boot touching our neighbors soil, because our God is able to save us to the uttermost: and if God opted not to save our flesh, we would be in heaven anyways, because we bow not to false idols.
When you make a specific scriptural claim, yes.
I would expect the same of anyone who claims the Bible speaks a certain way about something.
If not you, I would have asked someone else.
I'd like to make sure that what's being said is scripturally correct.
This is quite the Taoist thought.
That's also quite an ignorant statement that doesn't warrant a response.
He told the soldiers to be content with their pay and not accuse people falsely or extort money.
No where in there did John the Baptist condemn their profession. Once again, only that they should perform justly, fairly, and, righteously.
The KJV translation skews the thought a little bit with the word 'violence'.
So I double checked with the NASB, the NIV, the ESV, the NLV, even the Message, God forbid.
Oh, and a Greek translation.
John the Baptist isn't telling them to put down their weapons and beat their guns into tractors.
Again you take a flying leap with things I do not admit.
Come to, brother, how often did the Lord God give up the armies of Israel to their enemies? Was it not because of their backsliddings? And when the chosen kept the commandments, quite a few times we can note, the LORD himself did smite, while Israel sat and watched!
Luk 3:14 And soldiers also asked him, saying, And we, what must we do? And he said unto them, Extort from no man by violence, neither accuse any one wrongfully; and be content with your wages.
Extort is plainly understood to be to take without cause, to steal, or to cheat out of.
be content with your wages. This is exactly what I did in the sixties with every cent of my $93.00 a month. The citizen soldier is not to, nor does he do his duty ti get rich.
.. Thank you for finaly posting a scripture and yes, your other posts can be assumed to have come from nowhere but off the top of your head, just as this one did. The scripture you posted for reference has absolutely nothing to do with your thoughts on the matter. And since this is a Christian forum for discussion between Christians (people that have promised to follow the Christ) scripture is always required to back your position for we do indeed stand, very firmly, on the Word of God. You have totally bent that scripture out of it's context but once more, thank you for posting your reference.
I believe it was one of my favourite Christian authors, speakers and apologists, C.S. Lewis, who said something like this.
Words of nonsense, strung together to create illusionary accusations, are still words of nonsense.
He was speaking in the context of philosophical questions such as, can God make a stone even He can't lift? A four sided triangle? etc.
But it's nonsense. Even if it is in sentence form.
We're walking a mighty thin tightrope here guys. Keep it nice.
OH. We have critics of the KJV here. I feel like I was a bottle in the smoke, and the smoke has somewhat cleared.
You say instead of relying on defense we should put our faith in God. I understand your view. However, let me ask, do you wear a seat belt to protect your life? Do you lock your doors to protect life and home? Do you get vaccinated to protect yourself against disease? We are told to put all of our trust and faith in God. So is it hypocritical to do these things? Does doing these things suggest one does not have faith in God? Where do we cross the line from trusting God, to testing God?
These are things worthy of discussion. But RhymnRzn2Zion, you are not providing any kind of coherent philosophy. Instead you only condemn us for being wrong.
It has been said that God helps those who help themselves. I believe God also blesses those who help others, even in defense of life or of State against evil. We have all brought scripture supporting our view.
RhymnRzn2Zion, try to answer these questions and provide a relevant theological rationale so we can understand your position. This is something you need to learn to do in this thread and any other you participate in. I offer this feedback in good cheer.
In what venue would Christ have us refrain from being "Light and Salt"?
There's a burdensome stone for you to carry........That is the point, some are placed on that path to carry that burden while others are not. God gives strength through His Word to those that must carry it and blesses those that are obedient and walk that road as a warrior as they are doing God's will.
That is the point, some are placed on that path to carry that burden while others are not. God gives strength through His Word to those that must carry it and blesses those that are obedient and walk that road as a warrior as they are doing God's will.
Since RhymnRzn2Zion has not replied, let me play devil's advocate.
Fighting in self-defense, defense of family or others, or for defense of State is never justified because you should not trust your defense, but you should trust the Lord. Defense is for the protection of your life on earth. Is your life on earth so precious to you, do you love it so much that you are prepared to kill others to prolong it? Are you prepared to kill atheist or pagan enemies, thereby taking away any chance that they may repent in later life? Remember when your defense forces kill a non-believer they have just assigned that person to eternity in the lake of fire.
This was the argument given to me by someone who believes just like RhymnRzn2Zion.
Sad thing is, alot of our fellows here and abroad take that view. The hypocrisy of it is, by the same standard, God must have been greatly blessing the Mohammadeans in promoting their sword to the establishment of Al Haram Sharif and Al Aksa Mosque.
Do you believe in the God of Abraham? In other words... the one of the Old Testament? If yes... then how do you get around the simple fact that God ordained Israel going to battle?
Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. (12) Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. (13) There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.
In this babe's milk from the Gospel, Apostle Paul is indicating the same fact that the rest of the Bible also teaches, that, before the advent of Jesus Christ, when men died, they went the way of their fathers: not to the eternal judgement.
But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it. (2) And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. (3) And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. (4) But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it. (5) For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever.
The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: (21) Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
This argument certainly appears to have some force. It seems difficult to claim that God never countenances war, given his active promotion of it in the OT. And I generally believe that people often tend to dismiss the accounts of Israel's history as if their entire history was "an experiment gone wrong" that God "replaced" with a gospel of grace. No time to get into this, but I see Israel being central to the gospel. There are not distinct "threads" in the plan of redemption.
On the other hand, I was intrigued by the Micah 4 passage that Rhymn provided. Despite what I have written above, I think it is clear that God works in history and that there are indeed "differences" between the post-Christ era and the pre-Christ time.
Rhymn, can you make any kind of case that the Micah 4 passage is indeed descriptive of a state of affairs that comes into being with the advent of Jesus into the world, and not a state of affairs that applies "post-second coming"? I speculate most of the "pro just war" crowd will claim that this text from Micah describes a future world.
Context is everything. Here are the examples Paul was speaking of... perhaps you can show me the "war" issue in them?
6 Now these things happened as examples for us, that we should not crave evil things, as they also craved.
7 And do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written, "THE PEOPLE SAT DOWN TO EAT AND DRINK, AND STOOD UP TO PLAY."
Don't see it... do you?
Project Peter, for your future reference, I am not disposed for idle chatter: I neither have the time, nor the patience for spelling out every simple principle of the doctrine of Christ: especially with men's persons who go about contradicting for what seem's to me to be to PLAY AROUND.
RhymnRzn2Zion, if you can answer me this it would be helpful. Why did Jesus never tell all the soldiers he met, some he even blessed... never told them to stop being a soldier. If He didn't tell the soldiers then that it was a path that is wrong WHY would He tell soldiers today that it is?
People say it's a path that a faithful worshiper of God could never be on but Jesus never said this or even gave any indication that it was. I ask this cause Jesus always leads by example and in the situation with the adultress who was about to get stoned to death. Jesus stepped up, drew the line and told anyone without sin to cast the first stone. Then after the crowd stopped he told the woman to go and sin no more.
Sin is sin, so if it's sinful to be a soldier why did Jesus fail to lead a soldier out of service by telling all the ones He met to stop being a soldier?
Brother, it seems to me, from judging the levels of "edification" I find on internet chat boards, that the due order for brothers with many questions is to do as Paul said, to not confer with flesh and blood, but consult the Lord by all prayer, and study of the Word of God.
Okay listen. Jesus the Lord knew the thoughts of all men: he did not commit himself to men he knew to have wickedness in them. The way he has framed this present reality, the Lord lets us work out our own salvation. If someone harms one of the least of his, it will be better to be drowned in the depths: it is as if a brute beast touched Holy Zion.
I will say this, Teddy Roosevelt had in right (IMO) when he said: "Speak softly, but carry a big stick".
Men are men, nations are nations, and war is a fact of life.
War will be with us until the Glorious Appearing of Jesus.
God has/will use war to accomplish His purposes.
God plants His people in all walks of life...to include the Military.
i'm ignoring you ignoring me. don't lose sleep waiting for me.
This section of scripture concerns the 'end of days', after all is done and finished. I don't see what impact this has on us now, nor do I see it prohibiting war.
I've simply asked a question, one backed by scripture; seeking your input as to how you reconcile your stance with that written in the quoted passages.
Okay listen. Jesus the Lord knew the thoughts of all men: he did not commit himself to men he knew to have wickedness in them. The way he has framed this present reality, the Lord lets us work out our own salvation. If someone harms one of the least of his, it will be better to be drowned in the depths: it is as if a brute beast touched Holy Zion.Jesus commited Himself to at least one soldier who's faith resulted in the healing of his child. I don't know if this fits within your opinion of commitment to a person who is faithful. It does in my opinion so I'm right back to my question, why didn't Jesus tell this soldier to stop being a soldier if such a path (being a soldier) is sinful?
If you can't or don't want to answer the question then please just say so and I will let it stand and address my question to others, Thank you.
I have done this and not only did God make it clear I was to remain a soldier my career was blessed. Now I will use this experience to help present soldiers as they walk their path as a warrior offering support and understanding since I overcame my period of doubt and I'm led to assist them through their doubt.
I see because I look through the lookinglass also known as the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
While I do lean ever so slightly toward the "just war" position - that war can sometimes be God's will - I do not agree with the above, although I may be inferring too much about the writer's position.
"You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 43Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant,..."
Now the above teaching is not specifically about war, but I think there is a strong implication about the issue of power. And if not here, I believe there are other texts where Jesus basically teaches that the path of the cross is not one of gaining power but rather one of giving up power. And if you carry a big stick you are using power in the form of military threat - even if in the form of defensive posture.
Jesus announced the kingdom of God - a new way of running the world. The parables are ways of explicating what that kingdom should be like. And it certainly seems that Jesus is calling for a radical change to the status quo. So just because there has always been war, the newly announced kingdom - Jesus has been enthroned as Lord of the world, not just our "inner" lives - may not call for continuing in that pattern.
All this said, I do remain slightly on the "just war" side of this issue. But I cannot think of too many just wars in the last 50 years or so.
I find this to be a very difficult subject - I am somewhat on the fence on this one.
Can you justify this conclusion? How do you know it is not a state of affairs that comes into effect with the renewal of the covenant in Jesus Christ. And Rhymn, can you give us reasons to believe that this passage is about the covenant renewal that has already taken place in Christ?
Jesus commited Himself to at least one soldier who's faith resulted in the healing of his child. I don't know if this fits within your opinion of commitment to a person who is faithful. It does in my opinion so I'm right back to my question, why didn't Jesus tell this soldier to stop being a soldier if such a path (being a soldier) is sinful?
Then Paul called one of the centurions unto him, and said, Bring this young man unto the chief captain: for he hath a certain thing to tell him. (18) So he took him, and brought him to the chief captain, and said, Paul the prisoner called me unto him, and prayed me to bring this young man unto thee, who hath something to say unto thee. (19) Then the chief captain took him by the hand, and went with him aside privately, and asked him, What is that thou hast to tell me? (20) And he said, The Jews have agreed to desire thee that thou wouldest bring down Paul to morrow into the council, as though they would enquire somewhat of him more perfectly. (21) But do not thou yield unto them: for there lie in wait for him of them more than forty men, which have bound themselves with an oath, that they will neither eat nor drink till they have killed him: and now are they ready, looking for a promise from thee. (22) So the chief captain then let the young man depart, and charged him, See thou tell no man that thou hast shewed these things to me. (23) And he called unto him two centurions, saying, Make ready two hundred soldiers to go to Caesarea, and horsemen threescore and ten, and spearmen two hundred, at the third hour of the night; (24) And provide them beasts, that they may set Paul on, and bring him safe unto Felix the governor. (25) And he wrote a letter after this manner: (26) Claudius Lysias unto the most excellent governor Felix sendeth greeting. (27) This man was taken of the Jews, and should have been killed of them: then came I with an army, and rescued him, having understood that he was a Roman. (28) And when I would have known the cause wherefore they accused him, I brought him forth into their council: (29) Whom I perceived to be accused of questions of their law, but to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds. (30) And when it was told me how that the Jews laid wait for the man, I sent straightway to thee, and gave commandment to his accusers also to say before thee what they had against him. Farewell. (31) Then the soldiers, as it was commanded them, took Paul, and brought him by night to Antipatris.
Acts 23:17I'll take this as you're not gonna answer the question. Thank you.
Just so you know, not one Christian who says that a Christian on a path as a warrior is wrong and/or sinful has ever answered my question. You are not the only one I have asked and over the past year all Christians I have asked this, all have basically sidestepped but a few were straight up and honest with me and said that they could not answer this question.
It's a direct question and I was just hoping to find a Christian that can give me a direct answer.
Jesus Himself is going to make war, and we'll be right there with Him when He does it. Will it be a just war? Of course.
(11) And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
(12) His eyes [were] as a flame of fire, and on his head [were] many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
(13) And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
(14) And the armies [which were] in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
(16) And he hath on [his] vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
(18) That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all [men, both] free and bond, both small and great.
(21) And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which [sword] proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.
I personally hate war with a passion, and the taking of innocent life that always goes with it. Yet it is often forced upon us whether we like it or not.
^yep, the saints will be in company, and in glorified bodies. The just war, the good fight, will be finished after our feet leave the ground.
Seeing you have a reply everytime the answers are given to you, you must have figured everything out already. Fortify your strength, therefore........or keep on with endless inquiries........or whatever it is (?) your chain of command is appointing.
Can you justify this conclusion? How do you know it is not a state of affairs that comes into effect with the renewal of the covenant in Jesus Christ.
The thing I keep forgetting about that verse is the phrase 'exalted above the hills'--where the 'pagans' used to worship their gods (on the highest point possible).
I suppose it could be a new state of affairs after the renewal of the covenant in Jesus Christ. Verse 5 I probably should have read a little closer.
But that said. . .I don't see this state of affairs happening all over the world at the moment. So, a mindset for believers? Yeah, that makes good sense enough. A prohibition of war? It still isn't.
Seeing you have a reply everytime the answers are given to you, you must have figured everything out already. Fortify your strength........or keep on with endless inquiries........or whatever it is (?) your chain of command is appointing.
I was merely making a "left handed" observation as to the human condition, as it were...A result of that cancer we know as sin.
A simple observation: It is an unfortunate reality. I believe that God, being sovereign over the affairs of men uses war now to accomplish His purposes; even as He did in the OT.
Two that I refer to as examples that (at least in part) show His purpose (in hind sight) are WWII and Alexander the Great's conquest of the entire known world, both bloody, both full of terror.
In the former, through the horror that was the 3d Reich; Eretz Israel was established due to public outcry after the war stemming from the Holocaust.
In the later, Alexander established Koine (common) Greek as the "international language", enabling the distribution of the Gospels throughout the entire world some 300 years later.
War will always be with us until Christ's return (c.f. Matt 24, Revelation), a fact we must accept.
Firstly, there is no clear, unambiguous prohibition against a Christian being a soldier.
Secondly, if Christian's were not serving...then how would the light of the Gospel be carried to those soldiers who are unbelievers?
Matthew 5:14-16 (for example) as well as Acts 1:8 tells us that WE as Christians are to carry the Gospel....EVERYWHERE!
I can tell you from experience: When a soldier hears the Gospel from a fellow soldier who is sharing the same dangers...When a soldier sees the change wrought in his fellow soldier by the presence of Christ in his life...It has a much more powerful impact than anything else could have.
It's trite, I know...but yet very true (speaking of combat): "That if you haven't been there, you can't understand it."
I was blessed in my own life...I went to combat (not the first time) as a new Christian...3 months in the faith.
Soldiers in my platoon could not believe the change in me...and I was privileged to lead 6 young, hard, headstrong, fire-eating paratroopers to faith in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ....at 3 months in the faith myself.
God is still sovereign, and His will and Purpose will be done...If we truly seek to serve and love Him, will He not be faithful in leading us in His path?
Have I not sufficiently demonstrated that the conscience of the soldier is the determining factor? a soldier that is without sin is one that does not incur bloodguilt, among other things. If any man lacks that wisdom, then he knows not as he ought to.
Hmmmm, this doesn't answer the question though.
If I read what you just said correctly then a soldier who is determined by God to be on a path of a warrior should not (I say should... cause some do, due to doubt) have guilt as they do their job.
Well this is similar to my thoughts, I think. Just that the way you word everything makes it difficult to follow and understand.
I hear you there. But then for one so concerned about Scripture... I'd sort of think context would be important to you. I mean... you chose that passage to make your point and sure as God made little green apples... your point sort of falls through the old context crack.
Then you use a passage that speaks of the time that hasn't happened yet... etc. Seems you might just be basing your idea on your own thinking and not really much Scripture.
May God now look upon it brother, measure for measure.
Yes, that would also agree with Scripture: it is a rare thing that someone enlisted in the carnal military is going to fear God and abstain from all violence, as commanded in the Word. They should doubt, especially after the commandment, for guilty, unloving, violence.
You sound presumptuous about the nature and timing of his return in this statement. War is not with me, already! I already dwell without bars and gates, I already do not learn war after the flesh.
And how, pray tell, am I being presumptuous in asserting that war will be with us (humanity) until Christ returns?
"And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army." (Revelation 19:11-19 KJV) emphasis mine.
How then do you read this?
What is your understanding of His timing and return?
I just scanned over RR2Z's responses and from that I picked up what is likely the main point. Having had this very discussion with several Jehovah's Witnesses, he/she either is one or should be. The answers are very consistent with JW Ideology. I no longer believe this person to be a Christian.
You give your voice to justify Christian participation/approval/complicity to carnal war by saying "war shall be with us till Christ comes". Brother, we could drop dead right now, and the next thing we will know we are being raised from the dead on the day of the Lord's return.
For that cause, I answered you, to show that war is not with us (quoting you, if in fact we are in the Lord). War among unsaved humanity? that's not what you said at first.
I am a Christian, Bill. Not a Jehovah's Witness, or some other backslidden form!
Then brother, you are seriously in need of in depth study of exactly what you have aligned yourself with. Your attempts at hermaneutics is disastrous. At the very best you have not read the Word of God and if you are at worst, being taught this position as being Biblical, you are horribly deceived. Your exposition of scripture is straight out of the pits of Hell.
If these words of mine offend you, I cannot apologize for my position because the truth is the truth and it must never be glossed over.
If you will pick up any World History Text and read it through and then apply your ideology to the events and imagine the outcome under that ideology you will see, very clearly, why you and the JW's horrify those of us here that hjave chosen to walk, hand in hand, with Jesus.
Just as Solomon wrote, there is a time for all things. And staying current, for the moment, to simply ignore the successful attack on the Towers and sit quietly on our hands would have resulted in the extermination of tens of thousands more of the citizens of this country. In addition to keeping all scripture in it's intended context, it is also critical that as God's people we defend the innocent and preserve their right to worship Him.
Point; the Islamics are in the process of concurring the United States for the sole purpose of exterminating the Jew and the Follower of the Book. (That is what they call Christians.) Now, for just a moment, look up what is happening in the South of Sudan to the Christians there. These are not some radical movement of the Jihadist. This religious genocide is the action of the every day, common follower of Muhammad. According to your ideology God demands that we sit back, allow them to murder us and to do nothing to keep our wives and our children from a life of slavery and sexual misuse.
You are not teaching Christianity! Your doctrine is that of the Witnesses.
Christ said for those who have ears to hear.
I have read every thing RhymnRzn2Zion has written. I have ears to hear not necessarily what he's said, but what Christ through he Scriptures have said.
I believe America was ordained by God to exist and I believe there are times when we have to defend ourselves.
I don't like murderers but I don't go across America looking for murders so I can kill them, but if one comes into my house and threatens me or my family, he may suffer the blunt of my wrath. I believe I'd be in God's will to protect myself.
But, I have no fear of wicked men because I believe the power of Christ living in me not only guides me and nourishes me but also protects me. Christ is my fortress.
For us to take up arms to chase so called enemies is wicked and definitely not Christ honoring. To defend ourselves against enemies on the home front is another issue, but still, a greater issue is how much those of us who are believers really trust God to protect us.
Hebrews 7:26 says Christ is among other things "Harmless." Look up the meaning of harmless if you want.
If we are going to be anything like Christ, we have to put down our arms.
The Apostle Paul had the right to fight for his rights when he was being sent to Rome, but he didn't.
Christ told us to go forth in the midst of wolves but to be harmless of doves. We're not to take anything for defense. Dove's get killed, so do sheep but also God knows every sparrow that perishes. He loves and He protects. The battle is His, not ours.
Can we kill in the name of God? As I said earlier, maybe if we have to protect ourselves but how many of us have had to do that? God is a God of peace, not war. When He takes the war out of us and replaces it with the peace of God then that desire for war ends.
To say RhymnRzn is Jehovah Witness is ludicrous. I hope whomever said that can ask for wisdom.
It's human nature to hurl darts at anyone who disrupts our thought trenches. Most believers have blind spots that needs destroyed.
Now I believe the root of this discussion involves our attitude toward our counties present actions in the Mideast.
I don't think that should be discussed on a Bible Forum.
.. As for your attempt to admonish me, even after the snake has bitten me I do not have the right to call it a snake? The ideology came straight out of the Watch Tower instruction manual. And yes, it is an ideology and no it is not a theological stance.
Okay listen. Jesus the Lord knew the thoughts of all men: he did not commit himself to men he knew to have wickedness in them. The way he has framed this present reality, the Lord lets us work out our own salvation. If someone harms one of the least of his, it will be better to be drowned in the depths: it is as if a brute beast touched Holy Zion.RR2Z, the bolded portion may have been asked as I've only reached this point in the thread. My question in response to this portion is, What about Judas Iscariot? He was a zealot, remember?
On another forum discussing war, a Christian posted this: Anyone who calls themselves a Christian and supports or takes part in carnal combat/War is Not a Christian at all. On the day of judgment they will be calling out Lord Lord and He will say I never knew you.
He had no right to condemn another and put words in the Lord's mouth that may never be said to such individuals.
"Utterly slay old and young men, maidens and little children and women; but do not come near anyone on whom is the mark; and begin at My sanctuary. So they began with the elders who were before the house."
"...do not let your eye spare, and do not have pity."
Actually, the whole context is 9:1-11, but the command from God within stands.
Amen to II Chro. 7:14 But remember it is GOd that heals the lands, not us with guns and bullets.
Here are scriptures that go along with the principles i wrote in the post.
I Timothy 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.
2 Thessalonians 3:2 And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all [men] have not faith.
Psalms 31:3 For thou [art] my rock and my fortress; therefore for thy name's sake lead me, and guide me.
Psalms 91:2 (http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/search/list/?search_book=Psalms&search_chapter_verse=91&varchapter_verse=91:2) I will say of the LORD, [He is] my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
For us to take up arms to chase so called enemies is wicked and definitely not Christ honoring. To defend ourselves against enemies on the home front is another issue, but still, a greater issue is how much those of us who are believers really trust God to protect us. I Timothy 5:8 again.
Romans 8:10 (http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/search/list/?search_book=Romans&search_chapter_verse=8&varchapter_verse=8:10) And if Christ in you, the body [is] dead because of sin; but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness.
----Note: Death is necessary while we live. I'm need to write a post on this. When we die, we're transformed (Romans 12:1-2) We're in the image of Christ himself. His royal blood will run through our veins. As new creatures we life in the spirit and walk in the spirit and talk in the spirit and face those who want to harm us in the spirit. Paul was in the death state when he was arrested in Acts/ 22. He eventually ended up in Rome in a filty dungeon. But he never raised a hand against any of his captors.
There are many live Christians today. We need people who are dead to the world and all it offers.
Dead people don't kill and murder.
Christ told us to go forth in the midst of wolves but to be harmless of doves. We're not to take anything for defense. Dove's get killed, so do sheep but also God knows every sparrow that perishes. He loves and He protects. The battle is His.
[B]Matthew 10:16 (http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/search/list/?search_book=Matthew&search_chapter_verse=10&varchapter_verse=10:16) Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
Matthew 10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farting? And one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father.
Question: Could Adam kill while he was in the garden of Eden? I posted on another threat that there were other people on the earth at the same time the Garden existed. What if Adam killed one of them while he was in his sinless body? Jesus Christ is the Tree of life. His leaves heal during eternity. Then we will be like it was in the Garden of Eden. We'll have the same blood as Christ. Things will be glorious. We can be like that today. God wants to form a Garden of Eden now. He does that in the bodies of Christ who conform to His image. As I said before, In Christ we don't war, lie, steal hurl darts of threats, but we have no life. Our life is his life. We are one in Him. When America brings all her troops home and righteousness and Holiness reign, there is no need for fighting. God takes away Murder when we're conformed to His Image. When we present our bodies a living sacrifice and follow through, we produce righteousness. Not only put out, but we ARE Righteousness. We have a sword, It's the word of God. [I]Hebrews 4:12 (http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/search/list/?search_book=Hebrews&search_chapter_verse=4&varchapter_verse=4:12) For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
I stand by the human nature statement. We're all flesh beings and the flesh will roar up and cause problems at any time. That's why we have to let God create a new heart in us.
----Note: Death is necessary while we live. I need to write a post on this. When we die, we're transformed (Romans 12:1-2) We're in the image of Christ himself. His royal blood will run through our veins. As new creatures we life in the spirit and walk in the spirit and talk in the spirit and face those who want to harm us in the spirit. Paul was in the death state when he was arrested in Acts 22. He eventually ended up in Rome in a filty dungeon. But he never raised a hand against any of his captors.
Question: Could Adam kill while he was in the garden of Eden? I posted on another threat that there were other people on the earth at the same time the Garden existed. What if Adam killed one of them while he was in his sinless body? Jesus Christ is the Tree of life. His leaves heal during eternity. Then we will be like it was in the Garden of Eden. We'll have the same blood as Christ. Things will be glorious. We can be like that today. God wants to form a Garden of Eden now. He does that in the bodies of Christ who conform to His image. As I said before, In Christ we don't war, lie, steal hurl darts of threats, but we have no life. Our life is his life. We are one in Him. When America brings all her troops home and righteousness and Holiness reign, there is no need for fighting.No need for an army. God takes away Murder when we're conformed to His Image. When we present our bodies a living sacrifice and follow through, we produce righteousness. Not only put out, but we ARE Righteousness. We have a sword, It's the word of God. [I]Hebrews 4:12 (http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/search/list/?search_book=Hebrews&search_chapter_verse=4&varchapter_verse=4:12) For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Hi AliveinChristDave, and a blessed New Year to you!
Although I see your point, and respect your view; I must point out that Paul ended up in Rome precisely because he "fought for his rights" as a Roman citizen (Now I understand that this was orchestrated by God, as spoken by the prophet Agabus).
Coming full circle, I think this illustrates wonderfully that God uses governments/authorities etc. to accomplish the purpose that He has in mind.
First, thank you for your clear and definitive answer.
However, when I said "us" it was in the all inclusive sense of humanity as a whole.
This includes both the saved and the unsaved...we after all live in this world, and warfare touches us also.
For example, you assert that you are untouched by war (if I understand you correctly), but I submit to you that you are indeed touched by the current conflict in which the U.S. finds itself.
If you pay taxes (as commanded by our Lord), then the money you sent the government is being used (among other things) to finance the conflict in Iraq...Beans, Bullets, Supplies, etc., have you considered that?
The price of commodities is up as a direct result of the war...filled your tank with gas recently?
How many Christians perished on 9/11?
How many more lost loved ones?
As I stated earlier, Warfare is a fact of life in a fallen world. I truly wish it weren't but I accept that it is going to happen, and Christians are going to be caught in the middle.
Therefore, we come back to the original question of whether a Christian can (according to scripture) be a soldier.
If Christ has in fact forbidden His followers from serving in the Armed forces, then along with the obvious problems of Rom. 13 and 1 Peter; we have an additional problem....we have found the one profession to which we may not go and be a light. A room left dark because there is no "lamp" to light it.
Matthew 5, and 28, Acts 1:8 and following must then have an exemption clause.
Now if one feels led to be a pacifist...I will NOT judge or condemn him (Romans ch 14); should we then judge one who feels led of the Spirit to be a soldier?
Context, context and always context! The very moment you rip scripture out of it's context you violate the last command given by our LORD to neither add to nor to delete anything from the scriptures.
Mar 8:17 And Jesus perceiving it saith unto them, Why reason ye, because ye have no bread? do ye not yet perceive, neither understand? have ye your heart hardened?
Mar 8:19 When I brake the five loaves among the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces took ye up? They say unto him, Twelve.
Mar 8:20 And when the seven among the four thousand, how many basketfuls of broken pieces took ye up? And they say unto him, Seven.
Mar 8:21 And he said unto them, Do ye not yet understand?
As you or anyone can plainly see, this text has nothing to do with being a soldier and being a Christian at the same time.
Matthew 7:24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Mat 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you.
.. The scriptures have been divided into chapters for us today so that we can, with ease, determine the contextual flow and this chapter very firmly sets the context in the first two sentences. Once more, you cannot harm scripture to teach falsehood. For the sake of redundancy I'll not go any further with this. I do not seek to cause you embarrassment but do instead seek to restrain you from teaching this heresy and any thinking man can easily ascertain that you are not teaching the Word of God but are, instead, teaching a falsehood of your own design.
.. I wish you well, pray for God to open your eyes, forgive you your sin and I ask Him to place you into His family that you would be awakened with the truth of the gospel of Jesus, the Christ.
.. Good night and God bless, but remember, please, context. God has not hidden His word but has instead made it clear and easily understood, that the masses might, at their choice, easily find Him.
Posters are making some blurry assessments of God's will in this matter, and others need to polish off the pair of sixty-sixes they are looking through.
I like to call it rather Pass-the-fist: as the Lord has ALL power in heaven and earth, and, It is a frightful thing to fall into the hands of the Most High. As Jesus testified that he will recompense every man for his own works, Don't you think we should be telling soldiers what Jesus Christ commanded us, straightly warning them?
For the lack of that, we have a range of mischeivous-mockers (who know the hypocrisy of war) and blind-men (who's consciences are weak/defiled), gettin tatooed (acting like it's God's will), and singing "Let the Bodies Hit The Floor" whilst machine-gunning, and who knows what utter abominations.
This wisdom have I seen also under the sun, and it seemed great unto me: (14) There was a little city, and few men within it; and there came a great king against it, and besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it: (15) Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man. (16) Then said I, WISDOM IS BETTER THAN STRENGTH: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard. (17) The words of wise men are heard in quiet more than the cry of him that ruleth among fools. (18) WISDOM IS BETTER THAN WEAPONS OF WAR: but one sinner destroyeth much good.
It's about impossible to win hearts and minds, or acheive any amount of redemption, reconciliation, and atonement, when brothers (who probably have not seen or heard the things of God, neither his miracles) turn around and his house is blown up, or his neighbors children have perished from the assault from the heavily armed enemy who opresses and is stronger than him! He's more guarenteed to be mad-hot!
I just finished reading through this entire thread and decided the best way to respond was to simply focus on your OP.:) Just took a few minutes to condense and format it for a post here.
Pacifism is not an Old Testament ethic. Sometimes, to have been a pacifist would have been blatantly unethical. The Old Testament people of God were not pacifists. Capital punishment and killing in war were not considered different forms of murder. Such killing was not sinful. The days of the Garden of Eden were past. The people of God lived in the present. The present required killing some criminals. It required killing in defense of one's people and home, and in the occasional deliverance of other people from oppression. At times it was required to fulfill the command of God.
The prophets Isaiah and Micah spoke of a day when nations would beat their swords into plowshares (Isaiah 2:4; Micah 4:3). Nation would not lift up sword against nation, and no one would study war anymore. That day was far off, in the last days, when God would rule the earth with a rod of iron. Yet even before then, God himself would go to war against his enemies, crushing all opposition (Zechariah 14:3–16). God, the great warrior, would be victorious.
So back to your question regarding the New Testament..Peacemaker's were still needed and around then as they are today..there are no callings for "pacifists' in the bible.All pacifist discussions of this event seem to miss this point.
"all who draw the sword will die by the sword"
The first step is to recognize that it is an aphorism — a brief wisdom saying. It is a general truth that in the proper circumstances generally happens. It is not a divine law or unconditional prophecy. Many soldiers have died peacefully — General Eisenhower, for example. Their deaths prove this verse is not a divine law or prophecy. Jesus' words in this instance are words of wisdom. They are an aphorism, not a law.
The Gospels tell neither the good nor the bad soldiers to give up their profession. The military and those in it come under no broad moral judgment. On the other hand, Jesus took a clearly negative approach toward Pharisees, scribes, tax collectors and lawyers. Yet few believe that Christians cannot be scribes or tax collectors or lawyers. The Gospels never describe soldiering as sinful.
Luke 6:36, "Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful." The Greek word translated here as merciful is different from that found in Matthew 5:7. The word in Matthew (eleêmôn) often referred to those who compassionately fulfilled their social obligations. The word in Luke is oiktirmôn. It also includes the concept of compassion and appears to be a close synonym for Matthew's word.
Jesus calls on his disciples to have the same kind of mercy/compassion that the Father has. As we have observed, our God is a compassionate God and also a warrior. The two traits are not mutually exclusive.
Immediately after the Sermon on the Plain, Luke relates the story of the compassionate centurion who asked Jesus to heal his servant (Luke 7:1-10). Luke describes this soldier as a deserving man (verse 4). Jesus himself singles this centurion out for his exemplary faith.
Being a soldier, Jesus shows us, is no evidence of weak faith or a lack of compassion. This soldier's faith and compassion are examples for us. The Gospel says nothing negative about soldiering. Luke portrays this soldier as honorable and exemplary. Nor is this the only place where Luke speaks positively about soldiers.
Jesus says nothing about whether Christians should routinely arm themselves. When the disciples say they have only two swords, he replies that two swords are enough. Enough for what? To fulfill the prophecy "He was numbered with the transgressors." Apparently the charges that the authorities would bring against Jesus included sedition, for he claimed to be King of the Jews. Though the Gospels do not record it happening this way, Jesus' accusers could have used the fact that his disciples carried swords as evidence that he was an insurrectionist.
These verses place the church on the side of peace. Not only should Christians be on the side of peace, they are to promote peace. Christians are to love peace. They are to be peacemakers. They are to sow in peace to raise a harvest of righteousness.
Being a peacemaker and loving peace is not the same thing as being a pacifist. James does not call on Christians to totally renounce deadly force or warfare. Though as James says, peacemaking is part of heavenly wisdom, the Bible also teaches that God, in his heavenly wisdom, uses and will use violent deadly force.
Therefore, one cannot indiscriminately claim that one who uses such force has rejected heavenly wisdom. A more nuanced understanding of each situation is required before passing judgment.
Sometimes we hear the argument that those who defend with lethal weapons lack faith. If only they had more faith in God, he would deliver them without their need to fight. Or if they died, God would deliver them in the resurrection of the just.
This argument reminds me of those who believe that using doctors is a lack of faith. If you really trusted God, they say, God would heal you. You would not need doctors. Of course the Bible does not teach this approach either. One can trust that God will heal in whatever way he pleases, by miracles, through doctors or through the body's natural healing ability. To insist that healing from God comes only through what we call a miracle is to limit God. It is by limiting God that we show a lack of faith.
Hebrews 11 praises the faith of those who lived before there was a Christian church. Their faith at times involved combat. At other times it involved flight and deprivation. Even in Hebrews 11 contexts changed from one story to another. What might have been appropriate for one person of God may not have been for another. What united them was their faith in God. That ethic remains.
Although Hebrews 11 does not address military service and pacifism under the new covenant, by giving us its many examples of faith during times of war, it suggests that we should not automatically think less of those whose faith permits them to fight. In Hebrews 11, those who conquered their enemies through faith are equal morally to those who died as martyrs. In modern parlance, they praised the Lord and passed the ammunition.
John is known as the apostle of love. If love requires pacifism, then it seems that the apostle of love would say so..God also inspired the apostle of love to write the most enigmatic of the New Testament books — the symbolic and violent book of Revelation. Bloodletting fills many of its pages.
Love is multidirectional. Love for one person may conflict with love for another, or love for the community. One may find it necessary to punish those to whom one owes love. It may even be necessary to defend with deadly force one person you love against the assaults of another person you love. This is an unfortunate but occasionally real example of love in action. In both Testaments, bloodshedding and love are not mutually exclusive. The Bible makes no such dichotomy.
Whether these men are apocalyptic symbols or are real-live prophets makes no difference in the validity of their ethical example. Symbolically or literally, they are not pacifists.
God and the apostle John have no problem with that. In the new covenant era, it is righteous for the two witnesses to use deadly force.
If anyone tries to harm them, fire comes from their mouths and devours their enemies. This is how anyone who wants to harm them must die. These men have the power to shut up the sky so that it will not rain during the time they are prophesying, and they have power to turn the waters into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague as often as they will.
It is debatable how literally we should take this. Are these actual men? Time will tell. They may be. Regardless, they are portrayed as men who do God's will.
Paul commands Christians not to repay anyone "evil for evil." If one believes that all bloodshed is evil, then one will read this statement as denying any possibility of Christian bloodletting. Yet if one does not believe all bloodletting is evil, then one will not think this is what Paul means.
We cannot use this statement by Paul to defend pacifism until we prove that Paul believes Christians can never under any circumstances kill another human. Is this what Paul believes?
To clarify his teaching further Paul says, "If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone." Obviously Paul understands that living at peace may not depend on us, and, therefore, may not be possible.
If the enemy insists that he or she is going to bomb your home, peace no longer exists. Paul's statement implies that Christians may not always be living at peace. At those times may we use violent force?
Paul understood that mistreated people may try to seek revenge. The old covenant regulated vengeance within Israel. No one could demand more than an eye for an eye, or a tooth for a tooth. By Paul's day, the rabbis understood that the most practical way to handle such cases was to impose a monetary fine on the guilty party.
The law also imposed death sentences to maintain Israel's religious purity and to punish murder. In Genesis, God gave all nations authority to take human life. Murderers were to be executed.
Paul does not tell us in Romans 12 what kind of vengeance he has in mind when he says, "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath." However, a few verses later Paul explains that soldiers, those who "bear the sword," are God's servants and God's agents of wrath (13:4). To "leave room for God's wrath" would, therefore, have to include allowing for the activity of soldiers.
God's wrath is not limited to human activity, but may include it.
Since God has established government to execute his wrath, Paul's advice seems to mean that Christians should not take the law into their own hands. They are to allow for God's ordained way of bringing wrath.
Paul says nothing about ignoring crimes, or doing nothing to punish criminals legally. He says simply that we must not seek private vengeance, that we must trust in God's determination that vengeance will be done, and when possible to "live at peace with everyone." Then he goes on to say that soldiers are instruments of God's vengeance.
That God wants us to do good to an enemy does not mean that God never allows us to respond with violent force to our enemy's evil doing. Though we are not to return evil for evil, not all violent force is evil. Doing good and responding with violent force are not contradictory behaviors. Our enemies' actions have some bearing on how we respond. Private vengeance is usually wrong. Vigilantism can rarely be justified. Yet legal governmental wrath on evildoers God has ordained.
In Romans 13, governing authorities are God's servants and they behave as God's servants. Later in Revelation, as Rome persecuted the church, the Roman government is portrayed as a power that has joined the other side.
Revelation portrays Christian responsibility toward such governments as nonsubmissive. For example, the two witnesses resist with deadly plagues those who seek their harm, until it is God's time for the two witnesses to be martyred. The "woman" of Revelation 12 flees from Satan rather than submit to death, though some of her children are martyred.
In Revelation the righteous die rather than submit to "Babylon's" demands. Nothing suggests that their deaths are because they are pacifists or conscientious objectors. Socially powerless, they await the return of the Lord of Lords, who will lead the armies of heaven into righteous war.
In all of Paul's discussion of government authorities, their God-ordained functions, their power over life and our Christian submission to them, Paul never implies that Christians cannot morally perform government functions.
After examining all of the biblical testimony, I am left with one conclusion. Christians in government may take human life when fulfilling the God-ordained functions of government to protect and defend its citizens and to punish wrongdoers. It would also seem within biblical ethics that Christians who are private citizens may use deadly force to protect innocent victims.
The radical paradigm shift of the new covenant does not alter this long-established biblical ethic. The requirement that Christian pacifists must establish, that the New Testament teaches total pacifism, cannot be proved. The New Testament is not that simplistic. Christian love has a responsibility to protect and defend.
As God has not permanently laid down the sword, neither has he demanded that his disciples never pick it up.
:bounce:By the way, the reason I am so interested and have studied this subject was twofold..I encounter similar ethical questions I must turn to scripture when I have to work in the area of Domestic Violence as it applies to the issues of abuse on many fronts of battle. Furthermore, I felt deeply obligated as a Christian parent do so when counseling my own son's how to respond to their calling to enter the military.
RR2Z, the bolded portion may have been asked as I've only reached this point in the thread. My question in response to this portion is, What about Judas Iscariot? He was a zealot, remember?
Ah, Jesus Christ was obviously committed to the will of God in heaven, and not to the lying traitor Judas Iscariot, who in due time was exposed for his hidden intentions.
There's no way this passage is anything of a mandate for us people present in this tabernacle of flesh.
I tell you what Bill, there's not one instance that I would not rather choose to suffer those things in this life, than to suffer in hell like the people who inflict such things will in the judgement at hand.
Well constructed, articulate post. Thanks. I am satisfied the thesis in my OP is still correct. That God judges individuals by what is in their heart, not by their profession. Not all violence is necessarily evil or avoidable.
The pacifist view uses the word "carnal" with war. A carnal war, or a carnal warrior seeks to satisfy their fleshy desires, blood thirst. A carnal warrior likes to kill for the pleasure of killing. God would indeed judge such a person harshly. But I think the pacifist could be misunderstanding their own views. Not all warriors, not all wars are carnal. Not all violence is evil.
I have been intrigued by the "put your trust in God" argument. I lock my doors, wear a seat belt, and go to the doctor. Yet I also trust God. I have asked the pacifist to explain why such nominal behavior is not hypocritical for them, but they do not answer. At some point, not taking care of yourself is to test God. Or as you said, limiting God. I am just not sure how to put this together into a single coherent theological view.
This is a hot topic...always has been, and always will be.
I would like to remind everyone that dialogue about troubling issues is a good thing, because we all don't see things eye to eye, and wrestling with a different viewpoint can be beneficial.
That being said, I'd like to see a little more thought put into the posts BEFORE they are actually posted. As I've said on many occasions, we can't hear tone of voice, or read body language on this board...so we must work doubly hard to make sure that every post is spoken with love and consideration.
Do not compromise what you believe to be true...but remember to have a soft answer, and a loving heart. What you believe to be true may not be agreeable to others, but there's no need to present your belief in a harsh manner.
Lack of tact and thoughtful consideration in a post usually leads to only one thing: a harsh and tactless response. When that happens, you lose any chance you have to change someone's mind, or at least open their mind to a different viewpoint...because now it's likely gotten personal.
Ah, Jesus Christ was obviously committed to the will of God in heaven, and not to the lying traitor Judas Iscariot, who in due time was exposed for his hidden intentions.That was exactly the point RR2Z. You made it sound like Jesus didn't have anything to do with anyone who might be a soldier or in this case a zealot because they were a sinner. Your post here proves that it is what is in the man's heart, that matters, not what he may be doing. This includes being a soldier. Jesus knew Judas' role in the scheme of things, just as He knows a soldier's role in the scheme of things, and more importantly, their heart.
.. Many will notice that I have edited one of my posts. As I went to sleep last night, talking with the LORD I was under conviction. I was not under thyat conviction for the wrong stance nor was the word used in the passion of the moment incorrect. However, there are children and genle people like Grace that read these comments and to them, and them alone, I ask forgiveness for my failure to think. I have replaced the brass and unnecessarily harsh word with "harm."
.. Grace, I admire your thoroughness in your study. I hope you are teaching, the world, today, is in need of teachers that actually put on the attitude of work and begin to mine the jewels of scripture and the young and the new Christians are in need of teachers of the truth.
I'm sorry, I do not even need to read the rest of this chapter to draw on the context. But this, dispossessing them says it all, they went in to do battle.
Numbers 14:9Context! God was about the business of preparing the people to conquer the Promised Land. The LORD did not just slay all the people there and then send the people in. They had to fight their own battle and He was assuring them that they were the winner before the "battle" began. You just cannot use scripture to back up a lie. Context always gives the application, always!
I will admit that I find your lack of study, profound?
Thank you for the Godly rebuke.
:hug:..I can offer this humble observation I came to when trying to sort a lot of this out..we need to remember that long before war and sin arrived in our fallen realm of creation when it comes to all men..it began in Heaven with Satan and his rebellion against God..and from the angels perspective as they observe all of this---that there is a whole host of angelic realm watching a drama unfold on earth with regards to men, such that man's plight and what happens with the issue of salvation and redemption is not an end in itself, though it may be valuable in itself.
Instead, it points to a greater end, a different issue. Broadly speaking, the end of salvation is not for men, but the end of salvation is for God's glory. He's the center of this whole affair.
Man is an important player in the drama, but the goal of salvation isn't simply to bring people to salvation. Man is not the central focus. The Father and His glory is the central focus.
From this fixed point of reference, IMHO..we need to step back and observe that no scales of men can ever measure out the proper balance of justice and mercy for sinners who do not seek or desire peace with God. To be in enemity with God is always to be at war with Him..to seek ones own glory above His and to deprive Christ of that glory which is His alone.
However , again IMHO, we may also conclude that God can and does use men and women of God, to administer justice and balance His justice for His glory when it comes to sinners who rebel against him no differently than angels have.
God in the process extends mercy to man based on His good intention, not on any demand that He has to provide forgiveness. So He is not obliged to save angels and He chose not to. The same thing applies to man, but in this case He chose to do so. He has chosen to give His grace to whom He will. He doesn't owe it to everyone.
My answer is that God has no responsibility to forgive. He owes forgiveness to no one in the same way that the state owes pardon or clemency to no one who commits a crime against it. It is entirely up to God whether He's going to forgive man or not. It is entirely up to God to decide who it is that He will forgive. Guilty men deserve no pardon.
That puts every man with his mouth closed at the foot of the cross necessarily relying on the mercy of Jesus Christ. That changes the whole nature of the heathen debate. I think that it is true that God has provided a message for everyone. I think the problem isn't in the message, but in the man.
Men don't want the message regardless of what form it happens to come in. They flee from God, they don't run toward God, just like the angels..
So if there are still wars being waged in heaven between the angels who serve God is this capacity as warriors, I would tread softly in condeming anyone God has chosen to serve Him in this capacity, for His glory..
I agree with what you said. It's scripture. My point was he didn't resist physically. He knew God's will for himself.
As you or anyone can plainly see, this text has nothing to do with being a soldier and being a Christian at the same time.Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
I know this is out of context and Jesus was speaking to the Jews but here it is anyway.
I don't know you Bill, I am sure you're a pretty good fellow.
But I would hope you could get past the servant aspect of your faith and become a son who walks in the glorious light of truth.
I have posted several times about being sons of God but apparently it goes over everyones head.
There's life in Christ. But we have to get past the Way and Truth and see Christ as Life. When Christ who is our life shall appear, then shall we appear with Him in glory.
That verse in I John is speaking to us now. It is for the now, not the future.
I am going to start another thread about that again when I'm able.
That was exactly the point RR2Z. You made it sound like Jesus didn't have anything to do with anyone who might be a soldier or in this case a zealot because they were a sinner. Your post here proves that it is what is in the man's heart, that matters, not what he may be doing. This includes being a soldier. Jesus knew Judas' role in the scheme of things, just as He knows a soldier's role in the scheme of things, and more importantly, their heart.
My bad if anything seemed different to you: there's a big difference between being (foolishly) committed to sinners, and being (dutifully) subjected to all men, including sinners, as ambassadors of Christ.
But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men, (25) And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.
I don't consider myself a pacifist but I am against killing people unless they try to harm us.
I fasten my seat belt and take care of myself and family because i am told by God to provide for my household in I Timothy.
We're to be wise as serpents but harmless as doves.
There is no end to this discussion.
As I said before, I believe the crux of it is about being in war with Iraq.
Your observations are very articulate and from the heart. I wish I had your ability to express things.
I know an 18 year old boy who just joined the Army because he believes its his obligation to go fight for America.
I know another man (son of one of my close friends) who spent 13 months in Iraq. He was able to get out of going back when his unit was called up again because there were other men in other units wanting to go back and were willing to take his place. My friends son says it's one of the most evil places he's ever been in and refuses to talk about it. He's sorry he ever signed up for the National Guard. He did so to get his college paid for.
Who is right? There's no end to the debate.
Should men and women sign up to go fight now? Personally I'd tell them not too.
Do I believe in protecting myself or this country? Of course I do but we aren't fighting on the Mexican or Canadian borders.
Someone mentioned the evil atrocity going on in Africa. Do we interfere?
Are we to protect the world? That's a difficult question to answer. Maybe we should be there instead of Iraq. But I really don't believe we have a scriptural mandate to do so as a nation although it's our duty as believers to help those in need. That would not include warfare but acts of mercy in my opinion. We could do lots better at winning the world with food and clothes and medicine than we can with bullets.
Sadly, most of America's actions are produced from Wall Street instead of Washington.
Believers have the power to withstand evil without physical force. But, sadly, there are too many who want to shoot rather than pray. We are to go forth in the power of God. Vengeance is the Lords, He will repay.
Our duty is to love others and to bring glory to our Lord Jesus Christ.
We may have to take stands that threaten our lives as Daniel did with the king of Babylon, but as Daniel, we will have to deal with the lions. Is God able to deliver? Of course He can and will but He doesn't always. Many believers died in the mouth of lions during the Roman days. Were they faithless? I dare not say so.
So what do we do? We have to wait for the moment then trust God to get the Glory. If I live or die, He reigns. Let God be true and every man a liar.
Well, your right this time! You are so far off subject that I'm not at all sure what to say to you. Being "a" and not "the" son of God I fail to see the point of your post. Then men you are so busy condemning to Hell are, a great many of them, sons of God. I'll just have to admit it, I stand at a loss for words. You have gone so far down that rabbit trail I do not expect you'll ever see daylight again.
Shall I not visit for these things? saith the LORD: and shall not my soul be avenged on such a nation as this? (10) Go ye up upon her walls, and destroy; but make not a full end: take away her battlements; for they are not the LORD's.
From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? (2) Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. (3) Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid: by reason of breakings they purify themselves. (26) The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon. (27) He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood. (28) The arrow cannot make him flee: slingstones are turned with him into stubble. (29) Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.
Then I proclaimed a fast there, at the river of Ahava, that we might afflict ourselves before our God, to seek of him a right way for us, and for our little ones, and for all our substance. (22) For I was ashamed to require of the king a band of soldiers and horsemen to help us against the enemy in the way: because we had spoken unto the king, saying, The hand of our God is upon all them for good that seek him; but his power and his wrath is against all them that forsake him. (23) So we fasted and besought our God for this: and he was intreated of us.
Hey RhymnRzn2Zion, got a question for you... Have you read Acts 23 v11+ ever.
Here we have Paul condoning the use of 470+ soldiers as bodyguards to prevent this ambush and to protect his travels. I say condone because he didn't refuse the protection.
If it's sinful for a Christian to be a soldier then it's sinful for anyone to be a soldier. I mean, sin is sin... correct? Doesn't matter if a Christian is acting in a sinful manner, if a non-Christian was to do the same, it's just as sinful. Thus the use of soldiers would be sharing in other people's sins and go against scripture - 1 Tim 5:22.
For Paul to accept this protection would be awefully hypocrytical of him if it's sinful to be a soldier. I mean, if it's wrong to be a soldier then it's wrong to use one as well.
Great post Slug1, it cuts right to the heart of the matter in the New testament perspective. Another good illustration of the consistency of our LORD.
Great post Slug1, it cuts right to the heart of the matter in the New testament perspective. Another good illustration of the consistency of our LORD.Yep, and to push it one more step... if being a soldier is sinful (now we aren't talking about a Christian but ALL soldiers) then for God to authorize the governments to utilize police and armed forces to crush evil... is telling governments to sin. Now that can't be, now can it.
Seems to me God is delegating His vengeance "through" governments to bring wrath on the wrong doer.
Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. (53) Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? (54) But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?
Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? (36) Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Sir, this is not discussion and I can't read your mind.
You are good at searching the bible and finding quotes. Satan could do the same and probably find quotes for every occasion. Searching is of no help without understanding, without context.
You ever wonder why Peter was armed in the first place? Why did Jesus let Peter carry a sword? Could it be that Jesus had just told his disciples to go out and get swords, purchase if needed, and anything else they needed for their travels? Jesus told Peter to put the sword away because it was His time to be arrested. (Not to mention being hopelessly outnumbered!).
Jesus does not condemn any profession. He did not condemn any centurions when the opportunity arose. By His actions he teaches us to avoid conflict when possible but never does He say one cannot protect oneself. Never does he say a nation cannot protect itself and fight for what is right.
Many verses have been provided explaining this view, none of which have been countered by explaining why these verses or actions have been interpreted wrongly. Simply quoting something without context is not an effective counter argument. Ignoring all that has been presented is also not very compelling. I am indeed interested in the rationale for pacifism, but i cannot yet discern the rationale as presented thus far.


text:
Metallica's James Hetfield on his 'Addiction to Fame'
Metallica is undoubtedly one of the biggest metal bands on the planet, and James Hetfield has admitted that the fame he experienced as part of the group went to his head.
Danica Baker
"Being up onstage is a fantasy world," he said during an interview with The New Yorker, adding that he got carried away with the hype of being famous.
"Everyone is out there sprinkling you with wonderful dust. You start to believe it, and then you get home and you go, 'Where's my dust?' Not so wonderful now, sitting here alone with two cats, taking the garbage out," he said.
Hetfield said that the days between shows left his mind spinning and yearning to get back to the adrenaline rush of performing.
"My body is tired, but my mind is still going. What do I do with that? I just ask people in the crew, or friends, or my assistant, 'Hey, can you just sit down and watch TV with me?'
"I believe the addiction to fame is a real thing. I've got my little recovery posse on the road to help me out. We'll say a prayer before going onstage: 'James, you're a human being. You're going to die. You're here doing service. You're doing the best you can.' That is helpful for me," he said.
When asked how to define the feeling he experiences on stage, Hetfield described it as "getting in the zone".
Love Metal?
Get the latest Metal news, features, updates and giveaways straight to your inbox Learn more
"There are many names for it. I call it getting in the zone. You're not feeling shameful about past stuff, you're not future-tripping in fear about what's coming up next. You're right there, and you're doing exactly what you need to do."
The musician said that the adrenaline rush of being on the road was a catalyst for his well-known battle with alcohol.
"I think everyone searches for that sense of presence. I searched for it in the wrong medicines for a long time. I just wanted to turn my head off. That worked until it didn't work. Finding a new god that isn't alcohol . . . yeah, that's what I'm still workin' on."
Kip Moore to release new album on May 29

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Has rookie OG Anunoby made a case for inclusion in the Raptors' starting lineup?
Title: Has rookie OG Anunoby made a case for inclusion in the Raptors' starting lineup?
Synopsis: In my latest for The Athletic Toronto, I wrote about OG Anunoby's first career start and whether that might prove a long-term fit for the Raptors.
Ever since Vince Carter was traded in the middle of the 2004-05 season, the Toronto Raptors have employed a rotating cast of small forwards. The carousel at that starting position has been remarkable. When Norman Powell drew the opening-night start this year, he became the 14th different small forward to start for the Raptors in the last 15 seasons. Draft picks, free agent signings, trade acquisitions and internal promotions have largely been unable to lock the position down for longer than a few weeks or, maybe, months.
Ahead of schedule, OG Anunoby is doing his best to suggest that the conveyer belt is coming to a stop. With Powell sidelined with a right hip pointer Tuesday, Anunoby drew the start against the Houston Rockets. While the Raptors coaching staff won't use a one-game sample to dictate the future of their starting lineup, Anunoby did everything he could to look like a potential solution.
To wit, Anunoby had a team-best plus-22 in 30 minutes, playing a major role in perhaps the team's best win of the season, a 129-113 victory against a team that came in winners of six in a row. He scored a career-high 16 points on 6-of-8 shooting, helped the starters to a rare plus-4 marker in nine minutes as a group, and was a part of a closing lineup that sealed the tough road win.
Most notably, Anunoby was the primary defender on Harden for 12 possessions. Of those, Harden scored on just one, a savvy baiting of an and-one from behind the 3-point line as Anunoby jabbed at the ball and Harden expertly started his shooting motion in response. Anunoby fouled Harden on another possession, as well, and Harden scored against Anunoby in transition once.


text:
Devizes 3°c
Reader Rewards Module
Gazette and Herald Columnists
Wiltshire Sports Awards
More than 450 injuries at work reported in Wiltshire
New houses being constructed on the Chilmington development in Ashford, Kent. PA Photo. Picture date: Monday January 13, 2020. Photo credit should read: Gareth Fuller/PA Wire
More than 450 injuries at work were reported in Wiltshire last year, figures show.
The Trades Union Congress says a drop in reports nationally is the result of funding cuts and lack of awareness of the duty to report injuries.
In 2019/20, the Health and Safety Executive was notified of 473 non-fatal incidents in the area – 53 fewer than in the previous year. There were no fatal injuries.
Of the injuries, which workplaces must report by law, 146 were specified – these include incidents such as serious burns, amputations, loss of sight and fractures other than to fingers and toes.
A further 327 resulted in an employee or self-employed person being unable to perform their normal duties for more than seven consecutive days.
The figures mean 251 Wiltshire workers per 100,000 were injured at work last year, higher than the South West's average rate of 236.
Across England, 55,746 injuries at work were reported to the HSE – 4,166 fewer than the previous year.