How can a true Christian support the Iraq war ?

**uscitizen** · 12-09-2006, 08:47 AM

Jesus believed in conversion thru example not force and killing.
He did not turn away the gentiles, nor the "unclean".

This will seperate the true Christians from the cherry picking religious people.

**Immanuel** · 12-09-2006, 09:10 AM

I pray that I am a true Christian and I don't support the war.

I did support the removal of Saddam Hussein but from that point on I said it was time to get out and to offer our support to the people of Iraq from afar. Instead, our President saw an opportunity to occupy a sovereign nation, start a bloodbath and reward the people of Halliburton for their support of him.

I don't support this war and no longer support the man/men that are waging it from Washington by corralling our soldiers in Baghdad and painting targets on their backs. Unfortunately, too many of the men in Washington seem to think that "we have to stay and see this thing to the end" paraphrased. I can only hope that in 2008, the man or woman we elect will have a different perspective on how we can fight terrorists without fighting the innocent people of Iraq.

Immie

**Care4all** · 12-09-2006, 09:24 AM

Probably because "we all" fall short of the glory of God, uscitizen....

We all have our weaknesses, we all do things that are unchristianlike and give a "bad rap" to Christ....

Liberals accept abortion, and although Christ did not speak on the subject of abortion, from what I have read of His works and sayings and parables to teach us, I seriously doubt that he would be for people having casual sex outside of marriage let alone terminating a pregnancy because of it....

But abortion is a personal sin, just as screwing around before you are married, committing adultery, stealing....

Choosing to go to war using the kind of bombs and weaponry that we have now, for no reason other than self defence is an abomination of all that God stands for imo....the willingness to kill others that one differs with.... or innocent all together....

**Immanuel** · 12-09-2006, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by Care4all

Choosing to go to war using the kind of bombs and weaponry that we have now, for no reason other than self defence is an abomination of all that God stands for imo.

But, doesn't President Bush consider this war to be a war of self defense?

Immie

**Dixie - In Memoriam** · 12-09-2006, 10:17 AM

Mark 13:7-8
7 When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed; this must take place, but the end is still to come. 8 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be earthquakes in various places; there will be famines. This is but the beginning of the birth pangs.

Matthew 8:5-10 (Words of Jesus in red.)
5When he entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, appealing to him 6and saying, "Lord, my servant is lying at home paralyzed, in terrible distress." 7And he said to him, "I will come and cure him." 8The centurion answered, "Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; but only speak the word, and my servant will be healed. 9For I also am a man under authority, with soldiers under me; and I say to one, 'Go,' and he goes, and to another, 'Come,' and he comes, and to my slave, 'Do this,' and the slave does it." 10When Jesus heard him, he was amazed and said to those who followed him, "Truly I tell you, in no one in Israel have I found such faith.

Many people make the mistake of believing the Bible says, “You shall not kill,” and seek to apply this command to war. However, the Bible actually says, “You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13). The Hebrew word literally means “the intentional, premeditated killing of another person with malice.” God often ordered the Israelites to go to war with other nations (1 Samuel 15:3; Joshua 4:13). God ordered the death penalty for numerous crimes (Exodus 21:12; 21:15; 22:19; Leviticus 20:11). So, God is not against killing in all circumstances, but rather only murder. War is never a good thing, but sometimes it is a necessary thing. In a world filled with sinful people (Romans 3:10-18), war is inevitable. Sometimes the only way to keep sinful people from doing great harm is by going to war with them.

War is a terrible thing! War is always the result of sin (Romans 3:10-18). In the Old Testament, God ordered the Israelites to: “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites” (Numbers 31:2). See also Deuteronomy 20:16-17, “However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them--the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites--as the LORD your God has commanded you.” Exodus 17:16 proclaims, “He said, "For hands were lifted up to the throne of the LORD. The LORD will be at war against the Amalekites from generation to generation." Also, 1 Samuel 15:18, “Go and completely destroy those wicked people, the Amalekites; make war on them until you have wiped them out.” So, obviously God is not against all war. Jesus is always in perfect agreement with the Father (John 10:30), so we cannot argue that war was only God’s will in the Old Testament. God does not change (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17).

**Care4all** · 12-09-2006, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by Immanuel

But, doesn't President Bush consider this war to be a war of self defense?

Immie

NO.

Self defense was NEVER one of President Bush's many, ever changing, reasons to instigate and initiate a war in Iraq.

The Bush Policy/Doctrine, Preemptive War, has never, ever been a policy of the united states of America... preemptive war is a war of CHOICE, not a war of self defense.

**Dixie - In Memoriam** · 12-09-2006, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Care4all

NO.

Self defense was NEVER one of President Bush's many, ever changing, reasons to instigate and initiate a war in Iraq.

The Bush Policy/Doctrine, Preemptive War, has never, ever been a policy of the united states of America... preemptive war is a war of CHOICE, not a war of self defense.

This is not completely true. The whole purpose of our involvement in the middle east, is self-defense. Much the same situation can be found in our war against Germany in WWII. You do understand why we had to go to war with Hitler, right? It wasn't because we were defending ourselves against attacks from Hitler, that never happened.

We are a nation with allies, and as such, it is our obligation to stand with our allies in times of war and help them defend themselves, just as they are obligated to help us defend ourselves in time of war. You might say, we are an extension of those allies, and defending them is our own self-defense.

If you are sitting in your living room with your family, and a crazed lunatic busts down your door and pulls a gun on your kids, and you have the opportunity to grab the shotgun in the corner and kill him before he harms your children, would you consider that an act of "self-defense" or "preemptive action"? I think it would be both. So, we can't define this as an "either/or" situation, you can't say that preemptive war is not self defense also, because sometimes it is. The problem is, you don't agree with the preemption in the case of Iraq. I understand that, but others have a different opinion, and I understand those as well.

**uscitizen** · 12-09-2006, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by Immanuel

But, doesn't President Bush consider this war to be a war of self defense?

Immie

Yeah he does, but he is stupid

**uscitizen** · 12-09-2006, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by Dixie

This is not completely true. The whole purpose of our involvement in the middle east, is self-defense. Much the same situation can be found in our war against Germany in WWII. You do understand why we had to go to war with Hitler, right? It wasn't because we were defending ourselves against attacks from Hitler, that never happened.

We are a nation with allies, and as such, it is our obligation to stand with our allies in times of war and help them defend themselves, just as they are obligated to help us defend ourselves in time of war. You might say, we are an extension of those allies, and defending them is our own self-defense.

If you are sitting in your living room with your family, and a crazed lunatic busts down your door and pulls a gun on your kids, and you have the opportunity to grab the shotgun in the corner and kill him before he harms your children, would you consider that an act of "self-defense" or "preemptive action"? I think it would be both. So, we can't define this as an "either/or" situation, you can't say that preemptive war is not self defense also, because sometimes it is. The problem is, you don't agree with the preemption in the case of Iraq. I understand that, but others have a different opinion, and I understand those as well.

Yeah we defend our allies, Like the first gulf war and Kuwait was invaded.
Who had Iraq invaded this time ? Ohh we must be defending our ally of Iran ?
They are getting along very well with Iraq since Sadam was removed.

**Cypress** · 12-09-2006, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by Dixie

This is not completely true. The whole purpose of our involvement in the middle east, is self-defense. Much the same situation can be found in our war against Germany in WWII. You do understand why we had to go to war with Hitler, right? It wasn't because we were defending ourselves against attacks from Hitler, that never happened.

We are a nation with allies, and as such, it is our obligation to stand with our allies in times of war and help them defend themselves, just as they are obligated to help us defend ourselves in time of war. You might say, we are an extension of those allies, and defending them is our own self-defense.

If you are sitting in your living room with your family, and a crazed lunatic busts down your door and pulls a gun on your kids, and you have the opportunity to grab the shotgun in the corner and kill him before he harms your children, would you consider that an act of "self-defense" or "preemptive action"? I think it would be both. So, we can't define this as an "either/or" situation, you can't say that preemptive war is not self defense also, because sometimes it is. The problem is, you don't agree with the preemption in the case of Iraq. I understand that, but others have a different opinion, and I understand those as well.

The whole purpose of our involvement in the middle east, is self-defense. Much the same situation can be found in our war against Germany in WWII. You do understand why we had to go to war with Hitler, right?

Yeah, if Iraq had declared war on us, and sent a large fleet of iraqi U-boats to blockade us, prowl our harbors, and had been sinking american merchant ships, you'd have a point.

Otherwise, you sound like a bush boot-licking idiot.

**uscitizen** · 12-09-2006, 11:46 AM

Actually I veiw our invasion of Iraq more like a hitler type of action.

**Dixie - In Memoriam** · 12-09-2006, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by uscitizen

Actually I veiw our invasion of Iraq more like a hitler type of action.

Well then, this proves you are an idiot.

Hitler advocated a "Final Solution" to eliminate all Jews from the world. He incinerated over 7 million of them before he was stopped. He aggressively invaded his neighboring countries and eventually controlled most of Europe, and had designs on controlling the entire world. We do not seek to control the world, or even Iraq. There is not an American flag flying over Baghdad, and our government doesn't control the democratically elected Unity Government of Iraq. There has been no "death marches" for enemy combatants or detainees, we aren't feeding them into incinerators at Gitmo, we;re giving them ACLU lawyers! Hitler never installed democracy anywhere, nor did he give the people he oppressed, a right to have a political voice.

To make such an invalid comparison, is either evidence of complete ignorance or a willing lie you want to promote as truth. Either way, you are wrong.

**uscitizen** · 12-09-2006, 01:19 PM

Being called an idiot by an idiot bothers nor impresses me in the least.

And the bushies spout that all islamofascists must die. This seems to include all islamic people in their view. Sounds kind of like hitlers deal on the jews....

**Dixie - In Memoriam** · 12-09-2006, 01:55 PM

And the bushies spout that all islamofascists must die. This seems to include all islamic people in their view. Sounds kind of like hitlers deal on the jews....

See, this is where you are confused. The very essence of the word "Islamofascist" is to denote the distinct difference between Muslims, and radical fundamentalist Islamics who have perverted their religion. I challenge you to find one single statement from Bush or anyone supporting of the war on terror, who has EVER considered this a war against all Muslims. That is an assertion which has no basis in truth, and lacks intellectual honesty.