Jehovah's Witness Church

[Oxy]

All things aside, David, you need to be born again so that you can see the Kingdom of God. Once you have been born again you wil be able to describe your experience, thereby proving you have been born of the Spirit. I will inform you of the next step then..
Blessings

[Casey S Smith 29]

Quote

We'll call it God Day. And we'll say, even though it's not, that it's the date of God's birthday, I guess. Now, God doesn't like satan. That's clear. And all the people, if you look real close are still doing the same things that the satanic satan worshipping satan lovers were doing a thousand years ago

You seem to not get that on Christmas there are no trees being worshipped, no presents being worshipped and most definitely Satan or any of his workers are being worshipped. You make the correlation incorrectly in your comparison with the golden calf. The Israelites actually worshipped this calf as YHWH. On Christmas there are no decorations or images being “worshipped.” Kind of seems like a straw man. At best, you have some traditions derived from pagan customs but those pagan customs at the time were at times just secular and not religious in nature. No true born again Christian would worship any structure. The day is a commemoration of the day Yeshua the Messiah was born to die. As I stated and I will reiterate for the point is not considered on your part, the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation make no mention of birthday’s being condemned. As I said and I will say again, just because you see something done by the wicked in Scripture does not make the event of that day in itself wicked. If birthday’s were going to be perceived as a hindrance to ANY of God’s people in the OT or NT then the prophets of the OT and the Apostles of the NT would have made mention of it. You think I am wrong? Look through and see the specific sins and evil practices that were performed being rebuked by the OT prophets and the NT Apostles along with Paul. You say that we no a wedding is not sin. You then state correctly that getting drunk is. Well I say that getting drunk at some sort of “Christmas party” is sin but the true celebration in lieu of the birth of the Son is not a sin. You can’t have it both ways.

Quote

Do you remember when the israelites had the “festival to Jehovah” (that's what they called it) but really they were worshipping a golden calf?

Again, this passage with flat out in your face plain as day pagan idolatrous specific image WORSHIP cannot be placed side by side in relationship with a day in which true believers honor their Lord and Messiah. How is the worship with sacrifices and lude conduct the same as having a decoration and adornments around in celebration? Last time I checked the trees in believers homes were not prayed to or danced around naked with orgies being committed to honor a sun god of the winter solstice. I agree that the Israelites, though they thought they were worshipping YHWH with an image and maybe had pure motives were still in sin. But I go back to their worship of an image was sin and their ludeness, drunkenness, and other sinful activities were wicked and the idol was wicked for it was placed in the position of YHWH. I repeat, NO IMAGE IS BEING WORSHIPPED ONE AND JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE DO SINFUL THINGS ON IN VIEW OF A PURE HOLIDAY DOES NOT MAKE THE HOLIDAY EVIL. The Israelites were told of YHWH on their way to take the promise land to not take up the evil practices of the nations around them. The emphasis made by God is EVIL.

Quote

But what do we know about birthdays, their history, what the Bible says about them and what the Bible says about idolatry.

What the Bible says about birthdays? NOTHING.
What History says about birthdays? Details are sketchy at best. Then again, there hasn’t been any “proof” given.
What does the Bible says about idolatry? It’s a sin against all sins, trading the thing created for the Creator.

Quote

Of course not. But what if you adobt the satanist practices and make that day your day, his practices, your practices, his rituals, yours. Then, we have a different story.

We have not adopted any Satanic practices, or rituals.

RITUAL:
•of or relating to or characteristic of religious rituals; “ritual killing”
•the prescribed procedure for conducting religious ceremonies
•stereotyped behavior
Rituals are always seen in light of religious connotations and almost more than never, religious in nature, substance and observance. There are no practices or “rituals” at any holiday celebration be it Christmas or birthday’s. You cannot and I repeat and I restate and I reiterate and I CANNOT SAY IT LOUD ENOUGH…THERE……ARE…..NO, NONE, NADA POR TODOS, ZIP – NOTHING…WORSHIPPING…BEING…PERFORMED…AT…ANY…BIRTHDAY…CELEBRATION!!!

Quote

And this one quote, which still baffles me, I went to the library to find. It bothered me that it didn't provide any information except that it was from The Encyclopedia Canadiana. There, (Under Jehovah’s Witnesses), second paragraph: “The work of Jehovah's Witnesses is the revival and re-establishment of the primitive Christianity practiced by Jesus and his disciples during the first and second centuries of our era. Their services are kept simple. They have no ornate buildings or clerical vestments, no divisions of members into clergy and laity. All are brothers, and every one baptized is under obligation to be a minister.” (Toronto : Grolier of Canada, c1957-80. Vol 6)

I do find the quote baffling and intriguing; it did catch me off guard. Is there any way you can find the exact source being quoted or is it solely taken out of the Book you posted? I would be interested in reading it directly. Not that I don’t trust you or your quotes, I just have learned to verify quotes over the years after having been duped into just taken them at face value. And again, I do not think you are being dishonest for as our discussions have transpired I do not see you as one who feels the need to use deception or to twists ones words to defend your views. We both may have misunderstood what the other said but I do not lay pretense at your feet my any means.

Quote

I really don't feel like showing you my proof. As you said, you believe that most everything the watchtower quotes are biased. Of course, when I did this research, as I said earlier, I checked 10 encyclopedias, all I could find easily. They all said the same thing. I'm not going to give you any of these quotes. They all say the exact same thing: The early Christians didn't celebrate birthdays because they considered them idolatrous. Check for yourself. I've researched this so much I consider it a fact of history.

You are defending a position A. If position A is vilified then it needs to withstand all criticism and opposing stances presented it. We or specifically in this case me, have refuted your claims that birthday’s are 1 pagan in origin and 2 were not practiced
by the early church. You have yet to show me exact quotes from resources that do not stand for or against such views. If you quote me either from your Watchtower or from quotes from your watchtower then of course I will dismiss them our right. However with that said, with nothing to back your claim I stand corrected.

Quote

“If the Bible presents birthdays this way, why disregard it? Are those accounts not part of the “all scripture” that is beneficial for setting things straight? You say you prefer to stick to what scripture has to say about it. Do you?” I'm not sure you do.

I feel as if I am beating a dead cow now. Once again, the Bible does not present birthdays in a way that is sinful. If one chose to make that event a cause for evil that does not justify any claim that the event is evil. Again when the Bible presents weddings and those getting drunk at weddings in a way that is seen where some are getting drunk, that does not make a wedding feast evil. It is the same situation. The circumstances surrounding both events are not incongruous. One day is celebrated as a feast as well as the other. You cannot say that because you have TWO and may I mention ONLY TWO, passages from the text that reveals something done on that day in a negative way, that, that in and of itself makes the day evil. You have numerous examples of people using activities, days, events, celebrations and so forth, using good intentions and to themselves just motives brining upon themselves condemnation. Nadab and Abihu thought they were worshipping God and that it would be received as such. They disobeyed the commandment previously given and were condemned because of it. Regardless of their motive in which can be seen as a holy and upright, because it violated a previous creed they died. The same thing happened to David. He was bringing the Ark from the Philistines and had dancers and singing and people parading around the cart praising YHWH of Hosts. What happened? Well you know, one reached out to touch the Ark as it was falling and he died. David was upset and considered after time went on. When it was researched into the original standards that were set before the Israelites, the reason for the demise was apparent. They had disobeyed God by not following the priestly procedures required to bring forth and carry on with the Ark being on the shoulders of the Levitical priests. These are just a few examples where we are shown that motives are not always based in truth and are not always right or holy just because they are done unto God.
Admitting that I am sure we agree on the previous paragraph I will elaborate on how that compares or should I say, does not compare, with birthdays be it for Jesus or for ourselves.
These days are not done in worship. These days are not as I stated previously, condemned nor condoned in Scripture. These days have no standard by which to measure them such as the 613 commandments spelled out word for word unto the Israelites, hence no destruction to be brought about because of them. The decorations, presents, and glimmer of lights have no connection with pagan worship as done in modern day holidays. They are neither condoned nor condemned nor forbidden. Birthday cake is not made for a demon or a spirit to eat and blowing out candles is not seen as a wish granted for people who have common sense. When it is done all at one time then it is neat and yes, the tradition is that they all go out at one. You may say this tradition is pagan and blah, blah, blah but my kids aren’t pagan nor is the icing, nor is the cake batter, nor are the candles, nor are the presents nor is the day itself.

Catholic and Nazism

You have present the JW tortures and their stand for God against the Nazi regime many times. I have seen this portrayed many times. I can’t figure out why this is the only war or example that being a pacifist (which you deny somehow) was wise in Germany. You elaborate on the Catholic position in defending the war. In doing this, you take every believer and follower of Christ into this same lump and then condemn the whole together. You were not there. You have no idea how many Christians who were not JW that stood up against Nazism and Hitler’s rhetoric. Nor do the witnesses who were even there. As if the only group that bore the name of Jesus (although that Name was not used in defense as much as I am sure Jehovah was) were JW’s. Your logic in this thinking is absurd and without any sort of merit.

Quote

As Jesus said, his followers are “no part of the world.” They would not be involved in worldly pursuits or politics or … the world.

This is a topic that would end up making hundreds of threads. For my lil two cents on your sentence, not being apart of the world has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the right to vote, the right to bear arms and defend one’s country – people, the right to sentence one to death, the right for officials to bear arms and protect society in which Paul said they carry not the sword in vain. God instituted ALL governments for His purposes using them as a means to an end on a chess board who He controls. Solomon said the heart of the king is directed by YHWH. He uses His chosen people in brining about political control and affairs even. In the beginning YHWH said, “if man sheds men’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed.” Only the government has the authority to bring about such a charge and carry out such a sentence. Only the government can place one in prison for molesting children, for raping women, for murdering innocent lives, for stealing the property of an individual that does not belong to them, for breaking any of the laws of the land in which mankind must dwell. If there was no government, there is anarchy. When the Roman soldier asked John when he repented and was baptized what he must do, John told him to do his job as required and do not exceed his position and authority, do not do injustice to people and “bully” them around. He did not say, “You need to repent of being a soldier in an army of the god of this world. Jehovah requires His people to not be apart of the world. Remove yourself from the political affairs of this evil system. Let God’s kingdom be your government. Resign your post and turn in your sword and protection”…neither does God ask His vessels of mercy to do such a thing. He asks of to protect the wicked and just alike, to serve the public by just means, and live a holy life pleasing unto God. So, by your ideology police that oversee the breakers of the laws of the land should be run by the wicked? If we believers are not to be involved in any civil or governmental affairs, then the outcome or conclusion must be that only the wicked are to be these leaders and “protectors”? If someone breaks in your house and threatens your life and your families, does not the sight of a police officer bring a huge relief? Is there not a feeling of safety and justice? Only if the government attempts to usurp the authority and statutes of law is one to flee. I am curious, why is the removal of witnesses from politics always shown. What of the negative outcome of not participating in war and politics? In America we have many people hear from the tribes of the Kurds. A group of people Sadaam Hussein had slaughtered in 1982. Some have said the number was in the millions. Mass graves have been dug up by our American soldiers and Iraqi squads. The news 24-7 here over the past few days have placed these people as a main topic of news in light of the death sentence given Saddam. You see them cry and give their testimonies of how Sadaam slaughtered their entire fami
ly and they were the only ones to escape and live. Tears that flooded them to the point where they could not even speak…as they say and I quote, “…finally, justice has been served…”

[david]

Quote

You make the correlation incorrectly in your comparison with the golden calf.

My point with the calf was that you can't simply stick a new name, a godly name on a pagan thing and make it ok. And I was right in that point.

Quote

You seem to not get that on Christmas there are no trees being worshipped, no presents being worshipped and most definitely Satan or any of his workers are being worshipped.

No. I get that. But they were. That's the purpose and point and reason they are involved. People didn't one day say: “Just for no reason, let's bring an evergreen into our house. Let's cover the place with lights.” It didn't happen like that. These customs of yours have origins, roots, and they are bad roots.

Quote

No true born again Christian would worship any structure.

Would a true Christian pretend to then? Or would he make it appear as if he was? Or would he do everything that those who did worship those things do? No. He would completely seperate himself from such idolatrous things.

Quote

The day is a commemoration of the day Yeshua the Messiah was born to die.

And yet it's not on his birth day but on the birthday of the sun god. How interesting.

Quote

As I stated and I will reiterate for the point is not considered on your part, the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation make no mention of birthday’s being condemned.

It makes no mention of a lot of things. While it doesn't specifically say they are condemned, true, it does portray them in a bad light, a light which reflects in history, if you study it, their true nature.

Quote

As I said and I will say again, just because you see something done by the wicked in Scripture does not make the event of that day in itself wicked.

You're right. But combine that with the fact that the “good,” the earlierst Christians had definite reasons for rejecting this celelbration,kind of makes you wonder.

Quote

Well I say that getting drunk at some sort of “Christmas party” is sin but the true celebration in lieu of the birth of the Son is not a sin.

I'm not saying that every part of Christmas is wrong and doesn't really have anything to do with Jesus what so ever. If you look closely, you'll notice the whole world celebrates it. Athiests, pagans, voodoo witches, buddhists, etc. Everyone. When the world celebrates it, they are in general not celebrating the birth of Jesus, which took places months away. THey are celebrating what has always been celebrated on that day. Call it what you like. It's remained the same. Put a stamp on it that says “Christmas.” It is what it is. It always has been. Try to intertwine paganism with Christianity and you don't get Christianity, you get fake Christianity. There is no mixing of these two things. Separate yourselves, says Jehovah. And there's no mixing of lies with true. Christmas is based largely on lies.

The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.

Satan is the “ruler of the world.”

True Christians would be different from the world. Separate from the world and it's ways. Separate from the lies, the ancient pagan holidays. Separate. Distinct. Different. They would be “no part of the world.”
Christmas is a big part of the world. It's a worldly holiday that the world celebrates that is surrounded with bad history and lies. That should be enough.

Quote

What the Bible says about birthdays? NOTHING. What History says about birthdays? Details are sketchy at best. Then again, there hasn’t been any “proof” given. What does the Bible says about idolatry? It’s a sin against all sins, trading the thing created for the Creator.

It doesn't say “nothing” about them.
History is clear. Check anywhere.
So, if the Bible says something about idolatry and the early Christians rejected birthdays because they considered them idolatrous….then the Bible does have something to say about what birthdays are. YOu do understand what principles are. The Bible can state a general principle that we can act on. “YOu shall sow what you reap.” It's a basic truth. Not specific. There are many of these principles in the Bible.

Quote

We have not adopted any Satanic practices, or rituals.

As I said, I was using an example. But if you look at pagans who worshipped false gods were doing a thousand years ago and what you're doing, it's oddly similar. And oddly, you, or many who do these things have no idea why they do them.

Quote

RITUAL: • of or relating to or characteristic of religious rituals; “ritual killing” • the prescribed procedure for conducting religious ceremonies • stereotyped behavior Rituals are always seen in light of religious connotations and almost more than never, religious in nature, substance and observance. There are no practices or “rituals” at any holiday celebration be it Christmas or birthday’s. You cannot and I repeat and I restate and I reiterate and I CANNOT SAY IT LOUD ENOUGH…THERE……ARE…..NO, NONE, NADA POR TODOS, ZIP – NOTHING…WORSHIPPING…BEING…PERFORMED…AT…ANY…BIRTHDAY…CELEBRATION!!!

My comparison was to Christmas and yes, the dies natalis solis invicti and what the druids did in the forests with the evergreen trees and what other pagans did that many now do without question involve ancient rituals.
Yes, you're not actually doing anything ritualistic. But you've copied all the looks of their rituals for some reason. Why imitate Satanic practices?
What purpose does that serve if not satans?

Remember, he's the god of this world. He's good at what he does. He trickes people into doing things he wants them to. He puts “fun” all over bad things. Wraps them up nicely. Gives them innocent names. He portrays himself as an angel of light. But he isn't.

Quote

I do find the quote baffling and intriguing; it did catch me off guard. Is there any way you can find the exact source being quoted or is it solely taken out of the Book you posted?

I'm not actually sure if that' sthe correct volume. I forgot to write that down, but I'm pretty sure it was vol 5 or 6, prob six. If you find that encyclopedia, which the librarians had difficulty with, you can answer that question yourself.

Quote

I would be interested in reading it directly. Not that I don’t trust you or your quotes, I just have learned to verify quotes over the years after having been duped into just taken them at face value.

I know. As I've said, this quote bothered me for years. And it doesn't say: “This is what they believe.” It just says that and that's the idea it portrays. I don't know what to say.

Quote

And again, I do not think you are being dishonest for as our discussions have transpired I do not see you as one who feels the need to use deception or to twists ones words to defend your views. We both may have misunderstood what the other said but I do not lay pretense at your feet my any means.

If I lied, it would the easiest thing in the world to discredit me on this. Go to a giant library in your city. Of course, I'm from canada, so it was prob easier to find.

Casey, I'm going to a meeting now. I'll look at the rest of your post and respond later.

bye.

[david]

Quote

You have no idea how many Christians who were not JW that stood up against Nazism and Hitler’s rhetoric.

Go Washington. There's a Holocaust memorial museum there. To the best of my knowledge, there's never been a section there on Catholics, etc.
Most of the museum is on the Jews of course. Other little groups had there sections. The JW's had theirs. It has recently been taken down but there is still a lot on the Witnesses there. Go for yourself. See the pile of shoes. Actually, I'll come back to this, but I had to say something.

[david]

Ask for the latest tape on the holocaust. There were two made I believe. Ask your friend for the latest video. There, you will see many heads of departments of research on the holocaust, Historians, etc. They will back up what I say. I should mention again that these are the most reputable sources on the subject on the planet from all over the world. Watch the video.

[Casey S Smith 29]

I am going to keep it simple on this post. My larger more indepth post I have been working on is in regards to something neither of us got to get into and that was the Adam and Eve theory…

HOLIDAYS

You basically say in summary:

Holidays are pagan. Pagan worship was used for these days. Regardless that we are not worshipping, we are still disobeying God and therefore are in sin by having fun or honoring God on these days. Based on the sum total of ALL the sentences used to defend your claims, the final analysis for these beliefs are: All who practice in the celebration of these days regardless of motive, reason or your presumed conjecture are in disobediance, defiance, and in plain rebellion to God and His statutes. The final outcome of such activities is….hell. I think that about covers it. I find your theory in the end a hypothesis that will never contain vilidity and will always be vilified as it's very structure topples from the numerous blows to it's componets that cannot stand up under scrutiny. I guess, we agree to disagree and to each his own.

I will wait for your defense on how political and armed forces are sinful and God's people and Jesus' followers do not participate in or join.

[david]

Quote

I will wait for your defense on how political and armed forces are sinful and God's people and Jesus' followers do not participate in or join.

Hi Casey. Sorry that I don't have time to consider the rest of your post today. As far as war and neutrality and killing other people in other countries who may or may not be your spiritual brothers, I have discussed this for probably 30 pages in the “war” thread. Everything I would say to you I have said there. But I think I have a list of scriptures that pertain to this and I may as well put them down in this thread as it seems to fit here too.

BAD FRUITAGE
The Bible says that the “fruitage of [God’s] spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, mildness, self-control.” (Galatians 5:22, 23) Is this the fruitage that the world’s religions produce? Or do you find instead a surprising amount of “rotten” fruit, “the works of the flesh . . . fornication, uncleanness, loose conduct, idolatry, practice of spiritism, enmities, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, contentions, divisions, sects, envies, drunken bouts, revelries”? (Galatians 5:19-21) Likening men to trees, the Bible says that every “tree” producing such fruit is due to be destroyed. —Matthew 7:17-19; 12:33.
BAD FRUITAGE CAUSES CHRISTIANITY TO BE SPOKEN AGAINST
2 PETER 2:1-3
“However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among YOU. These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. Furthermore, many will follow their acts of loose conduct, and on account of these THE WAY OF THE TRUTH WILL BE SPOKEN OF ABUSIVELY.”
“Perhaps nothing has done more to discredit Christianity than its practice of taking a stand virtually indistinguishable from that of non-Christians on the practice of war,” notes The Christian Century article. “That Christians on the one hand espouse the faith of the gentle Savior while on the other they warmly support religious or nationalistic wars has gone far toward damaging the faith.”

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES
Casey, I'll put that weird quote from the Encyclopedia Canadiana here:
The Encyclopedia Canadiana (Under Jehovah’s Witnesses), second paragraph:
“The work of Jehovah's Witnesses is the revival and re-establishment of the primitive Christianity practiced by Jesus and his disciples during the first and second centuries of our era. . . .All are brothers.”
(Toronto : Grolier of Canada, c1957-80. Vol 6?)

Noting an interesting parallel (about what the Bibles says), lecturer in church history Geoffrey F. Nuttall commented: “The early Christian attitude to war was more like that of the people who call themselves Jehovah’s Witnesses than it is comfortable for us to suppose.”
Speaking about them, the editor of Holocaust Educational Digest noted: “No Jehovah’s Witness will ever go to war. . . . If everyone in the world in position of power had been of this faith, [World War II] would never have happened.”
Christine Elizabeth King wrote: “Only against the Witnesses was the [Nazi] government unsuccessful, for although they had killed thousands, the work went on and in May 1945 the Jehovah’s Witness movement was still alive, whilst National Socialism was not. The Witnesses’ numbers had increased and no compromises had been made. The movement had gained martyrs and had successfully waged one more battle in Jehovah God’s war.”—The Nazi State and the New Religions: Five Case Studies in Non-Conformity, page 193.

I know, it's getting off topic, but I realized yesterday that JW's were the only religious group in the concentration camps that had a distinctive badge (purple triangle.) The Jews of course had a badge, but they weren't there for religious reasons.
NO OTHER RELIGION OTHER THAN THE JW'S HAD A BADGE. They were seperate and distinct and as one historian said, who I recently was watching on a documentary: There really weren't enough of others there from other religions to warrent them being a separate group.

In WWII, while Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, and others were slaughtering one another, Jesus’ true disciples were obeying his new commandment: “Just as I have loved you, . . . you also love one another.”—John 13:34.
Anyway,
During Hitler’s Third Reich, while those of other religions in Germany followed their military chaplains. These gave the active right hand of support to the German political machine and made their stand clearly seen by heiling Hitler and saluting the swastika flag.

EARLY CHRISTIANS AND WAR
Those Known as Early Christians. Early Christians refused to serve in the Roman army, in both the legions and auxilia, considering such service as wholly incompatible with the teachings of Christianity.

Says Justin Martyr, of the second century C.E., in his “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (CX): “We who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons,—our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage.” (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, p. 254)

In his treatise “The Chaplet, or De Corona” (XI), when discussing “whether warfare is proper at all for Christians,” Tertullian (c. 200 C.E.) argued from Scripture the unlawfulness even of a military life itself, concluding, “I banish from us the military life.”—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1957, Vol. III, pp. 99, 100.

“A careful review of all the information available goes to show that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius [121-180 C.E.], no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service.” (The Rise of Christianity, by E. W. Barnes, 1947, p. 333)

“It will be seen presently that the evidence for the existence of a single Christian soldier between 60 and about 165 A.D. is exceedingly slight; . . . up to the reign of Marcus Aurelius at least, no Christian would become a soldier after his baptism.” (The Early Church and the World, by C. J. Cadoux, 1955, pp. 275, 276)

“In the second century, Christianity . . . had affirmed the incompatibility of military service with Christianity.” (A Short History of Rome, by G. Ferrero and C. Barbagallo, 1919, p. 382)

“The behavior of the Christians was very different from that of the Romans. . . . Since Christ had preached peace, they refused to become soldiers.” (Our World Through the Ages, by N. Platt and M. J. Drummond, 1961, p. 125) “The first Christians thought it was wrong to fight, and would not serve in the army even when the Empire needed soldiers.” (The New World’s Foundations in the Old, by R. and W. M. West, 1929, p. 131)

“The Christians . . . shrank from public office and military service.” (“Persecution of the Christians in Gaul, A.D. 177,” by F. P. G. Guizot in The Great Events by Famous Historians, edited by R. Johnson, 1905, Vol. III, p. 246)

“While they [the Christians] inculcated the maxims of passive obedience, they refused to take any active part in the civil administration or the military defence of the empire. . . . It was impossible that the Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes.”—The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, by Edward Gibbon, Vol. I, p. 416.

British historian C. J. Cadoux summarized the uncompromising position of the early Christians very well in his book, The Early Christian Attitude on War, on pages 245 and 246: “The early Christians took Jesus at his word, and understood his inculcations of gentl
eness and non-resistance in their literal sense. They closely identified their religion with peace; they strongly condemned war for the bloodshed which it involved; they appropriated to themselves the Old Testament prophecy which foretold the transformation of the weapons of war into the implements of agriculture [Isa. 2:4] . . . With one or two possible exceptions no soldier joined the Church and remained a soldier until the time of Marcus Aurelius (161-180 A.D.). Even then, refusal to serve was known to be the normal policy of the Christians—as the reproaches of Celsus (177-180 A.D.) testify. . . . The application of Jesus’ teaching to the question of military service was in a way unmistakable.”

A History of Christianity, Professor K. S. Latourette writes: “One of the issues on which the early Christians were at variance with the Græco-Roman world was participation in war. For the first three centuries no Christian writing which has survived to our time condoned Christian participation in war.”

The Rise of Christianity, by E. W. Barnes, who reported: “A careful review of all the information available goes to show that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius [Roman emperor from 161 to 180 C.E.], no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service.”

“The earliest Christians did not serve in the armed forces,” states an article in The Christian Century magazine. It explains that until the decade of 170-180 C.E., there is no evidence whatever that Christians served in the army. The article then adds: “Only gradually did Christians abandon their opposition to military service.”

“We who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons,—our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage,—and we cultivate piety, righteousness, philanthropy, faith, and hope, which we have from the Father Himself through Him who was crucified.”—Justin Martyr in “Dialogue With Trypho, a Jew” (2nd century C.E.), The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, Mich.; reprint of 1885 Edinburgh edition), edited by A. Roberts and J. Donaldson, Vol. I, p. 254.
“They refused to take any active part in the civil administration or the military defence of the empire. . . . it was impossible that the Christians, without renouncing a more sacred duty, could assume the character of soldiers, of magistrates, or of princes.”—History of Christianity (New York, 1891), Edward Gibbon, pp. 162, 163.

“Origen [who lived in the second and third centuries of the Common Era] . . . remarks that ‘the Christian Church cannot engage in war against any nation. They have learned from their Leader that they are children of peace.’ In that period many Christians were martyred for refusing military service.”—Treasury of the Christian World Edited by A. Gordon Nasby, p 369
(Because Christ’s disciples refused to serve in the emperor’s legions, the Romans put many of them to death.)

“Early Christianity was little understood and was regarded with little favor by those who ruled the pagan world. . . . Christians refused to share certain duties of Roman citizens. The Christians . . . .felt it a violation of their faith to enter military service. They would not hold political office. They would not worship the emperor.” (On the Road to Civilization—A World History, A. K. Heckel and J. G. Sigman, 1937, pp. 237-8)

Speaking of the early Christians, the book World History, The Story of Man’s Achievements says: “Zealous Christians did not serve in the armed forces or accept political offices.”

“Early Christianity was little understood and was regarded with little favor by those who ruled the pagan world. . . . Christians refused to share certain duties of Roman citizens. . . . They would not hold political office.”—On the Road to Civilization, A World History (Philadelphia, 1937), A. Heckel and J. Sigman, pp. 237, 238.

Church historian Augustus Neander reported that “the Christians were represented as men dead to the world, and useless for all affairs of life; . . . and it was asked, what would become of the business of life, if all were like them?”
“The Christians stood aloof and distinct from the state, as a priestly and spiritual race, and Christianity seemed able to influence civil life only in that manner which, it must be confessed, is the purest, by practically endeavouring to instil more and more of holy feeling into the citizens of the state.”—The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries (New York, 1848), Augustus Neander, translated from German by H. J. Rose, p. 168.

Christianity Today quotes church historian Roland Bainton: “From the end of the New Testament period to the decade 170-180 there is no evidence whatever of Christians in the army.”

Tertullian, a Christian writer born more than 100 years after Christ’s death, helps us to see how many early Christians viewed warfare and participation in it: “I think we must first inquire whether warfare is proper at all for Christians. . . . Shall it be held lawful to make an occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword shall perish by the sword? And shall the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not become him even to sue at law?”

The magazine The Christian Century draws attention to another conscientious stand taken by the early Christians when it says: “The earliest Christians did not serve in the armed forces. Roland Bainton notes that ‘from the end of the New Testament period to the decade A.D. 170-180 there is no evidence whatever of Christians in the army’ (Christian Attitudes Toward War and Peace [Abingdon, 1960], pp. 67-8). . . . Swift says Justin Martyr ‘takes it as a matter of course that Christians refrain from violent acts.’”

The Catholic work A History of the Christian Councils explains: “Many Christians, . . . under the pagan emperors, had religious scruples with regard to military service, and positively refused to take arms, or else deserted. The Synod [of Arles, held in 314 C.E.], in considering the changes introduced by Constantine, set forth the obligation that Christians have to serve in war, . . . because the Church is at peace (in pace) under a prince friendly to Christians.”

I should mention at this point, that what I am putting down isn't organized at all, really. It's just stuff that has been put down or discussed in the “war” thread.

WARS OF ANCIENT ISRAEL
Jehovah God decreed that Israel should make war to rid the Promised Land of the depraved Canaanites. (Leviticus 18:1, 24-28; Deuteronomy 20:16-18) Just as God had punished evildoers by means of a deluge in Noah’s day and fire in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, so he wielded the nation of Israel as his sword of execution.—Genesis 6:12, 17; 19:13, 24, 25.
According to the Bible, Israel fought other battles under God’s direction, usually to repel unprovoked enemy threats. When the nation obeyed Jehovah, the wars it fought ended favorably. (Exodus 34:24; 2 Samuel 5:17-25) But disaster usually resulted when Israel dared to do battle contrary to divine counsel. Consider the case of King Jeroboam. Ignoring a direct prophetic warning, he dispatched his huge army in civil war against Judah. When the mayhem finally ended, 500,000 of Jeroboam’s soldiers were dead. (2 Chronicles 13:12-18) Even faithful King Josiah once picked a battle that was not his. The rash decision cost him his life.—2 Chronicles 35:20-24.
What do these events show? That in ancient Israel, the decision to make war rested with God. (Deuteronomy 32:35, 43) He had his people fight for specific purposes. However, these purposes were long ago accomplished. Furthermore, Jehovah foretold that those who serve him “in the final part of the days” would “beat their swords into plowshares” and not “learn war anymore.” (Isaiah 2:2-4) C
learly, Biblical wars do not justify modern-day conflicts, none of which are fought under God’s direction or at his command.
*****
Jehovah directed ancient Israel to use warfare to take possession of the land that he himself designated as their inheritance and to execute people whose depraved practices and defiance of the true God caused Jehovah to view them as being no longer fit to live. (Deut. 7:1, 2, 5; 9:5; Lev. 18:24, 25) Nevertheless, mercy was shown to Rahab and to the Gibeonites because they demonstrated faith in Jehovah. (Josh. 2:9-13; 9:24-27) In the Law covenant God laid down rules for warfare that he would approve, stipulating exemptions and the manner in which this warfare was to be carried out. Such were truly holy wars of Jehovah. That is not true of the carnal warfare of any nation today.
With the establishing of the Christian congregation, a new situation came into existence. Christians are not under the Mosaic Law. Christ’s followers were to make disciples of people of all nations; so worshipers of the true God would in time be found in all those nations. However, what is the motive of those nations when they go to war? Is it to carry out the will of the Creator of all the earth or is it to further some nationalistic interest? If true Christians in one nation were to go to war against another nation, they would be fighting against fellow believers, against people who prayed for help to the same God that they did. Appropriately, Christ directed his followers to lay down the sword. (Matt. 26:52) He himself, glorified in the heavens, would henceforth carry out the execution of those who showed defiance of the true God and His will.—2 Thess. 1:6-8; Rev. 19:11-21.
*****
Some try to justify today’s religious wars by noting that God approved of the killing of Canaanites by ancient Israelites. Yet, that is no justification for professed Christians to wage war today. Why? Because the Israelites were directly instructed by God to act as executioners of his righteous judgments against demon-worshiping peoples, whose worship included gross sexual immorality and child sacrifice.—Deuteronomy 7:1-5; 2 Chronicles 28:3.
An evidence that the wars of ancient Israel were no ordinary conflicts is the miraculous nature of the victories that God gave the nation. For example, the ancient Israelites were once directed to use horns, jars, and torches—hardly instruments of classic warfare! On another occasion singers were positioned at the front of an Israelite army that was facing an overwhelming force of invading armies from several nations.—Judges 7:17-22; 2 Chronicles 20:10-26.
Moreover, when, on occasion, the Israelites engaged in wars that were not ordained by God, they were not blessed by him and they suffered defeat. (Deuteronomy 28:15, 25; Judges 2:11-14; 1 Samuel 4:1-3, 10, 11) Israel’s wars, therefore, cannot be invoked to justify the wars waged in Christendom.
****
We have to remember that this was a sanctified warfare by means of which Jehovah, the Judge of all the earth, had demon-worshiping nations exterminated. The Canaanites, for example, were squatters in the Promised Land and followed a demonistic, immoral life-style that would endanger God’s holy people. Jehovah had the land “vomit” those depraved humans out of their territory, using theocratic warfare to have it done. (Leviticus 18:1-30; Deuteronomy 7:1-6, 24) This justifies the spiritual warfare of the Christian today.—2 Corinthians 10:3-5; Ephesians 6:11-18
However, Jehovah did not approve of indiscriminate bloodshed. Thus, it is written concerning a king of Judah: “There was also innocent blood that Manasseh shed in very great quantity, until he had filled Jerusalem from end to end.” Though Manasseh later repented and humbled himself before Jehovah, that bloodguilt remained on him and his dynasty. Manasseh’s God-fearing grandson, King Josiah, acted positively to cleanse the land and restore true worship. But he could not remove that bloodguilt. During the reign of Josiah’s son Jehoiakim, Jehovah moved to bring Nebuchadnezzar against Judah, to execute judgment against that nation. “It was only by the order of Jehovah that it took place against Judah, to remove it from his sight for the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he had done; and also for the innocent blood that he had shed, so that he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and Jehovah did not consent to grant forgiveness.”—2 Kings 21:16; 24:1-4; 2 Chronicles 33:10-13.

BIBLE EXAMPLES OF FAITHFUL SERVANTS OBEYING GOD AND BREAKING THE LAW.
And when Daniels friends were to follow the law made and bow down to the image, did they?
Think of Daniel in the lion's pit.
Or when king ahaseurus made the decree that all the Jews were to die, was that God's will?
**
About the time that Moses was born in Egypt, Pharaoh commanded two Hebrew midwives to kill all newborn Hebrew boys. The midwives, however, preserved the babies alive.
Were they wrong to disobey Pharaoh? No, they were following their God-given conscience, and GOD BLESSED THEM FOR IT. (THE BIBLE-Exodus 1:15-20)
When Israel was in exile in Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar demanded that his officials, including the Hebrews Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, bow before an image that he had placed on the plain of Dura. The three Hebrews refused.
WERE THEY WRONG? No, since following the king’s command would have meant disobeying God’s law.—Exodus 20:4, 5; Daniel 3:1-18.
Similarly, when the Jewish authorities commanded Peter and John to stop preaching about Jesus, they replied:
“Whether it is righteous in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, judge for yourselves.” (Acts 4:19; 5:29) They could not keep silent.

SCRIPTURES AGAINST WAR
We must make a personal decision following our Bible-trained conscience. (Galatians 6:5) While taking the authority of Caesar into account, we must weigh carefully what he owes to Jehovah. (Psalm 36:9; 116:12-14; Acts 17:28)
A Christian will remember that the mark of a true Christian is love for all his fellow believers, even those who live in other lands or those belonging to other tribes. (John 13:34, 35; 1 Peter 2:17)
Further, he will not forget the Scriptural principles found in texts such as Isaiah 2:2-4; Matthew 26:52; Romans 12:18; 14:19; 2 Corinthians 10:4; and Hebrews 12:14.
LUKE 22:49
“Lord, shall we strike with the sword?”
MATTHEW. 26:52
“Jesus said to him: ‘Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword.’” (Could there have been any higher cause for which to fight than to safeguard the Son of God? Yet, Jesus here indicated that those disciples were not to resort to weapons of physical warfare.)
The fact that two swords were available among the disciples on the night of Jesus’ betrayal was not unusual for those times (Lu 22:38), and there is evidence that for Galileans in particular it was not uncommon to carry arms. (See The Jewish War, by F. Josephus, III, 42 [iii, 2].) Jesus’ words at Luke 22:36, “Let the one having no sword sell his outer garment and buy one,” would not indicate that his disciples were about to enter into a hazardous life. Rather, he desired to have a sword available among his followers on that night in order to demonstrate clearly that, though they would come into circumstances that could easily provoke armed resistance, he did not intend to resort to the sword but would give himself up voluntarily in harmony with God’s will. Thus, when Peter did react and try to put up armed resistance, lopping off the ear of Malchus, Jesus ordered him: “Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Mt 26:52; Joh 18:10, 11) Certainly, Peter’s sword and the other one at hand would have availed little against such a large group of armed men, and by trying to use them, they would undoubtedly have ‘perished by the sword.’ (Mt 26:47) More important, such attempted delivery of Jesus would have failed, being completely contrary to Jehovah
God’s purpose. (Mt 26:53, 54) As it was, later that day Jesus could plainly state to Pilate: “If my kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source.”—Joh 18:36.

MATTHEW 26:51-53
“But, look! one of those with Jesus [Peter, John 18:10] reached out his hand and drew his sword and struck the slave of the high priest and took off his ear. Then Jesus said to him: “Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword. Or do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father to supply me at this moment more than twelve legions of angels?”
Peter learned this lesson well, and later reminded Christians:
1 PETER 2:21-23
“In fact, to this [course] YOU were called, because even Christ suffered for YOU, leaving YOU a model for YOU to follow his steps closely. . . .When he was being reviled, he did not go reviling in return. When he was suffering, he did not go threatening, but kept on committing himself to the one who judges righteously.”
MATTHEW 22:39
“The second, like it, is this, ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’”
JOHN 15:14,17
“YOU are my friends if YOU do what I am commanding YOU. . . .These things I command YOU, that YOU love one another.”
LUKE 6:27, 28:
“I [Jesus Christ] say to you who are listening, Continue to love your enemies, to do good to those hating you, to bless those cursing you, to pray for those who are insulting you.”
JOHN 13:35
“By this all will know that YOU are my disciples, if YOU have love among yourselves.””
1 JOHN 4:20
“If anyone makes the statement: “I love God,” and yet is hating his brother, he is a liar. For he who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot be loving God, whom he has not seen.”
1 JOHN 3:10-12
“The children of God and the children of the Devil are evident by this fact: Everyone who does not carry on righteousness does not originate with God, neither does he who does not love his brother. For this is the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should have love for one another; not like Cain, who originated with the wicked one and slaughtered his brother.”
(No Christian can war against another Christian—it would be like a man fighting himself.)
ISAIAH 2:2-4
“It must occur in the final part of the days that the mountain of the house of Jehovah will become firmly established above the top of the mountains . . . And he will certainly render judgment among the nations and set matters straight respecting many peoples. And they will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore.” (Individuals out of all nations must personally decide what course they will pursue. Those who have heeded Jehovah’s judgment give evidence that he is their God.)

2 CORINTHIANS 10:3,4 (NIV)
“For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.”
2 CORINTHIANS 10:3, 4:
“Though we walk in the flesh, we do not wage warfare according to what we are in the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful by God for overturning strongly entrenched things.” (Paul here states that he never resorted to fleshly weapons, such as trickery, high-sounding language, or carnal weapons, to protect the congregation against false teachings.)
MICAH 4:3
“And he will certainly render judgment among many peoples, and set matters straight respecting mighty nations far away. And they will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. They will not lift up sword, nation against nation, neither will they learn war anymore.”
JOHN 17:6
“They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world.”
(When the WORLD goes to war, what does a Christian do?)
MATTHEW 5:9
““Happy are the peaceable,” (See 2 Cor 13:11)

Roman 12:18; 14:19; heb 12:14

ROMANS 12:17-21
“Return evil for evil to no one. Provide fine things in the sight of all men. If possible, as far as it depends upon YOU, be peaceable with all men. Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath; for it is written: “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says Jehovah.” But, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals upon his head.” Do not let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil with the good.”
ROMANS 13:10
“Love does not work evil to one’s neighbor; therefore love is the law’s fulfillment.”
JOHN 6:15
“Jesus, knowing they [the Jews] were about to come and seize him to make him king, withdrew again into the mountain all alone.”
JOHN 18:36 (Jesus told the Roman governor)
“My kingdom is no part of this world. If my kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source.”
JAMES 4:4
“Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God.” (Why is the matter so serious? Because, as 1 John 5:19 says, “the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” At John 14:30, Jesus referred to Satan as being “the ruler of the world.” So, no matter what worldly faction a person might support, under whose control would he really come?)
ACTS 4:19
“But in reply Peter and John said to them: “Whether it is righteous in the sight of God to listen to YOU rather than to God, judge for yourselves.”
ACTS 5:29
“In answer Peter and the [other] apostles said: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.”
MATTHEW 22:21
“Pay back . . . Caesar’s things to Caesar, but God’s things to God.”
(When Caesar demands what belongs to God, we must acknowledge that God has the prior claim.)
REVELATION 13:10
“If anyone [is meant] for captivity, he goes away into captivity. If anyone will kill with the sword, he must be killed with the sword. Here is where it means the endurance and faith of the holy ones.”
GENESIS 1:26
“Let us make man in our image.”
(So to kill a man is to do a most unholy thing. If man is made in God's image, what does it mean to take a life?)
GENESIS 9:6
“Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed, for in God’s image he made man.”
(All mankind today are descendants of Noah; hence, this divine law that emphasizes respect for life is binding on all humans who desire God’s approval.)
ROMANS 12:19-21
“Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but yield place to the wrath; for it is written: “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says Jehovah.” But, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by doing this you will heap fiery coals upon his head.” Do not let yourself be conquered by the evil, but keep conquering the evil with the good.”
LUKE 21:20-21
““Furthermore, when YOU see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then know that the desolating of her has drawn near. Then let those in Judéa begin fleeing to the mountains, and let those in the midst of her withdraw, and let those in the country places not enter into her;”
(In those days, Jewish factions were fighting one another, both verbally and by shedding blood. But Jesus’ disciples did not get mixed up in those revolutionary campaigns. For some 30 years they waited in Jerusalem. Then they obeyed Jesus’ prophetic sign by “fleeing to the mountains.” Their neutral stance and their flight resulted in their salvation.)
“A slave of the Lord does not need to fight.”–2 Timothy 2:24

(While the context shows that Paul was here referring to verbal fights, the original language word rendered “fight” (ma?khe?sthai) is generally associated with armed or hand-to-hand combat.)
PSALM 2:2
“The kings of earth take their stand And high officials themselves have massed together as one Against Jehovah and against his anointed one,”
DANIEL 2:44
““And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;”
1 CORINTHIANS 11:3
“But I want YOU to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God.”
(God is above man.)
JOHN 19:10-11
“Hence Pilate said to him: “Are you not speaking to me? Do you not know I have authority to release you and I have authority to impale you?” Jesus answered him: “You would have no authority at all against me unless it had been granted to you from above. This is why the man that handed me over to you has greater sin.””
TITUS 1:16
“They publicly declare they know God, but they disown him by their works, because they are detestable and disobedient and not approved for good work of any sort.”
ACTS 10:34,35
“God is not partial, but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.” (Does God have preferred nations?)
ROMANS 3:22b-23
“For there is no distinction. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,”
(No nation or country is without sin. With human wars, it’s not a matter of good verses evil. It’s a matter of sinful verses more sinful.)
2 PETER 3:9
“JEHOVAH is not slow respecting his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire any to be destroyed but DESIRES ALL TO ATTAIN TO REPENTANCE.”
(Notice what Jehovah wants. And how will they do this if they are dead?)
MATTHEW 5:43-48
““YOU heard that it was said, ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ However, I say to YOU: Continue to love YOUR enemies and to pray for those persecuting YOU; that YOU may prove yourselves sons of YOUR Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise upon wicked people and good and makes it rain upon righteous people and unrighteous. For if YOU love those loving YOU, what reward do YOU have? Are not also the tax collectors doing the same thing? And if YOU greet YOUR brothers only, what extraordinary thing are YOU doing? Are not also the people of the nations doing the same thing? YOU must accordingly be perfect, as YOUR heavenly Father is perfect.”
(We are to be different than the people of the nations. Vs 8)
**
LUKE 10:29,36-37
“But, wanting to prove himself righteous, the man said to Jesus: “Who really is my neighbor?”….”Who of these three seems to you to have made himself neighbor to the man that fell among the robbers?” He said: “The one that acted mercifully toward him.” Jesus then said to him: “Go your way and be doing the same yourself.””
PSALM 46:9
“He is making wars to cease to the extremity of the earth. The bow he breaks apart and does cut the spear in pieces; The wagons he burns in the fire.”
1 PETER 3:11
“let him seek peace and pursue it.”
GALATIANS 5:22,23
“fruitage of [God’s] spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, mildness, self-control.”
ISAIAH 9:6,7
Jesus, is “prince of peace.”

Luke 3 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.
1 TIMOTHY 1:18
“This mandate I commit to you, child, Timothy, in accord with the predictions that led directly on to you, that by these you may go on waging the fine warfare;”
2 TIMOTHY 2:3
“As a fine soldier of Christ Jesus take your part in suffering evil.”
ACTS 17:26-28
“[God] made out of one man every nation of men, to dwell upon the entire surface of the earth, and he decreed the appointed times and the set limits of the dwelling of men, for them to seek God, if they might grope for him and really find him, although, in fact, he is not far off from each one of us. For by him we have life and move and exist.” (How different history would have been if mankind in general had taken note of Paul’s words! Today, mankind is riven by nationalism, class distinctions, racial hatreds, and social inequities. Yet, Paul’s words still apply. All of us are descendants of that one man created by God. All of us are, in that sense, brothers and sisters.)
PROVERBS 26:17
“As one grabbing hold of the ears of a dog is anyone passing by that is becoming furious at the quarrel that is not his.”

Exodus 22:2
“If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed;

Again, as I've said, this isn't organized. Some of the scriptures above may be repeated or not explained. They are just things I have put in a file and haven't ever organized.

REASONING ON THIS
Imagine the dreadful situation if Christ’s followers were to fight in opposing armies, trying to kill one another. Such a scenario would be contrary to Christian principles. Really, those who obey the God of the Bible would not harm anyone—not even their enemies.—Matthew 5:43-45.
Does God have the power to end these wars? Yet he doesn’t. He doesn’t step in. He has a time for this.
Why did the early Christians not serve as soldiers? Doubtless, each one carefully studied God’s Word and laws and made his personal decision on the basis of his Bible-trained conscience. They were neutral, “no part of the world,” and their neutrality forbade them to choose sides in this world’s conflicts. (John 17:16; 18:36) Further, they belonged to God. (2 Timothy 2:19) Laying down their lives for the State would have meant giving to Caesar what belonged to God. Moreover, they were part of an international brotherhood bound together in love. (John 13:34, 35; Colossians 3:14; 1 Peter 4:8; 5:9) They could not in good conscience take up arms with the possibility of killing a fellow Christian.
**
Does God take sides on football games? On any football game, there are people praying on both sides, are there not? So who does God cheer for?
Similarly, what country does God choose to favor? Name that country, if you can. And name the countries that deserve to suffer death in war, if you can.

NOT PACIFISM (You have been confused by this.)
This is not pacifism, a policy of nonresistance under any circumstance. For example, Christians look forward to Armageddon, God’s war to end wickedness. As well, at Exodus 22:2, 3, a situation is described in which a thief is fatally struck while entering someone’s home during the day. Such a defensive measure was considered tantamount to murder, since the thief could have been identified and brought to justice. But during the night, it would be difficult for the householder to see an intruder and ascertain his intentions. Therefore, the person killing an intruder in the dark was considered guiltless. Thus, the Bible does not uphold impetuous attempts at self-defense. In not supporting pacifism, however, the Bible indicates that there is a time to defend oneself. Christians may ward off physically aggressive attacks against themselves, their families, or others in genuine need of defense. (A woman threatened with rape should scream and use any means at her disposal to resist intercourse.—Deuteronomy 22:23-27) But they would not initiate an attack, nor would they physically retaliate to save their possessions. They would not carry weapons in anticipation of such an attack; rather, they endeavor to “live peaceably.”—2 Corinthians 13:11
The warfare Jehovah’s Witnesses wag
e is strictly spiritual. Paul wrote: “The weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful by God for overturning strongly entrenched things.”—2 Corinthians 10:4; 1 Timothy 1:18.

CORNELIUS, AND SERGIUS PAULUS
Some may ask, ‘What of Cornelius, the centurion, and Sergius Paulus, the army-backed proconsul in Cyprus? Were not these men associated with the military?’ Yes, at the time they accepted the Christian message. The Scriptures, though, do not tell us what Cornelius and others did after their conversion. No doubt Sergius Paulus, who was an intelligent man and “astounded at the teaching of Jehovah,” would soon scrutinize his secular position in the light of his newfound faith and make a proper decision. Cornelius would have done likewise. (Acts 10:1, 2, 44-48; 13:7, 12) There is no record that the disciples told them what action they must take. They could see that from their own study of God’s Word.—Isaiah 2:2-4; Micah 4:3.

RELATIVE SUBJECTION
In the 15th century, a certain Peter von Hagenbach was put on trial for initiating a reign of terror in the area of Europe over which he had authority. His defense, that he was merely following the orders of his lord, the Duke of Burgundy, was rejected. The claim that a person committing atrocities is not accountable if he is following the orders of a superior authority has been made a number of times since then—most notably by the Nazi war criminals before the International Tribunal at Nuremberg. The claim has usually been rejected. The International Tribunal said in its judgment: “Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience imposed by the individual state.”
God’s servants have always recognized that there are limits to the subjection that they conscientiously owe to the superior authorities. About the time that Moses was born in Egypt, Pharaoh commanded two Hebrew midwives to kill all newborn Hebrew boys. The midwives, however, preserved the babies alive. Were they wrong to disobey Pharaoh? No, they were following their God-given conscience, and God blessed them for it. (Exodus 1:15-20) When Israel was in exile in Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar demanded that his officials, including the Hebrews Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, bow before an image that he had placed on the plain of Dura. The three Hebrews refused. Were they wrong? No, since following the king’s command would have meant disobeying God’s law.—Exodus 20:4, 5; Daniel 3:1-18.
(Daniel in the lions pit. King ahaseurus making the decree to have all Jews killed)
Daniel, realizing that the training would likely lead to a conflict with Jehovah’s Law, discussed the matter with the official in charge. As a result, special arrangements were made to respect the consciences of the four Hebrews. (Daniel 1:8-17)
Similarly, when the Jewish authorities commanded Peter and John to stop preaching about Jesus, they replied: “Whether it is righteous in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, judge for yourselves.” (Acts 4:19; 5:29) They could not keep silent.

Children are told to be “obedient to your parents.” (eph 6:1) If a Father tells a son to kill someone that the father dislikes, this is wrong. Killing is wrong. Whose authority is greater–God's or the parents? Yes, God said to obey your parents, but when doing so directly conflicts with or violates God's laws, whom do you obey?

Logically, therefore, Christian submission to such authorities is relative, not absolute.—Compare Daniel 3:16-18.

ILLUSTRATION:
To illustrate: Imagine that you had undergone surgery and stitches were securing the wound. Though the stitches are foreign to the body, they serve a purpose for a limited time. Removing them prematurely could be harmful. Similarly, human governmental authorities were not part of God’s original purpose. Until his Kingdom is ruling the earth completely, however, human governments hold society together, performing a function that fits in with God’s will for the present time. We should thus remain in subjection to the superior authorities, while we give priority to God’s law and authority.

SATAN IS RULER OF WORLD
Satan offered him “authority” over “all the kingdoms of the inhabited earth,” claiming that this authority had been delivered to him. Jesus rejected his offer, but he did not deny that such authority was Satan’s to give. Would this have been a “temptation” if they were not his to give?—Luke 4:5-8.

SUPERIOR AUTHORITIES
A careful reading of the first seven verses of Romans chapter 13 reveals that political “superior authorities” were “God’s minister” to praise those doing good and to punish those practicing what is bad. The context shows that God, not the superior authorities, determines what is good and what is bad. If, therefore, the Roman emperor or any other political authority required things that God prohibited or, conversely, prohibited things that God required, he no longer acted as God’s minister. Jesus stated: “Pay back . . . Caesar’s things to Caesar, but God’s things to God.” (Matthew 22:21) If the Roman State demanded things that belonged to God, such as worship or a person’s life, true Christians followed the apostolic counsel: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.”—Acts 5:29.
It is generally believed that the apostle Paul was executed upon the orders of Emperor Nero. Other emperors, notably Domitian, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus, Decius, and Diocletian, also persecuted the early Christians. When these emperors and their subordinate authorities persecuted Christians, they were certainly not acting as “God’s minister.”

CATHOLICS KILLING CATHOLICS–LOVE?

The Belgian newspaper La Dernière Heure relates that during the war Roman Catholic Cardinal Amette of Paris said this to the French soldiers:
“My brothers, comrades of the French army and of their glorious allies, the Almighty God is on our side. . . . God is near to our brave soldiers in battle, he gives them strength and fortifies them against the enemy. . . . God will give us the victory.”

At the same time, on the other side, the Catholic archbishop of Cologne, Germany, said to German soldiers:
“God is with us in this fight for righteousness . . . We command you in the name of God, to fight to the last drop of your blood for the honor and glory of the country. . . . God knows that we are on the side of righteousness and he will give us the victory.” (La Dernière Heure, January 7, 1967)

As the New York Times observed: “In the past local Catholic hierarchies almost always supported the wars of their nations, blessing troops and offering prayers for victory, while another group of [Catholic] bishops on the other side publicly prayed for the opposite outcome.” (New York Times, December 29, 1966, p. 3.)
Protestant leaders did the same.

Does this make any sense in the light of Jesus words:“By this all will know that YOU are my disciples, if YOU have love among yourselves.”” (JOHN 13:35)
No, it doesn’t. It does seem to match up better with these words:

MATTHEW 7:15-20
““Be on the watch for the false prophets that come to YOU in sheep’s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. By their fruits YOU will recognize them. Never do people gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? Likewise every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces worthless fruit; a good tree cannot bear worthless fruit, neither can a rotten tree produce fine fruit. Every tree not producing fine fruit gets cut down and thrown into the fire. Really, then, by their fruits YOU will recognize those [men].”

Have this world’s religions taught their followers such love? Have they taught them that this love should surmount national boundaries and racial or language differences? Have the churches of Christendom proved true to their claim to follow Jesus Christ as “the Prince of Peace”?

Afte
r Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1935, the Pittsburgh Courier commented:
“The church follows the flag, even though the flag be drenched with the blood of innocent victims of war madness slaughtered in the name of civilization . . .
“And just as the Catholic Church has either approved or seldom disapproved of this international robbery, exploitation and murder, so have the Protestant churches. . . .
“In large part, the spiritual weakness of the Christian Church today is ascribable to its constant compromise with the evils it is supposed to combat.”
(Pittsburgh, Pa., Courier, November 9, 1935.)

Because the world’s religions have undeniably ‘prostituted’ themselves for political and commercial and social gain, this religious empire, Babylon the Great, is pictured as a “harlot.” Of this harlotrous religious empire it is said: “In her was found the blood of . . . all those who have been slaughtered on the earth.” (Revelation 18:24) Does that sound shocking—that the world’s religions bear the principal guilt for all the slaughter of world history? Yet the influence they wield and the lead they have set in supporting war, as well as carrying on violent crusades and religious persecution, bring exactly that responsibility upon them.—Compare Matthew 23:33-36; 27:20-23, 25.

ANd I don't even know what this is, but I should really read it. It's in my file:
http://www.bibletexts.com/terms/war.htm#early-christians
ANF = The Anti-Nicene Fathers (edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, 1885-1887; reprinted in 10 volumes: Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994). Each reference below indicates the volume and page number in the ANF.

Ignatius of Antioch (35-110 AD)
Take heed, then, often to come together to give thanks to God, and show forth His praise. For when ye assemble frequently in the same place, the powers of Satan are destroyed, and the destruction at which he aims is prevented by the unity of your faith. Nothing is more precious than peace, by which all war, both in heaven and earth, is brought to an end. (110 A.D., The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, Chapter XIII)

Justin Martyr (100-165 AD)
We who formerly murdered one another now refrain from making war even upon our enemies. (c. 160), ANF 1.176.
We used to be filled with war, mutual slaughter, and every kind of wickedness. However, now all of us have, throughout the whole earth, changed our warlike weapons. We have changed our swords into plowshares, and our spears into farming implements. (c. 160), ANF 1.254.

Tatian (120-? AD)
I do not wish to be a king. I am not anxious to be rich. I decline military command. (c. 160), ANF 2.69.
Athenagorus (2nd century, AD)
We have learned not to return blow for blow, nor to go to law with those who plunder and rob us. Instead, even to those who strike us on one side of the face, we offer the other side also. (c. 175), ANF 2.129.

Irenaeus of Lyon (130/135-200/202 AD)
The new covenant that brings back peace and the law that gives life have gone forth over the whole earth, as the prophets said: “For out of Zion will go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem; and he will rebuke many people; and they will break down their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks, and they will no longer learn to fight.” … These people formed their swords and war-lances into plowshares,… that is, into instruments used for peaceful purposes. So now, they are unaccustomed to fighting. When they are struck, they offer also the other cheek. (c. 180) ANF 1.512.

Clement of Alexandria (150-215 AD)
It is not in war, but in peace, that we are trained. (c. 195), ANF 2.234.
The Scythians, the Celts, the Iberians, and the Thracians are all warlike races. They are also greatly addicted to intoxication and think that drunkenness is an honorable, happy pursuit to engage in. But we, the people of peace, feast for lawful enjoyment, not to wantonness. We drink sober cups of friendship. (c. 195), ANF 2.246
The spiritual man never cherishes resentment or harbors a grudge against anyone — even though deserving of hatred for his conduct. (c. 195), ANF 2.540.
Paul does not merely describe the spiritual man as being characterized by suffering wrong, rather than doing wrong. Rather, Paul teaches that a Christian does not keep count of injuries. For Paul does not allow him even to pray against the man who has done wrong to him. For he knows that the Lord expressly commanded us to pray for our enemies. (c. 195), ANF 2.548.
Christians are not allowed to use violence to correct the delinquencies of sins. (c. 195), ANF 2.581.
But for a man, bare feet are quite in keeping — except when he is on military service. (c. 195), ANF 2.267.

Tertullian (155/160-225/250 AD)
The one instrument of peace is what we employ: the Word alone, by whom we honor God. We no longer use the ancient psaltery, trumpet, timbrel, and flute. For those who are God puts His prohibition on every sort of man-killing by that one inclusive commandment: “You shall not kill.” (c. 197), ANF 3.80.
“Nation will not take up sword against nation, and they will no more learn to fight.” Who else, therefore, does this prophecy apply to, other than us? For we are fully taught by the new law, and therefore observe these practices … The practice of the old law was to avenge itself by the vengeance of the sword. It was to pluck out “eye for eye,” and to inflict retaliatory revenge for injury. However, the teaching of the new law points to clemency. It changes the primitive ferocity of swords and lances to tranquility. It remodels the primitive execution of war upon the rivals and enemies of the Law into the peaceful actions of plowing and cultivating the land. (c. 197), ANF 3.154.

We, on the contrary, bring before you an emperor who was their protector. You will see this by examining the letters of Marcus Aurelius, that most serious of emperors. For, in his letters, he bears witness that the Germanic drought was removed by the rains obtained through the prayers of the Christians, who happened to be fighting under him. (c. 197), ANF 3.22.
We sail with you, serve in the military with you, and cultivate the ground with you. (c. 197), ANF 3.49.
Now inquiry is made about the point of whether a believer may enter into military service. The question is also asked whether those in the military may be admitted into the faith even the rank and file (or any inferior grade), who are not required to take part in sacrifices or capital punishments … A man cannot give his allegiance to two masters — God and Caesar … How will a Christian man participate in war? In fact, how will he serve even in peace without a sword? For the Lord has taken the sword away. It is also true that soldiers came to John [the Baptist] and received the instructions for their conduct. It is true also that a centurion believed. Nevertheless, the Lord afterward, in disarming Peter, disarmed every soldier. (c. 200), ANF 3.73.
Men of old were used to requiring “eye for eye, and tooth for tooth” and to repay evil for evil, with usury! … But after Christ has supervened and has united the grace of faith with patience, now it is no longer lawful to attack others even with words, nor to merely say “fool,” without danger of the judgment… Christ says, “Love your enemies and bless your cursers, and pray for your persecutors.” (c. 200), ANF 3.711.
If someone attempts to provoke you by physical violence, the admonition of the Lord is at hand. He says, “To him who strikes you on the face, turn the other cheek also.” Let outrageousness be worn out by your patience. Whatever that blow may be, joined with pain and scorn, it will receive a heavier one from the Lord. (c. 200), ANF 3.712.
For what difference is there between provoker and provoked? The only difference is that the former was the first to
do evil, but the latter did evil afterwards. Each one stands condemned in the eyes of the Lord for hurting a man. For God both prohibits and condemns every wickedness. In evil doing, there is no account taken of the order… The commandment is absolute: evil is not to be repaid with evil. (c. 200), ANF 3.713.
“And they will beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks.” In other words, they will change the dispositions of injurious minds, hostile tongues, blasphemy, and all kinds of evil into pursuits of moderation and peace. “Nation will not lift up sword against nation.” That is, they will not stir up conflict. “Neither will they learn war any more”-that is, the provocation of hostilities. So you should learn from this that Christ was not promised to be powerful in war. Rather, He was promised to pursue peace. Now, you must deny either that these things were foretold (although they are plainly seen) or that they have been fulfilled (although you read of them). (c. 207) 3.339-340.
The Lord will save them in that day — even His people — like sheep… No one gives the name of “sheep” to those who fall in battle with arms in hand, or those who are killed when repelling force with force. Rather, it is given only to those who are slain, yielding themselves up in their own place of duty and with patience — rather than fighting in self-defense. (c. 207), ANF 3.415.
The soldiers, crowned with laurels, were approaching. However, one of them was more a soldier of God. In fact, he was more steadfast than the rest of his brethren, who had imagined that they could serve two masters. His head alone was uncovered, for he held the useless wreath in his hand. By that peculiarity alone, he was recognized by everyone as being a Christian. (c. 211), ANF 3.93.
Of course, if faith comes later and finds someone already occupied with military service, their case is different. For example, there is the instance of those whom John [the Baptist] received for baptism, and of those most faithful centurions. I mean the centurion whom Christ approved, and the centurion whom Peter instructed . Yet, at the same time, when a man has become a believer and faith has been sealed, there must be either an immediate abandonment of the military office, which has been the course of many-or else all sorts of quibbling will have to be resorted to in order to avoid offending God. And such quibbling is not allowed even outside of military service. (c. 211), ANF 3.100.
I think we must first inquire whether warfare is proper at all for Christians. What point is there in discussing the merely incidental, when that on which it rests is to be condemned? Do we believe it is lawful for a human oath to be added to one that is divine? Is it lawful for a man to come to be pledged to another master after Christ has become his Master? Is it lawful to renounce father, mother, and all nearest kinsfolk, whom even the Law has commanded us to honor and love next to God himself?… Is it lawful to make an occupation of the sword, when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword will perish by the sword? Will the son of peace take part in the battle when it does not become him even to sue at law? Will he who is not the avenger even of his own wrongs, apply the chain, the prison, the torture, and the punishment? (c. 211) 3.100.
Is the [military] laurel of triumph made of leaves, or of corpses? Is it adorned with ribbons, or with tombs? Is it wet with ointments, or with the tears of wives and mothers? It may be made of some [dead] Christians too. For Christ is also believed among the barbarians. (c. 211) 3.101.
Our religion commands us to love even our enemies, and to pray for those who persecute us. (c. 212) 3.105.
Marcus Aurelius, also, in his expedition to Germany, got rain in that well-known thirst by the prayers that his Christian soldiers offered to God. (c. 212), ANF 3.107.

Hippolytus (170-236/245 A.D.)
A soldier of the civil authority must be taught not to kill men and to refuse to do so if he is commanded, and to refuse to take an oath. If he is unwilling to comply, he must be rejected for baptism. A military commander or civic magistrate who wears the purple must resign or be rejected. If an applicant or a believer seeks to become a soldier, he must be rejected, for he has despised God.” (c. 200, Apostolic Tradition 16:17-19)

Origen (185-255 A.D.)
The existence of many kingdoms would have been a hindrance to the spread of the doctrine of Jesus throughout the entire world… This was because of the need for men everywhere to engage in war and fight on behalf of their native country — -which was the case before the times of Augustus… How, then, was it possible for the Gospel doctrine of peace to prevail throughout the world? For it does not permit men to take vengeance even upon their enemies. It was only possible because, at the coming of Jesus, a milder spirit had been everywhere introduced into the conduct of things. (c. 248), ANF 4.444.
The statement [of Celsus, a pagan critic] is false “that in the days of Jesus, others who were Jews rebelled against the Jewish state and became His followers.” For neither Celsus, nor those who think like him, are able to point out any act on the part of Christians that hints of rebellion. In fact, if a revolt had led to the formation of the Christian commonwealth, the Christian Lawgiver would not have altogether forbidden the putting of men to death. So it could not have derived its existence in such a way from the Jews. For they were permitted to take up arms in defense of the members of their families and to slay their enemies. Yet, Christ nowhere teaches that it is right for His own disciples to offer violence to anyone, no matter how wicked. For He did not consider it to be in accord with His laws to allow the killing of any individual whomever. For His laws were derived from a divine source. Indeed, if the Christians truly owed their origin to a rebellion, they would not have adopted laws of so exceedingly mild a character. For their laws do not allow them on any occasion to resist their persecutors, even when it was their fate to be slain as sheep. (c. 248), ANF 4.467.
Christians were taught not to avenge themselves upon their enemies… They would not have made war (although capable) even if they had received authority to do so. For they have obtained this reward from God: that He has always warred on their behalf. On certain occasions, he has restrained those who rose up against them and desired to destroy them… On special occasions, some have endured death for the sake of Christianity, and those individuals can be easily numbered. However, God has not permitted the whole nation [of Christians] to be exterminated. (c. 248), ANF 4.467, 468.
Perhaps the so-called wars among the bees convey instructions as to the manner in which wars should be waged in a just and orderly way among men — if ever there arise a necessity for them. (c. 248), ANF 4.533.
To those who inquire of us from where we come, or who is our founder, we reply that we have come agreeably to the counsels of Jesus. We have cut down our hostile, insolent, and wearisome swords into plowshares. We have converted into pruning hooks the spears that were formerly used in war. For we no longer take up “sword against nation,” nor do we “learn war any more.” That is because we have become children of peace for the sake of Jesus, who is our Leader. (c. 248), ANF 4.558.
Celsus [a pagan critic] adds…
“How could God command the Israelites through Moses to gather wealth, to extend their dominion, to fill the earth, to put their enemies of every age to the sword, and to destroy them utterly?… For, on the other hand, His Son, the man of Nazareth, promulgated laws quite opposed to these. He declared that no one can come to the Father who loves power, riches, or glory. Jesus said that to anyone who has given them one blow, they should offer to receive another. So is it Moses or Jesus who taught falsely? When the Father
sent Jesus, did He forget the commands that He had given to Moses? Or did He change his mind, condemn His own laws, and send forth a Messenger with opposite instructions?” …
[ORIGEN'S REPLY:] We would observe that it must be impossible for the legislation of Moses, taken literally, to harmonize with the c

[david]

ok, I guess my post was so long that the end parts of it were cut off. I didn't actually know there was a limit.

[david]

“IN THIS decisive hour we admonish our Catholic soldiers to do their duty in obedience to the Fuehrer [Hitler].”—The Catholic bishops of Germany, as quoted in The New York Times, September 25, 1939.

Jehovah's Witnesses decided to go a different way. If the Catholics held the same position, imagine how different that time would have been.

[david]

So, Casey, we can discuss adam and eve and God or we can discuss killing other people for governments. Please pick only one.

[sscott]

Hi David,

I would assume that you also do not “say” the days of the week or most of the months in our calander since they have pagan roots. Do you follow a different calander since so much of the one we use today has pagan roots?

[david]

1 CORINTHIANS 5:9-10
“In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, YOU would actually have to get out of the world.”

We cannot “get out of the world.” We live in this world. Therefore, we have to be reasonable.

Scott, “Let YOUR reasonableness become known to all men.” Phil 4:5

Satan is called the ruler of the authority of the air.
EPHESIANS 2:2
“in which YOU at one time walked according to the system of things of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that now operates in the sons of disobedience.”

His influence is everywhere and paganism is most everywhere. But as the principle was pointed out in that first scripture, while we are to be “no part of the world,” as Jesus said, we still must live in the world.

BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO CELEBRATE IN THE PAGANISM. We live among it because we live in the world. BUT WE DON'T CELEBRATE IT OR EMBRACE IT.

JOHN 17:15
““I request you, not to take them out of the world, but to watch over them because of the wicked one.”

[sscott]

Quote (david @ Nov. 10 2006,07:19)

1 CORINTHIANS 5:9-10 “In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, YOU would actually have to get out of the world.” We cannot “get out of the world.” We live in this world. Therefore, we have to be reasonable. Scott, “Let YOUR reasonableness become known to all men.” Phil 4:5 Satan is called the ruler of the authority of the air. EPHESIANS 2:2 “in which YOU at one time walked according to the system of things of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that now operates in the sons of disobedience.” His influence is everywhere and paganism is most everywhere. But as the principle was pointed out in that first scripture, while we are to be “no part of the world,” as Jesus said, we still must live in the world. BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO CELEBRATE IN THE PAGANISM. We live among it because we live in the world. BUT WE DON'T CELEBRATE IT OR EMBRACE IT. JOHN 17:15 ““I request you, not to take them out of the world, but to watch over them because of the wicked one.”

No offense but it sounds like an excuse for inconsistancy. I do know someone who will not use the current calander or say the names of the days and months due to their pagan roots. Now I totally disagree with him but one thing he is….. he is consistant.

[Proclaimer]

This whole thing about offending God because of a holiday is unfruitful and an unnecessary way to divide those who have faith. This is another danger with following denominations. They make you follow the commandments of men.

Please read the following passage of scripture. If you have ears to hear and eyes to see what it is saying then you would know that it is what is in a persons heart that admonishes or offends God. Not holidays or food.

Romans 14 5-18
5 One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

6 He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord.
He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.

7 For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone.

8 If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

10 You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat.

11 It is written:
” 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.' ”

12 So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.

13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way.

14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.

15 If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died.

16 Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil.

17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit,

18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.

Therefore as Christians we shouldn't judge one another by saying that you cannot touch this, taste that, or celebrate on that day. Such people are carnal minded because they know not that it is what is in the heart that pleases or displeases God.

This is a major difference between the Law and the New covenant, the new one is freedom and spiritual, the old one was made for the carnal and those who sinned. We are considered bewitched if we try and go back to the old from the new, and worse than that are those who teach the commandments of men as if they were the commandments of God.

[seekingtruth]

T8,
I just read David's post under the “first christmas tree” post about celebrating Christmas and wanting to be sure that I wasn't turning a blind eye to something offending God, I prayed asking if it is wrong to celebrate Christmas (yes I know it is not the right day but it is one me and my wife decided years ago to go ahead and honor it on). At the end of the prayer I realized that the few items we do at Christmas were nothing to me. By that I mean they held no pagan type thoughts or purposes behind them. Praise God for the freedom we have when we are “fully convinced”.

My question is I do not want to do anything that would destroy a brother for whom the Lord died. This seems to be a bondage (self imposed, based on love) but what should realistic restrictions be? I mean there are “christian” groups out there that feel you should only have sex to make babies. Should I allow that type of thought to rule in my life? Will I be putting a stumbling block in a David's way if I wish you Merry Christmas. This has always confused me and if you or anyone else could help with some insight it would be greatly appreciated. I will continue to seek the Lord on this.

[Casey S Smith 29]

For now David, you have some other post to reply or comment on if you so wish to from t8, seeking truth, and Scott.

Later on, so you are not bogged down with having to consume all your time on this site – we will discuss further at length the military – political issue.

Quote

I have discussed this for probably 30 pages in the “war” thread

Do not take it personal but I have focussed on this thread for a reason and I do not wish to jump threads. I have not followed the other threads and the others on those threads see things maybe differenlty then I hence the replies from you towards me are going to be redirected according to my comments. If you feel that you have exhaustively reponded to military service and the believer then we can move on; though this issue is not flippant to me. I will let you make the call and respect your choosing.

[david]

Quote

Therefore as Christians we shouldn't judge one another by saying that you cannot touch this, taste that, or celebrate on that day. Such people are carnal minded because they know not that it is what is in the heart that pleases or displeases God.

Hi T8. Closing your eyes and saying you love God with all your heart isn't necessarily a good thing. Many people say that. Aren't we to love him with our whole heart, and soul AND mind?

Doesn't the scripture say:
“This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” (john 17:3)

Shouldn't we attempt to learn from the Bible what we believe pleases or displeases God? Shouldn't we take in that sort of knowledge? And shouldn't we act on it? If God hated certain things in the past, I guarantee you he still hates them.
I wonder if those who will be saying “lord, lord” believed they loved God with their heart?
Just saying Lord lord, or thinking you have Jesus in your heart, isn't all that is required. If you notice the rest of that scripture, it mentions rather those doing God's will.(mat 7:21)

What is God's will? Wouldn't we have to look to the Bible to see how he feels about certain things T8? God doesn't change.

As for your comment on Romans 14 and other scriptures you've stated before which I think I commented on, in considering this matter, the main point is that the Christians did not look to these things for salvation.

The temple and the services carried on there were not despised by Christians, or looked down upon as wrong. They were not idolatrous. Furthermore, many of the practices had become ingrained as custom among those who were Jews. Moreover, since the Law was not merely religious but was also the law of the land, some things, such as the restrictions on work on the Sabbaths, had to be followed by all those living in the land.

The apostle explained that certain things, such as the eating of meat or vegetables, the observing of certain days as above others, even the eating of meat that had been offered to idols before being put up for regular sale in the marketplaces, were matters of conscience. He wrote: “One man judges one day as above another; another man judges one day as all others; let each man be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day observes it to Jehovah. Also, he who eats, eats to Jehovah, for he gives thanks to God; and he who does not eat does not eat to Jehovah, and yet gives thanks to God.” Then he summed up his argument by stating the principle: “For the kingdom of God does not mean eating and drinking, but means righteousness and peace and joy with holy spirit,” and he concluded: “Happy is the man that does not put himself on judgment by what he approves. But if he has doubts, he is already condemned if he eats, because he does not eat out of faith. Indeed, everything that is not out of faith is sin.”—Ro 14:5, 6, 17, 22, 23; 1Co 10:25-30.

An enlightening comment is made on this point by Bible scholar Albert Barnes, in his Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Acts of the Apostles (1858). Making reference to Acts 21:20—which reads: “After hearing this [an account of God’s blessing on Paul’s ministry to the nations] they began to glorify God, and they said to him: ‘You behold, brother, how many thousands of believers there are among the Jews; and they are all zealous for the Law’”—Barnes remarks: “The reference here is, to the law respecting circumcision, sacrifices, distinctions of meats and days, festivals, &c. It may seem remarkable that they should still continue to observe those rites, since it was the manifest design of Christianity to abolish them. But we are to remember, (1.) That those rites had been appointed by God, and that they were trained to their observance. (2.) That the apostles conformed to them while they remained in Jerusalem, and did not deem it best to set themselves violently against them. [Ac 3:1; Lu 24:53] (3.) That the question about their observance had never been agitated at Jerusalem. It was only among the Gentile converts that the question had risen, and there it must arise, for if they were to be observed, they must have been imposed upon them by authority. (4.) The decision of the council (ch. xv.) related only to the Gentile converts. [Ac 15:23] . . . (5.) It was to be presumed, that as the Christian religion became better understood—that as its large, free, and [universal] nature became more and more developed, the peculiar institutions of Moses would be laid aside of course, without agitation, and without tumult. Had the question been agitated [publicly] at Jerusalem, it would have excited tenfold opposition to Christianity, and would have rent the Christian church into factions, and greatly retarded the advance of the Christian doctrine. We are to remember also, (6.) That, in the arrangement of Divine Providence, the time was drawing near which was to destroy the temple, the city, and the nation; which was to put an end to sacrifices, and effectually to close for ever the observance of the Mosaic rites. As this destruction was so near, and as it would be so effectual an argument against the observance of the Mosaic rites, the Great Head of the church did not suffer the question of their obligation to be needlessly agitated among the disciples at Jerusalem.”

Quote

This is a major difference between the Law and the New covenant, the new one is freedom and spiritual, the old one was made for the carnal and those who sinned.

There's definitely a difference. The one was a set of rules. The second law should requires us to discern from godly principles what is acceptable.
As a side point, you say the two covenants are quite different, the “new on is freedom and spiritual.”
But just reading in Romans 14, a couple verses later, I noticed these words: “The Law is spiritual,” (Ro 7:12, 14)
Anyway, it is important that we recognize the difference, as you say. One was a set of rules. One requires us to put the law in our heart. We shouldn't just say: “I have Jesus in my heart,” like a lot of people who have yet to pick up a Bible, but to really put the Word of God in our heart, we must actually know what it says and discern how God feels about things. I believe he has made his views clear.

david

[david]

Quote

Posted: Nov. 10 2006,07:24 QUOTE Quote (david @ Nov. 10 2006,07:19) 1 CORINTHIANS 5:9-10 “In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, YOU would actually have to get out of the world.” We cannot “get out of the world.” We live in this world. Therefore, we have to be reasonable. Scott, “Let YOUR reasonableness become known to all men.” Phil 4:5 Satan is called the ruler of the authority of the air. EPHESIANS 2:2 “in which YOU at one time walked according to the system of things of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that now operates in the sons of disobedience.” His influence is everywhere and paganism is most everywhere. But as the principle was pointed out in that first scripture, while we are to be “no part of the world,” as Jesus said, we still must live in the world. BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO CELEBRATE IN THE PAGANISM. We live among it because we live in the world. BUT WE DON'T CELEBRATE IT OR EMBRACE IT. JOHN 17:15 ““I request you, not to take them out of the world, but to watch over them because of the wicked one.” No offense but it sounds like an excuse for inconsistancy. I do know someone who will not use the current calander or say the names of the days and months due to their pagan roots. Now I totally disagree with him but one thing he is….. he is consistant.

I take it you “totally disagree with him” because you think that's completely unreasonable. Of course, we should try to avoid paganism, but taking it to that extreme is unreasonable and so you totally disagree with him.
Above, I said: “Scott, “Let YOUR reasonableness become known to all men.” Phil 4:5″
Yet, you looked at that and shrugged it off. Scott, we don't choose to wake up on a Sunday (day of the sun) in a pagan world, but we do, regardless. But you can choose how you will spend that day. You can choose to celebrate paganism and embrace it, celebrate in it…..or you can avoid it.
I consider this to be reasonable. Especially, since, as that scripture explained, we cannot get out of the world. But we can avoid certain bad things.

david

[david]

Hi Casey.

Quote

Do not take it personal but I have focussed on this thread for a reason and I do not wish to jump threads. I have not followed the other threads and the others on those threads see things maybe differenlty then I hence the replies from you towards me are going to be redirected according to my comments. If you feel that you have exhaustively reponded to military service and the believer then we can move on; though this issue is not flippant to me. I will let you make the call and respect your choosing.

If you checked that other thread, you would only find me, basically, speaking with everyone else, who disagrees with me. Although it's not a JW thread, it is my scriptural convictions that are being discussed there. We could for sure have this discussion here if you like. I was just meaning that it would be exactly like the discussion that I had with those other 10 people. We'd discuss the same things. So, if you wanted to get a jump on what I'll be saying, you can go there.

david

[david]

Quote

Will I be putting a stumbling block in a David's way if I wish you Merry Christmas. This has always confused me and if you or anyone else could help with some insight it would be greatly appreciated.

It won't stumble me. I've had hundreds of people say this to me, especially when I worked at a store.
If someone who didn't know me said this to me, I would respond by saying: “Thankyou” because I know they mean well. They aren't trying to say anything bad to me. They don't know I don't celebrate Christmas or know I've spent many nights and every lunch hour in grade 11 AND 12 researching this subject for the 3 months before Christmas and have grown to view it negatively, as I believe God does.
So if someone who doesn't … know any better said those words to me, it wouldn't bother me.
But, I'm one of JW's. So, when people at a store, for example figure out that I'm a JW and I don't celebrate Christmas, I get some pretty ignorant comments. “I'm going to get you a blood transfusion for Christmas…” etc. Some say: “merry Christmas” and will say it three times with a bewildered look on their face wanting and expecting you to say it back. I find that a little annoying.

david

[Author]

Posts