Pics of gun-toting Marine in Church??? (page 3)

Double Edge

I note that your profile says that you've never been a JW.

That's right.... after learning from this board about JW abuse, thank GOD I was never one.

That being the case, I doubt that you have the background to make it possible for you to understand where I'm coming from here.

What, you think I live in a vacuum? My background DOES make it possible for me to understand where you're coming from. Over the course of my life I've attended many Christian and non-Christian churches. How many have you attended? I've been to Quaker, Mennonite, Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, Morman, Catholic, Lutheran, etc. etc.... and you know what, while they all believe that Jesus is the Messiah, a few view military service like the JWs do and for them, the photo probably wouldn't be appropriate. But then again, like the Methodist congregation that young man was from, it isn't an issue.

The fact is that the Church itself approves of person's who claim to be "Christians" joining the military. That's also at issue here

It's an issue to those who make it so by pointing the finger and noting who is and who isn't a "Christian". Hey, we have no "fight" or argument here. Just saying some Christians view military service as ok and some not ok - that's been going on for hundreds of years .... but that in itself doesn't define Christianity.

little witch

Dear Skiz,

I was raised in my youth a jw, and converted to christianity several years ago so I think my opinion is valid.

The question you are really pondering is, "Should there be a seperation of church and state".

You are bothered by the "glorification" of a fallen soldier in a religious setting. That is a very valid question, and one that divides denominations.

I am starchly in favor of seperation of church and politics. Jesus himself said, "give to ceasar what is ceasar's". That pretty much clarified things for me personally.

However, a church congregation also fills a deeply personal bond. Almost family like. The congregation marries our children, buries our dead, and in other like ways conducts matters of family bonds.

It seems to me that the congregation was announcing and mourning the loss of one of their own. It does not appear to take a side in politics or the right or wrong of the war and that being the case, perhaps you are reading too much into the situation?

Kenneson

The irony of it all is the teaching of JWs that somehow Christ is opposed to Christians participating in war because he tells us to love our enemies, yet they expect Jesus to soon participate in the bloodiest war yet when all his enemies will be destroyed at Armageddon. This is certainly a glaring inconsistency. Why does he tell us to love our enemies if he himself will not do it? Why does he tell us not to participate in war if he himself will do so?

little witch

Kenneson that is such an enlightening point! I never thought of that!

patio34

The irony of it all is the teaching of JWs that somehow Christ is opposed to Christians participating in war because he tells us to love our enemies, yet they expect Jesus to soon participate in the bloodiest war yet when all his enemies will be destroyed at Armageddon. This is certainly a glaring inconsistency. Why does he tell us to love our enemies if he himself will not do it? Why does he tell us not to participate in war if he himself will do so? --Kenneson

Hi Kenneson, How do you understand what Jesus said when he said "Love your enemies"? And how is that to be reconciled that he supposedly IS supposed to come fighting God's enemies at Armageddon? Pat

Eyebrow2

hey...it was a good picture of the guy thats all that matters.

now if it was a Quaker church, or another pacifist church they may not have chosen that picture, or had any military pictures up perhaps.

I don't think it is wrong..they are honoring the man that died, and being a solider was his profession.

myauntfanny

Schism,

I think it's dangerous to think that you can guess what God thinks, and I imagine God finds it ridiculous when we try. But come on, you're thinking with the group brain here, and ignoring your heart. This is a young man who died in service to his fellow citizens. HIs family and his community are proud of him and hearbroken to lose him. It is uncharitable to nitpick over a picture of a gun in a church when people are grieving over his death. There are probably people on this board who have lost friends and relatives in this or other wars, how do you think it makes them feel?

And I find it peculiar that a group of people so obsessed with wanting almost everyone on earth to die as soon as possible think of themselves as pacifists. People who walk around hoping for mass destruction would normally be considered murderous as well as mentally unbalanced.

Kenneson

Pat,

Since I do not believe that Christ ever fought in literal battles while on earth, I do not believe that he will do so in the future.

I see much of the Book of Revelation as allegorical. It is replete with apocalyptic imagery and symbolical language lifted from the Old Testament, especially Ezekiel and Daniel, Joel & Isaiah. There are beasts and dragons and battles and sacred numbers and visions, etc.

Christ's triumph over sin, death and the devil is presented as past, present, and future in one single reality. The idea is expressed in the rest of the New Testament. In Col. 2:13-15 the triumph has already taken place. The battle has already been fought and won. In Eph. 6:12 there is not yet triumph, but still struggle. And in 1 Cor. 15:24-26 the triumph is in the indefinite future, at the time of the resurection of the righteous. Yet in the same breath he adds (v. 27: "For God has put all things in subjection under his feet."

John depicts Christ as the conqueror Who "has freed us from our sins by his blood and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father" (Rev. 1:5-6); "I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of death and Hades" (1:18). But Christ lives on in His People, as Paul also taught, and the victory of Christ must consequently be constantly repeated in his members. "To him who.conquers....." is the condition of His promises to the churches (2:8; 2:11; 2:17; 2:26; 3:5; 3:12; 3:21). "Be faithful unto death and I will give you the crown of life" (2:10). Until the work of God's People has been done, Christ's victory is not complete. It was to assure his readers that this victory would be complete, that Rev. was written.

In spite of the imagery used in Rev., Jesus is still depicted as the Lamb of Isaiah 53. He ultimately triumphs over evil. The final struggle (battle) over evil will be won not through a literal war, but through Christ's death and resurrection and LOVE. It is LOVE that conquers now and LOVE that will ultimately conquer. Evil will not win.

patio34

Hi Kenneson,

Thanks for your reasonable explanation. It made as much sense as any other. My personal belief . . . oh, it doesn't matter, not being a theist.

Pat

Schizm

Thanks to all who participated in this thread in order to make your true feelings known. Even you, Yeru.

Schizm

Pics of gun-toting Marine in Church???

Share this