It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I got soul, but I'm not a soldier...

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:15 AM
link   
OK this is a call to those religious folk out there. I would like to get an opinion on what you think happens (according to your end of the spectrum/ beliefs/ doctrine) when a soldier goes to war because he believes it is a just war -then dies?

He killed as he was trained to do. He followed orders as he was trained to do, but the cause was in fact unjust and innocent lives were snuffed out by his actions alone. He caused great harm in other peoples 'world', not necessarily because he liked it or wanted to, but because that is what the situation called for. He was there to do a job and he did it.

What becomes of him when his time is up? Hell, Heaven, Limbo, 'bad Karma', 'good Karma'? I believe in some type of afterlife, but please, don't superimpose a Christian, Jew, Muslim or Buddhist ideology on me. In my opinion it does not matter which standards you adhere to. But, like I said, I do believe in an afterlife..whatever that may be.

Thanks for posting.




posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   
I love that song by the "Killers"

Is that off topic?




posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   
acts 24:15] And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

everyone sins, the soldiers are not any worse then anyone else

my thoughts anyway



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Luke 3:14


Then some soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?"
He replied, "Don't extort money and don't accuse people falsely—be content with your pay."


Consider the circumstances of when this took place. John the Baptist was baptizing, and some tax collectors were being baptized as well, asking what they should do. John told them not to take more than they should, which coincides with Jesus's comment about giving unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Tax collecting in and of itself was not against God, though Israel hated its tax collectors because it was part of the subjugation of Israel by Rome. John's comment was to not go beyond what they were to collect.

Then the soldiers came up. Again, these were probably Israeli soldiers serving in the Roman guard in some capacity. This meant they were soldiers who were sometimes called to enforce the Roman yoke over Israel, sometimes by force. From Israel's perspective, these guys were traitors to both nation and to God, since God had given them Israel. Yet, John's words to them were not, "throw down your swords," nor were they, "do not fight", but instead he told them to be just and honest.

In addition to this, the first Gentile (Non-Jewish) convert to Christianity was a Roman solder named Cornelius. Jesus commented about another solder, a commander of some rank, that He'd not seen greater faith in all of Israel.

The Bible says that God places rulers, and that nations are given the authority of the sword to enforce their laws.

So when a soldier goes to war and dies, regardless the cause of the war, the actual action there does not impact what takes place before the Throne of Heaven. What matters is that soldier's relationship with God, and that soldier's justification for their wrongs. If that soldier is standing before a perfect God saying, "look at all the great things I've done," God is going to say He did not know that soldier. If, however, that soldier comes before the Throne asking mercy on himself, a sinner, and has a personal, loving relationship with Christ, whom took the sin of the world, only asking that we love Him and trust Him in return, then that soldier will be welcomed like an old friend.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 10:56 AM
link   
aaahhhh...I was wondering who sang that. It got stuck in my head the other day and I couldn't figure out where it came from...Dam my wife and her pop music!:bnghd:...haha

I thought it was an old school song...I guess I have to admit it is pretty good though...



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by interestedalways
 


I was wondering where I got that song from...I though tit was old school! haha

thanks!



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by junglejake
 


Thanks Junglejake! That is just what a mormon friend of mine said. It is about what is in the heart of the soldier...In Christian terms he will surely end up with God no matter what acts were commited as long as his heart is pure when he is judged. Thanks for the input.

There is another question though Mr. Junglejake (or anyone else who feels like chiming in).

Lets say, a soldier does not believe in the actual war, but feels he has made a commitment (enlisted voluntarily) and he must stick to that commitment because he feels this is the right thing to do. He is also religious (apply to your beliefs) and feels the cause of the war may be unjust. Yet, he still does what he is told and does perform his job to the best of his ability. He is a good man, but needs the money and still feels the patriotism to his country outweighs making a decision that would eventually lead him to prison and disgracing of his name.

Doing his job to the best of his ability, unfortunately includes killing innocent civilians (knowingly or unknowingly) trying to get at his opposition. Even if the man repents for killing these innocent people, do you think his belief and trust in God is adequate for redemption even though he knowingly supported something so unrighteous?

I believe this situation can be applied to many a soldier serving in todays and past wars. As someone who does not recognize religion in a personal way or the 'God' of any religion I have to say it is hard to comprehend that the 'belief' in (input your 'God' here) will be adequate to show mercy on the mans soul.

This is not an attack on any soldier by any means, but I think this is in fact a very real dillemma that some soldiers in the American forces face today.

And maybe with the help of a religious mentor that some of these more religious soldiers look up to it could help them feel more justified in saying "no" to fighting in such a war.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 12:37 PM
link   
I think there's a core element of Christianity that you're missing in your questions. This is very understandable, as Christianity is the only religion that I know of where redemption is the focus (I'll define that in a moment), and many Christians don't understand this, either.

Christianity is not a works-based religion. This means that no amount of any "good" you do can reconcile you to God, and no amount of bad can distance yourself too far from God.

Christ said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me". In addition to this, 1 John 2:23 says, "No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also." There are those who take the book of James and the times where Christ says, "If you love me, you will follow my commandments" to mean that it is through works that we can be reconciled to God. However, James makes it clear that good works are the fruit of a relationship with Christ. It is not the works that bring about the relationship. Christ's comments, too, are in a similar type of those you feel when you fall in love with someone -- you want them to be happy, and will do what you can to do so. It's not because you have to prove your love, but instead your response is to want to do these things for them because you love them.

Romans 8:1 says, "For we know that there is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus." Does this mean Christians can't sin, can't go against God, can't really blow it at this thing called life? Certainly not, and a loving God is good to us in correcting us when we blow it often with discipline to break the hold that some evil has on us. However, there is no condemnation, meaning if you have Christ, love Christ, and earnestly seek Him, your sin does not disqualify you from His kingdom because He already paid the price for it.

The scenario you've depicted with a soldier killing everything in his way to achieve a goal is one deplorable to our culture today. Let's say that the killing of innocents (i.e. murder) in this case is sin. That means that by that action, the soldier is going against the will of God that has been made known to Him. He has sinned. That sin, though, is still sin. James 2:11 says, "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. " This means sin is sin, regardless of the sin, which means committing adultery is the same in God's eyes as murder, because both are willfully going against His will for our lives.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake

Christianity is not a works-based religion. This means that no amount of any "good" you do can reconcile you to God, and no amount of bad can distance yourself too far from God.


I do understand this. When it comes to Christianity I see this as somewhat of a paradox.

My point is, even though this soldier has a relationship with (for the sake of the argument) Jesus, he is directly (knowingly) contradicting what Jesus' message is by taking part in the war. So, when his judgement day comes does 'God' say "hey pal, you didn't follow the way of the lord because you took place in this war, so hell you go!" or does he say "Even though you killed and took part in the war I know you didn't want to kill/ take part and you did love me during the whole time so, surely you have a place in heaven."

So does he stand against his authority (which seems to be the more selfless and righteous thing to do) or does he accept his responsibility and do the job he is paid and trained for? I suppose that is the real question here. A tangent of that argument would be the fact that more than likely some innocent casualties are likely to take place. So are there no consequences for this in the afterlife?

War is a good example for these kinds of scenarios. During war, a logic that seems propostrous under normal standards, is deemed acceptable because there is some type of justification. The ends justify the means sort of thing.



The scenario you've depicted with a soldier killing everything in his way to achieve a goal is one deplorable to our culture today.


I don't think I quite depicted it that way. Let me give you a simple example of just how easy it is to kill a civilian in a hair-trigger decision making moment.

A soldier and his squad are ordered to clear a house. A house containing a mother daughter and husband. The family is eating when the squad raids the house. The father being opposed to the forces being on his land is an armed 'insurgent'. As soon as he hears the raid he goes to grab his gun that just so happened to be behind the wife. The soldier reacts and shoots both the the wife and insurgent.

I believe this is not a such a wild speculative situation that can not take place. So , again, even though soldier has a defined, clear relationship with Jesus, he knows the war is not justified and should not be there and should not have been in that situation where he had to kill an innocent life. So, even if he repents, but then goes out again the next day and a similiar situation arises and more lives are taken, does this man still has a place in 'heaven' with no consequences from his actions on earth?


This means sin is sin, regardless of the sin, which means committing adultery is the same in God's eyes as murder, because both are willfully going against His will for our lives.


Ok. So does Gods will dictate he should defy authority and refuse to take place in the war and risk prison time and never being able to find a job with a dishonerable attached to his name for forever? Or does it say do what is necessary but be sorry for it?

Again, thanks for your contribution JJ. Much appreciated

Are there any other members of another religion that would be willing to give some insight on there beliefs regarding these scenarios?



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by abelievingskeptic
My point is, even though this soldier has a relationship with (for the sake of the argument) Jesus, he is directly (knowingly) contradicting what Jesus' message is by taking part in the war.


This, I think, is something that needs to be addressed, as I'm unfamiliar with a soldier going to war contradicting what Jesus said... Do you have examples of this?



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Well, I can tell you while I was in the Navy, there certainly is a large number of sailors who would go to church. I am assuming they are or were Christian. Some just used it as an excuse to get a way for an hour or two, but these are the same sailors (good people) who launched thousands of sorties into Iraq and Afhganistan.

Some would say that war is as unconstitutional/ morally wrong as they get.
I don't think it had Jesus' approval anyway.

And I do have other ex military firends who were and are deeply religious who have fought in Iraq.

I have also heard stories from my father who fought in Vietnam. He was not religious, but Christianity became rather popular when they were in country.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   
My question, though, is where in the Bible does it say that Jesus disapproved of war?



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by junglejake
 


well, turn the other cheek seems like quite the pacifist message.

where in the bible does it say he approved of war?
where in the bible does it say that jesus disapproved of homosexuality?
where in the bible does jesus say he hated divorce?
where in the bible does jesus talk about heterosexual anal sex?
where in the bible does jesus bring up ther merits of dog ownership?
where in the bible does it give us jesus's opinion on tacos?

...my point is that jesus doesn't talk about a lot of things...

in fact, the bible doesn't talk about a lot of things
...
there's a point in there, you chaps should be smart enough to figure it out for yourself.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Well, if you take into consideration he said "live by the sword die by the sword"..i would assume that includes all people at all times. I mean when one of Jesus' disciples cut off the soldiers ear (the very soldier who carried him to his death nonetheless) and Jesus put it back on the soldiers head I would think is a clear indication for sorting things out non-violently. Unless there is an exception i.e., wartime?

I am pretty sure he believed in peaceful revolution.

Do you know of anywhere Jesus condones war?



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by abelievingskeptic
 


It's interesting that you should quote Christ's statement of "those who live by the sword die by the sword," because before that, this took place (Luke 22:36-38):


He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment."

The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords."
"That is enough," he replied.


What's more, Christ Himself said in Matthew 10:34, "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

It is something I've sought to fully understand myself, and, at least as of now, believe that it is not such a bad thing. Death, from a Christian perspective, ain't so bad, my friend! That those who live by the sword should die by it has several meanings, in that a soldier fighting has a chance of dying by the very thing he lives by. In addition to this, though, the Word of God is referred to as the Sword of the Spirit in Ephesians 6, which would be in line with much of what took place in Acts, following Acts 6, where many believers were killed for believing.

Madness, you're failing to take in the whole of scripture in your assumptions. Assuming the whole of scripture is accurate, then all of scripture speaks for Christ when taken as a whole.



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 




well, turn the other cheek seems like quite the pacifist message.


actually my good sir, from what I have been told (recently, actually) is (and it is very important to understand the times Jesus lived) this passage in particular is a way for Jews to undermine the Romans.

In other words, in Jesus' day, ff you were to clench your fists and hit a slave or backhanded a slave (which basically is what Jews were to the Romans in those times), then you as a 'superior' Roman were giving the slave a chance to fight you as an equal. A Roman was to use the palm of their hand. This was the proper "ediquate" when disciplining a slave. So, if you were to "turn your cheek" when a Roman soldier slapped you across the face that means he would not be able to slap you again without using the back of their hand. Once they did, even as a slave you would have the chance to retalliate.

So, it is not that Jesus said it to be peaceful, it is so Jews would not be in trouble if they were to get in a fight with a Roman.

Same thing goes when Jesus talks about "if someone (mostly meaning the Romans) takes your coat off of your back you are to give him your shirt and undergarments as well"...I don't know the exact Bible verse, but it is something along those lines. But again, Jesus was a smart man and knew what he was saying. When he told the Jews to give the man taking his clothes everything. He did not tell them to do it because he didn't want you to have clothes. He told them to give them everything because it was shameful to look upon a naked man in those times. So it was kind of like "ok you want my coat, here, have my shirt, shoes, socks and underwear to go with it. Take everything along with your dignity." It was not a shame to be naked, but to look upon a naked man most definitely.

Smart guy Jesus was.

Another example of this was when Roman soldiers would make Jews carry their backpack for them Jesus told the Jews to carry it for them an extra mile, or 2 miles or as long as you could. Again, it was not to just "go the extra mile" as the saying goes to actually help the Romans. In fact, if a Roman made a Jew carry his backpack for more than a mile, he would actually get in trouble. There would be consequences for those actions within the Roman military. So, Jesus said "walk an extra mile and get that soldier in trouble." Do not let them take advantage of you. If they do, this is how you get them back.

He wasn't about the sword I don't think, but more along the lines of undermining the Roman authority.

edit to correct who I was replying to

[edit on 29-5-2008 by abelievingskeptic]



posted on May, 30 2008 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by abelievingskeptic

He killed as he was trained to do. He followed orders as he was trained to do,

What becomes of him when his time is up? Hell, Heaven, Limbo, 'bad Karma', 'good Karma'? I believe in some type of afterlife, but please, don't superimpose a Christian, Jew, Muslim or Buddhist ideology on me. In my opinion it does not matter which standards you adhere to. But, like I said, I do believe in an afterlife..whatever that may be.

Thanks for posting.


So long as the soldier does his duty to the best of his abilities, and acts honorably his entrance into whatever comes next is as assured as anyones. He is, to a very real degree, a craftsman, his craft is the making of war...as trite as that sounds. Really, to all intents, he's no different than any other craftsman.



posted on Aug, 8 2008 @ 10:24 PM
link   
"This is not an attack on any soldier by any means, but I think this is in fact a very real dillemma that some soldiers in the American forces face today.

And maybe with the help of a religious mentor that some of these more religious soldiers look up to it could help them feel more justified in saying "no" to fighting in such a war. "


And if they say no they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, having committed the heinous crime of refusing to honor their commitment to fight for their country when ordered to do so. You can't pick and choose, any more than i could pick and choose what i want to do at my place of employment. Learn to play by the rules and you will help your country move forward rather than dragging us down.

NEN (happened on this blog by accident and seriously doubt i'll ever be back but feel free to say what you like



posted on Aug, 8 2008 @ 10:25 PM
link   
"This is not an attack on any soldier by any means, but I think this is in fact a very real dillemma that some soldiers in the American forces face today.

And maybe with the help of a religious mentor that some of these more religious soldiers look up to it could help them feel more justified in saying "no" to fighting in such a war. "


And if they say no they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, having committed the heinous crime of refusing to honor their commitment to fight for their country when ordered to do so. You can't pick and choose, any more than i could pick and choose what i want to do at my place of employment. Learn to play by the rules and you will help your country move forward rather than dragging us down.

NEN (happened on this blog by accident and seriously doubt i'll ever be back but feel free to say what you like



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join