Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[ken_sylvania]

as far as Ukrane goes, i’m not aware that anyone on this forum or in anything i’ve read, supports Putin’s invasion.
the strange thing that seems to be happening is (a lot like 2016-2020) HATE is the requirement. if anyone is not willing to HATE, the allegation is, you are supporting Putin. “how dare you?!” i could not abide this regarding DJT, nor can i regarding Putin.

it’s a bad formula, it’s primitive, not of Jesus Christ.

Are you implying that there are people in this forum insisting that others hate Putin?

[temporal1]

I think it's easy. Jesus said "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you. I cannot see how any rational person could believe that an unprovoked invasion constitutes obedience to this teaching.

Ken S., as I understand him, Nett is looking at this with a strict separation between what is addressed to believers (as for example your quote), and what might have been addressed to secular entities, specifically nations. So in a way these injunctions given to us as believers provide no clarity for what a nation might be told.

I think, however, that the injunctions given to believers express the will of God for mankind, and as such, they may be considered as an expression of the kind of morality that God wants (and expects) even non-believers and secular nations to abide by. We can see all throughout the OT story that God judges the wicked actions of non-believing ethnic groups or nations, even when he uses those evil actions to correct his own people.

.. There seems to be an idea among some that God has two sets of requirements. Something along the lines of "If you believe in Me and are willing to obey Me, I want you to love and forgive your enemies.

If you don't believe in Me and are unwilling to obey me, I want you to fight to the death for your rights and freedoms."
This cannot be true.

i think i see some of what you’re saying here, but, i don’t think “what God allows or uses” would be a “requirement,” or “what He wants.” i believe God uses all for His end purposes, even when it doesn’t look at all like it, in any given moment.


i can believe my country is right or wrong, without ability to change what is happening, with the important exception of prayer.
i believe in prayer, and do not believe it’s a lesser choice.

i do believe loving is more than “not hating.” i believe we have a hard time with going the extra mile to love.
and, maybe this is the worst of (problems on earth)! i’m pretty comfortable with not hating. but then i have to remember,
no, He said, “love.” which is often a big step further.

Does Jesus want us to respond to Putin with Christian love? How would that change things? Would it change things?

i haven’t gone that far.
it’s challenging to remain focused on prayers for resolution. i’m pretty sure this falls short of what Jesus instructed.

[ken_sylvania]

Ken S., as I understand him, Nett is looking at this with a strict separation between what is addressed to believers (as for example your quote), and what might have been addressed to secular entities, specifically nations. So in a way these injunctions given to us as believers provide no clarity for what a nation might be told.

I think, however, that the injunctions given to believers express the will of God for mankind, and as such, they may be considered as an expression of the kind of morality that God wants (and expects) even non-believers and secular nations to abide by. We can see all throughout the OT story that God judges the wicked actions of non-believing ethnic groups or nations, even when he uses those evil actions to correct his own people.

.. There seems to be an idea among some that God has two sets of requirements. Something along the lines of "If you believe in Me and are willing to obey Me, I want you to love and forgive your enemies.

If you don't believe in Me and are unwilling to obey me, I want you to fight to the death for your rights and freedoms."
This cannot be true.

i think i see some of what you’re saying here, but, i don’t think “what God allows or uses” would be a “requirement,” or “what He wants.” i believe God uses all for His end purposes, even when it doesn’t look at all like it, in any given moment.


i can believe my country is right or wrong, without ability to change what is happening, with the important exception of prayer.
i believe in prayer, and do not believe it’s a lesser choice.

i do believe loving is more than “not hating.” i believe we have a hard time with going the extra mile to love.
and, maybe this is the worst of (problems on earth)! i’m pretty comfortable with not hating. but then i have to remember,
no, He said, “love.” which is often a big step further.

Does Jesus want us to respond to Putin with Christian love? How would that change things? Would it change things?

I was responding to the nett's assertion that the Bible does not condemn war, as well as your own suggestion that somehow governments get a free pass from following Jesus' teachings. God allows people to sin, and he uses them in their sin, but that doesn't somehow make their sin OK or make them better. The fact that God uses governments to accomplish his purposes doesn't make them any better in His sight.

[temporal1]

In much the same way that the neocons sold Iraq as a defensive war in the wake of 9/11.
Creative redefinitions to justify the unjustifiable.

the way i recall, Iraq was heavily bipartisan, not unlike what is happening in Congress today, with Ukraine.
that doesn’t mean 100% support. but significant, and plenty to act.

to me, this does not speak about neocons, but career/legacy politicians, both parties. supported by legacy media.
one thing Congress can usually agree on is war/military action (with creative redefinitions).

[temporal1]

.. There seems to be an idea among some that God has two sets of requirements. Something along the lines of "If you believe in Me and are willing to obey Me, I want you to love and forgive your enemies.

If you don't believe in Me and are unwilling to obey me, I want you to fight to the death for your rights and freedoms."
This cannot be true.

i think i see some of what you’re saying here, but, i don’t think “what God allows or uses” would be a “requirement,” or “what He wants.” i believe God uses all for His end purposes, even when it doesn’t look at all like it, in any given moment.


i can believe my country is right or wrong, without ability to change what is happening, with the important exception of prayer.
i believe in prayer, and do not believe it’s a lesser choice.

i do believe loving is more than “not hating.” i believe we have a hard time with going the extra mile to love.
and, maybe this is the worst of (problems on earth)! i’m pretty comfortable with not hating. but then i have to remember,
no, He said, “love.” which is often a big step further.

Does Jesus want us to respond to Putin with Christian love? How would that change things? Would it change things?

I was responding to the nett's assertion that the Bible does not condemn war, as well as your own suggestion that somehow governments get a free pass from following Jesus' teachings. God allows people to sin, and he uses them in their sin, but that doesn't somehow make their sin OK or make them better. The fact that God uses governments to accomplish his purposes doesn't make them any better in His sight.

as usual, i agree with you.
i’m not so sure i yet understand all of what nett is aiming at.

[temporal1]

America is currently engaging in or supporting invasions just as bad as the current incidents with Russia.

For example, America just shipped more missiles to Saudi Arabia to be rained down on Yemen. I do not understand why Ukraine generates so much more sympathy and press then Yemen.

The situation with Saudi Arabia and Congress’ silence is peculiar, indeed.
There seems to be a special love/personal investment between them that .. is too big/too real to question??

[nett]

I think it's easy. Jesus said "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you. I cannot see how any rational person could believe that an unprovoked invasion constitutes obedience to this teaching.

Ken S., as I understand him, Nett is looking at this with a strict separation between what is addressed to believers (as for example your quote), and what might have been addressed to secular entities, specifically nations. So in a way these injunctions given to us as believers provide no clarity for what a nation might be told.

I think, however, that the injunctions given to believers express the will of God for mankind, and as such, they may be considered as an expression of the kind of morality that God wants (and expects) even non-believers and secular nations to abide by. We can see all throughout the OT story that God judges the wicked actions of non-believing ethnic groups or nations, even when he uses those evil actions to correct his own people.

One of the things I struggle with in this conversation is the assumption that since the nations are not under the same moral mandates as individual Christians, then there are no expectations about morality for them.

That makes no sense to me. Christianity is not the only source of morality in the world. There are secular sources of morality, even during war (such as the Geneva Convention which dictates how prisoners and civilians and other international law). To wave it away and say that none of that matters is deeply cynical and not really a world I want to live in.

I don't think it's deeply cynical to accept reality about the global order falling apart. For instance, the US has broken plenty of international law, and committed war crimes despite all of the international convention and law you speak of. That Russia is now blatantly violating the laws that western nations have been subtly violating for years shouldn't be shocking to anyone. Putin is making it clear that they want to withdraw from the global "order"

The way I see it, the world tried out the experiment of having a global "police", this police force turned out to be just as corrupt and brutal as the individuals nations that preceded it. Russia wants to opt out.

Making a moral judgement on that is bad. There is a lot about Western liberalism that has turned out to be very bad, even though it looked good at face value.

[temporal1]

You seem to be making an assumption that Russians would fundamentally agree with the Western perspective on things.

(Not speaking of Dan either way.) This is a COMMON view in the U.S.
Certainly exhibited in “full living color” following W’s invasion in Iraq.
i believe he was 100% convinced he would be welcomed with open arms by the people of Iraq. He expected glory.

[nett]

In what way did Jesus not address earthly nations' responsibilities and actions? There is no such thing as an earthly nation that is not comprised of individual people - individual people for whom Jesus died and who he has called to follow in his steps. Individual people who he has commanded to love their enemies.

How can an earthly nation engage in war without encouraging, even demanding, that individual people directly disobey Jesus?

If you are attempting to reconcile some kind of theory that supports nations engaging in war, with Jesus instructions to be peaceable and gentle, I can understand why you would struggle to reach and understanding. It would give me a headache too!

To follow this line of thought, you have to disavow police force and any kind of national defense. To do so would be a nation abdicating its biblical role, which is punishing evildoers.

Applying Jesus' commandments for his followers to the administration of nations just doesn't work, and every attempt to do so has created church-states that always turn out badly. I realize this is very cognitively dissonant for westerners who believe America is someone a "Christian nation". I don't know what to tell you.

[ohio jones]

How can an earthly nation engage in war without encouraging, even demanding, that individual people directly disobey Jesus?

It's especially problematic in this conflict, where the Orthodox churches on each side are also adding their encouragement.

The fact that God uses governments to accomplish his purposes doesn't make them any better in His sight.

It also does not absolve them (or the people in them) from eventual judgment for their actions.