Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[silentreader]

The Reformation was mostly about Henry the VIII wanting to keep marrying more wives, not about “separation of church and state”.

[temporal1]

The Reformation was mostly about Henry the VIII wanting to keep marrying more wives, not about “separation of church and state”.

he does pretty well. nobody’s perfect.

[Bootstrap]

The Reformation was mostly about Henry the VIII wanting to keep marrying more wives, not about “separation of church and state”.

This is at least as accurate as some of the other history shared in this thread ;->

[joshuabgood]

Before anyone gets the pitchforks. I'm not trying to make a case Russia is doing a good thing, and The Ukraine deserves it. I'm making a case for Christians remaining neutral on the morality of this invasion.

If being neutral means not joining the violence on either side because this is what political kingdoms do, then I agree. If being neutral means not being able to speak truth to power about the evils of killing children and bombing hospitals, then no.

All war involves killing children, and destroying infrastructure. Do you condemn all war in all cases?

I reject all violence in all cases...because it is not the way of God as perfectly revealed by the suffering servant.

[Josh]

The Reformation was mostly about Henry the VIII wanting to keep marrying more wives, not about “separation of church and state”.

As I keep pointing out, America at its founding had state churches. Just not a federal church over all 13 states.

Right Josh. Martin Luther, John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli, and Menno Simons were just carrying water for Henry the VIII.

… all of whom established state churches, except for Menno Simons.

[Falco Underhill]

The Reformation was mostly about Henry the VIII wanting to keep marrying more wives, not about “separation of church and state”.

As I keep pointing out, America at its founding had state churches. Just not a federal church over all 13 states.

Right Josh. Martin Luther, John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli, and Menno Simons were just carrying water for Henry the VIII.

… all of whom established state churches, except for Menno Simons.

In Catholic England, Separation of Church and State originally referred to the different spheres of influence, within the public realm, of those two institutions (or their different powers.) It didn't mean separation into the public and private spheres, as it does in modern secularism.

In attempting to set up their own state churches against the Catholic Church and each other's, the Reformation set up the conditions for the Wars of Religion, which became the reason for separation of Church and State in the modern sense of that term (into public and private spheres of influence.) That was mainly to keep them from warring against each other.

(That's my understanding of it, anyway.)

Secularism does seem to be leading to problems of its own — of which we haven't yet seen the full consequences.

[temporal1]

In Catholic England, Separation of Church and State originally referred to the different spheres of influence, within the public realm, of those two institutions (or their different powers.)

It didn't mean separation into the public and private spheres, as it does in modern secularism.

In attempting to set up their own state churches against the Catholic Church and each other's, the Reformation set up the conditions for the Wars of Religion, which became the reason for separation of Church and State in the modern sense of that term (into public and private spheres of influence.)

That was mainly to keep them from warring against each other.
(That's my understanding of it, anyway.)

Secularism does seem to be leading to problems of its own — of which we haven't yet seen the full consequences.

Well said.
At some point, even die-hard secularists might observe poor fruits and admit to “the distinct possibility” of error.

in my view, one poor choice was in taking that which represents nothing more than social engineering EXPERIMENTS married to fanciful wishes then preemptively embedding them into human law - as-if outcomes of EXPERIMENTS were known before tests-trials.

the hope can be: there is no need to remain ever-faithful to exhibited failures.
God is greater.

I personally like Hungary‘s approach. It’s not illegal, however traditional families are protected.
And they strongly use Christian principles in their law making. Poland is another, in this day and age these countries are showing a country can try to live morally and westernised.

i’m encouraged reading this.
i’ve been interested in Poland+Hungary for several years, reading they are pro-family and not God-denying/destroying.
but i see so little!

i’ve read that a few years ago, Hungary passed laws to encourage families, more children, and, results are positive!
but i see so little.

now i read Poland+Hungary are taking the majority of Ukraine’s refugees. i pray this has short+long term benefits for Ukraine, Poland and Hungary, and the world. i imagine it, and i pray for it. for all involved.

i’ve read both countries are under (expected+predictable) attack from the Left-West.
the ultimate+dedicated meddlers/“colonial imperialists” of this new century. they do not sleep.
they can’t rest. not possible. human reasoning alone is empty, it cannot nurture or sustain. it tricks+lies.

i pray for hearts+minds to be converted.

What great good God may have planned to arise out of this earthly train wreck! amen

[temporal1]

I reject all violence in all cases...because it is not the way of God as perfectly revealed by the suffering servant.

are you referring to physical violence, alone?
do you agree lots of violence results from other deliberate actions, words, thoughts that deeply damage, or even kill, without drawing blood? intent to kill (bodies/souls) without physical bloodshed?

from what you write, i’m unsure.

our suffering servant went well beyond not being physically violent.
that’s just the first step, right?

[Grace]

I reject all violence in all cases...because it is not the way of God as perfectly revealed by the suffering servant.

I agree with you 100%. But I am reading through the Book of Joshua and really struggling with the violence that occurred as recorded in the book. Inhabitants of whole cities being killed, including women and children. It seems so brutal and uncharacteristic of a loving God. The only way I can reconcile the brutality is that at the beginning God made a perfect world and it was mankind that destroyed that perfection. And at the end God will make a way of perfection for the believer. But I suppose that would be a whole other thread.

[Szdfan]

I reject all violence in all cases...because it is not the way of God as perfectly revealed by the suffering servant.

I agree with you 100%. But I am reading through the Book of Joshua and really struggling with the violence that occurred as recorded in the book. Inhabitants of whole cities being killed, including women and children. It seems so brutal and uncharacteristic of a loving God. The only way I can reconcile the brutality is that at the beginning God made a perfect world and it was mankind that destroyed that perfection. And at the end God will make a way of perfection for the believer. But I suppose that would be a whole other thread.

Those are some hard, uncomfortable passages in the Bible. I’ve read arguments that God changes during the narrative arc of the Bible, which I know is heretical. At the very least, the relationship between God and humanity changes as God works towards restoration. We know that the brutality in the OT is not the way of Jesus.