Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[Soloist]

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.

I disagree completely. God and the Son have the same mind and the same accord. That brings about a more indepth post I've been thinking about though...

[GaryK]

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.

If you look at these passages from the context of the fall of man, it was humanity that changed the original plan God put in place. God gave adequate warning of the consequences that would befall them if they chose to disobey His one command. From the day they made the choice to disobey, God has been dealing with fallen humanity, not from the context of His original design but from the context of humanity's choice to disobey. He's being true to the warnings He gave them originally.

Scripture is clear that God at times sets up earthly governments to accomplish what I believe is His ultimate desire - that all men repent and turn to the NT Kingdom He established through Jesus. But, as long as humanity chooses to continue in the context of sin, I believe God will move within that context. Jesus himself said "...for all who take the sword will perish by the sword."

There's a lot more that could be said about this, but viewing these passages from this context has helped me sort of reconcile some things about God that have been hard to understand.

[Dan Z]

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.

It is possible for a coach to employ a different approach to the second half of a game than the first half, depending on the score and the situation on the field. In this case, we don't claim the coach has changed, nor has their end goal of winning the game, only their tactics relative to the point in the game.

As Christ-followers we look first to the teachings and example and work of Jesus (God in human form) and his Apostles to define what God requires of us at this point in "the game" - as he has instructed us to do.

[Neto]

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.

I disagree completely. God and the Son have the same mind and the same accord. That brings about a more indepth post I've been thinking about though...

When Jesus read out of the Prophet Isaiah in the synagogue in Capernaum, do you (anyone) think he left off the last part of the passage (about judgement) because he rejected it, or because he was only quoting the part that pertained to his ministry at that time? (Just so you'all know where I'm coming from, I think it was the latter, and that the second part of that is still coming. I also think that it is possible - though I am in no way certain - that we will take part in that Great Army of God that will be a part of that. Again, the Kingdom of the Christ of God is not NOW "of this world".)

[RZehr]

From the NYT:

Russia signaled on Friday that it may be reducing its war aims. The Defense Ministry said that the goals of the “first stage of the operation” had been “mainly accomplished,” with Ukraine’s combat power “significantly reduced.” Maj. Gen. Sergei Rudskoi said that Russia would now focus on defeating Ukrainian forces in the eastern Donbas region. While Russia “does not exclude” that its forces will storm major Ukrainian cities such as Kyiv, he said that taking them over was not a primary objective.

This seems like a positive development.

[Ken]

From the NYT:

Russia signaled on Friday that it may be reducing its war aims. The Defense Ministry said that the goals of the “first stage of the operation” had been “mainly accomplished,” with Ukraine’s combat power “significantly reduced.” Maj. Gen. Sergei Rudskoi said that Russia would now focus on defeating Ukrainian forces in the eastern Donbas region. While Russia “does not exclude” that its forces will storm major Ukrainian cities such as Kyiv, he said that taking them over was not a primary objective.

This seems like a positive development.

I think the Russians know that they've already lost. And that none of their original war aims are attainable now. Just like the US knew it had lost in Vietnam by about 1968 but still took 6 more years to extract itself. Hopefully the Russians will be quicker than the Americans in that respect.

I wonder how hard their troops in northern Ukraine around Kyiv will keep fighting now that their government has announced that taking those cities is no longer an objective. No one wants to die for a cause that your own government has abandoned.

[Neto]

From the NYT:

Russia signaled on Friday that it may be reducing its war aims. The Defense Ministry said that the goals of the “first stage of the operation” had been “mainly accomplished,” with Ukraine’s combat power “significantly reduced.” Maj. Gen. Sergei Rudskoi said that Russia would now focus on defeating Ukrainian forces in the eastern Donbas region. While Russia “does not exclude” that its forces will storm major Ukrainian cities such as Kyiv, he said that taking them over was not a primary objective.

This seems like a positive development.

I think the Russians know that they've already lost. And that none of their original war aims are attainable now. Just like the US knew it had lost in Vietnam by about 1968 but still took 6 more years to extract itself. Hopefully the Russians will be quicker than the Americans in that respect.

I wonder how hard their troops in northern Ukraine around Kyiv will keep fighting now that their government has announced that taking those cities is no longer an objective. No one wants to die for a cause that your own government has abandoned.

I have from the beginning suspected that their main objective was to create a "land bridge" between The Russian Federation and Crimea. I also wonder if their support for the break-away areas back in 2014 wasn't also primarily a diversion so that they could take over the Crimean peninsula.

[Falco Underhill]

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.

Amen to that. There is always hope.

[Falco Underhill]

From the NYT:

Russia signaled on Friday that it may be reducing its war aims. The Defense Ministry said that the goals of the “first stage of the operation” had been “mainly accomplished,” with Ukraine’s combat power “significantly reduced.” Maj. Gen. Sergei Rudskoi said that Russia would now focus on defeating Ukrainian forces in the eastern Donbas region. While Russia “does not exclude” that its forces will storm major Ukrainian cities such as Kyiv, he said that taking them over was not a primary objective.

This seems like a positive development.

I think the Russians know that they've already lost. And that none of their original war aims are attainable now. Just like the US knew it had lost in Vietnam by about 1968 but still took 6 more years to extract itself. Hopefully the Russians will be quicker than the Americans in that respect.

I wonder how hard their troops in northern Ukraine around Kyiv will keep fighting now that their government has announced that taking those cities is no longer an objective. No one wants to die for a cause that your own government has abandoned.

He said from the beginning he didn't intend on occupying Kiev. Why not just admit you were wrong about his intentions from the start instead of pretending otherwise?

[Ken]

From the NYT:

This seems like a positive development.

I think the Russians know that they've already lost. And that none of their original war aims are attainable now. Just like the US knew it had lost in Vietnam by about 1968 but still took 6 more years to extract itself. Hopefully the Russians will be quicker than the Americans in that respect.

I wonder how hard their troops in northern Ukraine around Kyiv will keep fighting now that their government has announced that taking those cities is no longer an objective. No one wants to die for a cause that your own government has abandoned.

He said from the beginning he didn't intend on occupying Kiev. Why not just admit you were wrong about his intentions from the start instead of pretending otherwise?

Their objective was "regime change" That's why they used over half their forces to invade from the north towards Kyiv and Kharkiv, sent numerous assassination squads after Zelenskyy, and had a puppet government in waiting to replace him. Look at what they did, not what they said.