The sword is in the hands of government, to whom God entrusted it. Because God has designated government as his servant to be an agent of wrath in punishing evildoers. At least that's Paul's view in Romans 13 (forgive my paraphrase). This is another argument many use for the Christian's involvement in war and/or violence. Because if God designates a government to punish humankind for evil or good, shouldn't we be involved in ensuring that those governments have informed understandings of good and evil? Not my view necessarily (that Christians need to be involved in war), though I take Paul at his word that governments exist to dole out justice in some form or another…

The sword is in the hands of government, to whom God entrusted it. Because God has designated government as his servant to be an agent of wrath in punishing evildoers. At least that's Paul's view in Romans 13 (forgive my paraphrase). This is another argument many use for the Christian's involvement in war and/or violence. Because if God designates a government to punish humankind for evil or good, shouldn't we be involved in ensuring that those governments have informed understandings of good and evil? Not my view necessarily (that Christians need to be involved in war), though I take Paul at his word that governments exist to dole out justice in some form or another…

I agree that the oppressor needs rescuing from himself, and that he is still created in the image of God. I just don't agree that this means we keep him alive at all costs.

I want to, and think I do, agree also with your assessment that no sin is more wrong than another, in that they all separate us from God — and that the consequences are what may be different. But I don't know what to do with that: because there will exist some situations where I must choose between options that are either all wrong, or would have all been wrong at another time. David eating shewbread. Jesus healing on the Sabbath. Rahab lying about the spies.

Morality is situational. So either there was a more and less wrong in those situations, or the situation itself made it such that one of the “wrongs” became a right. In the case of Jesus healing on the Sabbath, I know it can't have been a wrong, because he was sinless. But this is my very argument. Killing is not what God wants or intends for us to do — but might there ever be a situation in which this is the right choice (or the less wrong one)? There is with lying, and with working on the Sabbath. How can we be so sure that killing is the exception?

What I suggested was laughable was comparing Jesus dying in order to save the entire world to me offering my life to a murderer in order to allow him to kill a group of innocent people. If I could die in a situation in order to save others, I would gladly do so. But to refuse to defend innocent people is not noble and Christlike in that I spare the life of a bad person; it is to enable and allow him to take a number of lives. Doing nothing in that case keeps me personally from being the one to pull a trigger, but it does not prevent murder and death. I see it as almost a selfish way for me to remain “clean.”

I agree that the oppressor needs rescuing from himself, and that he is still created in the image of God. I just don't agree that this means we keep him alive at all costs.

I want to, and think I do, agree also with your assessment that no sin is more wrong than another, in that they all separate us from God — and that the consequences are what may be different. But I don't know what to do with that: because there will exist some situations where I must choose between options that are either all wrong, or would have all been wrong at another time. David eating shewbread. Jesus healing on the Sabbath. Rahab lying about the spies.

Morality is situational. So either there was a more and less wrong in those situations, or the situation itself made it such that one of the “wrongs” became a right. In the case of Jesus healing on the Sabbath, I know it can't have been a wrong, because he was sinless. But this is my very argument. Killing is not what God wants or intends for us to do — but might there ever be a situation in which this is the right choice (or the less wrong one)? There is with lying, and with working on the Sabbath. How can we be so sure that killing is the exception?

What I suggested was laughable was comparing Jesus dying in order to save the entire world to me offering my life to a murderer in order to allow him to kill a group of innocent people. If I could die in a situation in order to save others, I would gladly do so. But to refuse to defend innocent people is not noble and Christlike in that I spare the life of a bad person; it is to enable and allow him to take a number of lives. Doing nothing in that case keeps me personally from being the one to pull a trigger, but it does not prevent murder and death. I see it as almost a selfish way for me to remain “clean.”

I honestly believe that war as a construct is beginning to end as an answer because there is so much evidence that is doesn't work. But like every other construct we've defined, it needed a period to be realized and then examined. Will it go away completely. I don't know.

I honestly believe that war as a construct is beginning to end as an answer because there is so much evidence that is doesn't work. But like every other construct we've defined, it needed a period to be realized and then examined. Will it go away completely. I don't know.

You bring up Nazi Germany, and specifically I would add Hitler. I've debated this before and one truth I would bring up is that Hitler was still a human being created in the image of God created very good. But he lost site of that. We don't like that because it takes away our excuse to hit back.

But I would also say this. I didn't have to make those decisions for war, and I am still not someone's judge.

You bring up Nazi Germany, and specifically I would add Hitler. I've debated this before and one truth I would bring up is that Hitler was still a human being created in the image of God created very good. But he lost site of that. We don't like that because it takes away our excuse to hit back.

But I would also say this. I didn't have to make those decisions for war, and I am still not someone's judge.