augustine17
Offline
Post: 55891853_226 created on Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:10 pmPosted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:10 pm
 |
Cutie-pie Sleepyhead augustine17 augustine17 augustine17 killing under conditions in general can be justified, as long as it is not in the name of the killing... my opinion is fighting and killing can be justified further than just protection of physical but can be carried over to idealistic protection (such as morality, or other Christian priorities) thus fighting can be brought about in enemy territory, as an attack in regards to defending an ideal... the way i see it: you must be in mindset of readiness to die rather than kill- i also believe that both sides can be in the right. also all Christian sects are derived from roman catholics which was the early church mended with Greco-Roman idealism and philosophy... the romans held honor and duty in very high regards, thus it is that fighting was quickly moralized in a community in which it was completely necessary. also fighting ( i talk of war very generally as to push my ideal of acceptance of combat in all areas) is inevitable if you want world morality rather than world piece. BUT as a Christian you must always hold war ethics and honor very strongly, and choose your battles very carefully, you must always remember (as Saint Peter forgot) that the message and significance to the cause is more important than the general defense of thing, by this i mean if you are to be a marauder have it have some message rather than to die in vain anyone bother reading this? Fine: augustine17 killing under conditions in general can be justified, as long as it is not in the name of the killing... my opinion is fighting and killing can be justified further than just protection of physical but can be carried over to idealistic protection (such as morality, or other Christian priorities) thus fighting can be brought about in enemy territory, as an attack in regards to defending an ideal... the way i see it: you must be in mindset of readiness to die rather than kill- i also believe that both sides can be in the right. also all Christian sects are derived from roman catholics which was the early church mended with Greco-Roman idealism and philosophy... the romans held honor and duty in very high regards, thus it is that fighting was quickly moralized in a community in which it was completely necessary. also fighting ( i talk of war very generally as to push my ideal of acceptance of combat in all areas) is inevitable if you want world morality rather than world piece. BUT as a Christian you must always hold war ethics and honor very strongly, and choose your battles very carefully, you must always remember (as Saint Peter forgot) that the message and significance to the cause is more important than the general defense of thing, by this i mean if you are to be a marauder have it have some message rather than to die in vain 1 my opinion is fighting and killing can be justified further than just protection of physical but can be carried over to idealistic protection (such as morality, or other Christian priorities) thus fighting can be brought about in enemy territory, as an attack in regards to defending an ideal... the way i see it: you must be in mindset of readiness to die rather than kill- i also believe that both sides can be in the right. You think Jesus exists and is the Light and the Truth. Bobby doesn't think this. Does it make sense for you to attack him in order to "protect" the concept that you are right and he is wrong? Has this ever passed as legitimate in any legal situation that wasn't skewed by social dissonance? No. It's an unreasonable position. 2 also all Christian sects are derived from roman catholics which was the early church mended with Greco-Roman idealism and philosophy... the romans held honor and duty in very high regards, thus it is that fighting was quickly moralized in a community in which it was completely necessary. 3 also fighting ( i talk of war very generally as to push my ideal of acceptance of combat in all areas) is inevitable if you want world morality rather than world piece. Everyone dies, therefore it is alright that I kill you, as you would die eventually anyway. Translated into your view it's basically "war happens therefore who better to start a war than us?", horrible reasoning. Quote: BUT as a Christian you must always hold war ethics and honor very strongly, and choose your battles very carefully, you must always remember (as Saint Peter forgot) that the message and significance to the cause is more important than the general defense of thing, by this i mean if you are to be a marauder have it have some message rather than to die in vain. 1 you have misinterpreted me, to say pushing an opinion by means of war is actually completely against morality as preservation of manful virtue (or liberty to think) is amongst the highest regards of Christianity, well at least Catholicism. What i was stating is in defense of a belief should you have right of fighting not on behalf of distribution of that belief, for example: Lets say Bobby is an Atheist and he live a very kind life and iluminates a regular ethical agenda, then i have no problem with Bobby. But now lets say Bobby is Atheist and because of it he disregards morality thinking it is weak and pointless for there is no God to enforce a certain karma like law, and in this mindset he commits the immoral: genocide, misuse of power, corruption of rights, and all that jazz- then you have grounds to fight... but also Bobby may be rather peaceful but his powers are used rather unjustly and inappropriately against a certain peoples (not just including Christians) then you also have means to fight. 2- i was not trying to make an argument on this one, I was simply explaining the Derivation of these beliefs, but you have it backwards as for Morality and ethics, Morality is the same if not greater than ethics, for morality is not bendable, and ethics are the ones who differentiate throughout cultures. Another reason one may argue is that the Romans had just reason to be for war as it has preserved all these ideals we speak of today, and kept unity and piety alive throughout the European areas. 3- I did not mean that because war is inevitable so why not start, but rather War is inevitable so know where you stand, also to start the war first in a better name is just. 4- To say God has told us to do wrong is completely absurd, unless your blind and maim you could probably figure that not many people have met God, when God has spoken it usually just means to have an epiphany in understanding morality, as God is a symbol for all that is good. Also you speak of God as if he has some sort of personification, God has no identity and is infallible for he does not speak wrongly- he wont speak wrongly for he is not human and does not understand humane absurdities and thus could never speak against his creation wrongly. |
|
