The good man that turned bad out of necessity
- Thread starter Riven
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
”Truman stood by his decision for the rest of his life, yet was deeply troubled by the loss of civilian life in the bombings. This response is, on the one hand, understandable, yet also curious: had not the ‘conventional’ firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the two atomic bombs combined? …
… in 1940, Churchill condemned the German bombing of civilians as an ‘odious form of warfare’; by 1942, England had adopted the policy as their own and Churchill would go on to vow that there are ‘no lengths to violence to which we will not go.’
What was unthinkable had become thinkable and doable. The bombing continued even when evidence suggested that it was not significantly undermining the industrial capacity of Germany to make war. Once adopted, the practice found its rationale in revenge and the infliction of maximum human suffering. Allied leaders felt no need for moral or theological justification for their actions.”
(Christopher Shannon, “Sheen and Hiroshima”)
“… I am certainly happy that the United States won the Second World War and did so without the tremendous liss if life - American, Japanese and Russian - that would have accompanied an invasion of Japan. At the same time, I am sad that this victory came through years of committing intrinsically evil acts.”
(Ibid.)
Christians committing “intrinsically evil acts” - compatible with the teaching of Jesus and the apostles?
We’re back to the non-Christan / un-Christian “the end justifies the means” philosophy.
Last edited:
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
No. I’m appealing to your conscience. That would be pointless if I thought you lacked a conscience.
P.S.
I’m reminded of this quote,
“If our theology does not quicken our conscience and soften the heart, it actually hardens both. - J.I. Packer
I attended at least one conference with Dr. Packer (perhaps others that I don’t recall off the top of my head) before I retired. I agree with what he says in the quote.
Last edited:
Yes, but we can’t watch them with blinders on. The New Testament instructs followers of Jesus not to revenge evil.
In scripture “quicken“ means to revive or make alive.
In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter speaks about having a good conscience toward God. A bad conscience toward God is a dead conscience; it must be made alive, or the person will perish.
We’ve already spoken briefly about Pharaoh having a hardened heart. Heart and mind are closely linked in scripture. Out of the abundance of the heart, what we think, what we believe, in our mind, our mouth speaks.
If our theology doesn’t make us alive to God, it hardens us against him.
This was a mixed company: in the air. Some of the men on the plane were Christian, some were not.
This was a mixed company: on the ground. Some of them (men, women and children) were Christian, most were not.
Who in this mixed company was living the theology of the Golden Rule?
Why didn’t the leader of the criminal gang - whom you’ve implied, with the title of your thread, was a good man - rely on God to survive?
Was the good man / criminal gang leader lost? What did he say / do that would lead us to believe that he was or he wasn’t lost?
The premise is that the good man / criminal gang leader was a bad man, not a good man, in the eyes of God.
What exactly was the sin the good man / criminal gang leader committed?
Did the good man / criminal gang leader come to see that what he had done was sin? Did he acknowledge his sin?
Did the sin the good man / criminal gang leader committed break his heart?
Did the good man / criminal gang leader repent of his sin?
Did the good man / criminal gang leader ask God for forgiveness of his sin?
You weren’t a Christian when you started this thread. Has your perspective about any of this changed since you’ve become a Christian?
I have. (I’ve watched the original, with Glenn Ford, 1957, too. Multiple times.)
What I’m interested in is your interpretation of the story.
Similar threads
