Killing And The Christian

  • 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!

lesjude

New Member
May 8, 2012
217
3
0
79
Central New York State
Preview: Killing and the Christian

Killing and the Christian
The principle of Mat 5:38-48 is nonresistance toward all. No killing or wounding or returning evil by a Christian. This is what father God had always intended in the old and new testaments.

Gen. 4:7-8: Cain made the wrong sacrifice which opened the door to sin of hatred, jealousy and finally killing. The sacrifice Christians are to make is in Romans 12:1-2. When they do not do this and yield to the Holy Spirit training as to what this means they will do what is right in their own sight. This often results in operating in expediency (armed guards in churches, killing in war) which is operating on the knowledge of good and evil, not Life.

Note what Jesus says in Mat 26:52. The disciples surely had a reason to wound and kill to defend each other and Jesus. The antichrist is killing saints and they are to follow nonresistance in Rev 13:7-10.

Gen 4: 23-24 tells of a killing for a wounding and possibly to save his own life. He indicates he realizes this was wrong with the statement he makes about Cain in vs 24.

In Gen 9:6-7 is a clear statement on killing. The exception being capital punishment (Old and New testaments Romans 13:1-7) and the OT wars of God's judgments on nations whose cup of iniquity was full. God had given the "ites" over 300 years to repent. Judgement does not come in the NT until the end of the age in Revelation.

The Bible in Acts 17:25-27 speaks of all being one blood. God's heart at this time is that men be saved not killed or injured, especially not by carnal Christians defending themselves or others.

King David is a type of Christ and was called by God a man after His own heart. However, Father God told him he could not build the temple because he had shed much blood on the earth in His sight. Even though these were nations under judgment in wars God had directed. Here is what God said to King David: I Chronicles. 22:7-8 and I Chronicles 28:3.

Jesus view of "just" wars and physical violence is in Luke 9:51-56. The disciples did not know what spirit they were of! They thought they had a "good" and Biblical response (see Elisha). Christians who either do not have the Holy Spirit or do not submit to His training in this area end up using 'expediency' or OT justifications for their violence which there is none there either.

Every non believer that a Christian kills ends up in the pit which was the point of what Jesus said in Luke 9:55-56. Then after you wound them, or talk to the ones who are left that are not killed, it makes it hard to tell them about the love of the Lord.

Some justify war by saying the US is a Christian nation. There is no such thing. There are nations with the King's citizens in them being salt and light, not acting like the world and serving its Godless systems or relying on the expediency of armed guards in churches.

At this point some anecdotal evidence is in order. Nate Saint and those with him who died rather than defend themselves or each other is an example. I will say they were told by leadership not to go and may be the reason for no Divine protection.

On Killing by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman has some good points. After the battle of Gettysburg (the South lost) 100's of rifles were gathered up from the battlefield. Many were double and triple loaded. The reluctance to kill with an individual weapon seemed to be the reason. To cover their reluctance they did not fire but "reloaded". He goes on with more evidence throughout history to support the point, and the ways the military and our society has overcome this God given reluctance to kill.

Also he establishes the killing as the cause of PTSD. His ways to overcome this are junk but his evidence is compelling. This is sowing and reaping for violation of God's laws.

PTSD is overcome by repentance and deliverance. How an airborne ranger and Delta force operator got set free by Jesus when we had the privilege of ministering deliverance to him is an interesting story.

General S. L. A. Marshall makes the point with his unique method of interviewing WW II, Korean War and Vietnam soldiers right after close combat. He interviewed the handful of survivors of Able CO. that hit the Dog Green on Omaha Beach. He talked with about 20 of over 200 not killed or wounded. It was the beach that Saving Private Ryan tried to show at the start of the film. He discovered a very high percentage that did not fire their personal weapons then, and in all these wars except Vietnam. By then the military had devised training to partially overcome the God given resistance to killing.

In Vietnam one platoon of less than 30 men stood off a force of 200 very determined NVA all night with no artillery and some of the time with no illumination. Near the end, having very little ammo left, knowing they were as good as dead they just all started laughing! Captured NVA later said this really affected their morale. I think the US troops had the resistance to killing removed and the NVA didn't. This platoon was mostly just a reg. bunch of draftees that had not even seen the elephant yet.

This training is so effective, along with the conditioning to violence that our society provides, that troops will assault immediately when ambushed by a superior well protected force and win! In training the same men thought to themselves, never will I do this! The other force probably still had that bothersome God given inhibition.

The US miltary seems to be most open and good at this. They tell all their 'boots' that they will make them into trained killers!
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
That above is a hogwash interpretation, even an interpretation FROM Christ's enemies who would destroy God's people!!!


Luke 22:35-36
35 And He said unto them, "When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing?" And they said, "Nothing."
36 Then said He unto them, "But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
(KJV)


That Scripture is Christ Jesus COMMANDING His disciples who didn't have a SWORD, to go BUY ONE!

That means God's people have a responsibility to be ARMED for SELF-DEFENSE.


The wicked criminals in this world WILL be armed. Christ's enemies WILL be armed in this world. Christ's disciples fulfilled the role of 'priests' in preaching The Gospel, and they WERE TOLD BY CHRIST TO ARM THEMSELVES.

That is WHY the 2nd Amendment of The Constitutiion of The United States of America states 'the right of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall NOT BE INFRINGED'.
 

Shirley

New Member
Aug 15, 2011
334
61
0
Ohio USA
I thought that scripture was written to fulfill a prophesy. Wasn't their a prophesy about his disciples being criminals or something? I just mean that I thought that Jesus wanted them to have the swords in order to fulfill an old testement prophesy? Didn't he later on tell them that anyone who took the sword would die by the sword. He told them to get out of Jerusalem when they saw the armies coming. They escaped and the rest of the Jews stayed to fight and were slaughtered. Seems to me both those things were written for their day. Don't have an opinion on Christians fighting and killing today. Just saying I don't think that scripture can be used to make that point.

Thanks for fighting for us Veteran! Glad for my freedom. Just don't know about it is all i'm saying.

I Will protect my children for sure!!!!
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
I thought that scripture was written to fulfill a prophesy. Wasn't their a prophesy about his disciples being criminals or something? I just mean that I thought that Jesus wanted them to have the swords in order to fulfill an old testement prophesy? Didn't he later on tell them that anyone who took the sword would die by the sword.

No, can't recall any Scripture declaring Christ's Apostles and disciples who followed Him as criminals. The unbelieving Jews certainly reckoned them as such though.

Luke 22 is a timeline just prior to His being delivered up with His disciples to the time of His arrest and trials. You'll notice there some of the disciples already had swords, even Peter who cut off the ear of one of the chief priest's errand boys who came to get Jesus.

Here's what you're referring to in bold...

Matt 26:51-54
51 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear.
52 Then said Jesus unto him, "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He shall presently give Me more than twelve legions of angels?
54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?"
(KJV)

Per John 18 that was Peter who drew his sword. The above verses in red are usually left off of that Message. Notice Peter didn't draw his sword for his own self-defense, but in Christ's defense. The idea of self-defense against murderers and robbers is still the main issue, and in that situation Peter's act was not self-defense, but on the offensive.

I think the lesson our Lord was giving about those who live by the sword was because some of His Apostles were somewhat impulsive, like Peter. One of them before being called by our Lord Jesus (Simon Zelotes?) had been a member of the Zealots, a militant group that used violence and assassination against foreigners to protect Judea. So our Lord's lesson there would definitely be about that idea of 'living' by the sword concerning the Zealots.

And yet, we find nowhere in Scripture where He told His disciples to not carry a sword, but Scripture telling those who didn't yet have one to go buy one. So our Lord's idea of self-defense is clear. Prior to His disciples going to preach in and around Judea was one matter, but now after His crucifixion they were being sent out on the open road to new lands to preach The Gospel. They were allowed to protect themselves.


He told them to get out of Jerusalem when they saw the armies coming. They escaped and the rest of the Jews stayed to fight and were slaughtered. Seems to me both those things were written for their day. Don't have an opinion on Christians fighting and killing today. Just saying I don't think that scripture can be used to make that point.

What that's about is for the very end of this world, a time that has not yet come in our day even. Christ gave that within His 7 signs of the end while upon the Mount of Olives. I realize some apply that to the time of the Roman's destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., but that's not really the time it was meant for.

Well, I have to disagree with you on the point that that Luke 22 Scripture isn't about the right to self-defense, especially when our Lord Jesus showed there that we do have that right. The point is self-defense, not seeking to conquer like how Christ's enemies try to make that Luke 22 idea read.


Thanks for fighting for us Veteran! Glad for my freedom. Just don't know about it is all i'm saying.

I Will protect my children for sure!!!!

You're welcome, though I never battled it out literally in a fox-hole like some of my brethren have. But just the same, I volunteered during wartime and served, and I'm still serving our nation's defense as a civlian. I cannot say enough for those who have laid their lives on the line for us so we may live in peace; not just those in the militaries of the western Christian nations, but also those in civilian service such as law enforcement, firemen, etc.
 

Shirley

New Member
Aug 15, 2011
334
61
0
Ohio USA
Luke 22:37 The scripture must be fulfilled in me, And he was counted among the lawless and indeed what was written about me is being fulfilled.

It appears to me that this was his explanation to them as to why he told them to buy a sword. They had two and he said it was enough.
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
Luke 22:37 The scripture must be fulfilled in me, And he was counted among the lawless and indeed what was written about me is being fulfilled.

It appears to me that this was his explanation to them as to why he told them to buy a sword. They had two and he said it was enough.


Luke 22:37
37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in Me, "And He was reckoned among the transgressors": for the things concerning Me have an end.
(KJV)

Our Lord Jesus was actually quoting from Isaiah 53 with that in bold. Our Lord Jesus was crucified among transgressors, the malefactors that were crucified with Him.

The last phrase should be understood as, 'these things concerning Me are coming to an end', i.e., with His crucifixion that was just getting ready to occur at that point.

So none of that changes what He commanded His disicples to go buy a sword for self-defense.
 

Shirley

New Member
Aug 15, 2011
334
61
0
Ohio USA
I hear what you are saying and I have been told that is what it meant but in context I am not sure that is correct. If you add the they that take the sword shall perish with the sword to his explanation of We need swords to fulfill this prophesy then I just can not see how you get this teaching from these scriptures. And again I am not saying I know just trying to read what it says. Funny, my brother read that and said check it out he set them up! Well I don't agree with his assessment either. I wish I knew for sure about all this.
 

lesjude

New Member
May 8, 2012
217
3
0
79
Central New York State
That above is a hogwash interpretation, even an interpretation FROM Christ's enemies who would destroy God's people!!!
Psalm 91 is true if a person is in Christ. It is a believer's assurance policy.


Luke 22:35-36
35 And He said unto them, "When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing?" And they said, "Nothing."
36 Then said He unto them, "But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
(KJV)


That Scripture is Christ Jesus COMMANDING His disciples who didn't have a SWORD, to go BUY ONE!

That means God's people have a responsibility to be ARMED for SELF-DEFENSE.
If you would please reread the post you will see why He said 2 swords were enough. He was going to give His disciples a clear real life lesson in non resistance.


The wicked criminals in this world WILL be armed. Christ's enemies WILL be armed in this world. Christ's disciples fulfilled the role of 'priests' in preaching The Gospel, and they WERE TOLD BY CHRIST TO ARM THEMSELVES.
No, in fact just the opposite. Please reread the post and see why.

That is WHY the 2nd Amendment of The Constitutiion of The United States of America states 'the right of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall NOT BE INFRINGED'.
No, it is their because carnal men put int there, specifically the Deist Thomas Jefferson. Jesus taught nonresistance, demonstrated it, lived it, and died practicing it. Jesus NEVER demanded obedience to any of His teaching. He simply says those who have ears to hear will hear and obey.

No, can't recall any Scripture declaring Christ's Apostles and disciples who followed Him as criminals. The unbelieving Jews certainly reckoned them as such though.

Luke 22 is a timeline just prior to His being delivered up with His disciples to the time of His arrest and trials. You'll notice there some of the disciples already had swords, even Peter who cut off the ear of one of the chief priest's errand boys who came to get Jesus.

Here's what you're referring to in bold...

Matt 26:51-54
51 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear.
52 Then said Jesus unto him, "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He shall presently give Me more than twelve legions of angels?
54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?"
(KJV)

Per John 18 that was Peter who drew his sword. The above verses in red are usually left off of that Message. Notice Peter didn't draw his sword for his own self-defense, but in Christ's defense. The idea of self-defense against murderers and robbers is still the main issue, and in that situation Peter's act was not self-defense, but on the offensive.

I think the lesson our Lord was giving about those who live by the sword was because some of His Apostles were somewhat impulsive, like Peter. One of them before being called by our Lord Jesus (Simon Zelotes?) had been a member of the Zealots, a militant group that used violence and assassination against foreigners to protect Judea. So our Lord's lesson there would definitely be about that idea of 'living' by the sword concerning the Zealots.

And yet, we find nowhere in Scripture where He told His disciples to not carry a sword, but Scripture telling those who didn't yet have one to go buy one. So our Lord's idea of self-defense is clear. Prior to His disciples going to preach in and around Judea was one matter, but now after His crucifixion they were being sent out on the open road to new lands to preach The Gospel. They were allowed to protect themselves.




What that's about is for the very end of this world, a time that has not yet come in our day even. Christ gave that within His 7 signs of the end while upon the Mount of Olives. I realize some apply that to the time of the Roman's destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., but that's not really the time it was meant for.

Well, I have to disagree with you on the point that that Luke 22 Scripture isn't about the right to self-defense, especially when our Lord Jesus showed there that we do have that right. The point is self-defense, not seeking to conquer like how Christ's enemies try to make that Luke 22 idea read.





You're welcome, though I never battled it out literally in a fox-hole like some of my brethren have. But just the same, I volunteered during wartime and served, and I'm still serving our nation's defense as a civlian. I cannot say enough for those who have laid their lives on the line for us so we may live in peace; not just those in the militaries of the western Christian nations, but also those in civilian service such as law enforcement, firemen, etc.
Vietnam was a war the US NEVER intended to win and escalated by a lie told about the Tonkin Gulf incident which never happened. Those that fought and died bravely were used like fools for nothing gained. The current wars are even worse examples of lies and tragic waste.
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
I hear what you are saying and I have been told that is what it meant but in context I am not sure that is correct. If you add the they that take the sword shall perish with the sword to his explanation of We need swords to fulfill this prophesy then I just can not see how you get this teaching from these scriptures. And again I am not saying I know just trying to read what it says. Funny, my brother read that and said check it out he set them up! Well I don't agree with his assessment either. I wish I knew for sure about all this.

Sorry Shirley, I can't see how you can relate that 'reckoned with transgressors' prophecy with His warning about living by the sword.

Psalm 91 is true if a person is in Christ. It is a believer's assurance policy.

And that's exactly a Scripture many soldiers who were Christian took into battle with them, and they survived!


If you would please reread the post you will see why He said 2 swords were enough. He was going to give His disciples a clear real life lesson in non resistance.

Once through was quite enough to recognize the false platform you're coming from. The reason why Christ did not have His servants 'fight' at His first coming was because He had to be sacrificed upon the cross, which is why He told His disciple to put up his sword when the Jew's errand boys came to arrest Jesus. But at Christ's second coming, it's going to be different, as His army then will... fight (Rev.19). Satan's host won't even have a chance.


No, in fact just the opposite. Please reread the post and see why.

Your negative won't change Christ's command to His disciples in Luke 22 to go buy a sword for those who didn't have one.

The fact still is, criminals will remain armed when the unrighteous try to disarm the peoples. Anyone not believing the Holocaust wasn't real needs to review that lesson of history in Nazi Germany. The Jews For Firearm Ownership group has a lot of important history on historical nations like Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, etc., passing gun laws to disarm the people so tyrrany can rule. When the people are allowed to own and carry firearms, the statistics reveal the crime rates in those areas go down. Even tyrranical puppets like Sarah Brady tried to deny that when the state of Florida passed its legislation to allow the people to carry arms; the criminals had to find others to mug that weren't armed, like people getting off airplanes at the airport! The people in Washington, D.C. just got back their Constitutional right to firearm ownership, as the city's gun laws were proven un-Constitutional. The crime rate there will go down too, just a matter of time.

So good luck United Nations Communist spokeman; not all Americans are ever going to give up their arms. And with God on the side of His people in America, it won't require that many to protect the rest of the peoples and nation. Looks like 'two swords' will be enough afterall.


No, it is their because carnal men put int there, specifically the Deist Thomas Jefferson. Jesus taught nonresistance, demonstrated it, lived it, and died practicing it.

Thomas Jefferson was probably one of the most Liberal of the U.S. founding fathers, so if he believed in the right of the people to have arms, it meant a lot more coming from him. Christ did not teach 'non-resistance', for if He had He would not have been CRUCIFIED! Nor would He have even allowed... His disciples to have swords, which the NT reveals some of them were armed even before... He commanded His disciples to go buy a sword in Luke 22! There's a huge difference between using arms to conquer vs. using them for self-defense. ALL peoples everywhere... have the God-given right to self-defense.


Jesus NEVER demanded obedience to any of His teaching. He simply says those who have ears to hear will hear and obey.

You OBVIOUSLY don't belong here on a Christian Forum with saying such a thing as that! Jesus' commandments were just that, commandments. And to be one of His disciples that means obeying what He said. Those who choose not to thus cannot... be one of His servants, and those who deny Him and what He said do will suffer His Judgment coming upon this earth in our near future. Only a servant of the devil would say things like a believer on Him is not to obey Him. Thanks for revealing yourself; it usually takes more time to weed out followers of the devil that come to Christian forums.


Vietnam was a war the US NEVER intended to win and escalated by a lie told about the Tonkin Gulf incident which never happened. Those that fought and died bravely were used like fools for nothing gained. The current wars are even worse examples of lies and tragic waste.

Those who actually fought in it intended to win. And fact is, the U.S. never did lose in Vietnam. Leftist Jews that crept into the U.S. State Department like Henry Kissinger never intended to win it, even said it wasn't desireable to win it. The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a real historical event. The fools that died were the people who chose Communist rule instead of freedom to govern themselves. And since South Vietnam fell to the Communists, even many of the Vietnamese people soon afterwards said how they had it much better when the Americans were there supporting South Vietnam. Now many of the people are on the edge of starvation once again because of Communist rule. And we can all see how independent South Korea flourished in contrast to the Communist state of North Korea! So keep lying to yourself, and keep to revisionist history, but it still wont' change real history.
 

lesjude

New Member
May 8, 2012
217
3
0
79
Central New York State
Sorry Shirley, I can't see how you can relate that 'reckoned with transgressors' prophecy with His warning about living by the sword.



And that's exactly a Scripture many soldiers who were Christian took into battle with them, and they survived!
Do not mistake God preserving and protecting because of His goodness and mercy with approval of what they are doing. Here are some examples of soldiers being miraculously protected: Kenny Wayne Fields, E. B Sledge, Marcus Luttrell, Louis Zamperini in Devil at My Heels and in Unbroken, also Mr. Lucky. Many Christians make the mistake of believing God approves of everything they think and do beause they are being blessed.
Read about the misery in the life of Alvin York after what he did in WW I and Audey Murphy.



Once through was quite enough to recognize the false platform you're coming from. The reason why Christ did not have His servants 'fight' at His first coming was because He had to be sacrificed upon the cross, which is why He told His disciple to put up his sword when the Jew's errand boys came to arrest Jesus. But at Christ's second coming, it's going to be different, as His army then will... fight (Rev.19). Satan's host won't even have a chance.




Your negative won't change Christ's command to His disciples in Luke 22 to go buy a sword for those who didn't have one.
God's judgement does not come until the end of the age. Here is His heart and the hearts of disciples:


Luke 9:53-56

New King James Version (NKJV)
[sup]53 [/sup]But they did not receive Him, because His face was set for the journey to Jerusalem. [sup]54 [/sup]And when His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, just as Elijah did?”[sup][a][/sup]
[sup]55 [/sup]But He turned and rebuked them,[sup][b][/sup] and said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. [sup]56[/sup]For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.”[sup][c][/sup] And they went to another village.

The fact still is, criminals will remain armed when the unrighteous try to disarm the peoples. Anyone not believing the Holocaust wasn't real needs to review that lesson of history in Nazi Germany. The Jews For Firearm Ownership group has a lot of important history on historical nations like Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, etc., passing gun laws to disarm the people so tyrrany can rule. When the people are allowed to own and carry firearms, the statistics reveal the crime rates in those areas go down. Even tyrranical puppets like Sarah Brady tried to deny that when the state of Florida passed its legislation to allow the people to carry arms; the criminals had to find others to mug that weren't armed, like people getting off airplanes at the airport! The people in Washington, D.C. just got back their Constitutional right to firearm ownership, as the city's gun laws were proven un-Constitutional. The crime rate there will go down too, just a matter of time. In every US war with few exceptions it has been "Christian" killing "Christian". What you are saying is that this is Jesus and He aooroves.
They do not have to disarm folks to get them to go along with their agendas. Here is why and it has ALWAYS worked in the US and is working now with some variations:
"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."


So good luck United Nations Communist spokeman; not all Americans are ever going to give up their arms. And with God on the side of His people in America, it won't require that many to protect the rest of the peoples and nation. Looks like 'two swords' will be enough afterall.
Psalm 91 is true.




Thomas Jefferson was probably one of the most Liberal of the U.S. founding fathers, so if he believed in the right of the people to have arms, it meant a lot more coming from him. Christ did not teach 'non-resistance', for if He had He would not have been CRUCIFIED! Nor would He have even allowed... His disciples to have swords, which the NT reveals some of them were armed even before... He commanded His disciples to go buy a sword in Luke 22! There's a huge difference between using arms to conquer vs. using them for self-defense. ALL peoples everywhere... have the God-given right to self-defense.
Jefferson was not a Christian.
Jesus was crucified because he was practicing non resistance. Note what he said in His lesson wiith the swords:

Matthew 26:52

New King James Version (NKJV)
[sup]52 [/sup]But Jesus said to him, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish[sup][a][/sup] by the sword.




You OBVIOUSLY don't belong here on a Christian Forum with saying such a thing as that! Jesus' commandments were just that, commandments. And to be one of His disciples that means obeying what He said. Those who choose not to thus cannot... be one of His servants, and those who deny Him and what He said do will suffer His Judgment coming upon this earth in our near future. Only a servant of the devil would say things like a believer on Him is not to obey Him. Thanks for revealing yourself; it usually takes more time to weed out followers of the devil that come to Christian forums
I never said disciples did not obey. They will. Jesus does not compel it. Please read my post on the "User Friendly" Jesus
or see John 6:60-71.




Those who actually fought in it intended to win. And fact is, the U.S. never did lose in Vietnam. Leftist Jews that crept into the U.S. State Department like Henry Kissinger never intended to win it, even said it wasn't desireable to win it. The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a real historical event. The fools that died were the people who chose Communist rule instead of freedom to govern themselves. And since South Vietnam fell to the Communists, even many of the Vietnamese people soon afterwards said how they had it much better when the Americans were there supporting South Vietnam. Now many of the people are on the edge of starvation once again because of Communist rule. And we can all see how independent South Korea flourished in contrast to the Communist state of North Korea! So keep lying to yourself, and keep to revisionist history, but it still wont' change real history.

Actually Vietnam is doing quite well economically, is a barrier against Communist China, and overthrew the murderous Pol Pot regime in Cambodia. I ministerd salvation to a survivor of the "Killing Fields" who escaped and fought with the NVA against Pol Pot.
No, the Tonkin Gulf Incident was a fabrication. Please research it. It was McNamara's war and he could have been charged with war crimes for his conduct of the war and impeachment for his "strategy" for running it.
Those "fools" as you say were human beings that Jesus died for and loved. They had parents,wives, families. What the military does is dehumanize the "enemy". Are you saying this is Jesus?