Bible-Discussion.com Forum Index Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
 

 FAQFAQ SearchSearch Free GamesMake a Donation  UsergroupsUsergroups Free GamesForum Rules ProfileContact RegisterRegister 
ProfileWebsite News Log inSubmit Articles  ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in 

Civil War - which side to fight for?


Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bible-Discussion.com Forum Index -> NEW! - Political Forum - Scripture and Christianity in Politics

Which side should Christians fight for?
Confederate?
6%
 6%  [ 1 ]
Union?
12%
 12%  [ 2 ]
Whichever State they lived in
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Should not fight at all
81%
 81%  [ 13 ]

Author Message
Steven3
Lion King



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205

Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Aug 20, 2007 1:45 am    Post subject: Civil War - which side to fight for? Reply with quote

There's various threads ongoing about whether Christians should participate in foreign wars (WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Iraq)

Turning the focus back to domestic wars....

Check Link


Which side should a Christian fight on in a Civil War. To make it more of a real question, which side should a Christian have fought on in the American Civil War?

I could ask UK forumniks the same question of the English Civil War (a battlefield of which lies within view of our back garden). Cavaliers or Roundheads? With King Charles or Cromwell?

My own spiritual ancestors did not participate in either war (resulting in gaol in England, usually not in the American one) but I'm interested in hearing those who advocate Christians fighting in foreign wars say which side they would have fought for in their own Civil War.

God bless
Steven
_________________
Jo5:26 The Father ... has granted the Son also to have life in himself.
Ro6:10 the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.
2Co13:4 he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Plotinus
Big Lion



Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 968

Location: Canada

PostPosted: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A strange question, but not an unreasonable one. However, I take my cue here from the sermon on the mount and from 2Cor 10:3-4, where we find

Paul (2 Cor 10:3-4) wrote:
For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses.

_________________
One would never discover the limits of soul, should one traverse every road -- so deep a measure does it possess.

Heraclitus, fragment 45, quoted in Diogenes Laertius 9.7.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
45degreeN
King Kong



Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2653

Location: Salem Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Aug 20, 2007 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As a historian of American history I have come to the conclusion that slavery was on its way out of American life as of 1854 and that eventually it would have died out allowing the slaves to attain their citizenship without a grossly uncivil war. It was just too expensive for the limited profits available from the cotton plantations and there was little need for slaves in any other type of agriculture.

We paid nearly 1 million American lives for something that would have concluded by itself in just a few years with a little patience. It was Washington and Jefferson who both made that sad choice not to abolish slavery before the constitution was agreed upon, together they bear the weight of having a "slavery republic" instead of a totally free republic. Clearly with their approval and a freeing of their slaves Washington and Jefferson would have convinced the rest of the south not to depend upon their slavery for their livelihoods.

It wasn't until around 1810 when the long fiber cotton allowed for huge plantations that the vast majority of blacks were required and sought after. But by 1835 the land itself couldn't sustain the crop and it began to move westward. It left a soil bereft of nutritional value for most crops until peanuts came into use much later. As the plantations moved further west they left a land unsuited for much agriculture much less the concentrated slave economies. By the time of the civil war the cotton culture had move nearly to Texas were the limit of suitable land was reached. The American slave economy was doomed to failure anyway.

I'll get to the English Civil war in another post.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.



Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
theseldomscene
Banned



Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 7817


PostPosted: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

a believer is not of this world...let the one who are of this world fight for their kingdoms....rememhber when JESUS told pilate that HIS kingdom wasn't here...and basically said that is why HIS follower's don't fight for HIM...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steven3
Lion King



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205

Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 3:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

theseldomscene wrote:
a believer is not of this world...let the one who are of this world fight for their kingdoms....rememhber when JESUS told pilate that HIS kingdom wasn't here...and basically said that is why HIS follower's don't fight for HIM...
=John 18:36, good verse TSS Smile

I'm quite surprised to see 100% (only 8 votes, but nevertheless) for conscientious objection in the US Civil War. I'm sure it wouldn't have been 100% if the question was WWII, but even so that's a high mark. It would have placed all those who voted in "sects" from 1863. I'd be interested in knowing which churches did register for conscientious objection North and South. Question


Also interested if anyone has an explanation for a verse raised by Kejonn: Luke 22:36 - who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.
God bless
Steven
_________________
Jo5:26 The Father ... has granted the Son also to have life in himself.
Ro6:10 the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.
2Co13:4 he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
45degreeN
King Kong



Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2653

Location: Salem Oregon

PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 6:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Methodists fought on both side of the civil war, since the Methodist church was unable to wrest the slaveholders out of the church. This church split several times over the issue of slavery in spite of the overwhelming disapproval of the church hierarchy and of the founders John and Charles Wesley.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.



Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
theseldomscene
Banned



Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 7817


PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

a little methodist church in darien ga....the northern army(yankee hordes around here Wink Laughing ) tried to burn it down twice....the rest of the town burned...but both times the church did not...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
45degreeN
King Kong



Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 2653

Location: Salem Oregon

PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 5:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Was that in the "War between the states" or the "war of northern aggression"?

In one sense it certainly wasn't a "civil"war with nearly 1 million Americans dead, many from both sides of horrible diseases or "surgical infections."

Many people afterward turned from Christianity to some early form of new age philosophy. America stopped being a "Christian nation" at that point.
_________________
My boss is a Jewish carpenter.



Read the
www.Christian-Thinktank.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
saintmichaeldefendthem
Big Lion



Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 979

Location: Boise, Idaho

PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course I am opposed to the war happening at all, but because Lincoln (precious few of us understand just what a tyrant he was) drew up a 75,000 militia war was thrust upon the South and it would be with the South that I would have taken my stand in what is considered "the 2nd War for Independence".

The Civil War was an "unjust war" as defined by the "Just War Doctrine" criteria originally authored by St. Augustine (and to this day remainst a doctrine of the Church) to govern the reasons that a state should go to war. One of the provisions is that "the evil to be eliminated must be greater than the evil of war itself" Few will argue that slavery was a stark evil in American society, but to kill 600,000 people is by far a greater evil, just to abolish slavery by force. The South suffered much more, having an entire generation of men wiped out. This affected the Southern economy and plunged them into a deep poverty that would last over 100 years....but at least we abolished slavery.

The issue of slavery is so emotional that people perversely don't care (in fact most don't even know) how many lives were lost. To most people, those 600,000 deaths were like clipping nails...it could have been 10 or 100 times as much...as long as slavery was abolished.

And make no mistake, Lincoln had no intention of freeing a single slave when the war commensed. It was all about power. It's sad that people aren't aware of what really happened.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora pro nobis pecatoribus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theseldomscene
Banned



Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 7817


PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

you are correct about lincoln...he himself said savery was not an issue with him and if he could keep the union together without freeing any or by freeing all the slaves he would....

the south lost one in four men....not counting the injured...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theseldomscene
Banned



Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 7817


PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

even then though they still beat the north in most of the major battles and had almost a five to one death rate(if memory serves correctly...like 4.82 or something//)...

that being close to five yankees killed for every one confederate killed....

sad story all the way around to me...

i would not have taken sides...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RevJP
Moderator



Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 7000

Location: USA

PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do you guys really think the 'civil war' was about abolishing slavery? Certainly it was an issue, but not the main issue by far...
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog


Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
theseldomscene
Banned



Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 7817


PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2007 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steven3 wrote:
[
Also interested if anyone has an explanation for a verse raised by Kejonn: Luke 22:36 - who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.
God bless
Steven


hey steven....i am not going to get into the depth of what i think it entails from the ot and all...

but for that alone it was to teach pacifism and nonresistance....for JESUS who told peter and the boys to get swords....then they say here are two and HE says that is enough...proving HE was not planning rebellion or even to protect HIMself with two swords and many followers....

HE was teaching how meeknes operates....for peter had the power of the sword...and even the justification to defend the innocent against tyrrany.....i mean, who was more innocent than the one he was fighting for?....

BUT our LORD stopped him and told him he who lives by the sword...dies by it....

so the end being the disciples had to know that violence was not the answer or alternative to the trails they would face....meekness being one that has the power to defend their self or another...but doesn't use it...and leaves all judgements to GOD....

JESUS wanted to lead by example...as the scriptures teach us many times....imho...HE went in meekness...not weakness...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steven3
Lion King



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205

Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey,
Someone just voted Confederate! Razz Looks like they may win this time around Very Happy

TSS
Good post on swords Smile

James
saintmichaeldefendthem wrote:
The Civil War was an "unjust war" as defined by the "Just War Doctrine" criteria originally authored by St. Augustine (and to this day remainst a doctrine of the Church)
Could you give us a link to where the Catholic Church actually pronounced the Civil War an unjust war? I know a little about Protestants in the Civil War, but am entirely ignorant of how the Catholic church treated the situation. I saw in the film 'Gods and Generals' that Irish regiments fought each other - if that is historically correct, then surely they would have been Catholics and had Catholic priests attached to each regiment??
God bless
Steven
_________________
Jo5:26 The Father ... has granted the Son also to have life in himself.
Ro6:10 the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.
2Co13:4 he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
saintmichaeldefendthem
Big Lion



Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 979

Location: Boise, Idaho

PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2007 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steven,

Official pronouncements are hard to find on any war. The Just War Doctrine is a guide and nothing more. But by the provisions of that doctrine, the War of Northern Aggression (sic) cannot be seen as just. We have had more definitive pronouncements on the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, this action being deemed incontrovertably as unjust.

And of course priests would accompany both sides. Priests are usually very nonpolitical and are passionate only about their role to attend to people's spiritual needs, even and especially in a time of war. I would recommend this book as a good read on the truth about the WONA The Politically Incorrect Guide To The South (and why it will rise again) by Clint Johnson. In it you'll see some startling historical truths about the tyranny of Lincoln, the complicity of the North in slavery, and yes, to bring us back to point, how the Irish were forced by Adolf Lincoln to fight for their citizenship.

For instance, did you know that the first slave holder in America was a black man, and his first 5 slaves were white? This man also went to court to argue that one of his slaves was his "negro for life" and the court agreed, setting the precident for court sanctioned slavery.

Did you know that Adolf Lincoln jailed journalists for telling the truth about him, and when the chief justice of the Supreme Court objected, he sent out an arrest warrant for him?

Did you know that Adolf Lincoln stated several times he had no intention of ending slavery and held a personal view that whites were superior to blacks?

Did you know that New York became what it is today because of slavery? The city's monumental industry was building ships and running the slave trade. A Southern flag never flew on a slave ship.

Did you know that until just a couple of decades preceding the WONA, slavery was legal in the North as well?

Funny how accurate history is at loggerheads with what is taught in our socialized public schools.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bible-Discussion.com Forum Index -> NEW! - Political Forum - Scripture and Christianity in Politics All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 

© 2001-2007