UPC to Change Stance on Military Combatants?<<

Charnock · #1 09-29-2011, 04:57 PM

Quote:

The most divisive issue in the United Pentecostal Church in my lifetime has been television. The debate was not about whether we should own televisions and use them for recreational viewing in our homes, but whether we should advertise our churches on television. That issue sent us in to a tailspin. The stench wafted across two General Conferences. I received e-mail about the issue. I sent e-mail about the issue. There were blogs. There were Internet forums. There were threats that some would leave the UPCI if the conference did not vote their way. Some published booklets in defense of their view. An entire issue of the Forward, the magazine for UPCI ministers in North America, was devoted to the debate. A survey of all ministers was conducted. Ultimately a group of ministers left the UPCI citing the outcome of that conference as their reason.

We have before us now the resolutions that will be presented at the upcoming General Conference of the United Pentecostal Church International. These resolutions include one, Resolution 6, that relaxes our historical position against Christians taking life in military service, leaving the decision up to individuals. I am writing this article two weeks before the General Conference, and I have not heard one comment about Resolution 6. I have not received any e-mail about Resolution 6. Most people I have talked to are unaware the resolution exists.

Can we delete the following text from our Manual, as Resolution 6 proposes to do, without a vigorous debate?

http://rodneyshaw.wordpress.com/2011...lowing-camels/

Very interesting.

Charnock · #2 09-29-2011, 05:01 PM

Basically, it boils down to this.

It's okay to kill someone. Just don't have a TV in your home.

Yep, we've officially gone off the deep end.

Cindy · #3 09-29-2011, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DKB

No, I think it basically boils down to, you move a line once, its easier to move it again.

Yes

MissBrattified · #4 09-29-2011, 07:35 PM

I honestly don't know where I stand on this issue. It's one I haven't totally sorted out. It's easy to say: Don't kill other human beings in defense of a country, but I would quickly and easily do so in defense of my family. On a larger scale, there's not much difference between the two.

That said: RS made some excellent points about the lack of debate and insurrection over this Resolution. Very interesting.

RandyWayne · #5 09-29-2011, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I honestly don't know where I stand on this issue. It's one I haven't totally sorted out. It's easy to say: Don't kill other human beings in defense of a country, but I would quickly and easily do so in defense of my family. On a larger scale, there's not much difference between the two.

That said: RS made some excellent points about the lack of debate and insurrection over this Resolution. Very interesting.

I am not that indecisive on the matter. People, Christian or otherwise, have the right to kill to protect their family or their country. On the other forum, on this subject, someone took the position that killing is killing yet she turned around and said "but I respect the military!". No, you cannot hold to the position that ANY killing is wrong and still respect the military (or cops or FBI or Homeland security, or border patrol, etc). It is like saying to them "Thank you for sinning, so I don't have to! I really appreciate it!".

TGBTG · #6 09-29-2011, 08:22 PM

Just to throw into the mix here:

So are we saying that christian soldiers should kill other soldiers from other countries even though the enemy soldier might be a christian too?

If we have Christians in our military, there's no doubt that other countries also have Christians in their military. So what then happens? Christians end up killing other of God's children for the kingdoms of this world? hmmm

Honestly, I don't think this issue is as clear cut as some it. I think each man must be persuaded in his own mind...

MamaHen · #7 10-06-2011, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

It is like saying to them "Thank you for sinning, so I don't have to! I really appreciate it!".

Amen.

Sabby · #8 10-08-2011, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

I am not that indecisive on the matter. People, Christian or otherwise, have the right to kill to protect their family or their country. On the other forum, on this subject, someone took the position that killing is killing yet she turned around and said "but I respect the military!". No, you cannot hold to the position that ANY killing is wrong and still respect the military (or cops or FBI or Homeland security, or border patrol, etc). It is like saying to them "Thank you for sinning, so I don't have to! I really appreciate it!".

Well said, RW

pelathais · #9 10-07-2011, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I honestly don't know where I stand on this issue. It's one I haven't totally sorted out. It's easy to say: Don't kill other human beings in defense of a country, but I would quickly and easily do so in defense of my family. On a larger scale, there's not much difference between the two.

That said: RS made some excellent points about the lack of debate and insurrection over this Resolution. Very interesting.

You're right. And I agree about "family." It is a tough issue to really hammer down and that is why I've always thought that any statements on this topic ought to be rather open ended.

Personally, I'd like nothing more than to take the high road and adopt an entirely pacifistic stance. However, I would still need someone to "take up the sword" on my behalf (Romans 13:3-4 & etc.). So, what kind of relationship do I have with the one who does "bear the sword?" Should I pay his salary? Provide his medical care when he gets injured in battle? Should I contribute toward the cost of his sword?

If we are to follow Romans 13 here, then we do all of the above. We do all of the above anyway just because we're American taxpayers. The hypotheticals can start to add up quickly, too. What would you do and how far would you go to stop a Columbine type of attack? What if you were a teacher in the school and you had the chance to jump one of the shooters? Would you use his gun to stop the other shooter?

We live in a dangerous world. Unless we are we willing to get into a quiet and orderly line leading to the gas chambers, we will have to participate in the fight at some level.

Jack Shephard · #10 10-08-2011, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

I honestly don't know where I stand on this issue. It's one I haven't totally sorted out. It's easy to say: Don't kill other human beings in defense of a country, but I would quickly and easily do so in defense of my family. On a larger scale, there's not much difference between the two.

That said: RS made some excellent points about the lack of debate and insurrection over this Resolution. Very interesting.

Funny you say this... I wouldn't just take someone's life just on a whim. I would if someone came in my home to harm me or my family. I definitely would if I were in war and someone was shooting at me or wanting to harm me. In the military way of life and war you are trained in such a way that you don't think you just react to your training. So I wouldn't think that killing would be wrong. It's interesting that the UPC ministers will pray for the troops and even the ones out of their assembly, but taking a hardline stance against defending themselves in battle and taking lives is weird to me.