Iraq Does Not Fit Jewish Tradition of 'Just War'

Blessed are the peacemakers:
for they shall be called the
Children of God
(Mat 5:9)
Jesus's way is not by sword but by cross
http://club.us.cyworld.com/prcc

Mommadona, just above, had said,
"War is the failure of male civilizaton. When is the last time you saw a buncha women out with weapons annihalating one another?"

This is incorrect. The female "equality" revolution made great strides to gain equality for women in the "male oriented" society of this world, which includes equality in all occupations and services. The fact that females are toting guns and fighting is the result of that equality revolution. Women started the equality revolution, not the men.

Some good things happened with that revolution, but as a whole, it was done blindly, without "righteous" principles, and without God. It was the women that caused women to end up fighting in wars. It was not the men that caused it. What we see now are the results of seeking things for selfish reasons, with no sense of righteousness and wise application. The women got what they wanted, but had no foresight in seeking it, a failure shared by both genders.

This brings me to the point about war.

The men and women of society, in the world, are at fault for the wars because they rejected Christ and rejected the principles, laws, and commandments of the Father in heaven. Wars existed because of wickedness, selfishness, pride, greed and evil in both men and women. It is this spiritual failure, where men and women of the world, pushed for things of the world, and never sought things of God. The result is the evil we all see in the world.

If people believed properly in Jesus Christ and the Father in Heaven, there would be no wars, there would be peace, because people would be following a righteous and faithful path in life.

In that respect, Mommadonam, peace is hard because all unfaithful people on this earth that have rejected Christ and his gospel, cannot know what is truly required for peace, and since peace cannot be attained by selfish, greedy, prideful ways, they are doomed to the results of that wickedness and blindness.

This says, that peace cannot exist, or be made, without righteousness, faith in God and abiding in his gospel principles. It is a contradiction (oxymoron) to try to make peace from the worldly mindset of pride, selfishness, greed, and all other forms of wickedness and evil.

Amen

from orthodox rabbis against zionism

One of our most oft-asked questions is "what is Zionism?"

Theodor Herzl
Theodor Herzl

Zionism is a movement founded by Theodor Herzl in 1896 whose goal is the return of Jews to Eretz Yisrael, or Zion, the Jewish synonym for Jerusalem and the Land of Israel.

The name of "Zionism" comes from the hill Zion, the hill on which the Temple of Jerusalem was situated.

Supporters of this movement are called "Zionists".

The purpose of this website is to explain why traditional Jews do not support Zionism (the return to the land called "Israel") and why the Zionist idealogy is totally contrary to traditional Jewish law and beliefs and the teachings of the Holy Torah.

The birthday of Herzl is a national holiday n Israel.

THESE ARE THE OPINIONS OF JEWISH PEOPLE OPPOSED TO ZIONISM

1) In the past two thousand years of the dangers and sufferings of exile not once did any of the Sages of Israel suggest that we make a state to protect ourselves. And in every generation we had thousands of Sages well versed in the Torah.

2) We have thousands of legal work of Torah law that have been handed down to us by the Sages of all generations. Not once do we see a word suggesting the establishment of a state. What we do find is warnings against it.

3) The founders of Zionism where all atheists who denied the Torah. And all the Torah Sages of that time opposed them and opposed Zionism, saying that Zionism would lead only to destruction.

However the true People of Israel will never change their nature or give up their faith. They are the strongest of the strong. Because of their strength the Creator gives them. Zionism is a foreign growth in the body of the Jewish People. The end will be that it will rid itself of this foreign growth and remain pure. Zionism has overcome the Jewish people by force. With fraud and terror, but none of this will help them because the truth will always remain with the help of the Creator. Zionism will not replace the Jewish People. The Jewish People will remain strong in their faith and the Zionist state will cease to exist.

4) It is therefore, our demand that the State that calls itself ISRAEL should cease to exist. Since this won't be done, we demand that they cease to call themselves "Israel", because the entire being is in complete opposition to the true People of Israel. The true People of Israel deny them permission to call themselves by that Name. The Zionist leaders have no right to set themselves up as the representatives and spokesmen of the true People of ISRAEL.

5) Since we know they will not fulfill this demand either we feel that at least we cry out the truth. And the truth will always remain the truth. By no means or force can the truth be changed. Even if all the world would say that one and one are three, the truth will remain that one and one is two.

6) Let the truth be declared. The use of the Name "ISRAEL" by that state is a complete falsification. The people of Israel have nothing to do with the state. Zionism and its state have no share and no part in the true ISRAEL.

AGAIN ONLY THE WORDS OF JEWISH PEOPLE ABOUT ZIONISM ARE EXPRESSED HERE
search jews not zionists
orthodox rabbis against zionism
true torah jews againast zionism

zionism is a political organization created by atheists-
zionism = anti-semitism in its most extreme form
anyone can earch these sites there is no discrepancy in the history of zionism from the israeli peprspective or anyones.

BGONE:

Here are two verses from the BOM, Book of 'Ether', Chapter 2. on instructions to build water tight barges to be like a whale while crossing the great deep (it should at least be amusing).

" 19 And behold, O Lord, in them there is no light; whither shall we steer? And also we shall perish, for in them we cannot breathe, save it is the air which is in them; therefore we shall perish.
20 And the Lord said unto the brother of Jared: Behold, thou shalt make a hole in the top, and also in the bottom; and when thou shalt suffer for air thou shalt unstop the hole and receive air. And if it be so that the water come in upon thee, behold, ye shall stop the hole, that ye may not perish in the flood.

I will ask again, "Please tell me the Jewish basis for a JUST war regarding JUSTICE - or even the LEGALITY - in what Israel has done in the West Bank and Gaza strip.

Neuberger wrote:
"You have to have criteria about what constitutes a just war. For instance, the taking over of your territory, or arguably the complete disregard for the life of the inhabitants of a country (more problematic if they voted for the government that is starving/killing them), as well as a clarity about what the war is to achieve and how you will exit from the engagement with honour."

Israel - a Jewish state which I would assume strives to govern on the basis of Jewish ethical principles - has failed on each of these criteria.

(And apparently Israel announced yesterday that it intends to build more settlements in the occupied West Bank.)

War is the failure of male civilizaton. When is the last time you saw a buncha women out with weapons annihalating one another?

JUST War is the ultimate oxymoron.

WAR is easy. PEACE is hard. You have to WANT it.

First, it is sad to see that some posters purposely got completely off topic from madam's Neuberger's post.

In regards to a "just war", when speaking of Judaism, Islamic and Christian faiths, we are still speaking of the events found in the Old Testament of the Bible. When God directed his people into war, it was always just and always in accordance to his principles of righteousness. His people had to follow the directions and commandments of God in order that the battle be "just" under God.

IN the Old Testament times, war was for the purpose of righteousness under God's will.

IN the Iraq - US war and events thereafter, the "right-ness" of it was gone from it long ago. Now it is a political agenda that serves the interests of the USA and other countries, and can no longer fit within the righteousness principles and laws of God and a "just war", because this war was a problem created decades ago by those governments who aided Saddam Hussein.

In God's righteous principles and laws, which is the only basis by which a "just war" can exist, one must still do good to get good, do righteous, to get righteous. When this pattern is followed faithfully, one would find good things born from it, and one of them is peace. This is what is called "good things of the spirit", speaking in faithful terms.

When one does evil, thinking they will get good, will find that evil is bred and born. What comes from this is contention, wars and rumors of wars. Is it any wonder that God prophesied this centuries ago?

When the many governments aided and supported an evil man, Saddam, decades ago, they were doing evil with the blind hope to get good. The result was, that evil was born and bred, and hence the war and problems thereafter.

The good in all this are the sincere, faithful and honest men and women who are fighting it, caught in the evil aftermath of unrighteousness bred long ago.

The honest men and women will be blessed for serving their country, but those men and women who bred evil, will suffer the results of it in God's own timing.

Amen

David, it's just a matter if time until you get at least part of your wish. The Bible is a proved hoax and that is a truth that will never go away short of total destruction of the earth.

Stan, thanks a lot.

Interesting. I never knew there was anything "Egyptian" about J Smith's hallucination. A Mormon missionary attempted to convert me once and told me about the witnesses. He also said one or more turned and said the whole thing was a farse and they, being perfectly honest had included that in the book.

The hoax buster uses "glyphs" saying they are the source of the original text of the Bible. I wonder if they had anything like that around Joe Smith's divine revelation. I can make out significant Biblical passages without reading any of the symbolic writing myself.

A couple more references in the Book of Mormon:
Mosiah 1: 4
4 For it were not possible that our father, Lehi, could have remembered all these things, to have taught them to his children, except it were for the help of these plates; for he having been taught in the language of the Egyptians therefore he could read these engravings, and teach them to his children, that thereby they could teach them to their children, and so fulfilling the commandments of God, even down to this present time.

Morm. 9: 32
32 And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.
******
From "The Pearl of Great Price":

"A of F 1: 10
10 We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory."

Imagine, this day and age, where folks still look on the Bible as something other than "historical fiction", transcribed by aboriginal tribes. Judaism, Christianity and finally Islam, all got their marching orders to eliminate "unbelievers" from this little biblos. Looking over these comments, editorials, bullogs, etc., wouldn't it be nice to think we could all have our huge knowledge of "justness", "religiosity", "righteousness" perhaps even the Bible, expunged from our memories? Perhaps we could start over then and express a better future for ourselves.

On the Book of Mormon:

Joseph Smith wouldn't let anyone see the original of the 'plates of gold' but produced three witnesses then eight witnesses to say they had seen the plates.

The Book of Mormon, The First Book of Nephi, Chapter 1, verse 2: 'Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.'
******
"When according to arrangements, the messenger called for them, I delivered them up to him: and he has them in his charge until this day, being the second day of May, one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight." (This was quoted as being a quote from Joseph Smith.) The original Book of Mormon was published in 1830.

There was a Urim and Thummin and a breastplate involved with being able to translate.

I find it amusing that the only word in a regular dictionary that starts with "morm" is 'mormon' and that if you leave out the middle 'm' you get "moron"!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agree with the panelist's conclusion, disagree with the logic. It doesn't matter what the Jewish religion holds (or any other religion). What matters is that there is a reasonable definition of the use of aggression (war) on the planet. We need an international code of law (like Nuremburg, etc.) to limit the use of state agression.

Again, religion has nothing to do with this reasoning. Invoking Judaism in the face of the injustices suffered by innocent Palestinian people today is nothing more than am awful joke. It would be analagous to seeking an insight in Lutheran dogma concerning genocide, while the ovens of Auchwitz were operating around the clock.

Victoria,

Can you keep a serious face and say that Zionism is NOT in any way religiously based? And you believe that somehow you can say this while attempting to condemn Bush on the basis that his actions are tied to his religion?

You cannot be serious! You must be kidding if you are trying to argue that somehow Zionism is nothing more than a political movement and is independent of any religious connection!!! Using such a twisting of logic and reasoning you have used for Zionism, if you give any claim at all to consistency in the use of your reasoning, I see absolutely no basis from which you could ever say that any of Bush's actions are based on religion!!!!!!

(And apparently your statement re "God is love" was meant to be a slam. But if you read what I wrote and not project into it some twisting of my meaning, then you will find that the point you are trying to make has to do with exactly what I originally said! And while on this topic, I would strongly recommend that this concept of love of others might just also might be expanded to include even Bush! A little more love and a bit less hatred of Bush might bring about a smidgen more reason and fairness in the postings by some persons! And you can choose your poison as to what basis you base this principle; make it secular, Hindu, Rabbinical, Islamic, Christian or whatever!)

Stan:
Book of Mormon was originally in Egyptian? Do you know the whereabouts of the original, untranslated version?

Jehovah's wittnesses are active right now. My door bell just rung. It's time for my "I am God and if you don't stop agravating my people" routine. Works!!

Victoria stated: "Zonism is a political movement only 100 years old-
it isnot relgiously based."

The concept of Zionism appears to be clearly included in the Book of Mormon, placing it more nearly at least two hundred years old and also clearly intangling in religion. It no doubt took lots of years to conceive of the Book of Mormon and a supporting cult and write it and then get some 16 year old uneducated farm boy to find it and translate it from Egyptian to English!!

It may be that a political movement was also created but it clearly appears to be the basis of Mormonism.

And people think Zionism is not active here and now!!!!

There is no just war. There is war with blood, fear, torture, devastation, despair and cruelty. War is Death and Death is not just. It simply is. Hitler thought his war of extermination against the Jews was just, and so maybe some radical muslims, and so was the war of Roman pagans on Christians, and later Christians on pagans and Muslims on polytheists, and all religion against one another. Some human being are splitting hair in the name of their belief to defend the indefensible. Unfortunately for mankind, because it gives an aura of respectability to something that has none.

"The Protocols of International Zionism" dates the Russian revolution. Is there such a thing as a Zionist or does the notion there is come from that proved hoax? Maybe it created Zionists like Chaucer create Druids. (That was Chaucer wasn't it?)

Has anyone ever had a vision of a God that DIDN'T love them and hate at least one group of people?

Zonism is a political movement only 100 years old-
it isnot relgiously based.

Krishna the hindu incarnation of god on earth had a message of divine love. 8000 years ago.

Certainly Jesus(ata) is not the first to equate god and love.

I want to be clear: I do not believe that the Zionists have any ethical basis for claiming land because of a deed - written or otherwise - given to them by God.

Also, I subscribe rather strongly to the concept that "God is love!" And I also believe that all the other nonsense about whether the virgin mary is god or not, etc. is of little or no importance. (And I would add that the concept that God has to do with treating other persons with love is a central truth found in one form or another in all major religions. Thus, I believe we should be looking for what joins us together in religious belief – not what separates us. Also, when boldly confronted by someone who professes their atheism – or contends the Bible is without any truth, I rather enjoy asking the person if that means he or she does not believe that they should not extend love to other humans?)

And without the input of early - and modern - rabbinical thinkers, I do not believe that the concept that "God is love" would have evolved (or been revealed) in human society as quickly as it did. For it was in fact a Jew – Jesus – who is so widely cited as having made this statement! We are indebted to Judaism for what it contributed and contributes to ethics. But the Zionists - in my opinion - are causing a major problem in their contention that modern day boundaries of Israel should be based on some ancient claim. And the same can be said for the beliefs of some groups such as Southern Baptists (to which Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter profess their faith) who contend that Israel’s border should be based on the maps found in the King James version of the Bible!

W Stricklin:
It's the source ot the ethics that's the problem. God, Amenophis IV may well have deeded parts of Palestine to Jews, (12 different groups of people). But where is the deed? Wasn't that Canan and not Judah anyhow? The deed is only legal if it's notarized and recorded. Who verified God's signature on it?

Then there is the complication. Was Amenophis IV the "son of God?" Sons of Gods are Gods, a given. How about daughters of Gods?

If Jesus is God and mothered by Mary isn't Mary God too? Why not? Ever see a cat mother a dog? (Dislexick atheists don't eaven believe there is a dog)

The problem, all the frustration comes from the source of ethics, the Bible in particular and "sacred scriptures" in general. Lucky for us the Bible is a proved hoax. How about the other big two, Koran and BOM? Did angels visit Muhammad and Joseph Smith?

We can't deny hallucinations. http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul tells us what they are all about. Does this explain why there is so much mental anguish, agony in the world? Was that really God, really angels of God for the other two or does our ethics come from hell?

Interesting contention - that Bush's motives do not meet the Jewish criteria for a Just War. And given the use of warfare by Jewish nations in ancient and modern times, I am not sure what these criteria are? I may be a bit out of step with the modern ethical theorists. Nevertheless - I still believe that when one discusses ethics, one should strive for consistency in one's use of principles. Thus, I wonder how much Neuberger has written regarding the ethics of Israel’s modern era use of warfare and occupation? Too bad Bush cannot use the common position taken by many in Israel and contend from a bibical basis that he invaded Iraq because he has a deed to the land given to him from God – as do modern day Zionists! I see politics - and nothing regarding ethics of warfare - in the statement by Neuberger.

You scored a bulls eye with the word "exit." The failure so far has been in the third element of a successful battle, exit strategy. It hasn't actually failed yet but it is on life support.

The Iraq strategy is like the anti hangover strategy of "keep on drinking." That does NOT prevent the hangover, only puts it off. Monday moring quarterbacking with arguments about just wars is a plea for another bottle, the "keep on drinking" scenario.

Baroness- in isalm there is a codified set of rules of war- the main point being that it must not be aggressive but only in defense if ones homeland is encroached upon and when the invaders cease- there must be no retaliation but cessation.

also a long list of peoples and animals exempt from being touched- even wounded soldiers- articles of rights for pows - even safe conduct to a place of neutrality for combatants who agree to cease-also trees and vegetation are not allowed to be destroyed!
peace baroness i always like your posts

to be honest- i think its a testament to your reasonableness and lack of inflammatory remarks that
have kept the arguers away---