it was for a righteous cause. In WW II, Korea, Vietnam, the North during the Civil War….was all righteous.However, the more I read, there were Godly men fighting for the South.There are Godly people living in Palestine. So, how do we reconcile one being more righteous than another?
I don’t think we can:So, how do we reconcile one being more righteous than another? Too many variables. It is even hard to discuss a comparison without being crushed by ‘Another view!’________________Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/
David said Joab shed the blood of peacetime as if it were in battle. Judah and Israel would fight battles against each other at that time. One of the generals killed Joab’s brother. Joab assassinated him when they were in a time of peace.David did not seem to think it was the same to slay in peacetime as it was to slay in battle. Shimei cursed David as a man of blood. David had killed a lot of Philistines. David’s bloodiness seems to have been tied to Uriah. I am not sure how that seven sons of Saul thing was okay. But the famine resulting from Saul’s breaking Israel’s covenant with the Gibeonites stopped________________
While it’s being fought. Every war is sold as righteous (i.e., just, justified, etc.). Otherwise, who would want to fight for the country?Some argue that a number of our wars were not justified. Certainly the Mexican-American War was less than justified (U.S. Grant and Abraham Lincoln allowed as much). But if you sell it right, why, you’re fighting for God and country–all to the tune of Battle Hymn of the Republic.In virtually every war, there are arguments for it and against it. The deciding vote is cast, it seems, by national interests alone.
War