daily Bible verse

[falcon9]

Well, falcon, to a fellow member of the uniformed services, I salute you.

Salute returned, (although we enlisted don't normally actually salute other enlisted - nor 'butterbars', if that can be avoided).

[alaric99x]

So when you take this oath is your hand on the bible....like in a courtroom?

Also if you are familiar what Jesus said and did after Peter tried to defend him that should be your answer for a Xtian serving his country.He should remain neutral.

Also,what god do you serve if any?

No hand on any bible, we raise our right hand and swear (or affirm) to the officer rendering us the words of the oath.  We're talking about the United States Uniformed Services here, not some kind of church service or bible study group.  News for you, the Unuted States Military is non-denominational.

I actually am familiar with the bible, but I'm not familiar with your particular sect, I never had, and never will have, enough interest in your particular religious beliefs.  I assume from your answer that your religion doesn't serve in the military?

I don't serve any god or gods, if there really were a god, then he or she should be serving me.

[alaric99x]

Well, falcon, to a fellow member of the uniformed services, I salute you.

Salute returned, (although we enlisted don't normally actually salute other enlisted - nor 'butterbars', if that can be avoided).

I fully understand that, I was also "only," enlisted, a senior NCO.  However, we know, especially when serving with other armies, that we always return a salute once it has been rendered.

Thank you for returning that courtesy.

[falcon9]

Salute returned, (although we enlisted don't normally actually salute other enlisted - nor 'butterbars', if that can be avoided).

I fully understand that, I was also "only," enlisted, a senior NCO.  However, we know, especially when serving with other armies, that we always return a salute once it has been rendered.

Thank you for returning that courtesy.

You're welcome, (the 'butterbar' mention was made because so many 'lewts' never came to realize that NCOs run things and let officers believe they do).

[hitch0403]

If you had to defend yourself or your wife from an attack walking down the street and you killed someone doing so i am sure that would be justified.

Senseless wars do not justify killing innocent people.

If you are familiar with bible then you should be familiar with JWs....they are the only sect to truly honor and obey it.

And why should God serve you?

[alaric99x]

Salute returned, (although we enlisted don't normally actually salute other enlisted - nor 'butterbars', if that can be avoided).

I fully understand that, I was also "only," enlisted, a senior NCO.  However, we know, especially when serving with other armies, that we always return a salute once it has been rendered.

Thank you for returning that courtesy.

Understand, that's why it was our job to school them.  My captains, majors, LTCs, colonels and general officers very, very rarely failed to show proper respect and appreciation for my service.  These were, or course, the grown up officers.

You're welcome, (the 'butterbar' mention was made because so many 'lewts' never came to realize that NCOs run things and let officers believe they do).

[alice44]

I am sooo pleased to see how many replies this subject gets.

My verse for today:
for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.  Philippians 2:13

[falcon9]

for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.  Philippians 2:13

That is an unsupported religious belief and as such, does not apply to those who do not accept such without valid evidence.

[hitch0403]

Let me also say....if i was on Flight 93 and i had to fight for my life and others because of a bunch of brainwashed terrorists that were gonna crash a plane....DAM RIGHT I WOULD!!

If on the other hand i was told to go to N Vietnam to kill others so the country wouldnt become communist.....take a hike!!

[falcon9]

If you had to defend yourself or your wife from an attack walking down the street and you killed someone doing so i am sure that would be justified.

So, even a "jw" would do so, despite 'biblical prohibitions' against taking another life?

Senseless wars do not justify killing innocent people.

Such inherent hypocrisy is readily apparent.  Countries maintain military forces for various reasons; one of which is to defend themselves from attacks which would kill "innocent people"/civilian populations and service personnel.

If you are familiar with bible then you should be familiar with JWs....they are the only sect to truly honor and obey it.

Apparently not if a "jw" would kill to protect themselves/family but not their neighbors/fellow citizens.  Hypocrisy hold no honor.  You didn't answer "alaric's" question; are there "jws" in military service?

[falcon9]

Let me also say....if i was on Flight 93 and i had to fight for my life and others because of a bunch of brainwashed terrorists that were gonna crash a plane....DAM RIGHT I WOULD!!

Would you still do so if those hijacking "brainwashed terrorists" were "jw" adherents?  Or, does such a stance only apply against other religious adherents?

[hitch0403]

A TRUE Xtian remains neutral....otherwise he is breaking Gods law.If 1 claims to be JW he is breaking Gods law being in armed forces.

JUdas broke Jesus loyalty.Because of that Jesus said it would have been better if he werent born.

Obviously terrorists in the mind-set of those on 93 would be breaking Gods law so even if they called themselves JWs it wouldnt matter.

You have this mind-set that the organization isnt monitiored.Dis-fellowship follows disobediance to keep it clean.Imperfections happen as again Judas was an apostle and an imperfect human that sinned against holy spirit.That sin wasnt forgiven.

[falcon9]

A TRUE Xtian remains neutral....otherwise he is breaking Gods law.If 1 claims to be JW he is breaking Gods law being in armed forces.

Yet there are self-proclaimed xtians serving in military forces so, the "jws" are presumptuous enough to invalidate the 'xtianity' of those others by some fundamentalist 'decree' that "g-d's law" is being violated.  Such self-righteous hubris which imputes "laws" to a supernatural entity whose existence remains hypothetical/unsubstantiated is an irrational religious conceit.

Obviously terrorists in the mind-set of those on 93 would be breaking Gods law so even if they called themselves JWs it wouldnt matter.

It doesn't matter what they call themselves in any case if any "jw" aboard flight 93 killed islamic terrorists since they'd still be violated their own biblical prohibition against it.  Your post emphasizes that the specious religious rantings of a religious fundie remain irrational.

[hitch0403]

Ive mentioned this numerous times.....Babylon the Great in Revelation <false empire of religeon or christendom>will soon be destroyed by world government culminating in Armagheddon....so biblically speaking it doesnt matter what other so called xtian organizations think that are not on Gods side.

Remember the high priests and Pharrisees in Jesus day wanted him killed because He exposed their man-made & satanic doctrines.

And i guess you cant discern the comparisons i tried to use between 93,N Viet & defending yourself on a street attack.

Not sure why i even bother explaining bible to you when you are only gonna go back to sq 1.

Sorry for delay...internet connection suks.

[falcon9]

Ive mentioned this numerous times.....Babylon the Great in Revelation <false empire of religeon or christendom>will soon be destroyed by world government culminating in Armagheddon....so biblically speaking it doesnt matter what other so called xtian organizations think that are not on Gods side.

It's possible that you may not realize that others, (xtians and non-xtians), view the "jw" sect as another "so-called xtian organizations"; albeit more of an extremist-fundamentalist one than all but a few others.  Such infighting over who's specious superstition is the least invalid may be amusing but, ultimately pointless.  All of it remains unsubtantiated mythology which lacks supportive evidence of validity.

Remember the high priests and Pharrisees in Jesus day wanted him killed because He exposed their man-made & satanic doctrines.

That's not how the Romans recorded it:
"The Jews charged Jesus with blasphemy. Pilate pointed out that the Jews were to judge their own religious questions. They replied that they had no permission to put anyone to death, as was their intention with Jesus. Since blasphemy was not a charge under Roman Law, under which Jesus was tried, it must be concluded he was sentenced without charge, even though the Jews tried to bring some allegations of treason against the Roman state to give it a semblance of legality."

Regardless, such attempts to proselytize irrelevant religious beliefs are specious.

And i guess you cant discern the comparisons i tried to use between 93,N Viet & defending yourself on a street attack.

On the contrary, it seems that you are unable to discern the commonalities between defending yourself and defending others.

Not sure why i even bother explaining bible to you when you are only gonna go back to sq 1.

A collection of religious mythogy and speciously-irrational religious beliefs such as the one you keep referencing is of no interest to someone without blind faith and with the ability to reason.  Although it's clear why it appeals to you; for the same reasons it doesn't to me.