Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: 1st amendment (was: religious courses in a se Message-ID: Date: 22 May 91 04:22:10 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of California, San Diego Lines: 28 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article krueger@writeon.physics.arizona.edu (Theodore Krueger) writes: +respect to the recent war in the gulf. I do not wish to debate +with him the old matter of whether or not war for any cause is or +can be considered a christian act, but I do wish to give him my And why not. The 'just' war seems to have been an invention of Augustine to allow the 'state' to become compatible with Christianity. Until Constantine's recognition and support of Christianity, Christian writers seemed to advocate supporting the state without compromising Christian principles(in particular emperor worship). The reason for 'supporting' the state seemed to be in terms of a stable state is more likely not to persecute Christians. But on many occasions these writers seemed intent on the distruction of the state. After Augustine it seems that the only martyrs were either killed by barbarian hords or later reformers who conflicted with the now Christian State much as the former Church fathers did with Pagan Rome. As for the argument that 'silence == approval' or 'silence != approval' that happens every where. I find it 'humorous' that so many Christians lead off an attack against some other Christians by the catchy label of 'liberal'. One would have to label the early Christian martyrs as 'liberals' since they refused to maintain the 'status quo' or 'conserve' pagan values. -- John Clark jclark@ucsd.edu