NazareneRemnant header graphic
 

Church Doctrine on War, Bearing
Arms, and Resistance to Evil

Tell A Friend | Add to Favourites | Print this Page

   

The URL of this page is:
http://NazareneRemnant.org/church-doctrine-on-war,-bearing-arms-and-resistance-to-evil.html 

PDF download button.
Double-Click the Link below to Download the 
Full PDF Version of this Book

Beliefs and Structure of the
Nazarene Remnant Church of God

 

 The Sixth Commandment:
“Thou shalt not kill.”
(Exodus 20: 13)  

If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” (2 Chronicles 7: 14 RSV)  

 

"Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." (Matthew 26: 52)

"Beloved, never avenge yourselves but leave it to the wrath of God. For it is written vengeance is mine I will repay, says the Lord." (Romans 12: 19)

 

“You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you.” (Matthew 5: 38-42, RSV)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


The Nazarene Remnant Church of God restores and affirms the ancient and not so ancient (for example, the old teachings of the Quakers on this important subject) teaching of non-resistance to force, refusal to bear arms, and war. The so-called teachings of the "Christian" churches of the world teaches the doctrine of the "just war," which is nothing other than the doctrine of "an eye for an eye," a doctrine that has long ago been rescinded in favour of the doctrine of love through the outpouring of the Birthright Holy Spirit, which is freely available to all men and women over the age of 30 years who repent and become baptised, and begin faithfully keeping the New Moon Festivals (For an introduction to this vital subject see our free book The New Moon Festivals: the “First Works” of Salvation, here: http://NazareneRemnant.org/the-new-moon-festivals-the-first-works-of-salvation.html ).

 

Because the doctrine of non-resistance to force is the true ancient teaching on this subject, I feel that the true Christian Church can do no better than honour gentle Christian folk from the past who have given their lives to teach the world the true doctrine of peace and love. 

 

One such person was William Lloyd Garrison, and Leo Tolstoy tells his story in his book, The Kingdom of Heaven Is Within You:

 

"The son of William Lloyd Garrison, the famous champion of the emancipation of the negroes' wrote to me that he had read my book, in which he found ideas similar to those expressed by his father in the year 1838, and that, thinking it would be interesting to me to know this, he sent to me a declaration or proclamation of "non-resistance" drawn up by his father nearly fifty years ago.

This declaration came about under the following circumstances: William Lloyd Garrison took part in a discussion on the means of suppressing war in the Society for the Establishment of Peace among Men, which existed in 1838 in America. He came to the conclusion that the establishment of universal peace can only be founded on the open profession of the doctrine of non-resistance to evil by violence (Matthew 5: 39), in its full significance, as understood by the Quakers, with whom Garrison happened to be on friendly relations. Having come to this conclusion, Garrison, thereupon composed and laid before the society a declaration, which "was signed at the time—in 1838—by many members." (Kingdom of Heaven Is Within You, p. 2)

 

Here are a few comments from the introduction to this important Declaration, from Tolstoy's book:

"Among the first responses called forth by my book were some letters from American Quakers. ln these letters, expressing their sympathy with my views on the unlawfulness for a Christian of war and the use of force of any kind, the Quakers gave me details of their own so-called sect, which for more than two hundred years has actually professed the teaching of Christ on non-resistance to evil by force, and does not make use of weapons in self-defense. The Quakers sent me books, from which I learnt how they had, years ago, established beyond doubt the duty for a Christian of fulfilling the command of non-resistance to evil by force, and had exposed the error of the Church's teaching in allowing war and capital punishment.

 

ln a whole series of arguments and texts showing that war-that is, the wounding and killing of men-is inconsistent with a religion founded on peace and good will toward men, the Quakers maintain and prove that nothing has contributed so much to the obscuring of Christian truth in the eyes of the heathen, and has hindered so much the diffusion of Christianity through the world, as the disregard of this command by men calling themselves Christians, and the permission of war and violence to Christians.

 

"Christ's teaching, which came to be known to men, not by means of violence and the sword," they say, "but by means of non-resistance to evil, gentleness, meekness, and peaceableness, can only be diffused through the world by the example of peace, harmony, and love among its followers."

 

"A Christian, according to the teaching of God himself, can act only peaceably toward all men, and therefore there can be no authority able to force the Christian to act in opposition to the teaching of God and to the principal virtue of the Christian in his relation with his neighbours."

 

"The law of state necessity," they say, "can force only those to change the law of God who, for the sake of earthly gains, try to reconcile the irreconcilable; but for a Christian who sincerely believes that following Christ's teaching will give him salvation,such considerations of state can have no force."

Now to the Declaration of William Lloyd Garrison ...

 

Declaration Of Sentiments Adopted By Peace Convention' 

 

“ Boston, 1838.  

 

We the undersigned, regard it as due to ourselves, to the cause which we love to the country in which we live, to publish a declaration expressive of the purposes we aim to accomplish and the measures we shall adopt to carry forward the work of peaceful universal reformation. 

 

We do not acknowledge allegiance to any human government. We recognize but one King and Lawgiver' one judge and Ruler of mankind. Our country is the world, our countrymen are all mankind. We love the land of our nativity only as we love all other lands. The interests and rights of American citizens are not dearer to us than those of the whole human race. Hence we can allow no appeal to patriotism to revenge any national insult or injury. 

 

We conceive that a nation has no right to defend itself against foreign enemies or to punish its invaders, and no individual possesses that right in his own case, and the unit cannot be of greater importance than the aggregate. lf soldiers thronging from abroad with intent to commit rapine and destroy life may not be resisted by the people or the magistracy, then ought no resistance to be offered to domestic troublers of the public peace or of private security. 

 

The dogma that all the governments of the world are approvingly ordained of God and that the powers that be in the United States, in Russia, in Turkey, are in accordance with his will, is no less absurd than impious. It makes the impartial Author of our existence unequal and tyrannical. It cannot be affirmed that the powers that be in any nation are actuated by the spirit or guided by the example of Christ in the treatment of enemies; therefore they cannot be agreeable to the will of God, and therefore their overthrow by a spiritual regeneration of their subjects is inevitable.  

 

We regard as unchristian and unlawful not only all wars, whether offensive or defensive, but all preparations for war; every naval ship, every arsenal, every fortification, we regard as unchristian and unlawful; the existence of any kind of standing army, all military chieftains, all monuments commemorative of victory over a fallen foe, all trophies won in battle, all celebrations in honour of military exploits, all appropriations for defense by arms; we regard as unchristian and unlawful every edict of government requiring of its subjects military service.  

 

Hence we deem it unlawful to bear arms, and we cannot hold any office which imposes on its incumbent the obligation to compel men to do right on pain of imprisonment or death. We therefore voluntarily exclude ourselves from every legislative and judicial body, and repudiate all human politics, worldly honours, and stations of authority. lf we cannot occupy a seat in the legislature or on the bench, neither can we elect others to act as our substitutes in any such capacity. It follows that we cannot sue any man at law to force him to return anything he may have wrongly taken from us; if he has seized our coat, we shall surrender him our cloak also rather than subject him to punishment.

 

We believe that the penal code of the Old Covenant—an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth—has been abrogated by Jesus Christ, and that under the New Covenant the forgiveness instead of the punishment of enemies has been enjoined on all his disciples in all cases whatsoever. To extort money from enemies, cast them into prison, exile or execute them, is obviously not to forgive but to take retribution.  

 

The history of mankind is crowded with evidences proving that physical coercion is not adapted to moral regeneration, and that the sinful dispositions of men can be subdued only by love; that evil can be exterminated only by good; that it is not safe to rely upon the strength of an arm to preserve us from harm; that there is great security in being gentle, long-suffering, and abundant in mercy; that it is only the meek who shall inherit the earth; for those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.  

 

How Many Men are Necessary to
Change a Crime into a Virtue?

“In another pamphlet, entitled How Many Men are Necessary to Change a Crime into a Virtue? Adin Ballou [another champion of non-resistance] says: ‘One man may not kill. lf he kills a fellow-creature, he is a murderer. lf two, ten, a hundred men do so, they, too, are murderers. But a government or a nation may kill as many men as it chooses, and that will not be murder, but a great and noble action. Only gather the people together on a large scale, and a battle of ten thousand men becomes an innocent action. But precisely how many people must there be to make it so?- that is the question. One man cannot plunder and pillage, but a whole nation can. But precisely how many are needed to make it permissible? Why is it that one man, ten, a hundred, may not break the law of God, but a great number may?” (Quoted in Leo Tolstoy’s book, The Kingdom of Heaven Is Within You, p. 6.)


Hence as a measure of sound policy-of safety to property, Life, and liberty-of public quietude and private enjoyment-as well as on the ground of allegiance to Him who is King of kings and Lord of Lords, we cordially adopt the non-resistance principle, being confident that it provides for all possible consequences, is armed with omnipotent power, and must ultimately triumph over every assailing force.  

 

We advocate no Jacobinical doctrines. The spirit of Jacobinism is the spirit of retaliation, violence, and murder. It neither fears God nor regards man. We would be filled with the spirit of Christ. lf we abide evil by our fundamental principle of not opposing evil by evil we cannot participate in sedition, treason, or violence. We shall submit to every ordinance and every requirement of government, except such as are contrary to the commands of the Gospel, and in no case resist the operation of law, except by meekly submitting to the penalty of disobedience.

 

But while we shall adhere to the doctrine of non-resistance and passive submission to enemies, we purpose, in a moral and spiritual sense, to assail iniquity in high places and in low places, to apply our principles to all existing evil, political, legal, and ecclesiastical institutions, and to hasten the time when the kingdoms of this world will have become the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ. It appears to us a self-evident truth that whatever the Gospel is designed to destroy at any period of the world, being contrary to ir, ought now to be abandoned. lf, then, the time is predicted when swords shall be beaten into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks, and men shall not learn the art of war any more, it follows that all who manufacture, sell, or wield these deadly weapons do thus array themselves against the peaceful dominion of the son of God on earth.  

 

Having thus stated our principles, we proceed to specify the measures we propose to adopt in carrying our object into effect.  

 

We expect to prevail through the Foolishness of Preaching. We shall endeavour to promulgate our views among all persons, to whatever nation, sect, or grade of society they may belong. Hence we shall organize public lectures, circulate tracts and publications, form societies, and petition every governing body. It will be our leading object to devise ways and means for effecting a radical change in the views, feelings, and practices of society respecting the sinfulness of war and the treatment of enemies.

 

ln entering upon the great work before us, we are not unmindful that in its prosecution we may be called to test our sincerity even as in a fiery ordeal. It may subject us to insult, outrage, suffering, yea, even death itself. We anticipate no small amount of misconception, misrepresentation, and calumny. Tumults may arise against us. The proud and pharisaical, the ambitious and tyrannical, principalities and powers, may combine to crush us. So they treated the Messiah whose example we are humbly striving to imitate. We shall not be afraid of their terror. Our confidence is in the Lord Almighty and not in man. Having withdrawn from human protection, what can sustain us but that faith which overcomes the world? We shall not think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try us, but rejoice in as much as we are partakers of Christ's sufferings.  

 

Wherefore we commit the keeping of our souls to God. For every one that forsakes houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for Christ’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.  

 

Firmly relying upon the certain and universal triumph of the sentiments contained in this declaration, however formidable may be the opposition arrayed against them, we hereby affix our signatures to it; commending it to the reason and conscience of mankind, and resolving, in the strength of the Lord God, to calmly and meekly abide the issue.” (Source: The Kingdom of Heaven Is Within You, by Leo Tolstoy, pp. 2-4. ISBN 9781466325982)

 
Related Articles:

Are World Wars Orchestrated?
http://www.henrymakow.com/000936.html

 

Doing the Dirty Work of
Satan and His Followers

“Satan cannot do evil except through a human body. Although ‘a murdered from the beginning,’ it cannot murder except with human hands. It does not have the power to kill or even harm by itself. It must use human beings to do its devilry. Although it repeatedly threatened to kill the possessed and the exorcists, its threats were empty. Satan’s threats are always empty. They are all lies.

In fact, the only power that satan has is through human belief in its lies. Both patients became possessed because they bought its false seductive promise of ‘friendship.’ Possession was maintained because they believed its threats that they would die without it. And the possession was ended when both chose to believe its lies no longer but to transcend their fear by trust in the resurrected Christ and to pray to the God of Trust for deliverance. During each exorcism satan’s lies were confronted. And each exorcism was concluded successfully by a conversion of sorts—a change of faith or value system. I now know what Jesus meant when he so frequently said, ‘By your faith you have been healed.’

Satan can use any human sin or weakness—greed and pride, for instance. It will use any available tactic: seduction, cajolery, flattery, intellectual argument. But its principal weapon is fear. And in the postexorcism period, after its lies had been exposed, it was reduced to haunting both patients with its dully repetitive threats: ‘We will kill you. We will get you. We will torture you. We will kill you.’” (From Peck, M Scott, People of The Lie: The Hope For Healing Human Evil, Rider Publishing, Melbourne, 1983, pp. 202-208)



Appendix

The Theory of the Just War

 By Wade Cox

Christian Churches of God, Australia

Summary: This paper is an historical and philosophical analysis of Just War Theory that demonstrates the development of the process with Augustine of Hippo and through the orthodox or catholic system from the fifth century. The meaning of the papal bull Unam Sanctam is explained and the implications that holds for war and Just War Theory as well as for the concept of the church as an exclusive organised body, membership of which is essential to salvation. The history of the doctrine up until modern times is of great importance to Christians who adopt any position on military service or warfare.
 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

Up until the reformation, the Roman Catholic Church had justified its exercise of civil and ecclesiastical power by a series of subtle and erroneous philosophical contrivances. These subtleties sought to explain the use of force and the interference of Church in state power despite the biblical sanctions of the New Testament. The argument became known as Just War Theory and, after the Reformation, could not be accepted in total as some of the argument derived from the patristic literature. For the reformers, biblical authority alone was the standard and, hence, the concept of Just War Theory had to be secularised in order to expand its terms of reference. To understand its origins and, hence, deal with its premises the historical development must be understood. 


From the close of the first century, Christian doctrine had been under attack from various quarters, some passing as Christian, some later being attributed as Christian such as the Gnostics. The Christian sect was pacifist and continued so almost in total until the beginning of the 4th century when a forced fusion of Western Christian and Elagabalistic churches occurred under Constantine. In order to adjust to the seduction of empirical recognition, two factions emerged which claimed to be Christian but which had long since been tainted with apostasy. The factions came to be known as the Athanasian faction after
 Athanasius,  Bishop of Alexandria (296-373 CE) and the Arian faction after Arius, Presbyter of Alexandria (250-336), both of whom were deposed by packed synods, for Arius at Alexandria in 321 and for Athanasius at Tyre in 335. The history of the conflict is too detailed to go into here but it was instrumental in the production of many theories and doctrines and a by-product of one was Just War Theory. 

The Church was faced with the dilemma of being an official state religion and continuing the exercise of civil and military power contrary to the instruction of Christ’s doctrine. Doctrine had to be promulgated. The first comprehensive biblical analysis we have of the use of military force occurred in the writings of Augustine, a North African thinker, who was baptised a Christian and was educated in Punic, a variant of Hebrew as well as Latin. From 373-383, he was a Manichean and Platonist philosopher. He was rebaptised in 387 an Athanasian. Ambrose of Milan with Theodosius had gained control of the Roman Church for the Athanasian faction in 381 and ordered the Council of Constantinople. Ambrose’s involvement with Augustine was instrumental in the latter's adoption of that creed, which at the time was no doubt seen as a prudent course. Theodosius suppressed paganism after defeating Eugenius in September 394. 

The so-called Athanasian/Arian disputes led to bitter persecution by the Athanasians or Trinitarian faction. The Goths and Vandals were Unitarians (the Gothic Bible dates from 351). They were later termed Arians by the Trinitarian faction to disguise the real nature of the dispute. The disputes were to continue to arise even later when the Empress Placidia sent the Goths, aided by Vandals, to oppose the revolt of Count Boniface in Africa in 427. They were accompanied by Maximinius, a Unitarian Bishop. Augustine had to publicly defend the Athanasian or Trinitarian sect in 428. 

By and large the formulation of Just War Theory stems from the writings of Augustine of Hippo. 

It is a rationalisation of the endorsement of Christianity of its adoption as the syncretic state religion. Christianity’s adoption as the state religion meant consequential involvement in the military and civil infrastructure.

Subsequently Augustine’s faction persecuted other sects. Just War Theory attempts to justify those activities. 

Augustine's position was adopted by one of the ecclesiastics educated in his schools and who became a disciple of his thought. This most powerful cleric became Gregory 1 (or the Great). He successfully fused civil and ecclesiastical power together. In 590 he commenced a union of church and state. The union was to form a series of empiric groups, which achieved relative continuity until 1850 - lasting some 1,260 years. 1,260 years is three and a half prophetic times. The significance of this time scale should not be lost on Bible students. 

The doctrines established by Augustine and Gregory were substantially unchanged until events of the thirteenth century were to precipitate a further spate of theorising. Firstly, by Gregory IX in 1232 in his conflict with the Greeks. In 1236, Gregory IX with Frederick II asserted that Constantine the Great had given temporal power to the popes and that emperors and kings were only his auxiliaries, bound to use the material sword at his direction. From 1265-1272 Aquinas developed this theme in the Summa Theologica (at II II, 40. c.~271) and together with writings of Bernard of Clairvaux and Hugo of St Victor et. al. inspired the writing of the Bull Unam Sanctam issued by Boniface VIII on 18 November 1302. This became the definitive word on the dual power argument and the legitimate use of force. 

The modern doctrine of Just War Theory is dependent upon the status quo and the existence of the state as is. It further rests upon the assumption that the crime of aggression is the measure of justification of Just War. Following from this there are divisions of Jus ad Bellum dealing with the determination of a Just War and Jus in Bello regulating conduct of the participants. 

To see how these distinctions are made, and from whence they derive, we must look atsome premises of Augustine and later of Aquinas. We will examine their accuracy and then look at Unam Sanctam. From this Modern Just War Theory will be examined. 

From Augustine’s political writings we see the following premises. At C a, he reflects his earlier Platonist days when he quotes Cicero: that a state should be so constituted as to be eternal. Thus death is not natural to a republic as to a man; and, no war is to be undertaken save for safety or for honour.

From reference to the Saguntine’s choice of destruction of the state rather than breaking faith Augustine points out that Cicero did not say which was preferred, safety or faith (the Saguntines chose to keep faith with their allies because of their word even though they knew that it meant extermination). Hence, the dilemma of safety, and by extension winning, is implied to be in conflict with morality here as faith. He concludes with ...

But the safety of the city of God is such that it can be retained, or rather acquired by faith and with faith, but if faith be abandoned no one can attain it. 

At C b he says … 

Yet the natural order which seeks the peace of mankind, ordains that a monarch should have the power of undertaking war if he thinks it advisable and that soldiers should perform their military duties in behalf of the peace and safety of the community. 

He poses the most extraordinary question. 

What is the evil in war? Is it the death of some who will soon die in any case that others may live in peaceful subjection? This is mere cowardly dislike not religious feeling.

There are two major areas of objection to this premise. 

The first is that it is directly contrary to the commandmentsand it attempts to insinuate that a temporal ruler can order one to commit an act against biblical law. 

The second is that if the argument is admitted that the death of some is acceptable, so that others may live in peaceful subjection, we admit a series of doctrines; euthanasiaon economic grounds and executionon doctrinal grounds or even on ethnicity 

Augustine attempts to list the real evils of war as love of violence, revengeful cruelty, fierce and implacable enmity, wild resistance, and the lust for power, etc. 

These would appear to be objections of Jus in Bello (Justice in War) and therefore relate to restrictions on participants. He makes the premise based on Romans 13:1 that there is no power but God who either orders or permits, so that a righteous man may be under an ungodly king but he may fight on two grounds. That: 

it is plainly the will of God, or  

it may be an unrighteous command on the part of the king but the soldier is absolved because his position makes obedience a duty.

Further he stated How much more must the man be blameless who carries on war on the authority of God? The limitations of this position were evident at Nuremburg. [Nazarene Remnant comment: “Eichmann's defence at Jerusalem followed the example of General Alfred Jodl at Nuremberg. Jodl denied all responsibility for his actions. He said that it is "not the task of a soldier to act as judge over his supreme commander. Let history do that or God in Heaven" (International Military Tribunal, 1950, p. 517). The tribunal did not entertain the plea from high-ranking officials who were regarded as the policy-makers and programme designers. As a matter of fact, Jodl's plea did not sit well with existing German law and precedent. A German Supreme Court in 1921 had heard and rejected this very plea from two submarine officers who had obeyed orders to massacre the survivors of a sinking ship. This judgement has never been repudiated (Lord Russell, 1962, p.310.) Moreover, the German Army field manual declared each soldier responsiblefor his own conduct,  a standard provision to discourage indiscipline, pillage, and rape. No soldier in the army Jodl commanded had the duty of blind obedience he claimed for himself. The tribunal didn't leave the matter of judgement to God or to history and its judgement was definitive: Jodl and the others received capital sentences. That Eichmann should choose a line of defence which had already proved so unsuccessful indicates not only his desperation but also his bad judgement. (Von Lang, J (Ed) Eichmann Interrogated, 1984). … Eichmann had neither the strong beliefs nor the will-power to be a consistent anti-Semite or anything else. He was vain, supercioious, a man who very often tried to get along with everyone by telling them what they wanted to hear. He was also very stupid; his perceptions of the motivations and desires of others was none too keen. The essential point about Eichmann is that it was not that the bureaucratic system had prevented him from exercising what Immanuel Kant had called 'reflective judgement' to distinguish right from wrong. He lacked that ability in the first place, because he refused to engage the rational side of his spirit to discover right from wrong for himself, and then act on that discovery.” (From Little Atrocities: Eichmannism in the Church. [1] This book aims to show how committed Christians will commit evil, such as bearing arms and going to war, with remarkable ease, under the cloak of obedience to authority.)] 

Augustine is biblically unsound on a series of points. Firstly, his biblical examples in support of the above are misused. Luke 3:14 relates to the baptism of John the Baptist before the introduction by Christ of the New Covenant. In all cases those baptised by John for repentance were always rebaptised and did not, until their laying on of hands, have the power of the Spirit. The wars permitted under the Old Covenant were, in the first place, to ensure the unhindered occupation of Canaan by Israel for two reasons. Firstly, to replace a nation which had forfeited its right by disobedience and secondly, to safely establish the biblical narrative and the plan of salvation. 

Matthew 22:21 refers to the tribute money and rendering unto Caesar all that is Caesar’s. Augustine attempts to infer that because the tribute money was used to pay soldier’s wages then Christ was indirectly condoning war. 

Matthew 8:9-10 refers to the centurion who asked Christ to heal his servant. Because he was commended for his faith and he was not rebuked or told to change his profession but rather the opportunity was taken to explain that there would be those chosen not of Israel, this example is misused. There is no record of this man being baptised unless he was Cornelius at Acts 10. 

The argument at Romans 13:1-6 requires submission to authority and the payment of taxes as a requirement of the faithful. The fact that those of this world bear the sword and are raised by God does not mean the called or elect are to do the same. 

Christ's response to Pilate at John 18:36 was My Kingdom is not of this world. If it were my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. At verse 11 he had commanded Peter to put his sword away. From Pentecost it is not recorded biblically or in the early Church records that any Apostle or elder ever bore arms or condoned it.  

Augustine's argument stems from two points. Firstly, he was an Athanasian apostate who did not understand the plan of salvation and, secondly, the Athanasian faction (now called Orthodox or Catholic) were attempting to rationalise their faith with their new found power; and doctrine was adjusted accordingly. 

Gregory was to adapt Augustine's rationalisation to reconstitute a temporal and ecclesiastical empire under the supreme authority of the Pope. 

Gregory IX reiterated this position which led to the doctrine of the status quo in that all states existed by the authority of Rome. When this authority was withdrawn, it was seen that internal disorder generally eventuated, as all states were released from oaths of allegiance. 

The argument of Just War Theory status quo is largely derived from this premise of Pontifical Authority. Augustine’s, and Gregory's, justification of war worked well while there was a common enemy or external threat to the empire (preferably heathen). By 1000 AD the empire was expanding well in the establishing of Catholic hierarchies with the archbishoprics of Gniezno in Poland in 1000 and Gran in Hungary in 1001, and in 1018 the Byzantines occupied Bulgaria. 

By 1031 Muslim Spain fragmented with the dethroning of the last Caliph of Cordoba and in 1050 they were expelled from Sardinia. By 1092 the Almoravids had imposed their rule on southern Spain with only three independent emirs left. In 1094 El Cid took Valencia. In 1095 Urban II proclaimed the Crusade which set out from Constantinople in 1097. The historic demonstration of the argument of the status quo was seen from the year 1041 with the occupation of Melfi by the Normans under Tancred d'Hauteville. 

All feudal states in Europe relied on the church for smooth running. The largest feudal system ever created was the German or Holy Roman Empire. The incursion by the Normans of Melfi on the Lombardy/Byzantine border in southern Italy was seen as a serious destabilising influence. An alliance of the eastern Byzantine and western Holy Roman Empire together with the Pope attempted to crush them but were defeated at Civitate and Leo IX was captured. 

Several serious repercussions were to flow from this as the Pope blamed the Byzantines for his defeat. The result was the East/West schism of 1054. As a result of the weakened position of the papacy, some internal reforms of the church were forced. However, Nicholas II took the election of the papacy out of the hands of the clergy and the people of Rome by declaring the Pope solely elected by the Cardinals. To restore stability in the authority question he recognised the Normans, who by 1060 had conquered all southern Italy, and in 1061 removed the Muslims from N.E. Sicily. The dispute over the appointment of bishops became of fundamental importance in this question. A dispute erupted between Emperor Henry IV and Pope Gregory VII (Hildebrand) in 1076. After Henry's excommunication, followed by surrender and penance in 1077, it finally resulted in Henry's occupation of Rome in 1084 and the election of Pope Clement III who crowned him. Hildebrand held out in the Castel San Angelo to be later rescued by the Norman Robert Guiscard. 

Far from being irrelevant conquests and squabbles, these struggles were fundamental to the question of who established the status quo and the legitimacy of state identity, which was fundamental to Just War Theory.

Over the period coinciding with the Norman expansion and from about 1066 a great upsurge in building and the creation of abbeys occurred. From 1076 (at Salerno) the foundations were laid for the establishment of Universities. In 1098 Robert founded the Cistercians at Citeaux and the school of Dialectic was opened by William of Champeaux in Paris in 1104 which commenced the university there. In 1107 the Synod of Westminster settled the appointment of bishops controversy, in England, between Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Henry I with joint investiture agreed. At this time also, city expansion commenced in western Europe and the Age of Reason (later aided in 1210 by the founding of the Franciscans) was under way, although Abelard’s doctrines were condemned by the Council of Sens in 1141. In 1115 Bernard founded the Abbey at Clairvaux. In 1122 the Concordat at Worms between Pope Calixtus II and Henry V, the German or Holy Roman Emperor, settled the appointment of the clergy question in Europe which whilst appearing to be a compromise was a defeat for the Empire which desperately needed the exclusive loyalty of its clergy. With this decision the establishment of the states and the status quo remained firmly within the papacy. 

By 1158 Frederick Barbarosa's recognition of student rights at Bologna marked the formal start of the university there and the University of Paris emerged as a regulated body. By 1160-62 Henry the Lion Duke of Saxony conquered the Wends of the Lower Elbe who were forced to accept Roman Catholicism and in 1164 the Swedish Archbishopric of Upsala was founded. 

With the establishment of a relatively stable feudal state system under Roman Catholic domination with the subjugation of internal unrest and external threat, two things occurred. Firstly, a population explosion and, secondly, an interest in philosophy and science developed. 

The conquest of the crusades began to collapse, commencing in 1145 with Turkish reconquest of Edessa and Saladin's annihilation of the Army of Jerusalem in 1187. The situation caused the Pope to introduce new crusades headed by the Kings of England and France, i.e. Richard Lionheart and Phillip II. 

An interesting reaction to the new situation was that of a spirit of intolerance which arose in Europe. The Church of God had established itself in Southern France, Spain and to some extent Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ukraine in the east. Keeping the same festivals as the original Jewish Church, it was identified with the Jews. In 1182 Phillip II issued an edict banning all Jews from France. The south was composed of either English fiefs or lands claimed by them and consequently the church, called Albigensian, was still occupying the areas of Toulouse, Languedoc, Gevaudan and parts of Provence and Guyenne becoming a repository for the banished "Jews" as did Spain and later Portugal. 

In 1208, the year that saw OxfordUniversity in existence, Innocent III called for a crusade against these heretics. The sect called Cathars (i.e. Cathari or Puritans) had sprung up in the same areas and it was their alleged practices which led to the justification for the crusade. 

In 1226 Louis VII took Avignon as part of the crusade and there were a series of papal edicts issued relating to the justification for the crusade and the conduct of the crusade. In 1229 the crusade ended with the French crown annexing Languedoc and the Inquisition established in Toulouse. Originally Benedictine controlled, the establishment of the Dominicans at Toulouse in 1215 to combat this heresy saw them assume control of the Inquisition. Under the Dominicans, the Inquisition reached new heights of perversion, sadism and avarice. 

The extending of the university system to Cambridge  in 1213 and Padua in 1222 (from Bologna) saw a philosophical rationalisation of theories of Justification of War and of crusades and heretical suppression by the church. The church became drunk on the blood of the saints.

The absurdities of Just War authority was highlighted by the conflict between Gregory IX and Emperor Frederick II, when Gregory excommunicated Frederick for not going on a crusade in 1227, for going on a crusade in 1228 and for recovering Jerusalem, without papal permission in 1229. 

In 1241 the Mongols invaded Poland and Hungary. They withdrew on receiving news of the death of Ogadai Khan, but the defeat of Henry of Silesia at Liegnitz and Bela IV of Hungary at Mohi created some uncertainty. 

The proliferation of the centres of learning and inquiry, and the philosophical problems of the legitimate pursuit of war were raising serious questions amongst churchmen and the philosophical and ethical questions raised by the Albig(h)ensian crusade and the establishment of the Inquisition required explanation. 

In order to rescue the Church of Rome from its philosophical dilemma,Thomas Aquinas, as one of its leading dogmatists, was prompted to take Augustine's works and pose a series of inquiries. The answers to the points of inquiry at Question 40 on War were fundamental to Just War Theory for Athanasian Christians and hence the Western world. 

Aquinas' points of inquiry are: 

1. Are some wars permissible? 

2. May clerics engage in war? 

3. May belligerents use subterfuge? 

4. May war be waged on feastdays? 

In answering the first point, Aquinas demonstrates clearly but not exhaustively that it is always sin to wage war on the following grounds: 

a. It is proscribed by God with the punishment specified, vis. all who live by the sword shall die by the sword (Matthew 26: 52). 

b. It goes against the divine commands of Scripture. The example Aquinas uses is from Matthew 5: 39 where Christ does away with the doctrine of an eye for an eye and states:
 

but I say unto you, do not resist one who is evil But if anyone strikes thee on the right cheek turn to him the other also etc. 

This is also echoed by Paul in his letter to the Corinthians (at 2Cor. 11:20).  


For you bear it if a man makes slaves of you or takes advantage of you or put on airs or strikes you in the face (although he himself was too weak for that). 

This point was made after the point that Satan poses as an angel of light and his servants disguise themselves as servants of righteousness (verse 12-15). This text is very relevant to this whole question of war and the redress of wrongs. 


2Corinthians 11:12-21 12 And what I do I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do. 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. 15 So it is not strange if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. 16 I repeat, let no one think me foolish; but even if you do, accept me as a fool, so that I too may boast a little. 17 (What I am saying I say not with the Lord's authority but as a fool, in this boastful confidence; 18 since many boast of worldly things, I too will boast.) 19 For you gladly bear with fools, being wise yourselves! 20 For you bear it if a man makes slaves of you, or preys upon you, or takes advantage of you, or puts on airs, or strikes you in the face. 21 To my shame, I must say, we were too weak for that! 

Again at Romans 12:19  

Beloved, never avenge yourselves but leave it to the wrath of God. For it is written vengeance is mine I will repay, says the Lord. 

c. Anything contrary to virtue is a sin. As war is contrary to peace it is therefore always a sin. 

d. In the fourth point, Aquinas draws on current church practice, which outlaws war tournaments and denies victims ecclesiastical burial. Consequently if practising for war is wrong then the act itself is therefore plainly wrong. 

Despite a clear case, Aquinas then goes on to rationalise the position by reference to a number of philosophies commencing with Augustine's misinterpretation of Luke 3:14 relating to the fact that John did not tell the soldiers to lay down their arms but rather to do violence to no man. As we have seen, this was under the Old Covenant and Christ laid specific instructions, which Augustine ignored. 

His reply to this point is based on the fact that the civil worldly powers allowed by God are to be obeyed as they wield the sword as the servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer. Whilst denied to the individual, groups of Christians may exercise civil power with resort to arms. 

The objection to this is that Christ's comments in John 18:36 that his kingship was not of this world clearly precludes this interpretation of Aquinas and Augustine. In order to circumvent this objection it was necessary for Gregory and the church to declare the Kingdom of God on this earth in the form of the Roman Church and Empire, and the papacy as the Vicar of Christ. 

This argument is fatuous on the following grounds; 

Firstly, Daniel 2:44 shows that in the last days of the ten kings, the God of Heaven will set up a Kingdom which shall never be destroyed. It shall break in pieces those kingdoms, bringing them to an end. The comment is that the sovereignty will not be left to another people. The stone is Christ and all of these kingdoms spoken of will be brought to an end forever. The fact that there is a multiplicity of warring nations continually extant defeats the Roman argument. 

Secondly, the comments in Revelation indicate a Millennium of 1,000 years which Rome attempted to appropriate and Aquinas no doubt accepted as being the period expected to end at 1590 with judgment and the resurrection. As we know, 1590 passed without such an event and with it the argument. Revelation has been rearranged and reinterpreted to accommodate Catholic theory as has Daniel 2 and 11 been conveniently ignored. Aquinas’ reply in the first inquiry is therefore irrelevant to Christianity and his three requirements are purely philosophical speculations of a worldly nature symptomatic of an apostate cleric. 

His three necessary points for the conduct of a Just War are: 

1. The authority of the sovereign on whose command war is waged (in that the power to counsel and declare war belongs to those in supreme authority). 

2. A just cause is required. From Augustine it is ascribed as one which avenges wrongs, either in punishing states which refuse to make amends for outrages done by its subjects or to restore what it has seized injuriously. 

This point is so totally against the sentiments expressed by Christ at Matthew 5:38-42 that one must marvel at the duplicity of Aquinas in stating it. 

Matthew 5:38-42 38 “You have heard that it was said, `An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil.But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; 40and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; 41 and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you.” (RSV) 

The relevance in engaging in war to redress wrongs assumes some control over the size and nature of war or that the seizure of property is to be greater than that estimated to be lost in the war. History has shown this premise to be totally erroneous as indeed it demonstrably was when Aquinas wrote it. Its intent was to justify (along with the third premise) the conduct of the religious internal and external crusades. 

3. The right intention. Participants must intend to promote the good and to avoid evil. Aquinas restates Augustine's argument that ...

Among true worshippers of God those wars are looked on as peacemaking which are waged neither from aggrandisement nor cruelty, but with the object of securing peace, or repressing evil and supporting the good. 

Aquinas allows that wars can have the first two requirements yet still be wrong because of perverse intention. Augustine's consideration of intent and conduct are used as exclusions of this category thus Jus in Bello considerations collectively held or held by the power can be Jus ad Bellum criteria. 

Augustine's argument is that to draw the sword is to arm oneself or to spill blood without command or permission of superior or lawful authority. Aquinas argues from this that use of the sword by authorities of the sovereign; or a public person in zeal for justice is by the authority, so to speak, of God and is therefore not punishable. 

He accounts for the fact that even those who use it sinfully are not always slain but they will always die by the sword since they will be punished eternally for their sinful use of it unless they repent. 

Aquinas' argument here has no biblical basis, indeed it is contrary to Scripture and is certainly the product of a worldly consideration. 

Aquinas' second Article of Inquiry is whether it is lawful for clerics and bishops to fight

In dealing with this premise he uses the authority of Gregory (Hom in Ev XIV) and that of Leo IV who ordered clerics to meet the Saracens. He also makes a major premise in the theory of condonation of offences when he introduces at objection 3 that according to Romans 1:32 They who do such things are worthy of death, and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them. Those, above all who seem to consent to a thing, are those that induce others to do it. As Adrian induced Charles to go to war with the Lombards by this precedent they are also allowed to fight. It would seem here that Aquinas argues that the inducing of others is not only condonation but also consenting participation by logical extension. Indeed this is what must be deduced from it. 

At objection 4 Aquinas condones the concept of the crusade or Holy War on the sanction of patristic literature but rightly quotes Christ at Matthew 26:52 instructing Peter to put up again thy sword into the scabbard, (the Vulgate has its place although scabbard is from John 18:11). 

It is in this premise that Aquinas introduces the concept of non-combatants on the premise of importance of task. War is forbidden to a cleric on the premise that it is of secular nature (from 2Tim. 2:14 where Aquinas paraphrases Paul's comments). He further decrees that all who shed blood become irregular and, therefore, clerics would be rendered unfit for their primary duty as war is directed to the shedding of blood. On these grounds any who are called to the faith, ministry or not, would be precluded, but Aquinas does not address this point. 

He mentions that the Prelates are precluded on the grounds that the weapons available to them are spiritualas stated by Paul at 2Corinthians 10:4 The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God. For a cleric of Aquinas' ability to argue that clerics are precluded from warfare by this text and argue elsewhere that the laity is allowed to engage in warfare is absurd. The previous verse states For though we walk in the flesh we do not war after the flesh. Verse 4 was also cut short by Aquinas and includes to the pulling down of strongholds

2Corinthians 10:4 for the weapons of our warfare are not worldly but have divine power to destroy strongholds. (RSV) 

Aquinas argues also from Joshua 6:4 that clerics are permitted to accompany troops in battle but not to engage. He also asserts that it is the duty of clerics to depose and counsel other men to engage in Just Wars but are forbidden to take up arms, not as though it were a sin but because such an occupation is unbecoming their personality.

He also asserts that although it is meritous to wage a Just War it is rendered unlawful for clerics on the same grounds as marriage becomes reprehensible in those who have vowed virginity. 

Whilst tedious, the examples quoted above are useful in coming to grips with the sort of mind required to rationalise the absolute conflicts that arise from the positions adopted by the church between the fourth and thirteenth century. These very premises occupy man’s thinking and have distorted his attitudes almost beyond rectification.

The application of immunity from battle and the role of non-combatant stem directly from Aquinas. From his arguments, it is perfectly reasonable to hold that all clerics should be instantly shot as the subject of intensive military operation on the grounds of argued culpability greater than the participants. His doctrine allows the argument of systematic extermination from this and the following grounds of all clerics who argue for a Just War. 

Aquinas’ third article shows clearly why war leads to subterfuge and deception in his example Ambushes and that this directly contravenes biblical law (e.g. Mat. 7:12). In what is probably the most laughable of rationalisations this cleric justifies secrecy in campaigning, not on grounds of practicality but by Matthew 7:6 Give not that which is holy to dogs. Further, it is argued from Augustine (QQ in Heptateuch, qu X super jos), provided the war be just it is no concern of justice whether it be carried on openly or by ambushes, proving this from Joshua 8:2. 

Joshua 8:2 and you shall do to Ai and its king as you did to Jericho and its king; only its spoil and its cattle you shall take as booty for yourselves; lay an ambush against the city, behind it. (RSV) 

Aquinas demonstrates why ambush contravenes principles of holy and good conduct yet overturns his objection on the most tenuous of grounds. 

We therefore develop from this that in Just War Theory there are no limits to deception or propaganda. Aquinas argues, however, that there are limitations to deception. Deceiving the enemy through false statement or by breaking promises are in breach of the rights of war and covenants which ought to be observed. This is derived from Ambrose (De Offic 1). The total inoperability of the sentiments and the conflict of Aquinas' position are evident. 

Aquinas argues from Apocryphal writing (1Maccabees ch. 41) that it is lawful to fight on holy days. Perhaps this is why this erroneous writing is included in the Catholic canon. 

He is aware of the censure of Isaiah at 18:3 of smiting with the fist, etc. on fast days but confuses these with Sabbaths. In the most extraordinary piece of rationalisation one would have thought him capable, he justified, from John 7:23, that because Christ healed on the Sabbath it was therefore permissible that they should also tear each other in pieces on the Sabbath to protect the common weal of the faithful because not to fight would be to tempt God

Catholic doctrine became dependent on the rationalisation of this cleric and at the Council of Trent the Summa Theologica was elevated along with the patristic writings and Bulls to equality with Holy Scripture as the three pillars of the Catholic faith (see Catholic Encyclopedia article St. Thomas). 

Unam Sanctam 

From these writings the codification of Just War Theory emerged in the Bull Unam Sanctam [Latin - The One Holy (i.e. The Church)]. Issued on 18 November 1302 during the dispute with Phillip the Fair it arises from the Roman Council of October 1302 and was incorporated in the Corpus juris canonici and thus is established as definitive canon law on the subject of authority and force. 

The main dogmatic assertions concern the unity and necessity of belonging to the church and the position of Pope as supreme head and the duty arising therefrom of submission to him for salvation. This position is held to emphasise the higher importance of the spiritual in relation to the secular. 

The main propositions of the Bull are: 

Firstly, unity of the church and the necessity to belong to it are derived by reference to the one ark of the flood and to the seamless garment of Christ. As there is unity of the body so there is unity of the head in the Pope as successor to St Peter, i.e. he who is not subject to the Pope denies he is Christ's sheep. This position is in total opposition to the doctrines of the New Testament church and its structure, and NT prophecy, specifically Revelation chapters 2 and 3. 

Second, the following four principles and conclusion emanate from the Bull: 

1. Under the control of the church are two swords i.e. two powers which is an expression of the medieval theory of the two swords, the spiritual and the secular. This is substantiated by the customary reference to the swords of the Apostles at the arrest of Christ (Lk. 22:38 & Mat. 26:52). 

Luke 22:38 And they said, "Look, Lord, here are two swords." And he said to them, "It is enough." (RSV) 

Matthew 26:52 Then Jesus said to him, "Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. (RSV) 

2. Both swords are held to be in the power of the church, the spiritual wielded by the hands of the clergy and the secular to be employed for the church by the hands of the civil authority but under direction of the spiritual power (this answers perfectly Revelation 13:15). 

Revelation 13:15 and it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast should even speak, and to cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain. (RSV) 

3. The one sword must be subordinate to the other, the civil power must submit to the spiritual which has precedence because of its greatness and sublimity having also the right to guide and establish the secular power, having power of judgment over it when it does not act rightly. An earthly power is judged by a spiritual authority, which in turn is judged by the highest spiritual authority (the papacy) which in turn is judged by God. (It is seen from this that Just War authority is rigidly feudal or hierarchal). 

4. The authority, although granted to and exercised by man, is divine and granted to Peter by divine commission and confirmed in him and his successors. Whoever opposes this power ordained of God opposes the law of God and, like a Manichean (who hold a dualist theology), to accept two principles. Now therefore we declare, say, determine and pronounce that for every human creature it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff

From the declaration on the margin of the text of the record the last sentence is noted as the real definition of the Bull. Declaratio quod subesse Romano Pontifici est omni humanœ creaturœ de necessitate salutis (tr. it is here stated that for salvation it is necessary that every human creature be subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff). 

This has been the constant teaching of the church and it was declared in the same sense by the Fifth œcumenical council of the Lateran in 1516. ... The Bull also proclaims the subjection of the secular power to the spiritual as the one higher in rank and draws from it the conclusion that the representatives of the spiritual power can install the possessors of secular authority and exercise judgement over their administration ... 

This is a fundamental principle, which had grown out of the entire development in the early Middle Ages of the central position of the papacy in the Christian national family of Western Europe. It has been expressed from the eleventh century by theologians like Bernard of Clairvaux and John of Salisbury, and by popes like Nicholas II and Leo IX. Boniface VIII gave it precise expression in opposing the procedure of the French King. The main propositions are drawn from the writings of St Bernard, Hugo of St Victor, St Thomas Aquinas and letters of Innocent III. 

The Bull and the Canonical position derive from the actual conditions of medieval Western Europe (Catholic Encyclopaedia (1912), article Unam Sanctam, pp. 126-127). 

It is therefore demonstrated exhaustively from the above that the Just War position is a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Churchand is evolved from a justification of its external conquests and expansion and its internal bigoted persecutions. 

From 590 to 1850, for 1260 years, this power attempted to achieve world domination by whatever means at its disposal, both civil and theological, permeating every aspect of law and society, exercising ultimate power and control. By terror and repression, justified by philosophical and biblical rationalisation, it became a whoregorged on its internal minorities and drunk with the blood of the saints and martyrs (Rev. 17:6). 

With the Reformation of the seventeenth century the reformers sought to codify its ethical conduct while renouncing the papacy and found itself in extreme philosophical and historical contradiction. 

In relation to Just War Theory it follows, without the authority of Rome, the doctrine of the Status quo has no meaning. Certainly it is open to attack along the simplistic line of Stalin (vis. How many divisions has the Pope?) and of Napoleon (God is on the side of the big battalions). The doctrine exists only so far as nations recognise and restrict themselves to it. 

Because of this inherent problem the nations and leaders have sought to replace Rome with a secular world authority and the current movement for a World Government is gathering momentum supported by Middle Europe whose nations see a revival of the Holy Roman Empire of European world domination. This new United States of Europe was scheduled to come together in 1992 as a complete functioning state. 1990 saw the Warsaw Pact disintegrate.  

The United Kingdom ratified the Single European Act of 1986 and ceded authority to the European Parliament in effect doing away with the rights of the monarchy and the absolute sovereignty of the British people (the details are in T. C Hartley, Foundation of European Community Law, Oxford, 1981 and show the development from the Treaty of Rome leading up to this event). England has so bound itself to the European system under the Treaty of Rome that internal political reorganisation may only be possible legally by succession from Europe which of itself can be declared illegal by Europe and could justify invasion on the grounds of Just War Theory as above. 


Under the doctrines established by canon law, world peace is impossible unless Europe and Rome achieve total world domination exercising full civil and ecclesiastical power.
 History has shown that when it is considered achievable Europe and Rome will act to realise this aim. Thus historically Just War Theory can only be seen as a tool of European Athanasian Christian self-justification for its religio-political ambitions. This doctrine applies equally to modern Islamic Hadithic doctrine and to Marxist-Leninist ideology. The current attempts at superimposing Marxist ideology on Roman Theology in South America is seen as a way of fusing two of these three groups. The new age religious movement is another facet of this syncretic amalgam for world authority and hence established power structures, which justify the status quo. 

The Book of Revelation shows, by allegory, how this historical sequence is to come to pass. It shows the sequence of cause and effect commencing with the first horseman of the Apocalypse: that offalse religion, which arms itself with the bow and seeks to conquer setting off a chain reaction which was to span over 1,400 years and ultimately lead to the establishment of a world government, which, given total power, persecutes those who are in its power, and are not of it, until it is overthrown by the return of Christ. Philosophers, of course, dismiss the religious aspects of the argument and seek to make some sense of the arguments on the merits and hence fail to come to grips with its aims and parameters. 

Modern Just War Theory follows closely the considerations laid down by Catholic theologians. The conditions are: 

1. Right Authority 

2. Just Cause 

3. Right intention 

4. Peaceful aim  

5. Proportionality condition, 

a. The good to be achieved should outweigh the harm done 

b. You should not use excessive means to accomplish your ends 

6. Possibility of success. 


Proportionality conditions are invariably exceeded in the ensuing hostilities as they increase. The Holy War traditions are supposedly opposed to the body of Just War Theory but as has been demonstrated Just War Theory developed as a justification for Holy War and religious persecution. 

Protestant philosophers are in a serious predicament. Given the perverted nature of the biblical rationalisations involved in the premises of Just War Theory espoused by Rome, they are left with few alternatives. The alternatives are chiefly that of pacifism or similar perversion or of rationalisation. Most rationalise. 

While war was relatively unsophisticated, this was of itself somewhat harmless. However, the escalation of war in its modern phases from 1860 with the American Civil War into the wars of the twentieth century has shown the absurdity of the concepts of Just War Theory limitations. From Clauswitz, we have seen modern war explained in terms, which shows its tendency to totality and extremes of destruction. If it is an act of violence pushed to its utmost bounds, then, given the capacity to destroy the world as we know it, war must be seen as an act of insanity of the ultimate kindwhere humanity and all life would be destroyed. 

The modern limitations placed upon it are, in a sense, the highest form of gambling. Morality is seen as having no place in international relations being for domestic consumption. Indeed morality is seen as being dangerous in these considerations and the interest of the state is seen as the only moral consideration. It is for this reason that both biblical and secular power looks to unified world government. Biblical argument does away with nations at Christ’s return. Some political leaders espouse world government. The assumption that world government will eliminate war is held true and the cost to individual liberty ignored. The end result will be mass extermination. 

In the slow evolution of war as a political tool we have seen the slow elimination of considerations of honour and sentiment or morality. Somehow these considerations are always sacrificed on the altar of success, practicality and efficiency. Efficiency of action is paramount and invariably the doctrine of the end justifies the means emerges. 

From these considerations the tendency towards the absolutes will always outstrip the bounds or restrictions placed upon it. Its tendency to the absolute will render it liable to get out of control and therefore subvert its political purposes. 

Limited war is only possible when one side is not threatened with total defeat and has supremacy in weapons to the point of controlling its destiny. Where two nations are locked equally in war, they are only limited by their technology and some agreed restrictions on Jus in Bello considerations. The case of chemical warfare is an example, although the wars in the Middle East show that previously held assumptions about these considerations are suspect. 

War has a demonstrated end result and will always tend to the extreme. The causes are deeply rooted in erroneous religious considerations or philosophical considerations, which justify the taking of human life and the enforcement of religious or ideological belief to extermination of non violent or minority groups. A fundamentalist Christian will argue that it is not permissible to fight even in defence of one's nation and life and some philosophers tend to claim that defensive operations are the only permissible acts under Just War Theory. It seems therefore that even this is false. 

Non violent action seems only to work where the ruling power is bound by constraints, which allow it to succeed. In the case of India, by a legal system which guaranteed the participants a form of legal framework within which to operate. It is doubtful if Ghandi would have been as successful against Hitler for example. 

Similarly, it cannot be argued that Jus in Bello considerations rest on any other premise than what participants agree to be reasonable standards of conduct at the time. However, there is no absolute rationality to them. Indeed, having once embarked on a course of war, modern warfare renders such conditions untenable and ultimately enforceable only by supremacy of arms. 

Just War Theory is as untenablenow as it was when the Roman clerics developed it to justify an unbridled lust for world domination, power and wealth.Membership of a body or world organisation is totally unnecessary for salvation. The doctrine that the Church is a corporate or physical structure or organisation, membership of which is necessary to salvation, is a heresy. It is an even greater heresy when it preaches contrary to God’s laws. The head of every man is Christ and the head of Christ is God (1Cor. 11:3). The elect of Christ will follow him everywhere he goes. The 144,000 follow him from their sealing. They are not defiled by church systems. They move with Christ, the pillar of Fire and Cloud (see Rev. 14:1-5). 

The first horseman of Revelation or the Apocalypse, that of false religion, was released from the Councils of the early Church. It established and set in motion the second horseman of war. When the 1,260 years had been completed, the false religious system had alienated the world. It had divided it into armed camps and established a military system that set off the chain events of revolution and modern warfare. Commencing with the American Civil War, the first of the modern wars, it developed into the wars of the twentieth century. Coupled with the technology of war is that of the materialism of the military industrial complex. The third and fourth horsemen are unleashed and follow from the first two. The forthcoming Third World War and the subsequent wars will kill over two thirds of the planet. Pray fervently "Thy kingdom come". 

(Copyright 1995, 1999 Wade Cox: The papers on this site may be freely copied and distributed provided they are copied in total with no alterations or deletions. The publisher's name and address and the copyright notice must be included. No charge may be levied on recipients of distributed copies. Brief quotations may be embodied in critical articles and reviews without breaching copyright. PO Box 369 Woden, ACT 2606 Australia; PO Box 45 Rockton Ontario LOR 1XO Canada. Web sites: http://www.logon.org  and http://www.ccg.org

 

 

 

The URL of this page is:
http://NazareneRemnant.org/church-doctrine-on-war,-bearing-arms-and-resistance-to-evil.html

 

Share This Page
Delicious Digg Facebook Google Bookmarks Reddit Stumbleupon Yahoo My Web Blogmarks Diigo Livejournal Ma.gnolia Netvouz Newsvine Technorati Wists
 

 

 

 

• Home
• How to Translate this Page
• Sacred Calendar 2004 to 2017
• The New Moon Festivals
• Beliefs and Structure
• Invitation
• Core eBooks
• Articles and Reports
• Healing and Health
• Things I Would Like My Grandchildren To Know
• Stages of the Restoration of All Things
• Last Days Watch ezine
• Expose the Synagogue of Satan Locally
• Download Brochures
• Download Full Web Site
• About Nazarene Remnant
• Help Us
• Resources
• Quotations of Interest
• Contact
• FAQ
• Link to Us
• Code of Conduct
• Mirror This Site
• Site Map
 


The Most Stern Warning in all Scripture ...

We are entering an age that Satanists call the Age of Fire, when they will use every murderous, demonic, vicious, and most cunning tactics and lies to usher in their Nazi Fourth Reich (aka the New World Order). They have made the following point very clear:

“No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation.” (David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations Organization) ...

Read the Full Article:
The Most Stern Warning in all Scripture


The Warning of the Last Days 

The Warning of the Last Day eBook cover image

"Therefore, behold, I will make them know, this once I will make them know my power and my might, and they shall know that my name is the Lord. The clamour will resound to the ends of the earth, for the Lord has an indictment against the nations; he is entering into judgment with all flesh, and the wicked he will put to the sword." (Jeremiah 16: 21; 25: 31)

Free Download:The Warning of the Last Days


The Usher of Desecration 

Usher:Noun: “Somebody who shows people to their seats, e.g. in a theatre or at a wedding.” Verb: “To inaugurate or introduce (something): usher in a new era.”

Desecration: Verb: “1. To violate the sanctity (of something sacred); to profane (it). 2. To treat (a sacred place) irreverently or contemptuously.” The Penguin English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 2003.

“If someone was planning to murder you, you would like to know months in advance, wouldn’t you?”

Read the Book:
The Usher of Desecration


The Real Crisis Is About To Unfold and It's Not Financial. 

 Read the Book:
The Real Crisis Is About To Unfold and It's Not Financial


The Time for Talk is Over

“The trip is over folks, we are out of road. I wish I could tell you where you are going. If you don't know or don't have a map, it wouldn't do me much good to try to tell you anyway. One thing is for certain; from here you will walkthe rest of the way. For many it will be to destination unknown. Most are on the way to the City of Despair, in the State of Confusion, located within the Nation of Disgrace. For others, the destination will not be pleasant nor a matter of choice. You get the picture. Those who, ‘take all of your belongings and climb into the truck,’ will weep in utter misery for the personal negligence that they brought upon themselves and their families. You will have paid the ultimate price.

 A prudent [man] foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Proverbs 22: 3, KJV)

 

So,...will you take the final moments God is giving you to step away from your ‘stupid zone’ and do what you should have so long ago? Will you finally make some plans? Will you really sell off your unnecessary toys and purchase the absolutely necessary survival tools that will give you just a chance to make it through? Will you search out the ultimate truth of our predicament and the One who can give you peace, serenity and eternal life? Can you admit that putting a dictator in office was one of your very worst mistakes, and you will try to make amends by resisting him and his communist platform? Will you do all you can to convert your family and friends who also voted for him and others supporting him to work against him in every way possible? That may sting and burn to be told that, but it is far better than the amputation of your limbs that is coming if he continues to dismantle this nation and its last freedoms.

“Procrastination in implementing your family's self preservation plans will be terminal.” [1]

 

Editorials like these are expected to consume about 1500 words. This is half that. Like I said, the time for talk is over.”

 

Footnote:
[1] Dr. Greg Evenson

 

Read the Article:
The Time for Talk is Over


Defining the Spiritual War You Failed To Fight 

Defining the Spiritual War You Failed To Fight cover image

Read the article Defining the Spiritual War You Failed To Fight.


Worldwide Church of God Returns to the Vomit as Grace International 

Worldwide Church oof God Returns to the Vomit as Grace International book cover.

“But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.” (2 Peter 2: 22)

“As a dog returneth to his vomit, [so] a fool returneth to his folly.” (Proverbs 26: 11) 

Discover the part played by the Illuminati Jew, Rupert Murdoch (pictured above), and his Zondervan publishing company, in the destruction of Herbert W Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God.

What Murdoch "... is not is an Australian 'right wing' billionaire. Murdoch, though born in Australia is an Israeli citizen and Jewish. Why is this important?

Murdoch is now admitted to have controlled the political systems in Britain and America for two decades. He has had the power to choose national leaders, make policy, pass laws at will. Where did the power come from?

We now know it came from spying, blackmail, bribery and propaganda." (Veterans Today Senior Editor, Gordon Duff.)

Get the book here.


UFO's Originate in Nazi Antarctic Bases 

Nazi flying saucers thumbnail.

"Perhaps in order to engineer and prepare the global collective psyche to the "great earth-shattering announcement" that may be coming any day now, ... that the US, UK and allies are in contact with "technologically superior beings from other worlds, which do exist after all and we are in contact with them."

Read more here ...


"The only correct term for the mis-called 'anti-Semitic' is 'Jew-wise.' It is indeed the only fair and honest term. The phrase 'anti-Semite' is merely a propaganda word used to stampede the unthinking public into dismissing the whole subject from their minds without examination: so long as that is tolerated these evils will not only continue, but grow worse." (The Nameless War, by Captain Archibald Maule Ramsay, p. 63)



Why Are Christian Men Such Wimps?

“Is it ok if I vent a little today? I’ve built up a little frustration over the past couple of months and I just need a pressure release. Will you let me do it?

 

As you may be aware I have started a varsity football program at a local Christian High School. Although I vowed to myself that I would never return to prowling the sidelines when I walked away from public education in 2000,the opportunity to train young males to be men was something I could not, in good conscience, run from.

 

Not all males are men. I hope you understand that. Especially convincing is the evidence I have garnered recently that Christian males in particular are the least manly.

 

ReadMore:

Why Are Christian Men Such Wimps?

 


How Shall We Tell The Children? 

 "And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth." Isaiah 2:19 (KJV)

How Shall We Tell The Children eBook cover image

"But how shall we tell the children? We probably won't tell them; the knowledge would be too dangerous to the "system" we have developed to ensure our own preservation. As long as they will continue to work in order to support, and in order to die in, for, and because of our system, we will allow as many of them who can do so, to survive until we have lived out our lives in the manner to which we have become accustomed. It has always worked before, so maybe it will continue to work long enough to keep me comfortable until I die. It is a gamble in which the odds are becoming increasingly negative."

How To Get A FREE Copy>>> How Shall We Tell The Children eBook 


How The World Really Works, by Alan Jones 

How The World Really Works cover image

Get A FREE Copy>>> How The World Really Works eBook

The picture which Alan Jones paints in this book is one which you must understand if your efforts in truly understanding how the world REALLY works are ever to amount to anything. We paint that picture by presenting an ordered set of book reviews which identify our enemies and describe the primary strategies and actions which they have taken against us over the last 100 years or so. Our goal in writing the book was to provide an accurate portrayal of that picture within the covers of a single moderate- length book. The 12 chapter titles of How The World Really Works are ... the names of the books being reviewed.

How To Get A FREE Copy>>> How The World Really Works eBook


Secrecy or Freedom, by Alan Jones 

Secrecy or Freedom ebook cover

Get A FREE Copy>>> Secrecy or Freedom eBook

This is Alan Jones' most recent book, published in April, 2001. While countless books have been written revealing yet one more outrage which the New World Order folks have perpetrated on us, Jones has resolved on an entirely different purpose: to define a way of mounting a counterattack on those elites, and not just delay their next victory, but destroy their viability, and take back our country and the world for middle class citizens everywhere. In the same way that an army or a football team will surely lose in the long run if it has only a defense and no offense, we too shall lose our world to the elites if we fail to marshal our resources, mount a viable offense against them, and reduce their present dominance of public affairs to a nullity. To that end, this book goes right back into history to discover their origin, their modus operandi, their strengths, and most importantly, their weaknesses. The exercise has been successful, and reveals a crucial weakness which may readily be exploited. We will, in this web page, outline our search, our major findings, and finally a plan of action to save our country for the benefit, we hope, of a great number of future generations of free citizens. Our historical look will go back 2000 years and beyond. Our sources are not generally well known, are not Nobel prize- winning historians, but nevertheless are historical truth seekers whose researches are uniquely valuable. Each of the chapters of Secrecy or Freedom? carries the title of the historical work which is reviewed in that chapter. In this web page, we will give you an inkling of what is covered in each of these chapters, with the hope that these few words will lead you to order our book, carefully absorb its contents, and then join in our proposed action plan to take back our country.

How To Get A FREE Copy>>> Secrecy or Freedom eBook


How I Clobbered Every Bureaucratic Cash-Confiscatory Agency Known To Man, by Mary Croft 

You're an asset of the state. You're duped into entering the world of commerce and finance and trapped in imaginary debt bya brilliant but simple con. When you see your name written in UPPERCASE LETTERS it has a very different meaning to the one your parents gave you. This is an amazing ebook. We highly recommend it.

Click here to download


Classy Beauty, 25, Seeks Man Making $500K 

 Classy Beauty, 25, seeks man making $500M.

Reply to "Classy" Beauty,25, who advertised on Craig's List for a Man Making $500K.

The Answer ...

I read your posting with great interest and have thought meaningfully about your dilemma. I offer the following analysis of your predicament. Firstly, I'm not wasting your time, I qualify as a guy who fits your bill; that is I make more than $500K per year.

Read the Answer the "Classy" Beauty Got



"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." - George Orwell (1903-1950)



We [the Jews] infiltrated  the Roman Catholic Church right from the very beginning.

“Regarding the Jesuits, quoting Rabbi Finkelstein: “We [the Jews] infiltrated  the Roman Catholic Church right from the very beginning. Why do you think the Pope, the Cardinals and all the Bishops wear yarlmulkahs? (skullcaps) The white race never figures this out. A thousand years later the white race began to wake up ... we had to come up with a plan B ... so we formed the Jesuits. There was a nice boy, Ignatius Loyola. He started the Jesuits.” (Loyola was Jewish. Research/read the Jesuit Extreme Oath.)”

(From The Real History of the Earth. Why in Hell is All This Happening Again? by David Thatcher.)


False Flag Operations or "False flag terrorism" occurs when elements within a government stage a secret operation whereby government forces pretend to be a targeted enemy while attacking their own forces or people. The attack is then falsely blamed on the enemy in order to justify going to war against that enemy.

False Flag Operations


John Taylor Gatto's "The Underground History of American Education"

"If we ever needed a battering ram to pull down the evil structure of compulsory public schooling, this book should be able to do the job. The book calls for a revolution. But not a violent one. It can be won easily and peaceably by merely taking the kids out of the public schools. It's still legal to do so. That would change America radically. But the pessimists will say that most parents are too brain-dead to care what goes on in the public schools. Those parents who do care have already gotten their kids out and are homeschooling them. But we know that every day more and more parents are beginning to see the light. That's encouraging." (Samuel L. Blumenfeld)

Read more: 
John Taylor Gatto


Democracy Is An Illusion 

"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one perhaps of the Right, and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can 'throw the rascals out' at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy... But either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor,approximately the same policies". (Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966, p. 1247-48)

Read more >>
Democracy Is An Illusion


Why Men are So Attracted to Foreign Women 

Have you ever wondered why men are so attracted to foreign (non-Western) women? Have you heard from a friend lately that her ex fiancee is now looking for a Russian bride or that a male relative is engaged to a Filipina? And, do you scoff at that and put it down to these men being 'desperate' and those women as just wanting a ticket into the country?


Why You Shouldn't Get Involved With a Married Man [or Woman]
 
Here's a question that's been sent to me recently about a woman wondering if she should get involved with a married man. Here's my reply telling her why you shouldn't get involved with a married man! This woman's name has been changed to remain anonymous.


What You Should Know About Swine Flu 

What You Should Know About Swine Flu eBook cover image

"These are challenging times and we need to stay calm and think things through - not just panic and react. Fear, panic and emotional reaction got us into this mess and it is certainly not going to get us out of it.

We also need to realise - here, now - that  we have long crossed the line into a fully-fledged  fascist dictatorship. It has hidden itself to most people this far, but it is about to lift the veil.

It is no longer an option to do nothing or passively acquiesce to authority out of fear or apathy. Or, at least, it's not if we care about our freedoms and, most importantly, those of our children and grandchildren who will have to live almost their entire lives under a global jackboot of sheer, undiluted evil.

The word 'evil' is much overused and I don't say it lightly; but we are dealing with evil in the sense that the word is the reverse of 'live'. Those behind the conspiracy to cull the human population and turn the rest into little more than computer terminals are anti-life. They have no respect for it and no empathy with those who suffer the consequences of their actions, no matter how appalling.

I have been warning of what was coming for nearly 20 years and it is not 'coming' any more - it's here. No more excuses from anyone, please. We have to deal with it. We have to draw a line in the sand and say no more.

Never was this more important than with  the conspiracy to force swine flu vaccination upon the global population. The swine flu virus was created in a laboratory to generate  mass panic with the specific intention of forcing everyone to have the vaccine. Problem-Reaction-Solution. This 'natural' swine flu virus apparently contains genes from humans, birds and pigs from several continents.

If you concoct and release a virus and then implement a clearly long-planned mass vaccin-ation programme, there can be only one sensible conclusion: swine flu is not the biggest danger here - it's the vaccine." (David Icke)

Free Download: What You Should Know About Swine Flu 



This Has to be the Definitive Report on the Vaccination Hoax.  

“The only safe vaccine is a vaccine that is never used.” – Dr. James A. Shannon. National Institutes of Health.

Are you scared when you’re told you have to vaccinate your child with 49 doses in 14 vaccines before age 6? Or are you scared at the idea of not vaccinating and so “exposing” your child to serious illnesses?

Are you scared about the school threatening you that if you don’t vaccinate you can’t enrol your child?

FEAR. That’s what all these pro-vaccine campaigns are based on. As a parent, what’s the biggest scare of all? When your child gets sick with a serious disease and you feel responsible for that. As you see, vaccine supporters couldn’t go wrong with this and developed a dogma that’s been bought over and over again over the years by people. The magic insurance policy to solve it all.

So, even if your child gets sick, at least you know you did everything you could for his/her health and vaccinated, right? But what if the very vaccination is able to cause the illness in the first place??

Could The Vaccine Hoax Be Over?

An extraordinary paper published by a courageous doctor and investigative medical researcher has dug the dirt on 30 years of secret official transcripts of meetings of UK government vaccine committees and the supposedly independent medical “experts” sitting on them with their drug industry connections.

The 45 page paper with detailed evidence can be downloaded here.

Also see the short article about this report in Issue #65a of our newsletter Last Days Watch, which is here.


Wolves in Sheep's Clothing 

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves"  (Matthew 7: 15)

Vicious wolf

"For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works." (2 Corinthians 11: 13-15)


We are Facing Orwellian, Totalitarian Slavery 
 

That's what they want to impose on us. That's the reason behind all the national identity cards, DNA data bases, surveillance cameras, GPS tracking devices in cars and trucks and cell phones, digital micro-chipping of everything from A to Z, Internet surveillance and censorship, telephone taps, body and luggage searches and scans at airports, finger printing of air travelers and bank customers, interrogations at airline boarding gates, intrusive banking regulations, and much more. The Powers That Be are branding and penning up the global "human herd" in just the same way that cattle ranchers tag their cattle herds with ear tags and fence them into feed lots to fatten them up for slaughter. The Powers That Be regard us as their livestock, as their personal property, and they are in the process of branding us, tagging us, and penning us up, so that they can manage us like cattle or swine. Our plight is that stark and simple.

 

So do you want to be a slave or free? That's the question. Because if you want to be free you're absolutely going to have to do something about it. Millions of people are going to have to go outside of their comfort zone, that's the hard truth of the matter, because the status quo is simply not remotely acceptable for people who want to live as free human beings on this planet.

 

Don't imagine that you can just vote in the next criminally rigged election and a new set of corrupt politicians will somehow magically make things better. THEY WON'T. The galling thing is that the Powers That Be have set up a global system to which they insist we assiduously adhere and obey every corrupt dictate they issue, while they themselves flagrantly flout the Constitution with impunity, and never cease massively enriching themselves and their plutocrat cronies, and rolling in corrupt luxury, at our ruinous expense.

 

This pathetic charade will continue only as long as the people permit it, because when the people declare a de facto Jubilee Year, the jig will be up. As a matter of fact, that process is already underway. It is a simple truth that unemployed people cannot service a loan, cannot pay a tax bill, and cannot pay a fine that is imposed on them for failure to do any of the foregoing. So as the unemployed rolls continue to swell, more and more people will simply refuse or fail to make credit card payments, to pay back home, automobile and student loans, and will default on furniture, appliance and pay day loans, and much more. This is already happening and the trend will increase.”

 

Read the Full Story:
Hidden in Plain Sight 

 


The Manipulated Man

The Manipulated Man book cover.


Are You Laughing Yet, or Would You Forward this Email on to a Friend or Relative? 

The Email "Are You Laughing Yet?"

Pass this very insightful email on if you think it has merit. If not then just discard it ... no one will know you did. But, if you discard this thought process, don't sit back and complain about what bad shape the world is in.


The Plain Truth About Glorious Carbon Dioxide 

"Nature is a self-regulating mechanism that dwarfs any mindless effort to 'control' the amount of CO2 produced by coal-fired utilities, steel manufacturers, autos and trucks, and gasoline fueled lawn mowers. Okay, children, let's all sit up straight at our desks. We are going to begin 2009 with a lesson about carbon dioxide (CO2)." (Alan Caruba)


The Oil, Gas and Energy Crises are Massive Hoaxes  

Lindsey Williams' book cover,

Lindsey Williams, a Baptist minister and author of the 1980's book The Energy Non-Crisis (on line) has been reporting inside information about oil price-manipulation for many years now, and generally the information has been accurate.

According to Pastor Williams, the Globalists are fomenting rebellion as an excuse to raise the oil prices to $150-200 a barrel.

Pastor Williams revealed in his book that the US has huge untapped oil reserves that the elites have known about for decades. After manipulating the oil prices  to around $200 a barrel, we will finally see these US oil reserves opened for production.

The Oil, Gas and Energy Crises are Massive Hoaxes


"Anyone not preaching coming out of the state church and the government system is a false prophet."(Neal King, Iron-Clay.com)


Christ's Flag is The Union Jack 

The Union Jack.

The Union Jack

The Australian and New Zealand flags go back much further than the 200 years you probably are aware of. Notice the most prominent symbol on all these flags is the eight-pointed cross. This 8 pointed cross consists of two different four pointed crosses (the x and the + crosses) that are superimposed!

The Australian National Flag.

Australian Flag

The New Zealand National Flag.

New Zealand Flag

Their heraldic  symbolism goes back 3,500 years; to the time of Moses and Joshua, the great Israelite (not Jewish) Military-Commanders.

The vertical cross on the flag is for the Great Cross that is formed at critical times in the Galaxy, and this is called the Galactic Cross. T  he diagonal cross stands for the Earth Cross. The Earth cross is the cross of the Zodiac, while the Galactic Cross is the intersection of the Galactic Equator with the Ecliptic and its perpendicular axis.

Four times during the Great Year (which is 25,920 years long)--i.e. every 6,480 years--the Earth Cross aligns with the Galactic Cross to form a single four-pointed cross in the sky. This is what will occur on December 21, 2012, which will herald the end of the "Dark Cycle."

For more information download Part I and Part II of Jan Wicherink's "Great Celestial Conjunction Crosses" reports.  These reports are also in our free book The Prophet Daniel and December 21, 2012.

The red on the flag stands for human blood, and the white stands for the Birthright Holy Spirit, which does the work of redemption (i.e. the born-again process), thus changing a sinful human being into a true blue-blood (i.e. the Elect). Blue is the colour of Sirius, and the Creator God of ancient Khemit (Egypt) known as Ptah (who we call God the Father). In this process it is important to know that there are 216 bones in the human body, and the blood is actually made in the bones!

Furthermore, the science of Khemitology reveals that Ptah was referred to as “He Who Comes from the Blue,” and was always depicted with a blue head covering or with blue skin.

What race was Ptah depicted as?

In the depictions of Ptah from ancient Khemit (the proper name for ancient Egypt) “Ptah is usually depicted with Asian eyes, a Caucasian nose, and Negroid lips. He apparently represents many races as the ‘Father’ or progenitor race from Sirius. Ptah became known as Dyas or Zeus to the Greeks, and later ‘pater’ (father) to the Romans: Ptah, Pater, ‘Father Race.’” (Source: Stephen S Mehler’s The Land of Osiris: An Introduction to Khemitology, Adventures Unlimited Press, 2001, p. 180)

It is also noteworthy that Egyptologist’s word for the bright star Sirius is Sopdet (Sp.dt). According to the science of Khemitology, the Egyptologists have it wrong (and I would heartily agree), and the word should be S.pth, which is Sa-Ptah, “The Birthplace of Ptah.” Thus we see the clear connection between God the Father and the eighth planet of the Solar System, the bright star Sirius.

For more information on the names of the Messiah and God the Father, and these flags, see our free book The God Messiah Worships.


The Heraldic Symbolism of the Unicorn on the British Coat-of-Arms

British coat of arms.

The British Coat-of-Arms is the Coat-of-Arms of the 12 tribed Kingdom of Israel and Christ their Rightful KING.

The TRUE Israel People have, on their "Coat-of-Arms", a Lion and a Unicorn which is shown as a white horse "rampant" with one horn. The amber Lion "rampant" on the left-side is the emblem of the two-tribed "House of Judah" and the Unicorn or white Wild-Ox "rampant" on the right-side is the emblem of the ten-tribed "House of Israel", collectively making the 12-tribed "Kingdom of Israel".

The word British is Hebrew. It means "the People of the Covenant" or in other words "the People Israel", whose written Constitution; under that Covenant, that they have rejected to their own loss; is written in the Bible (Israel's Book) that they still swear on to tell the Truth, but whose Constitution, under which there are no poor people, is then foolishly rejected by almost everyone, in favour of inferior and unjust, man-made laws and economics which cause poverty and therefore also crime brought about by deprivation and desperation.

Read More.

Compare the imposter Antichrist's Coat-of-arms (below) ...

The Antichrist's coat-of-arms.

The lion facing the East stands for the Zodiacal Sign of Leo, the 12th Sign in the Birthright Zodiac. The unicorn stands for the Constellation of Pegasus in the Zodiacal Sign of Aquarius. Both animals are holding the Shield of Salvation, or the Shield of Damnation, depending upon your attitude to God and your way of life, whether you are in rebellion or submission.

Consequently the Lion stands for the White Crown of Upper Egypt, while the Unicorn stands for the Red Crown of Lower Egypt. While the symbols may have changed, the meaning has remained the same over the Millenia.


The Bible is Not a Jewish Book 

The statement is commonly made, even by those who should know better, that “we Christians owe a debt to the Jews, for we got our Bible, and our religion, from them.” While many people have been deceived into believing this, it is completely false.  Part of the mistake comes from the complete confusion in the minds of nearly all people as to just what they mean by “Jew.” Are they referring to people of a certain race? Or people of a certain religion? For the two are not the same.  There are in Africa today some pure-blooded Negroes who are Jews by religion and there are in China today some pure-blooded Mongolians who are Jews by religion. Likewise, there are some people today who are racially of the stock we know as Jews, but who have been converted to other religions.

Read the Full Article:
The Bible is Not a Jewish Book


How Many Men are Necessary to Change a Crime into a Virtue? 

“In another pamphlet, entitled How Many Men are Necessary to Change a Crime into a Virtue? Adin Ballou [another champion of non-resistance] says: ‘One man may not kill. lf he kills a fellow-creature, he is a murderer. lf two, ten, a hundred men do so, they, too, are murderers. But a government or a nation may kill as many men as it chooses, and that will not be murder, but a great and noble action. Only gather the people together on a large scale, and a battle of ten thousand men becomes an innocent action. But precisely how many people must there be to make it so?- that is the question. One man cannot plunder and pillage, but a whole nation can. But precisely how many are needed to make it permissible? Why is it that one man, ten, a hundred, may not break the law of God, but a great number may?” (Quoted in Leo Tolstoy’s book, The Kingdom of Heaven Is Within You, p. 6.)


"Don't think for a moment you are going to vote the Illuminati out of office. They control the major and minor political parties. They control the process of government, they control the process of information flow, they control the process of creating money and finally they control Christendom. (However, God controls the hearts of His people.)" (From The Top 13 illuminati Bloodlines, by Fritz Springmeier)
Woe Unto You Lawyers! (and Policemen) 

"Of all the specialized skills abroad in the world today, the average man knows least about the one that affects him most – about the thing that lawyers call The Law. A man who will discourse at length about the latest cure for streptococci infection or describe in detail his allergic symptoms cannot begin to tell you what happened to him legally – and plenty did – when he got married. A man who would not dream of buying a car without an intricate and illustrated description of its mechanical workings will sign a lease without knowing what more than four of its forty-four clauses mean or why they are there. A man who will not hesitate to criticize or disagree with a trained economist or an expert in any one of a dozen fields of learning will follow, unquestioning and meek, whatever advice his lawyer gives him. Normal human skepticism and curiosity seem to vanish entirely whenever the layman encounters The Law.

There are several reasons for this mass submission, One is the average man’s fear of the unknown – and of policemen."



“Telling the story of the rise of Communism [Nazarene Remnant comment: This term Communism needs to be replaced by the word Satanism, because we now know that this term was chosen to hide the underlying devotion to Satan that drives these people. End NR comment] means revealing the histories of the worst of the criminals involved at the time. But this is necessary, for without knowledge of the secrets of evil, we cannot properly develop the good, either. As the Swedish philosopher Henry T. Laurency wrote: ‘Only he who knows evil knows good.’ 
Then we shall appreciate goodness above everything else on earth.Then we may really be able to welcome the truth, even if it is frightening and dismiss lies, even if they are pleasant.” (Juri Lina, Under the Sign of the Scorpion, p. 63)