<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What Is It Good For? Nonviolence In A Violent World: Part IV</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/</link>
	<description>amiable. anglican. awesome.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:48:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: children of light, children of day &#171; latter day satyagraha</title>
		<link>http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/#comment-6064</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[children of light, children of day &#171; latter day satyagraha]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 10:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theophiliacs.com/?p=1354#comment-6064</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] touched on this in my comments in Part IV of this series. According to Matt. 5, nonviolent disciples of Jesus SHOULD EXPECT persecution [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] touched on this in my comments in Part IV of this series. According to Matt. 5, nonviolent disciples of Jesus SHOULD EXPECT persecution [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: doshoe</title>
		<link>http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/#comment-812</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[doshoe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2009 01:30:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theophiliacs.com/?p=1354#comment-812</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DRF~

Any relation to Charles and Daniel Fuller? Fuller Theological?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DRF~</p>
<p>Any relation to Charles and Daniel Fuller? Fuller Theological?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: adhunt</title>
		<link>http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/#comment-808</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[adhunt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:23:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theophiliacs.com/?p=1354#comment-808</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[D.R.Fuller III,

I think that is even a part of what Tolkien attempted to communicate by the mechanization of war in his Lord of the Rings.  It gave expression to what he felt about his service in the Great War.  To mechanize it is to make it impersonal and therefore so much easier and immoral.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>D.R.Fuller III,</p>
<p>I think that is even a part of what Tolkien attempted to communicate by the mechanization of war in his Lord of the Rings.  It gave expression to what he felt about his service in the Great War.  To mechanize it is to make it impersonal and therefore so much easier and immoral.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: D. R. Fuller III</title>
		<link>http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/#comment-805</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[D. R. Fuller III]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:42:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theophiliacs.com/?p=1354#comment-805</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A central flaw with the JWT is its current inability to adequately discriminate between a just or unjust war; not because its tools and questions have gone awry and become distorted and unusable (although this is what has happened overall in its application when slimy politicians borrow its rhetoric), rather, it has everything to do with the indiscriminate and omnivorous nature of modern warfare -- impersonal and imprecise airplane bombing, economic sanctions that intentionally target non-combatant, nuclear weaponry by definition is unable to make citizen v. soldier distinction (even the manufacturing of nuclear weapons is a suicidal risk to the country that develops them -- that makes a &#039;just&#039; war an impossibility.

Augustine was not creating an ethic for a nation that had the capability of wiping Africa off the face of the earth with one push of a button. 

I have read that the economic sanctions applied to Iraq before the 2003 US-invasion had the unfortunate and tragic result of killing thousands of people even before the actual combat was underway.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A central flaw with the JWT is its current inability to adequately discriminate between a just or unjust war; not because its tools and questions have gone awry and become distorted and unusable (although this is what has happened overall in its application when slimy politicians borrow its rhetoric), rather, it has everything to do with the indiscriminate and omnivorous nature of modern warfare &#8212; impersonal and imprecise airplane bombing, economic sanctions that intentionally target non-combatant, nuclear weaponry by definition is unable to make citizen v. soldier distinction (even the manufacturing of nuclear weapons is a suicidal risk to the country that develops them &#8212; that makes a &#8216;just&#8217; war an impossibility.</p>
<p>Augustine was not creating an ethic for a nation that had the capability of wiping Africa off the face of the earth with one push of a button. </p>
<p>I have read that the economic sanctions applied to Iraq before the 2003 US-invasion had the unfortunate and tragic result of killing thousands of people even before the actual combat was underway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony David Jacques</title>
		<link>http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/#comment-778</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anthony David Jacques]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:25:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theophiliacs.com/?p=1354#comment-778</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reed, 

Yeah, that&#039;s the Missus. She&#039;s incurably east coast, therefore blunt, but it&#039;s something you get used to. Hell, by now it&#039;s one of the things I love most about her. 

We&#039;ll keep reading to see how you wrap this up.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reed, </p>
<p>Yeah, that&#8217;s the Missus. She&#8217;s incurably east coast, therefore blunt, but it&#8217;s something you get used to. Hell, by now it&#8217;s one of the things I love most about her. </p>
<p>We&#8217;ll keep reading to see how you wrap this up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jhgharineh</title>
		<link>http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/#comment-773</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jhgharineh]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:27:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theophiliacs.com/?p=1354#comment-773</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First of all I must say that I am incredibly pleased that Julia decided to join our conversation. It has been a long battle for me an Tony to get our wives involved in our debates. Secondly, I would like to respond to Tony&#039;s first point which was somewhat side stepped by Reed. 

Tony I think that you hypothetical assumes a lack of faith. I believe that the Christian is called to extreme &quot;pacifism&quot; because of faith that God is in control. Look at Jesus for an example. It was quite logical for him to assume that the probable conclusion to his death on the cross would be an annihilation of his message. After all it seems he was leaving his message in less than capable hands. However, he seems to have acted out of a strong conviction that God would oversee the continuation of his message.If one can surmize, as Reed has, that the New Testament ethic is one of peace not violence, then the Christian response should be in spite of the seeming logical failure of the position.

Also I would like to point out that Gahndi lived out much of the pacifistic ideas that we throw out, in a very practical way. Everyone said that he would fail and that his ideology would be killed by those who were willing to fight for the opposite view. While it ultimately cost him his life, it ended up working. He never picked up a gun to fight for peace. He stood radically in defiance of human logic which told him to resort to violence. He proved it can work. It seems that violence to stop violence is often the easy approach. But it never works. We as Christians are called to a more radical approach. Fight violence with kindness. Stand firm but do not attack. Fighting fire with fire will never work. To truly bring about a broad incarntion of the kingdom of God radical pacifism is the only solution.

Jeremy]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all I must say that I am incredibly pleased that Julia decided to join our conversation. It has been a long battle for me an Tony to get our wives involved in our debates. Secondly, I would like to respond to Tony&#8217;s first point which was somewhat side stepped by Reed. </p>
<p>Tony I think that you hypothetical assumes a lack of faith. I believe that the Christian is called to extreme &#8220;pacifism&#8221; because of faith that God is in control. Look at Jesus for an example. It was quite logical for him to assume that the probable conclusion to his death on the cross would be an annihilation of his message. After all it seems he was leaving his message in less than capable hands. However, he seems to have acted out of a strong conviction that God would oversee the continuation of his message.If one can surmize, as Reed has, that the New Testament ethic is one of peace not violence, then the Christian response should be in spite of the seeming logical failure of the position.</p>
<p>Also I would like to point out that Gahndi lived out much of the pacifistic ideas that we throw out, in a very practical way. Everyone said that he would fail and that his ideology would be killed by those who were willing to fight for the opposite view. While it ultimately cost him his life, it ended up working. He never picked up a gun to fight for peace. He stood radically in defiance of human logic which told him to resort to violence. He proved it can work. It seems that violence to stop violence is often the easy approach. But it never works. We as Christians are called to a more radical approach. Fight violence with kindness. Stand firm but do not attack. Fighting fire with fire will never work. To truly bring about a broad incarntion of the kingdom of God radical pacifism is the only solution.</p>
<p>Jeremy</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: toldandretold</title>
		<link>http://theophiliacs.com/2009/01/04/what-is-it-good-for-nonviolence-in-a-violent-world-part-iv/#comment-763</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[toldandretold]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 09:05:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theophiliacs.com/?p=1354#comment-763</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[well it says love is peace.


love includes the truth. It doesn&#039;t meen i love you so i will let you plunder and destroy countries. Violence can be needed to satisfy truth and is therefor needed for love. Sometimes.

peace and love,

http://toldandretold.com]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well it says love is peace.</p>
<p>love includes the truth. It doesn&#8217;t meen i love you so i will let you plunder and destroy countries. Violence can be needed to satisfy truth and is therefor needed for love. Sometimes.</p>
<p>peace and love,</p>
<p><a href="http://toldandretold.com" rel="nofollow">http://toldandretold.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

