Wars of aggression is such a vague moving target which
Posted on: September 20, 2016 at 12:35:27 CT
MizzouTigerz
MU
Posts:
37095
Member For:
21.74 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
is used to de-legitimize the opponents reasons for war.
For example. Funding of terrorism. Is that a legitimate reason to go to war? For some it is, for others it's a war of aggression. What if it's just a little funding, say, tens of thousands? What if it's hundreds of millions? At what point does the scale tip for one person, as opposed to the next?
People seem to think God is always anti-war. He's not. He's going to lead His troops into battle Himself. He will be aggressive in the destruction of His enemies.
So no, your catch phrase doesn't fit well in every situation.
"Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses. Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS."