Don't be Fooled...Iraq Is NOT State Sanctioned Murder

an acquaintance of mine posted a link on a forum related to the Iraq War and the U.S. perhaps being guilty of State Sanctioned Murder. here's the site if you wish to read the article by Laurence M. Vance.

i take some exceptions to mr. vance's stance.

first off, regarding the title "state sanctified murder":
the Ten Commandments listed in Exodus 20:1-17, were given for the good of mankind. one of these laws is in verse 13: "Thou shalt not kill." the hebrew word for "kill" is the word "murder" or "to slay someone in a violent manner unjustly." unjust, premeditated killing with the wrong motives of hatred, vengeance, greed, jealousy, etc. is murder. killing in self defense is not murder nor is executing condemned killers. now if this author or you want to debate whether this is a just war or not based on self-defense motives then that can happen but it's a judgement call and clearly this author you posted doesn't see the war as remotely justifiable. i'm not sure where common ground can be had there.

the more interesting debate is the one on "sanctioned government authority" which this author appears to have a very real issue with. he claims two verses as the absolute authority on decisions about state authority:
As a Bible-believing Christian, I reject this ghastly statolatry, and for two reasons:
* "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3).
* "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29).

first off, we need to understand that the bible deals with the role of government differently than that of an individual christian. throughout the bible, the main role of governments was to protect its people from threatening invaders and to maintain law and order within its borders. a military force did this. those who argue against our country's military position, must also ask what our nation would be like without policemen and prisons.

God set boundaries on mankind by establishing ruling authorities that would make and enforce the laws He gave. He knew degenerates would try to destroy the good...it's part of the fall of man dating from adam/eve. most folks have an issue reconciling God's law of justice with His law of mercy fulfilled ultimately by Christ. i don't b/c i'm convinced God instituted civil authorities to maintain order on earth--God uses them to restrain evil and they should be obeyed for this purpose.

i choose to use the teachings of the NT more for my life than the OT not b/c they are contrary or conveient but b/c Christ came to fullfill the law and the apostles/disciples walked with Christ and were commissioned to teach the fullfillment of the law through mercy and Christ's atonement. Paul takes time to speak on this perceived confliction b/w OT law and serving "earthly leaders" in Romans:
Romans 13:1-5 (RSV):
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
4 For he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

governments have the right to bear a sword if they want. the results may be devastating but in light of not, it could be worse...the slaughter and destruction of the innocent by the wicked. certaily there are codes we should follow and biblically, God commands those that go to war to find or at least seek peace before being the aggressor. i'd argue the u.s. did this for over 8 yrs regarding iraq. the point though is that there is a biblical explanation for why a state has the right to "sanctify" a war though that author would rather you just rely on the OT to make that judgement. he threw out acts 5:29 to tell the reader to obey God but to do so in a NT times, it requires further readings than the two verses he laid out as the premise for his piece.