Make Love Not War - Tolstoy Law of Love

Sacredstar

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Essex, UK
Lunamoth inspired my interest in Tolstoy and in a search I found this website and loved this solution to the war!

The most famous of the anti-war plays is Lysistrata (411 BC) in which the lady of that name organizes the women of Athens and Sparta to go on strike until a peace treaty is concluded. Lysistrata gets the women to take a vow to refrain from willingly granting any sexual favors to their husbands. The women take over the state treasury at the Acropolis. To speed the plot along the wives and mistresses adorn themselves in transparent gowns to seduce the men. The men of Athens and Sparta become sexually aroused and not being granted any satisfaction they impatiently arrange a hasty peace treaty. The play is a poignant and ribald representation of the power of women to correct the follies of an aggressive masculine world by making a choice of the popular slogan - "Make love not war."
       
I knew nothing about Leo Tolstoy and that he was a Christian and had written on the 'Law of Love and Non-Violence, a friendship with Gandhi.

It is long read but well worth it.

http://www.san.beck.org/WP18-Tolstoy.html

What is written here warmed my Christ heart.

being love

kim xx
 
Kindest Regards, Star!

"Make love not war." Sounds great when you are trying to seduce your lover. But "cockroach diplomacy" has its own pitfalls, like overpopulation and death by starvation.
 
Thanks for the great link, SStar. I'm still working my way through The Kingdom of God Is within You. Guess I need to spend less time online and more time reading. :) By the way, the other reads at the bottom of that page also promise to be awsome.

Hello, Juantoo3! OK, now you are going to have to explain cockroach diplomacy and how it leads to starvation etc.. Do you mean to say that war is a necessary population thinner?? [luna puts on the gloves].

peace,
lunamoth
 
Dear Lunamoth yes I agree wonderful website.

Seems it will be down to the feminine principles of unconditional love and compassion to bring peace to earth.

Dear juantoo3

I like this message received from two listeners.


The Ideal Man

Draw nigh, shows off they feet, in silent awe and adoration.
Draw nigh, as Moses drew near to the burning bush.
I give you the loving intimacy of a friend, but I AM God too,
And the wonder of our intercourse, the miracle of intimacy with me,
Will mean the more to you, if sometimes you see the majestic figure of the Son of God.

Draw nigh in the utter confidence that is the sublimest prayer.
Draw nigh. No far-off pleading, even to a God clothed with majesty of fire.
Draw nigh. Draw nigh, not as a suppliant, but as a listener.
I am the supplient, as I make known to you my wishes.
For this majestic GOD is brother too, longing intensely that you should serve your brother-man, and longing,
even more intensely, to be true of that vision that he has of you.

You speak of your fellow man as disappointing you,
As falling short of the ideal you had of him.
But what of me?
For every man there is the ideal man I see in him.
The man he could be, the man I would have him be.
Judge of my heart when he fails to fulfil that promise.
The disappointments of man may be great and many,
they are nothing as compared to my disappointments.
Remember this, and strive to be the friend I see in my vision of you.

GOD Calling edited by A.J. Russell

He certainly as a way of seducing us to be like him.

blessings in abundance

Kim xx
 
The Yin and the Yang

The Scarab Beetle was a representation in symbology of GOD of creation in ancient egypt. In Africa, in the Congo, it is a lunar symbol of eternal renewal.

This links explains a lot, synchroncity indeed.

Discover How God Delivers From Life's Tight Corners

Exodus 7:7-9:12    Successful miraculous deliverance from the bondages of addictions, dictators or deceivers often begins with someone being willing to take a risk for God.

http://www.newhope.bc.ca/01-12-30.htm

being love

kim xx
 
Sacredstar said:
Seems it will be down to the feminine principles of unconditional love and compassion to bring peace to earth.

Well, women do not have the monopoly on love and compassion, nor men the monopoly on war-mindedness.

What do you hope to gain by calling things feminine or masculine?

lunamoth
 
Kindest Regards, lunamoth!
lunamoth said:
Hello, Juantoo3! OK, now you are going to have to explain cockroach diplomacy and how it leads to starvation etc.. Do you mean to say that war is a necessary population thinner?? [luna puts on the gloves].

peace,
lunamoth
I would hope you know by now I love you as a sister and value your contributions. I suspect you may not agree with me, and I have no problem with that.

I have had a very eloquent response running through my head for the last two days, but I am too strapped for time to properly post. The gist centers on the importance of warriors to all cultures across time and around the world, from tribal warriors such as the Native Americans and Japanese Samurai, to modern service men and women of all nations. Without them, those who espouse passivity have no room to hold such a position. The trite little saying, "make love, not war" seems to me to belittle the contributions of warriors to society and culture at large. Those contributions are not to be lightly dismissed, in my view. Even in the most maternal societies, warriors still held a very important position, for example the Celts and the reign of Bodicea in fighting the Roman occupation of Britain.

So, I can only hope this brief sustains my point. Perhaps I can return to it later. Until then, peace. Peace held by strength and defended with honor and dignity, to the last breath.

PS, do you find it at all ironic, putting on the gloves to defend making love instead of war? That is, defending passivity with aggression? ;)
 
juantoo3 said:
PS, do you find it at all ironic, putting on the gloves to defend making love instead of war? That is, defending passivity with aggression? ;)

Hello good friend Juantoo3! Hahaha--I knew you would catch that one. No worries, it is only a figure of speech. I will not harm one hair on your head. :D

I'm looking forward to what you have to say and hope you can find time to return to this thread. I recall that we touched on this before in another thread, something (I think I even started it) about using passive resistance against nations.

Actually, I have been thinking very hard about Tolstoy's extreme non-resitance to evil. I don't think that I agree with him, although I am a peacenik. I still have not finished the book (The Kingdom of God Is within You--quite dry through the middle although it is addressing exactly the points you alluded to. Maybe I should wait for you post so I can glean discussion points as I complete the book!). Anyway, what I gather so far is that Tolstoy interpretted Jesus' teachings to say that all killing, even in war, is murder. He believed that the only way for mankind to be "cured" of war is for individuals to decide not to take up arms against others, to resist enlistment in the military, to refuse to fight. In fact he more or less reduced Christ's message to this single idea. I'm coming to the mind that any attempt to reduce Christ's teaching to a single idea, whether it is compassion, or non-violence, or forgiveness, or whatever is your favorite, is to cut ourselves off from the richness and fullness of His Word.

I, too, respect and support our service men and women. The concept of a just war is beyond me, but I know sometimes evil actions must be suppressed by force. Could other ways, other means besides the horror of war be used to put down an abomination such as the Holocaust? I don't think so in this age. We are in a fallen world, although that is no excuse not to try to change things.

I actually believe that there is another, better cure for war. It is not simple like make love not war. It is working to establish social and economic justice across the globe. It's also going to take a lot more unity and cooperation between nations, whether the USA likes it or not.

"My country is the world; my countrymen are mankind."
William Lloyd Garrison (1838, Declaration of Sentiments)

Anyway, hope to hear more from you soon.

lunamoth
 
Kindest Regards, lunamoth!
lunamoth said:
I actually believe that there is another, better cure for war. It is not simple like make love not war. It is working to establish social and economic justice across the globe. It's also going to take a lot more unity and cooperation between nations, whether the USA likes it or not.
Ah!, but therein lies a double edged sword! The "one-world" governmental and economic system Christians are specifically warned against...

I have so much to say, I hope to return soon.

Shalom!
 
I can see this is going to be an interesting discussion, if you can find the time.

Just for fun:

Zor and Zam

By Bill Chadwick and John Chadwick


The king of Zor, he called for war
And the king of Zam, he answered.
They fashioned their weapons one upon one
Ton upon ton, they called for war at the rise of the sun.

Out went the call to one and to all
That echoed and rolled like the thunder.
Trumpets and drums, roar upon roar
More upon more.
Rolling the call of "Come now to war."

Throughout the night they fashioned their might
With right on the side of the mighty.
They puzzled their minds plan upon plan
Man upon man
And at dying of dawn the great war began.

They met on the battlefield banner in hand.
They looked out across the vacant land.
And they counted the missing, one upon one,
None upon none.
The war it was over before it begun.

Two little kings playing a game.
They gave a war and nobody came.
And nobody came.
And nobody came.
And nobody came.
And nobody came.
[repeat and fade]

lunamoth
 
St. Augustine's Just War

Kindest Regards, all!

Only by popular demand am I supplying this from a previous discussion I had elsewhere. I steadfastly refuse to discuss the current events in Iraq.

"Having only heard of Augustine's Just War writings second hand in editorials, I persuaded myself to look into the matter. Augustine apparently was a very prolific writer, and I never did find the specific writing to which his Just War proposals were attributed. I did find numerous references and commentaries, but not his specific work. Since certain attributes seem relatively universal, I will accept for the moment and for the sake of argument those attributes are genuinely his.

Jus ad Bellum, justice in resort to war, consists of: Right Authority, Just Cause, Right Intention, Last Resort, Proportionality, Reasonable Hope, Relative Justice, and Open Declaration. These are balanced with Jus in Bello, justice in the conduct of war: Discrimination and Proportionality.

I also confirmed that Augustine lived and taught during the time the (Western) Roman Empire was crumbling. One commentator suggested that "Christian pacifism" contributed to the demise of that empire. My original point was that Augustine was attempting to establish (successfully) political legitimacy for the fledgling Catholic church. Augustine's writings were dominated by concerns of "sinful nature", and rightly so considering his position.

Augustine's designs were later expanded upon by Thomas Aquinas, and the rest is history.

I cannot help but wonder, given the Catholic Church's quest for political supremacy throughout the Dark Ages of Western history and beyond, our political motivations for fulfilling such requirements. For insurance of conducting warfare in a moral, noble and honorable way? Perhaps I may be mistaken, but it seems religion is not required for that. Or more properly, satisfying religious authority is not required to conduct a moral and honorable war. I make this statement in light of the present state of the world, and warfare in particular. Augustine could not humanly foresee weapons that can devastate entire populations. Some in the wink of an eye.

War is not always conducted by Augustine's rules of engagement. Indeed, much of WWII was not. Civilian populations were frequently targeted. I cannot say with certainty who began that process, but by the time of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it was accepted and established practice on both sides. Some commentators called this "necessity". I would be inclined to agree in principle, only because the warfare by that time was so prolific, and the destruction so indiscriminate, that "collateral" civilian casualties became an accepted part of the process. The current conflict in Iraq offers an opportunity to "minimize" civilian casualties, brought about predominantly by the development of precision munitions. I say minimize, because war by its nature exposes civilians to risk. This should serve as a warning as well to us, living comfortably and casually as we do. We are at risk here as well, from clandestine threats by combatants who do not subscribe to Augustine's views.

When all is said and done, we will know whether or not this has truly been a "Just War". Until then, we can only hope and pray. Support our Nation, support our president, support our troops, and pray (in earnest!) for the people of Iraq."
 
Two little kings playing a game.
They gave a war and nobody came.
And nobody came.
And nobody came.
And nobody came.
And nobody came.
[repeat and fade]


oh my goodness,,,this was the funniest thing to me
two little kings.:D :D :D
 
"There will be no peace on earth as long as we allow enemy pictures within us." Sabine Lichtenfels

It is my truth that Jesus understood group consciousness and how what we think and believe manifests the outcomes hence why he was so stringent about 'love one's enemies' and 'turning the other cheek' for he knew that nobody could kill the soul because it is eternal.

What happened in Germany could have been avoided if people took off the blindfolds and ear muffs, the rest of the world knew for six years but yet took no action until they themselves were threatened, more of I'm alright jack'. But yet we have learnt from this atrocity in Europe and moved quickly to resolve the civil war of ethic cleansing in Yugoslavia, for me this was justice, to come between people who are slaughtering each other for human sacrifice is satanic and against the commandment of GOD 'Thou shall not kill'.

Much easier now with the internet and modern communications to discover an injustice and crimes agaisnt humanity quickly. So it is much easier for us to intervene with peace talks very early in the confrontations and disputes so that we can build bridges and not destroy them.

Would Jesus go to war?

We all know in our hearts that he would not.

Would he lay down his life as a human shield to save others?

We all know in our Christ hearts that yes he would.

Our Prince of Peace, King of Earth and the Master of Compassion.

Faith is one thing but understanding the faith is very different and I feel that Tolstoy really understood Christ and the teachings of this loving understanding.

Hand in hand, side by side, in the front line creates the Kingdom of Love.

Love beyond measure


Kim xx
 
Kindest Regards!

I do not presume to know what my Lord or my God might or might not do, say or think. In my mind, that is the height of presumption, bordering on blasphemy.

What I can and will say is that it has taken me almost 25 years to come to the point of realization I am at now. A "man of war" can still be a "man of God." And I thank God for this, and for them. Passivism is no pre-requisite to get to heaven, I need only point to the military man Joshua (who Jesus is named after!). And what of the military man and king, David? (*I might also add, that according to prophetic scripture, when Jesus returns with His army of angels to reclaim the earth, it will be a military action to remove those who stand against Him!) What God approves of and asks for is action, specifically right action. Military people seem better able to get the job done in my estimation than a bunch of cry babies lying around boo-hooing about the state of the world and doing nothing about it. Military people have an entirely different frame of mind, an awareness of how short life is and how brutal it can sometimes be, an experience that pacifists can only guess at. Military people make things happen. Pacisfists, in the political sense, don't do anything but point fingers. When it comes to action vs. non-action, I'll take action any day. :)

So, we have a dichotomy. Yes, we are asked to be a peaceful people. But we are also asked to take action to correct wrongs, and there are times when that action takes the form of non-peaceful action. Peace is only maintained in our present state and epoch by strength, specifically the strength of the military. The wise do not war for the sake of making war, the wise war only of necessity, and are fully prepared for the moment when necessity happens. I consider this practical reality.
 
Last edited:
Ah!, but therein lies a double edged sword! The "one-world" governmental and economic system Christians are specifically warned against...

I have so much to say, I hope to return soon.

Shalom!
this is true. a one world religious, political and economic system is what we would like to think will work, however I see great deception and a false sense of peace in this...What I think we will see is authority given to 'states', but the people themselves will not be protected by the laws passed. Economics is always first, then political and the religions will give there power to the first and the second.
We have been warned that these things must come to pass.
I don't expect a lot of people to see this as it is happening, because we are in the middle of the process right now and many people are oblivious.
(1Thessalonians 5:2,3)

when i hear the sound of marching, hear the sound of battle cry...
then I know my Lord is coming,
I can hear the sounds of His coming everywhere
Getting louder and louder each day
and they crescendo, until, that great and final sound!
when the trumpet shall call me away.
 
juantoo3 said:
So, we have a dichotomy. Yes, we are asked to be a peaceful people. But we are also asked to take action to correct wrongs, and there are times when that action takes the form of non-peaceful action. Peace is only maintained in our present state and epoch by strength, specifically the strength of the military. The wise do not war for the sake of making war, the wise war only of necessity, and are fully prepared for the moment when necessity happens. I consider this practical reality.

Dear Juantoo3,

I appreciate the information you posted aabout the concept of Just War. I've heard the term bandied about and never knew all the specific criteria. Stipulating that we are not now living in a time when war can be eliminated overnight I actually think we are in pretty good agreement. However, I do hold out hope for the day when we can put our weapons aside.

1. I believe I said above that military intervention is sometimes needed to stop violence, primarily violence between nations or large groups. Intervention is different than initiating a war and the distinction is going to be fuzzy due to different points of view.

2. Being a pacifist (and I am not sure I qualify for this label) does not mean inaction and hand-wringing. It might mean putting your life on the line to go stand with those being oppressed or violated. It might mean going to war but not taking up arms, but a medical bag instead. It might mean risking the scorn of your neighbors or even jail to stand by your beliefs. It does not mean denigrating our service men and women or undermining their efforts.

3. I don't have power over armies (thank God, and God be with those who do). I can choose whether or not to support a military action taken by my government based on the best of my understanding of the situation. I might choose to enlist myself, depending on the situation. I might choose to serve in a different manner (medic, cook) or support on the homefront. WWJD? Perhaps I also shouldn't presume since He did not speak directly about nation-nation combat, but to me it is a safe bet that He would intervene against injustice. I can protest (beforehand) against wars I do not think to be justified. How will I know for sure, given the complexities of the world and the lack of information most of us have? I won't. The road to perdition may be paved with good intentions but for now that is all I have, except of course my faith in God.

4. About the "two-edged sword" of a "one-world government," oh what a can of worms of a discussion that is. I'm going to go look at the old thread on this and see if it's worth bringing up again. I'd take the position that some form of future world governance is not only likely and necessary, but also considered righteous in the Bible.
Isaiah 9:5-7 (New International Version)

5 Every warrior's boot used in battle
and every garment rolled in blood
will be destined for burning,
will be fuel for the fire.
6 For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, [a] Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign on David's throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.
The zeal of the LORD Almighty
will accomplish this.

Having said this, it does not mean that there must be a single government and single economy, but more likely that there will be better agreements and cooperation between nations, far short of a World Republic.

I do not believe war has to be the eternal lot for mankind.

7 How beautiful on the mountains
are the feet of those who bring good news,
who proclaim peace,
who bring good tidings,
who proclaim salvation,
who say to Zion,
"Your God reigns!"

8 Listen! Your watchmen lift up their voices;
together they shout for joy.
When the LORD returns to Zion,
they will see it with their own eyes.

(Isaiah 52:7-8)

returning your brotherly/sisterly love,
lunamoth
 
I just perused the One World Governemnt Thread quickly. I see that a main point being argued is the huge potential for abuse a world government would hold. I am not naive (well, not totally :) ) and admit that a world government could make things worse rather than better. It almost certainly would mean some growing pains for the rich nations of today. But it is not inevitable that a world government will be bad. Like other institutions, scientific, political, religious, the instument itself is not inherently evil or good. Even in Revelations two governments are alluded to, if I remember correctly, one based in greed and the other in justice. I also remember which one prevailed.

Boy, time to get off the soapbox and throw it away! Apologies!

lunamoth
 
wonderful posts

People power and emotive social evolution will come to be
GOD's flock is rising inspired by the heart of GOD
I could accept the UN as a world government
One planet, one people, one heart.

being love

kim xx
 
Isa. ii. 4. "And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plow-shares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." 
 
Back
Top