Desiree Bradley (Desiree_Bradley@mindlink.bc.ca) asked us whether we
should think of the Serbs as doing God's work in Bosnia.  I've
refrained from posting, in hope that someone who is more familiar with
the OT than I would answer.  But at this point I feel I have to say
something.

Many things about this posting bother me.  I know of not the slightest
suggestion in the NT that Christians should use force to propagate the
Gospel, and the idea that we should not be concerned about the death
of Moslems violates the heart of the Gospel.  Christ died to break
down these distinctions.  In him there is neither Jew nor Greek, there
is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female.  If
Moslems do not know him, we may preach to them, but we don't kill
them.  Furthermore, the attack is between states, not religions.
There are Christians being attacked as well.  One of the towns under
attack is one of the few places where Christians and Moslems are
living together peacefully.

The precedents being suggested are from the OT.  There are in fact two
different things being alluded to.  The first is from the entry into
Canaan.  For that to be a parallel, we would need for God to have
promised this land through a prophet.  And we would need the war to be
a holy war.  There were tight constraints on behavior in those
attacks.  Any violations were likely to cause the Israelites to be
defeated.  Rape would not have been tolerated.  While the accounts in
Joshua emphasize towns that were totally destroyed, note that it was
possible for a town to make peace with the Israelites, and that once
that was done -- even when deception was involved -- they were
expected to honor it.  In contrast, there have been many violations of
agreement in this incident. I see no evidence that God has granted
Bosnia to the Serbs as a promised land, and if he had, their behavior
would have disqualified this from being a holy war.

The other OT parallel is from later, when Israel was defeated by
Assyria and Babylonia.  The prophets saw this as a judgement on Israel
for her sins.  Someone asks whether we shouldn't see this as a
judgement on the Bosnians for their sins.  This sounds like a replay
of the old claim that we shouldn't have doctors or hospitals because
illness is God's judgement.  Yes, even bad things may be used by God
for good.  That includes actions of bad people.  But that doesn't
justify them.  If you read the prophets, you find them very clear that
in attacking Israel, the Assyrians and Babylonians were acting as
*unintentional* agents of God.  Their intent was to attack God's
people, and they would be judged for it.  The fact that they were
actually carrying out God's plan didn't excuse their action.
Furthermore, we shouldn't conclude from this that all attacks are
judgements from God.  God explicitly interpreted that case, through
his prophets.  As far as I know, he did not send any prophets to
Bosnia.  While I find it hard to see any good in the current fighting,
I am sure God will eventually make good come out of bad.  But that
doesn't justify it, and it won't save the people who are doing it from
judgement.