The abrahamic religions all stem from a basis whereby moses laid out the ten commandments.
one of these: Thou shalt not kill.
The question i would like to ask of those who have a abrahamic faith (and also opinions of others) is:
How can religious war (or war in general) be justified by those who claim to be faithful and support the idea that scripture is god breathed ?
Thankyou in advance for any replies as I would like to know peoples views 
Hypocratic?
I’m guessing the OP means “hypocritical.” Hypocrisy has nothing to do with Hippocrates, the Greek physician who said “first, do no harm.” Both concepts are unrelated to the hippopotamus, hip-hop, and the hippocampus.
God breathed?
I imagine they refer to all the parts of scripture where God explicitly condones, rewards, and/or demands that people kill each other.
Given that God commands the Hebrews to wage a war of conquest and basically go genocidal on the Cannanites almost immediately after giving them the 10 commandments, its pretty obvious that “Do Not Kill” isn’t meant as a blanket Prohibition on warfare.
The phrase “Thou shalt not kill” does not appear in the Bible. The original wording is “לא תרצח”, which translates to “Don’t murder”.
Mrs. J. has never referred to me as a “Hippocratic oaf”, but it’s only a matter of time.
You’d be surprised at the amount of people I run into who will adamantly refuse to accept this information.
And like others said, by the next couple of pages the same deity is telling us when and for what reasons and who is it OK to execute for crimes or kill in war.
(and BTW, are “hypocrisy” and its derivatives the most misspelled - never mind misdefined - debate terms around here?)
I’d never heard it until I just read it, but had always suspected that, or something like that, was the case. I’ve just never been religious enough or curious enough to check it out.
In other words, “no unauthorized killing”. Big difference.
And it amazes me how many people come out with this giant “Gotcha!” in the apparent belief no-one’s ever thought of it before.
I’m assuming it’s an over-literal interpretation of “inspired”, but I’m open to correction.
It’s the literal translation of the Greek word that is translated ‘inspired’ in II Timothy 3:16. The NIV renders it as “God-breathed”.
Given that the difference is slight but significant and the wrong word is always used, I think it’s worth mentioning.
So the bottom line is don’t kill anyone. Not your neighbor or his wife. Not your local roman or Egyptian or cannanite magistrate, and certainly not women and children… Unless god tells you to.
I’m not sure. Does the word “murder” already leave other sorts of killings untouched? Aren’t, say, assorted killings in self-defense or defense of others excluded even before God weighs in?
Of course not - killing in war (divinely mandated or not) is permitted, as is killing in self-defense and executing people, with due process. The latter is important - to the best of my knowledge, the ancient Israelite rulers never had absolute powers of life and death over their subjects, and couldn’t execute them without a trial.
In this matter, biblical law isn’t all that different from modern law.
This is just begging the question. Who decides whether a killing is murder? When God told the Israelites to kill Amelekite infants (to kill ALL Amelekite infants and children), was that killing or murder?
When Truman ordered the U.S. military to nuke Hiroshima, was it war or murder?
(Note: that was a rhetorical question. I already know your answer).
As a side note - within the context of the story, the Amalekites were inherently evil, one and all. I mean, if you can accept the existence of the God giving the order, can’t you accept the premise that they deserved it?