Christians: how do you justify war?

Christianity hasn’t been about Jesus since the advent of the Holy Roman Empire…

I don’t see how you could if you follow the bible verbatim like many Christians do. But honestly it’s not much of a choice, if a nation as a whole ‘turns the other cheek’ the country won’t last very long.

True Christians cannot and do not justify war.

We are all but animals drawn to war like moths to a flame.

We will use any excuse to start a fight, no matter how trivial it is. Our beliefs and religion are but one of the countless excuses used to justify war.

Give a man a weapon, and he will ineluctably use it.

God seems pretty accepting of war.

@Ivan I’d almost say he’s fond of it.

Hmm, great question, how abut we go here and check out an incomplete yet historical list of war-like behavior by Christians, true and otherwise.

I would think
God is less fond of war than you pontificate.

Having been blessed with Free Will, man has allowed a small minority of greedmongers to run the show. War is their reason d’etre… It is those who donate those funds into the tax machine who fund these wars. So really, it is the taxpayer who would seem to be pretty accepting and fond of war, and the True Christians, who love their enemy and don’t kill anyone their whole lives.

aside from the crusades that is, right? cause those were commanded by the pope… you know, the guy that’s supposed to be infallible?

I’m protestant so the pope doesn’t come into account on this one. This discussion isn’t about pointing fingers at Christians. I would like a Christian who advocates just war theory to provide an explanation. Most of these responses are irrelevant.

LOL…C’mon dude. Surely you don’t believe anyone is infallible? Perhaps the proof of his fallibility is that he commanded the Crusades. Surely, if there is a god, he did not suggest this option to to the pope. The pope was acting on his own, and quite obviously erroneously.

@Zendo I don’t what so ever. I’m a Pastafarian. But Catholics, yeah, they do, at least true catholics.

If someone came into your house and was going to kill your children do you think it’s murder if you defend them? I don’t think so. War is the same thing on a larger scale. Yes, some of the authorities who condone, plan, and exercise this war are questionable at times.. but it doesn’t mean that the defense of a country is necessarily a sin whether proactive or not.

What’s wrong with putting evil out of business?

Christians can justify anything. Any religion can.

If you are a Christian then you surely recognize two separate things 1) our souls, and 2) this world.

Thus, love your enemy, forgive them, pray for their soul, then kill them (physically) so they don’t spread evil in this world.

I thought the biggest part of being a Christian is knowing Jesus died on the cross for our sins. War = sin??

@Zendo is right. Someone who truly lives by what the Bible says, and does what is taught in it, will not involve himself or herself in war, or anything that supports war.

Jesus did not involve himself in politics. In fact, when they tried to make him king in Jerusalem, he got out of there, so as to avoid it.

Jesus said that “everyone will know that you are my followers, if you have love among yourselves.” How can you have “love among yourselves” if you’re willing to kill a fellow Christian (or member of any other religious group)?

Many people have used religion/God/so on as justification for war, genocide, and the like, but just using something doesn’t make it so. If someone today killed a black man in the name of science, just because, no one would simply go “oh, yeah, well, science. must be ok.”, even if there were some whack job scientists who “agreed”. Most would acknowledge that it was wrong, regardless of whatever justification the murderer used. Likewise, they would likely put little or no faith in the scientists who were complicit.

How can you have Catholic priests blessing the troops, weapons and leaders on both sides of World War II? They obviously have something wrong.

Jesus could have started a war very easily. But it wasn’t on the to-do list. He’d rather lay down his life than do that. His followers laid down their lives for at least 300 years after that. Then Christianity got a hold of it and turned it into a religion instead of a “Way” of being. The true form of Christianity (the Way), that died as soon as Rome accepted it.

@Steven0512
”...being a Christian is knowing Jesus died on the cross for our sins”

So to speak. But that teaching is the beginning of dogmatic Christianity. It often develops into believing in the Virgin Birth, and then the Resurrection, and then that Jesus IS God, and then, and then, and then… And then self righteous judgment is hurled at anyone who doesn’t adhere to all the rules. History repeats itself as Christians make the same mistake as the Jews did by adding all the rules beyond the original 10 Commandments.

The rules only serve to dilute the true essence of the teaching. The rules are a form of information entropy… noise on the line, preventing the original message from being received.

The essence of biblical teaching is separating truth from deception. Truth is the Way. Deception clouds the Way. War is not the Way and that’s why Jesus never promoted it.

Jesus dying for sin is a symbolic representation of how Truth died for Deception. Truth loves us so much that it will allow us to kill it, so that we may preserve our personal Deceptions. But what we must understand is that eventually, Truth is ALWAYS resurrected. It can never Truly be killed. If we killed Truth, then it would be True that we killed Truth, thus Truth remains.

“I am the Way, the Truth and the Life”

Accept the Way of Truth and Live.

That’s it, that’s all.

@NaturalMineralWater
That analogy doesn’t really fit.
It certainly doesn’t fit for afghanistan, the two iraq wars and vietnam.
The accurate version would be, “You go into their house and kill them to prevent that they might do something bad in the future.”

Jesus was not beyond righteous indignation. Recall that he ran the moneylenders from the temple. His actions must have been seen as (or indeed have been) violent. The Book of Revelation speaks of war in heaven. I’m not claiming that Jesus or early Christians supported war, but I also would not claim there are not occassions when war may be necessary, even if never justifiable – war is never the result of godly intentions no matter who initiates war.

The will of a deity, nationalism, survival, a natural human desire for war; whatever seemingly reasonable justification is available can (and likely will) be used by christians or humans in general to justify a war. Though such should not be considered an inarguably negative occurrence.

@ragingloli @NaturalMineralWater‘s analogy may not be the general case, but it does fit some, just as your analogy is not the general case but does fit some.

Nicely put RealEyes.

It should be pointed out that not everyone who calls themselves Christians lives by all or even many of Christ’s teachings. I am Christian and tend towards pacifism because of my religion. “Turn the other cheek”

However, at the same time the tenants of a just war (which come from Catholicism, not the bible directly) are fairly convincing and the things that motivate war are often so horrific that I want something to stop it.

Finally some of your comments are incredibly offensive and the questions SPECIFICALLY asked for that kind of thing to not go on.

@boots It is. How can you say that it is not?

@ABoyNamedBoobs03 Your first comment is the attitude many Christians have but the bible would teach that God would protect that country for their faith in him.

The pope is not infallible, that is a common misconception, Catholicism teaches that he can make infallible statements after much consideration but it is very rare and I don’t believe if for a second.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies You’re statements about Christianity are out-right wrong. One should believe everything the bible states. There are obviously figurative parts of the bible, Jesus said he had spoken figuratively. However, he did die on the cross and rise from the dead, there was a virgin birth, and Jesus was and is God.

If you are trying to say that a belief in the tenants of Christianity but not the events then you do not have a true belief in Christianity.

Thank you for indulging me. I adore these opportunities.

@tramnineteen states as fact:
”...he did die on the cross and rise from the dead, there was a virgin birth, and Jesus was and is God.”

Whether he did or not is completely irrelevant to the message of Christ. We can argue about Jesus hair color and fashion sense as well, but none of it has anything to do with the message of Christ. It’s just noise on the line.

@tramnineteen said:
”...then you do not have a true belief in Christianity.”

Neither did Jesus. Jesus never taught Christianity. Jesus taught the Way.

Jesus never claimed to be God.

Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God.

Jesus never taught that salvation is the reward for believing in the Virgin Birth, the Miracles, or the Resurrection.

Why would “true” Christianity teach something that Jesus never taught?

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies You are simply wrong. Some things are irrelevant like what his skin color was (which gets debated). His resurrection however is paramount to the religion. Without it we are all doomed to hell. The resurrection was the only thing that could pay for out sins.

He did claim to be God, that is why the Jewish people wanted to crucify him, it was blasphemy of the worst kind.

You are right that salvation is not the reward for believing in the Virgin Birth or miracles, etc. however faith in Jesus is the key to salvation and believing he was a human only doesn’t count.

Also, it’s true that Christianity does not always = belief in Christ. Christ didn’t coin the term Christian, but I’m not going to stop calling myself Christian because of it. Few people would know what I meant if I said I was “A follower of the way”

Now, so that we don’t just keep saying “I’m right, he’s not” here are some verses:

Matthew 3:17 (God’s voice from heaven says Jesus is his son.)

John 10:30–33 (Jesus says “I and the Father are one.”)

John 13:12–14 (Jesus says the disciples are correct in calling him Lord, and adds that he is.)

@tramnineteen said:
“His resurrection however is paramount to the religion.”

Sure it is. That’s why the religion is wrong. Christ never once said that salvation is dependent upon belief in the resurrection. His message is independent of any specific act at any specific space/time coordinate. Let’s say he did, let’s say he didn’t… How does it effect the message to “Love one another”?

@tramnineteen said:
“Without it we are all doomed to hell.”

I’ve got news for you friend. We are already living in that place where “there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth”. Welcome to hell buddy. The eternal fires of hell are depictive of the fires that eternally burn in the hearts of men. Those fires that thirst for lust and unquenchable desire.

Jesus did not come to make bad people turn good. Jesus came so that dead people could live. The spiritually dead could attain spiritual life.

@tramnineteen said:
“The resurrection was the only thing that could pay for out sins.”

Then I suggest we let our sins die, and resurrect ourselves anew. This happens only after we forgive ourselves for our past transgressions.

Mathew 3:17 does not quote Jesus.

John 10:30 is unfairly taken out of context. 25–29 clearly speaks of the “Father” as a separate agent. “I and the Father are one” is a declaration of being in “accord” with the Way of Truth. If Satan is the father of lies, then God is the father of Truth.

Jesus designates the difference further in John 10:32
“but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many great miracles “from” the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

And the full context of this teaching is explained further in
John 10:34–38
“34-Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’? 35-If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36-what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? 37-Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. 38-But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”

This simple message illustrates that we are all Gods when we abide by the principle of the Father in Heaven. The Sermon on the Mount supports this premise by teaching that the Kingdom of Heaven is within us. If the Kingdom of Heaven is within us, and the Father is in Heaven, thus the Father is within each and every one of us and we are all Gods in our own right when we adhere to the principle of accepting the Way of Truth.

John 13:12–14 does not refer to God. The term “Lord” refers to Master. In following Christ, the disciples accepted him as their Master. The term “Teacher” refers to the lessons he taught them. Jesus’ “Lordship” over their lives is what gives him the authority to instruct them in…
John 13:14
“Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet.”

He explains his Lordship further by illustrating the servant/master relationship in
John 13:15–17
“I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. 16-I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. 17-Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.

The term Lord does NOT refer to Jesus as being God. Christians hate when Atheists take scriptures out of context. Christians then should not hypocritically take scriptures out of context to serve their own purposes.

@tramnineteen said:
“Few people would know what I meant if I said I was “A follower of the way”.

It doesn’t matter what people think of you. Christ did not care what people thought of him. He did not need to label himself either. Neither then should we.

@tramnineteen said:
“faith in Jesus is the key to salvation and believing he was a human only doesn’t count.”

The teachings of Jesus are different from the man of Jesus. The medium is not the message. To think so is idolatry. The essence of the teaching is much more important than the embodiment of the man. Your “only human” reference doesn’t count for Jesus or ANY human because it refers to the physicality of flesh based purely on energy/matter alone. But we are all creators of the Word. We are all authors. We author our essence with every Word that proceeds from our mind. Our Word crafts reality and us into beings of anger, lust, desire, empathy, hope, compassion, love and hatred.

In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was God and the Word was with God. And the Word became flesh.

The modern day Christian will miss the second coming of Christ every bit as much as they accuse the Jews of missing the first coming. They will not recognize him.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies

The fact that you simply come out and say “The religion is wrong”, says a lot.

The fact that you think life here on earth is hell says a lot too. I’m happy and love my life and I’m not making that up to support my argument. Sure I have bad days, but I take solace in the hope that comes from God. His spirit nourishes me and keeps me going. Even though trials life is still good because of God.

You are right that he didn’t come to cause people to stop sinning, he knew we could never become perfect.

No kidding Matthew 3:17 doesn’t quote him, it simply is an example in the bible that points out that he is the son of God. What difference does it make?

I do know the difference between LORD and Lord. But I’m not going to continue this argument over semantics.

You have an impressive handle of the bible for a non-believer but you have missed the truth that the words represent. I am no bible scholar but I know that Christian theologians who study and pore over the word would side with me here even if I have made small mistakes in my argument.

See:

1 Corinthians 1:18

@tramnineteen

What makes you think I’m a non-believer? I just don’t believe the Christian theologians who would side with you.

1 Corinthians 1:18 is very supportive of my position.
“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”

Look closely @tramnineteen… Look very closely please.

It says “the message” of “the cross”.

The verse clearly separates the medium from the message.

The medium is “the cross”

The message is “the Way”

It does not say the cross is foolishness. It says the message is foolishness. Thus the message is what is important, not the medium, not the cross, not the resurrection, not the miracles, not the virgin birth, and not the hinge of believing that Jesus was God.

Accept the Way of Truth and Live. In this way a child born 600 years ago in China who has never heard of Jesus Christ can attain spiritual Life by accepting the Way of Truth.

Many Atheists I know embrace this principle more than most Christians I know. The afterlife will hold many surprises for Christians of modernity. Many of the Atheists that Christians pass judgment upon will be there crying for the self induced eternal Christian damnation.

For real. The bible specifically says in exodus the 20th chapter do not kill. My dads a baptist and proclaimed christian but thinks war for oil is okay. Thats why i quit church at 15 years old. All the hyprocrisy.

@buster

yep! Thou shalt not kill. What part of that commandment is debatable?

@buster When you look at the original language that commandment is saying not to murder not simply not to kill. After God said that he later commanded people to kill. God cannot tell us to sin. I don’t think its right for us to kill but this argument is flawed

@jaketheripper

Don’t confuse the Law of Moses with the 10 Commandments. The Law of Moses is War Dogma. Christianity is Jesus Dogma. It’s the same thing all over again.

The message is much simpler than any “religion” makes it out to be.

I dont think im confusing anything God specifically told people to engage in war during those times.

Well “Moses” said he did. Just like Christians say that God wants war. Every political agenda works better when playing the “God said” card.

The Way of Christ is based upon the 10 Commandments, not the Law of Moses. Christ specifically rejected the Law of Moses when an “Eye for an Eye” became “Love your enemies”.

When Christ said:
“I did not come to replace the Law, I came to fulfill it”, he was not referring to the Law of Moses. He was referring to the Law of God, being the 10 Commandments. That’s why he gave us a new commandment that fulfilled all the others… To love one another.

Rejecting the Law of Moses was exactly the reason why Christ even came. The Pharisees had corrupted the Temple so much with errant teachings and undo sacrifices, temple prostitutes, making the Temple into a marketplace. Christ came to set all that right. And that is why he was killed.

So how do we know Moses didn’t come up with the 10 commandments?

Inductive reasoning.

If Moses wrote the 10 Commandments himself…

He would not have been reported to come down from the mountain with his face aglow.

He would not have broken them and then forced himself to do it all over again.

He would not have authored new laws that conflicted with the previous ones.

He would not have created the Ark of the Covenant to carry them around whilst leaving his own Laws to scribes on multiple scroll storage.

The original tablets would not be lost whilst the later writings remain available.

Jesus only rejected the Law of Moses.

Jesus would not have used the phrase “your Law” in John 10:34
“34-Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law…”

The Law of Moses is for the purpose of governance of a nation.

The 10 Commandments are for the purpose of guiding the heart of humanity.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies
please be aware that all of your points could have been added to the story later in time, just like all the additions to the jesus mythos.

@ragingloli

Well sure they could have. But a clear first reading should not require that qualification. Jews and Christians alike are responsible for bending the texts to fit their own agendas. If people would actually read the bible instead of sitting back and let someone tell them about it then we wouldn’t have these issues.

However, that I suppose was dependent upon the invention of the printing press. Earlier followers (many illiterate) were at the mercy of what they were told.

Well what about when The Israelites were in battle against the Amalekites. Everyone saw the sun staying in the sky longer than normal and why would Moses say that his arms needed to be elevated at his own expense? you say we should just read the Bible but you seem to not believe it. I must say I don’t understand where you are coming from.

@ragingloli As you see, I put “whether proactive or not” in my post…. I’m certainly not going to wait in a foxhole for an enemy to jump down when I could go get them first and save lives..

You should also note that I said “Yes, some of the authorities who condone, plan, and exercise this war are questionable at times..”… I don’t always agree with the method or the madness.. but separating war from Christianity based on the slap the other cheek approach is simply incorrect.

It is often difficult to pull the lessons out of folklore. But reason demands that we do this in order to make any valid argument for the underlying truths taught from bible. History is filled with myth and legend of great and wondrous supernatural explanations for every moral discourse. When will humanity exercise their God given capacity to embrace logic, reason, allegory, metaphor and understand that poetry and fable are often the most powerful tools to introduce the ignorant into higher concepts of awareness beyond our physical realm? Parents do this with the primitive thoughts of their children. A higher being would also do this with the primitive thoughts of humanity?

As humans, we cannot even unify on the concept of a God. Personification comes up short to fully explain the otherness of such a being. Let us benefit from the lessons learned from all religious stories by coming together with the realization that their deepest purpose refers to a quintessential agent so beyond us that we can never hope to comprehend all but a very few characteristics of its reality.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies I guess we are going to have to agree to disagree

@NaturalMineralWater
Such thinking can often lead to results that are worse than if you stayed put.
Had the CIA not trained Osama and his minions in guerilla warfare, afghanistan would now be a vasall state of russia, and likely much more peaceful. Instead it became a breeding ground for islamic extremists and new york is short of two buildings.
Had the US not invaded Iraq, it would still be a dictatorship, sure. But terrorism would not have become a problem there. Instead we have suicide bombings on a regular basis.
Had the US employed this thinking during the cold war, along the lines of “The Soviets will attack us sooner or later anyway, let’s launch our nukes.”, we would have had world war 3 and a nuclear holocaust.
I find the “get him before he gets me” doctrine questionable at best.

@jaketheripper

Of course. Peace be with you.

@ragingloli Let me ask you this: Have you ever served in the military in any capacity? If so, what was your role?

@NaturalMineralWater

How about the being crucified or fed to the lions approach? Would those justify a Christian call to arms?

The greatest love a Christian can express is by laying down his life for his fellow man, especially if that man intends to harm him. That was the example of Christ. Christians have the Christ given authority to protect the innocent at any cost. Who among us is innocent? Who among us is qualified to judge such a thing?

Christ judged that scenario for us by illustrating the horrors that await anyone who harms a child. But even then, that fate is doled out by God, and not mankind.

@NaturalMineralWater
I don’t see how that is relevant.
Anyway, I was deemed physically unfit for servive, because of my malformed spine.
If anything, it gives me greater distance to the actors and events, enabling me to make better judgements.

@ragingloli Being separated from a thing doesn’t necessarily give you better insight on that thing. It’s like me being a food tasting judge without ever eating the food.

no.
it is like being a food tasting judge without being the cook who made it.

you see, i DO eat the food, e.g. i see the results of war and premature actions.

@ragingloli I don’t mean to beat this into the ground but you can’t possibly know what goes on in the military unless you’ve served. All you know is what is on tv and in the newspapers. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve watched the news and scoffed “yeah.. like that’s how it went down.. riiiightt” .

My only original point is that there is strategy to war.. one of those strategies is waiting, occasionally, and other times the strategy is to attack. The overall objective is to win the war.. charging in without weapons saying “can’t we all just get along?” is just not reality.

“The military is a body of men assembled to rectify the mistakes of politicians. ”

I don’t need to serve to judge the results it produces.
And my point is that one should not start wars that are not necessary.

“The military is a body of men assembled to rectify the mistakes of politicians. ”
I think that is blue-eyed mystification.
Ancient and medieval soldiers will disagree with that statement. From the beginning of time, the military was a tool for the rulers, no more, no less.
Rectifying mistakes requires that it has the power to go against the decision of the politicians, it requires that they have authority over politicians, which they don’t have.

@NaturalMineralWater said:
“The military is a body of men assembled to rectify the mistakes of politicians.”

Politicians control the military. I don’t think any of them say
“We’ve made a terrible mistake! Time for war!”

Well… actually, maybe they do now that you mention it.

War is a last resort. Stopping massive genocide does make sense from a Christian point of view. We missed that opportunity in Rwanda. Hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved.