War and Christianity

Since Bush has made the Iraq / Terrorism war not only a security issue, but one of Christianity vs. Evil, I ask:

In what ways and under what conditions does the teachings of Jesus Christ condone war? (if any)

I have my own thoughts, but I'll wait until a few people post before I state mine.

And if you don't believe Bush has made the war a "Christian" initiative, consider:
- He says God speaks with him
- His biggest supporters are conservative "moral right"
- Some American Christian Church leaders have spoken out for the war
- Terrorists are in the "Axis of Evil"
- He keeps claiming things are "the right thing to do" with no further explanation
- He has stated that his Christian beliefs guide his morals and decisions

*** MUSLIMS BELOW = EXTREMIST MUSLIMS, NOT ALL

The Muslims say Allah is telling them to blow us up.
The Muslims say Allah is talking to them.
The Muslims biggest supporters are other Muslims.
Some Muslim church leaders have spoken out for the war.
The Muslim terrorists call America "Evil".
The Muslims keeps claiming killing Americans is "the right thing to do" with no further explanation.


What's the difference?

Obviously the extremists are bastardizing their religion. Is it then your opinion that claiming "war in iraq / terror is Christian" is bastardizing Christianity? (I just want the focus to be on topic)

Aaron, what's your point?

Two sides of the same coin. When it comes down to it, I'm not sure religion is ever a real reason that wars are waged... it's usually territorial, or about resources, or control. Religion is more a means of justification, and reinforcing allegience to "the king" and imperialist ambitions by obfuscating it with allegience to a higher power and more saintly aims (saving the infidels). War and religion have a very symbiotic relationship.

The use of religion as a justification for war and other nasty things is one of the main reasons why i'm agnostic.

Well, that and I really don't belive in any kind of diety... hmm think that might be important too?

Okay, so... so far we're 0/4 in people believing Christianity actually condones a war?

I don't think it's Christianity... it's just Bush's extremist views being twisted into some wierd mix of zealotry and... ah... heck I dunno... it's late and i'm tired and I don't wanna debate religion...

So why am I posting, you ask?

For the children... for the children...

I do remember he said the word "Crusade" a while ago, I can't remember the context... but does the context really matter with that word?

Hahah that's okay, participation is volutary. I don't think it's Christianity either, but see my first post - Bush has claimed that the war is a Christian thing. He's had some Christian right-wingers support him with this. This is sorta why I'm posting.

I don't think it's possible to definitively answer your question since religion is by nature so open to interpretation. Which sect of Christianity? The very fact that there are so many different belief systems that start with Abraham kinda proves that it's subjective. Religion can condone anything. It depends on the flock and their shepherd(s).

Refer to post 1 -

In what ways and under what conditions does the teachings of Jesus Christ condone war? (if any)

No sects. the teaching of the man. I mean, Chip, what you're saying is kinda my point - that the religion itself is twisting the original teachings. But it'd be nice if people responded to the original post.

The bible is full of war and smiting

Jesus is supposed to come back and bring war. Maybe Bush think he is Jesus ?

Other than that (the) Jesus (character depicted in the Evangiles) was a very cool guy, very non-violent ; so saying God is on your side when you got to war is total bullshit.

God does not need Bush's help in his war, Bush when saying god is on his side is lying or simply stupid and ignorant (that later explanation fit well with the man).

Bush did call the "war on terrorism" a crusade. As you can imagine, that term goes over real well with the people in the middle east. Next time he should just pinch them on the asses and call them Shirley.



I think after the fact he realizes the mistake he made and has not used it again.

Religion is about control and power. Naturally, it leads to wars.

Many of the radical neo-con religious righters are of the belief that we are entering the end of times from the book of Revalations. Though poetic and mystical the last book of the bible has little or nothing to do with Jesus Christ and more to do with closure and catharsis for the christian sect. In their minds the final cage match between God and the Devil is drawing nigh and they want a backstage pass. In effect it is easy for the powers that be to latch on to these radical and abstract concepts of armaggedon and the destruction of satan by spinning the wars into a fight against evil instead of a fight for oil. Why would anyone not want to fight on the side of the righteous? Why would anyone want evil to remain in power? Why wouldn't you want to fight against one of the Devil's workers? The evangelical religious fundamentalists took the bait. In their minds, they are not fighting against other humans. They are not party to the deaths of the innocent. This is a war against evil and any human carnage is considered a sacrifice to God. They want the war to end all wars; the war that will summon their martyr back down from the clouds to beam them all to heaven. If you are a leader and it is your desire to rally people to war, you can either rally them around the flag or around the predominate religious sect. Man may be driven by wealth but guilt forces him to find justification for his actions. In the end it is all about the big lie. You have to tell a completely illogical whopper of a lie to get folks to follow an unjustifiable and ethically bankrupt war premise.

Christianity dosent *generally* condone war. I dont think it absolutley forbids war either. Everything in the Old Testament is irrelavent so to speak. Im just as lost as anyone else... but I get your point though; Christian American society is kinda twisted these days.

1. Iraq was responsible for the Terrorists Attacks on September 11th.

2. Iraq was harboring Terrorists who were responsible for the Terrorists Attacks of September 11th.

3. Iraq has weapons of Mass Destruction.

Oh Yeah.

Bush is the King of Whoppers!

My perspective, as a life-long Christian, is that the modern American (mainline really, not all flavors) church has lost its sense of identity and purpose, and is struggling madly to re-define itself. It is interesting to note that, although the new covenant generally touts "servant leadership" principles, religion is cyclical. It may begin with revolution (Calvin, Luther, etc.), but religion eventually attempts to systemize what is actually a wild and semi-intangible faith construct into something that can be controlled (and in some cases, wielded).

In addition, I once read that "fanaticism" is one of the stages of faith maturation. Perhaps it's the equivalent of the "terrible twos" IRT religious development. In any case, for the last few decades, the church has been decrying moral decay but has had virtually no ability to stem the tide. It may be that this larger movement toward conservatism is an act of desperation in hopes of preserving a value system that was all but taken for granted in generations past.

Religion is and has historically been a tool of deception that the moneyed elites use to control the unwashed masses. Being religious just brings you one step closer to letting someone else rule your life for you and use you as it best suits them. In this case, religion is being used by both sides to rally support for some idiotic genocide. Which is hardly original. It's like the crusades all over again...

That's exactly the kind of "cyclical" behavior I'm referring to, Eggy. However, I think it's very important that we don't throw the baby out with the bath water. On a personal level, faith in Christ can be a deeply enriching and powerful source self-renewal. It is the broader sociological/organizational phenomenon that, I think, is worth examining. I'd strongly caution against forming a syllogism that essentially paints all individual Christians as neurotic ignoramuses. If we go down that route, we're guilty of the same attribution errors we're accusing them of...

How do you "twist" something that was never an absolute to begin with? People speak of the teachings of Jesus as if they came in the form of a very specific instruction manual. I hardly think the bible qualifies for that kind of characterization. To talk in terms of absolutes about a collection of often self-contradictory allegory is in itself a bit twisted.

What's agnostic?

I am athiest.. just in case.

It is a state of ackowledgement that you don't ("a" know ("gnostic".

Thanks, Paolo!

I truely believe Religions only fuel Ignorance by filling up the "gaps" of mankind knowledge with bullshit. Their general formula: if you don't know why.. "it's the works of the mighty lord!". Heh.

You are exactly right..it's territorial, and we want stretigic advantage of the Oil with Democracy. We do not want Terrorists controlling what resources we need so dearly and giving them a financial stepping stone.