Should Christians participate in wars ?

[Ben Dhyan]

@ben d my teacher is going over Romans 7 with us last Sunday. And I believe that our mind changes but our body continues to serve the law of sin for the most part of it; we still live in carnal bodies he suggest and it will not be perfect however when the mind is renewed the hearts is changed ; we become in longing for God and looking towards him living by and through the spirit of Christ Jesus. When our minds are renewed and the heart is changed though our bodies remain the same; and will continue to make mistakes in my best estimation maybe the mistakes are less frequent but thank God for Gods patience, tolerance and kindness towards us that leads us to change our minds when we fail, and we go and be reconciled to the person we might have got angry at, or may we suffer through life enduring by living in patience or whatever.

I really like your insights thank you for that.

I am happy for you Matthew. Just a couple of thoughts, the body is a temple of God, it is not who we really are, yet because we are no longer (as an aspirant) a pure expression of the spirit, more of an expression of the body's mind, emotional and carnal desires, we tend to fully self identify with it rather than the spirit or soul.. In our culture, an ID picture of our body is considered who we are. As we are reborn in the spiritual sense, it is a natural process that our self identity transitions back to the pure spirit again, and hence the struggle with the base desires of our body nature lessons. But this natural process of the migration of self identity from the body to the Soul is a part of the arduous straight path, so don't be too hard on your self wrt the inertia to change in the shorter term.

 

[Neuropteron]

.

Hi,

You shouldn't be like a parasite just taking and expecting others to die for you while you do nothing

I'm sorry you feel that way about conscientious objectors.
But you should be aware that refusing to be forced to kill other does definitely not mean that others are expected to agree to that.
Ideally if no one could be coerced to go to war, there wouldn't be any.
Taking the stand of being peaceful is not as easy as some might think.

 

[MatthewA]

Okay thank you for you insight. It would be understandable that the body is who we are and that was the difference however my teacher made in how it is the mind/heart in which is the expression of who we are and the body is what we are housed in, which would be the soul of course. Which has the mind/will/emotion. Thank you again @ben d for your comment and explaining your viewpoint on this matter.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The question is:

Considering the principles that Christ laid down, how can a christian defend his involvement in a war ?

I think there are a lot of things Christians do that are inconsistent. War is one example; proselytizing is another.

IMO, both activities involve a similar hubris. Both require the assumption that the individual believer is a necessary part of God's plan... IOW, that God can't achieve his goal without help.

So yes, Christians going to war are hypocritical, but not in a way that's out of keeping with standard, run-of-the-mill Christian hypocrisy generally, IMO.

 

[loverofhumanity]

In a few words here are four examples of Christians involvement in wars:

In November 1095, at the Council of Clermont in southern France, the Pope called on Western Christians to take up arms to aid the Byzantines and recapture the Holy Land from Muslim control. This marked the beginning of the Crusades.

Pope Urban’s call for war was met with a tremendous response, both among the military elite as well as ordinary citizens. Those who joined the armed pilgrimage wore a cross as a symbol of the Church.

In the first world war: while some British Christians did become conscientious objectors, the vast majority supported the war and well over a million practicing Christians enlisted. For many it was a matter of Christian duty and conscience.

In the second world war ordinary Catholics fought on both sides of the conflict, each side claiming God's support, whilst fighting each other.

the Catholic Church signed a concordat with the Nazi government in 1933 and “the collusion between the Protestant churches and the Nazi regime was even closer, helped by anti-Semitic tradition in German Protestantism” (84). The fact that pastors like Dietrich Bonhoeffer were radicals in the church for opposing this collusion is an indication that such opposition was not the norm among Protestant churches. Therefore, the historical fact of such pastors is not reason enough, argues Baggini, for Christians to celebrate.

The question is:

Considering the principles that Christ laid down, how can a christian defend his involvement in a war ?

Can a Christian join military service (conscription), if so what would he/she do if ordered to participate in armed warfare ?

Is there a conflict between "loving my neighbor" and shooting at him. Does following order of a military leader, politician or church head relieve me of accountability ?

It seems to be an easy question.
Do you agree or do you think differently ?

My understanding is that religion should unite hearts, reconcile differences and be a cause of love and unity. Religion should cause peace not war.

 

[blü 2]

In a few words here are four examples of Christians involvement in wars:

In November 1095, at the Council of Clermont in southern France, the Pope called on Western Christians to take up arms to aid the Byzantines and recapture the Holy Land from Muslim control. This marked the beginning of the Crusades.

Pope Urban’s call for war was met with a tremendous response, both among the military elite as well as ordinary citizens. Those who joined the armed pilgrimage wore a cross as a symbol of the Church.

In the first world war: while some British Christians did become conscientious objectors, the vast majority supported the war and well over a million practicing Christians enlisted. For many it was a matter of Christian duty and conscience.

In the second world war ordinary Catholics fought on both sides of the conflict, each side claiming God's support, whilst fighting each other.

the Catholic Church signed a concordat with the Nazi government in 1933 and “the collusion between the Protestant churches and the Nazi regime was even closer, helped by anti-Semitic tradition in German Protestantism” (84). The fact that pastors like Dietrich Bonhoeffer were radicals in the church for opposing this collusion is an indication that such opposition was not the norm among Protestant churches. Therefore, the historical fact of such pastors is not reason enough, argues Baggini, for Christians to celebrate.

The question is:

Considering the principles that Christ laid down, how can a christian defend his involvement in a war ?

Can a Christian join military service (conscription), if so what would he/she do if ordered to participate in armed warfare ?

Is there a conflict between "loving my neighbor" and shooting at him. Does following order of a military leader, politician or church head relieve me of accountability ?

It seems to be an easy question.
Do you agree or do you think differently ?

I think we'd have felt silly singing Backwards, Christian Soldiers ...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Jesus' teaching was about attaining to a spiritual kingdom, Heaven, not about some impossible concept of a paradise on Earth.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

My understanding is that religion should unite hearts, reconcile differences and be a cause of love and unity. Religion should cause peace not war.

IMO, nothing in the history of religion suggests that this is what religion is supposed to do.

 

[Brian2]

In a few words here are four examples of Christians involvement in wars:

In November 1095, at the Council of Clermont in southern France, the Pope called on Western Christians to take up arms to aid the Byzantines and recapture the Holy Land from Muslim control. This marked the beginning of the Crusades.

Pope Urban’s call for war was met with a tremendous response, both among the military elite as well as ordinary citizens. Those who joined the armed pilgrimage wore a cross as a symbol of the Church.

In the first world war: while some British Christians did become conscientious objectors, the vast majority supported the war and well over a million practicing Christians enlisted. For many it was a matter of Christian duty and conscience.

In the second world war ordinary Catholics fought on both sides of the conflict, each side claiming God's support, whilst fighting each other.

the Catholic Church signed a concordat with the Nazi government in 1933 and “the collusion between the Protestant churches and the Nazi regime was even closer, helped by anti-Semitic tradition in German Protestantism” (84). The fact that pastors like Dietrich Bonhoeffer were radicals in the church for opposing this collusion is an indication that such opposition was not the norm among Protestant churches. Therefore, the historical fact of such pastors is not reason enough, argues Baggini, for Christians to celebrate.

The question is:

Considering the principles that Christ laid down, how can a christian defend his involvement in a war ?

Can a Christian join military service (conscription), if so what would he/she do if ordered to participate in armed warfare ?

Is there a conflict between "loving my neighbor" and shooting at him. Does following order of a military leader, politician or church head relieve me of accountability ?

It seems to be an easy question.
Do you agree or do you think differently ?

Maybe it was a good thing to stop Hitler.

 

[loverofhumanity]

IMO, nothing in the history of religion suggests that this is what religion is supposed to do.

This is what the Founders of the great religions taught. That the followers have failed to follow these teachings is their own fault.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This is what the Founders of the great religions taught.

Sure they did.

That the followers have failed to follow these teachings is their own fault.

At a certain point, when enough people fail to learn the material, we have to start looking at the teacher as the source of the problem.

A teacher who can't get a big chunk of their students to understand the material is a poor teacher.

 

[KerimF]

I think you have to fight at some point in duty to your country. Even Jesus said if my kingdom were of this world; then would my servants fight.

I am afraid that you understood Jesus in a way that suits our natural instincts of survival.

But Jesus just said that if he 'were an earthly king' (as Jews were expecting the Messiah to be so) he would act as any worldly king does by commanding his servants to fight his enemies for his glory and survival.

But Jesus is not of this world as I am not of this world anymore while I live the unconditional love towards all others, even towards who are created to play my enemies.

In brief, everyone has the right to defend himself and his ruling system (called country). But if he does it in the name of Jesus, he is just fooling himself (if not others as well) or he knew another Jesus on whom I have no idea yet.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Sure they did.


At a certain point, when enough people fail to learn the material, we have to start looking at the teacher as the source of the problem.

A teacher who can't get a big chunk of their students to understand the material is a poor teacher.

Orphanages, schools, charities, humanitarian organisations such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army and St Vincents. There is a plethora of history showing Christians to be compassionate people who assist the poor and downtrodden. Over the centuries, the positive contributions of Christianity are the stuff of history.

Free will means that no one can be forced to behave or act in a certain manner. We can only appeal to people to be good but cannot force them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Orphanages, schools, charities, humanitarian organisations such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army and St Vincents. There is a plethora of history showing Christians to be compassionate people who assist the poor and downtrodden. Over the centuries, the positive contributions of Christianity are the stuff of history.

This probably isn't the week to be praising the history of Christian "charity."

‘Not an apology’: Pope’s statement on residential school deaths angers those seeking accountability from church

Free will means that no one can be forced to behave or act in a certain manner. We can only appeal to people to be good but cannot force them.

Actual teachers' students have free will, too. We're still able to judge the quality of a teacher by how successful they are at educating students.

If half of a high school physics teacher's class don't understand physics by the end of the year, we don't shrug it off with a "meh - free will! What are you gonna do?"

 

[KerimF]

Orphanages, schools, charities, humanitarian organisations such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army and St Vincents. There is a plethora of history showing Christians to be compassionate people who assist the poor and downtrodden. Over the centuries, the positive contributions of Christianity are the stuff of history.

Free will means that no one can be forced to behave or act in a certain manner. We can only appeal to people to be good but cannot force them.

I am afraid that, in reality, those who 'head' such formal humanitarian organizations, as the ones you mentioned above for example, are actually serving certain powerful rich groups to cover up their crimes, besides other non-humanitarian purposes. But please note that it doesn't matter if this sounds weird, if not nonsense, to you and many others, because this sad truth is not supposed to be known by the world's multitudes; mainly by those who devoted themselves really to serve others in such organisations (though some of them will discover it sooner or later).

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I am afraid that you understood Jesus in a way that suits our natural instincts of survival.

But Jesus just said that if he 'were an earthly king' (as Jews were expecting the Messiah to be so) he would act as any worldly king does by commanding his servants to fight his enemies for his glory and survival.

But Jesus is not of this world as I am not of this world anymore while I live the unconditional love towards all others, even towards who are created to play my enemies.

In brief, everyone has the right to defend himself and his ruling system (called country). But if he does it in the name of Jesus, he is just fooling himself (if not others as well) or he knew another Jesus on whom I have no idea yet.

If your love for the victims of violence stops short of ever being willing to use force to protect them, then your love is more conditional than you're letting on, IMO.

 

[KerimF]

If your love for the victims of violence stops short of ever being willing to use force to protect them, then your love is more conditional than you're letting on, IMO.

You are right and since you, unlike I, are in this world, I am afraid it is indeed your 'duty' to apply what you said above in your life. I mean; you, like many others, have to follow the natural human instincts of survival so that the world can go on properly.
In fact, the ordinary people in all conflicting sides who joined wars just do what you said.

But, on my side, protecting human living fleshes by destroying/killing the living fleshes of some others lets me be just another executioner, if not a hero anytime my crimes serve a certain ruling system.

For instance, you remind me when I was young and serving the military service for a couple of years (as an officer for being an engineer). I was asked once to join a gun training session. There, I told them that I personally don't need learning how to use a gun because I have no reason, at all, to using it in any situation I may face.

They: But this is not just for you. Your country may be attacked by certain enemies anytime and we all have to be ready to stop them.
Me: Please, what do you mean by enemies?
They: They are the ones who will invade our land to impose their will on all of us.
Me: Do you mean they will do it as you try doing it with me now?

They laughed and I wasn't asked again to join such a training session. (I did the service as an assistant teacher in electronics).

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

In a few words here are four examples of Christians involvement in wars:

In November 1095, at the Council of Clermont in southern France, the Pope called on Western Christians to take up arms to aid the Byzantines and recapture the Holy Land from Muslim control. This marked the beginning of the Crusades.

Pope Urban’s call for war was met with a tremendous response, both among the military elite as well as ordinary citizens. Those who joined the armed pilgrimage wore a cross as a symbol of the Church.

In the first world war: while some British Christians did become conscientious objectors, the vast majority supported the war and well over a million practicing Christians enlisted. For many it was a matter of Christian duty and conscience.

In the second world war ordinary Catholics fought on both sides of the conflict, each side claiming God's support, whilst fighting each other.

the Catholic Church signed a concordat with the Nazi government in 1933 and “the collusion between the Protestant churches and the Nazi regime was even closer, helped by anti-Semitic tradition in German Protestantism” (84). The fact that pastors like Dietrich Bonhoeffer were radicals in the church for opposing this collusion is an indication that such opposition was not the norm among Protestant churches. Therefore, the historical fact of such pastors is not reason enough, argues Baggini, for Christians to celebrate.

The question is:

Considering the principles that Christ laid down, how can a christian defend his involvement in a war ?

Can a Christian join military service (conscription), if so what would he/she do if ordered to participate in armed warfare ?

Is there a conflict between "loving my neighbor" and shooting at him. Does following order of a military leader, politician or church head relieve me of accountability ?

It seems to be an easy question.
Do you agree or do you think differently ?

Depends on the war. Jesus didn't tell the Roman centurion whose servant He healed to give up his career as a solider. Yahweh wasn't a pacifist in the OT and if Joan of Arc is to be believed, He still isn't. War is something that will always exist until the world ends. What is more important is protecting and defending the vulnerable, and upholding justice. Sometimes force is required in those areas. If I saw someone being attacked in the street, it would be my duty as a fellow citizen to be prepared to use force - deadly, even - to help them, if practical. Otherwise you're just another coward who walks by and ignores it.

 

[1213]

...
Is there a conflict between "loving my neighbor" and shooting at him. Does following order of a military leader, politician or church head relieve me of accountability ?

It seems to be an easy question.
Do you agree or do you think differently ?

Jesus said:

… love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust.
Mat. 5:44-45

...Put your sword back into its place, for all those who take the sword will die by the sword.
Matt. 26:52

That is why I think, if person is a Christian and it means a disciple of Jesus, it would be best not to be violent. However, I think everyone has right to defend himself and his country. If other nations attacks another, it is really their own fault, if they get killed. Should be no good reason to attack.

Also, wars seem to be pointless, not good for anything. People have fought thousand of years and they have achieved nothing by doing so. For example, in last century people fight against communism/socialism and now Europe is almost like Soviet Union and even USA seems to be turning to communism and at the same time oddly Russia reminds more of the older USA that supported sovereign nations. I think best way to make a good change in the world is to teach people to love. Without it everything is quite pointless and failing.

 

[KerimF]

Depends on the war. Jesus didn't tell the Roman centurion whose servant He healed to give up his career as a solider.

This Roman centurion believed in Jesus as a healer only and got what he asked for.

On the other hand, Jesus, being all-knowledge, knows in advance that ordinary people don't listen seriously to another ordinary one (best example here in forums). Naturally, peoples are attracted by whatever a powerful rich group may say (via its official speakers) in public. So what Jesus did to the servant is just another miracle to attract the attention of another type of people at that time.

Now, miracles are of no use anymore since Jesus sayings could be accessed by almost any human anywhere on earth (though many of them cannot be heard from preachers because they contradict all known laws in the world).