War?

[OttomanScribe]

I am close friends with a pastor from America, she would host gatherings on the lawn of my campus and discuss various things. She observed with mixed feelings my transition from atheism to Islam. After my conversion she invited me to dinner with a few of her Christian friends. I met one of her friends and he brought up the war in Iraq. After some discussion he essentially stated that he would kill an Iraqi himself were he called to.

Now I would be a Mujahid (warrior in the path of God) if I were attacked, however that is an established part of my religion. Is killing ever sanctioned in Christianity? Or war for that matter? Even in self defence?

My knowledge of history tells me that Christian societies obviously sanctioned it, but does the religion itself?

I am aware that Christianity, like Islam, is not a monolith, so speak for your own denomination.

Thanks in advance, peace.

 

[drich0150]

Is killing ever sanctioned in Christianity? Or war for that matter? Even in self defence?

Murder is not ever sanctioned for any reason, Killing on the other hand is.
Murder is a selfish act of taking another's life for one's personal benefit.
Murder is born out of hate.
We are told that if we hate a man it is the same as if we have murdered him.

Incidental this is why we are also told that it is impossible to up hold all of the law.

 

[OttomanScribe]

Murder is not ever sanctioned for any reason, Killing on the other hand is.

How does this work?

Murder is a selfish act of taking another's life for one's personal benefit.
Murder is born out of hate.
We are told that if we hate a man it is the same as if we have murdered him.

We have a similar position. 'To kill a single man is as though you had killed all of humanity'.

Incidental this is why we are also told that it is impossible to up hold all of the law.

Does this constitute an abrogation of the law itself? Understanding that true perfection is unattainable, is not the same as tell people to cultivate imperfection.

 

[drich0150]

Does this constitute an abrogation of the law itself? Understanding that true perfection is unattainable, is not the same as tell people to cultivate imperfection.

See romans 7 in the other post you have.
We are not to cultivate imperfection, but to seek another form of righteousness/perfection.

How does this work?

It works on the idea that God knows and records all aspects of our lives and that we are to be judged on all that we say do, and even down to the intentions of our heart. (Heb 4) So if you kill or murder someone than you will be judged not on your actions but the intentions you had in your heart.

In Christianity it is not what you do that is important but why you do it.

 

[OttomanScribe]

I understand the point about intention (it being a foundational Muslim understanding). However I do not understand how this relates to the question at hand.

In order to have intent that centres on following Jesus's way, one must know what that is. What is the point of Christianity if it makes no claims upon what is right and wrong. What is this form of righteousness/perfection of which you speak? A form of righteousness/perfection that is separate from Christian morals?

The ultimate perfection a Muslim can attain is the status of Mu'min, where one has a natural inclination towards the rulings of the Sha'riah, inseparable from ones own desires.

What is the Christian version? What should Christians aspire to?

 

[drich0150]

What is the point of Christianity if it makes no claims upon what is right and wrong.
What is this form of righteousness/perfection of which you speak?

The whole point to Christianity is to provide a way for all those who seek a personal relationship with God a way to do so. Because after the first sin all of Man has been separated from God. Because of the sacrifice of Jesus we now have a way to find true righteousness or perfection. Only the most Holy and pure deserve to be in the presents of God. Because of our sin we were no longer worthy of being with God.

Sin allows us a choice. Without true options there is no true Choice. So we have been given this life not to live our version of a good life,, we have been given this life to choose whether we want to be with God for all of eternity or not. So if one chooses the path a sin and does not seek redemption for his sin then he chooses an eternity away from God. If a man knows he is and always be a sinner and seeks redemption for his sin then He chooses to be with God for eternity..

Our true purpose is not about living this life well, but about making a choice as to where we wish to spend eternity.

A form of righteousness/perfection that is separate from Christian morals?

A Christian is not separated from morals or morality, quite the contrary. We are moral and seek morality because God is moral. If a true Christian (One that loves the Lord with all of his heart, mind, spirit and strength) loves God he will seek morality because it will bring him closer to God.

That said a Christian's righteousness is not directly affected by his level of morality. A True Christians righteousness is solely determined by his relationship with God through the blood of Jesus Christ. Righteousness is a gift, not a reward so that no man can boast.

What is the Christian version?

We know we are all sinners, and the one who hold the most prominence is the one who truly see himself for what he is. a sinful man not worth of God, forgiveness or recognition. Jesus told his disciples the greatest in the Kingdom of heaven is the one who will humble himself like a child.

What should Christians aspire to?

The day we meet our Lord, and God...

..to Hear well done good and faithful servant, coming from the mouth of Jesus.
That will be the day of days.

 

[OttomanScribe]

So the statement 'and the best amongst you is the best in piety, and the best in piety is the one who performs righteous deeds and has faith in God' would be incorrect according to this understanding?

How do Christians define what constitutes moral action without a moral code or law? The emphasis in your posts has been upon belief, not action, from whence does the guide to action come?

 

[drich0150]

So the statement 'and the best amongst you is the best in piety, and the best in piety is the one who performs righteous deeds and has faith in God' would be incorrect according to this understanding?

I have never heard those words before I just read them. I would say that those words are incorrect with my current understanding of the word piety. Primarily because these words do not reflect the teachings of Jesus in Mt 18.

How do Christians define what constitutes moral action without a moral code or law?

We do have a moral code we are just not bound to it for the purposes of obtaining righteousness.

Righteousness as I am using the word, is a state that deems one worthy to be in the presents of God.

True righteousness is a Gift given to those who Love the Lord God with all of their Heart, Minds, Spirit, and Strength. This love is reflected through our works and in our beliefs.

James tells us in Chapter 2:
14What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? 15Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. 16If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? 17In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
18But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds."
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.
19You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
20You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless[d]? 21Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,"[e] and he was called God's friend. 24You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone. 25In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

So to have true faith one must have works, but again it is not the works that save us it is the faith as per Paul's instructions in Romans 4:

Abraham Justified by Faith

1What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? 2If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."[a]

4Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. 5However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. 6David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
7"Blessed are they
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
8Blessed is the man
whose sin the Lord will never count against him."[b]
9Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. 12And he is also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
13It was not through law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. 14For if those who live by law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless, 15because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.
16Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham's offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. 17As it is written: "I have made you a father of many nations."[c] He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed—the God who gives life to the dead and calls things that are not as though they were. 18Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, "So shall your offspring be."[d] 19Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead—since he was about a hundred years old—and that Sarah's womb was also dead. 20Yet he did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, 21being fully persuaded that God had power to do what he had promised. 22This is why "it was credited to him as righteousness." 23The words "it was credited to him" were written not for him alone, 24but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. 25He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.

and again in Eph 2

1As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. 4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

I believe this also answers this question:

The emphasis in your posts has been upon belief, not action, from whence does the guide to action come?

 

[Sketcher]

Early Christians were all pacifists. A "holy war" would have been unthinkable to them. I believe as a Christian that killing an unbeliever is the exact opposite of what Jesus told us to do when he gave us the Great Commission:

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." - Matthew 28:19-20

At the same time, we are called to love our families. It's not loving to anyone, let alone a little child, to let some maniac have his way with them. If anyone came after anyone I loved, I would do whatever is necessary to protect him or her to the best of my ability, and I pray that God would be helping me. And hopefully, what I'd need to do wouldn't be fatal, but it would be final.

Considering all this, this is why I'm not in the military. I've considered joining multiple times, but it all comes down to this: If I'm going to be in the military, I may have to kill someone. I don't want to kill someone. And I don't want to be that guy who joins up only to not want to do his duty when he hits the combat zone. You're either all in or you shouldn't be there. Now, I respect members of our military who join and do their duties out of pure motives - in their minds, they are protecting people from bad people. I'm thankful that they do what they do so it doesn't come to my back yard and I have to do it. Besides, it's a matter of math sometimes - if you shoot a suicide bomber before he reaches his target, fewer people are getting killed than if you just let him do what he was going to do. One person goes to hell, but you're giving 20 more another chance to receive Jesus and go to Heaven. So I can see both sides of it, but I wouldn't be comfortable doing that. When I was a kid, one of our youth leaders was a combat vet, and I could see the pain on his face as he recalled how he shot and killed enemy soldiers who probably were not Christian. I don't want to have to live with that.

 

[Coralie]

Hi again OttomanScribe!

In Eastern Orthodoxy, as with other Xian expressions, murder is a grievous sin (of course).

We Xians are called to pacifism. Even if we are attacked for our faith, it's considered the ideal to rather suffer a martyr's death than retaliate.

However, we have many soldier saints, St George being the most famous. The military is seen as a sad necessity in a fallen world that is stained by sin. There will always be times that the innocent must be protected--that means we must have soldiers.

Defending one's country from invasion and slaughter is considered a mercy mission (if I can put it that way), and being obedient to one's king/ruler is also considered a virtuous action (Romans 13). Soldiers were exhorted by St John the Baptist/Forerunner to be content with their pay, and never falsely accuse others; he didn't urge them to leave the military, but rather to serve with humility and integrity.

Nonetheless, in Orthodoxy, soldiers who have killed or wounded enemies in battle still confess this as a sin**, and may be given penances* by their priest before receiving Communion.

Life is life, and life is holy; to take it away, even in the heat of battle, is a monumental thing that must be addressed by the believer before he can safely move on with his life. If he doesn't confess the sin** to God and his brothers, he may soon find his heart terribly wounded. We must always remain sensitive to life, and strive to preserve it. This is part of what it means to be Christlike.

It's true what others say here; it is about intention. Murder is a passionate, selfish action--killing in battle, out of duty, is a horrible thing, but not the same as murder at all. It's seen more as a heavy burden brought about by the sinful state of the world.

*Note: in Eastern Orthodoxy, penances are not punitive at all, but rather "medicine" for a heart that has been wounded by sinful actions. Penances prepare us to face God again without the stain of shame and self-loathing. They may also help a confused believer to understand why his action was a sin in the first place--something that is often missed. They usually consist of prayers, and perhaps almsgiving or fasting of some kind.

**Also note that Eastern Orthodoxy doesn't see sin in the same way as Western theology tends to. Sin is any action that causes separation from God; it's not a legal transgression, not a "breaking of a law". That's why our understanding of repentance/confession and penance differs quite a bit from the Western model. We see these things as healing sacraments that bind up a heart once broken by separation from God.

 

[Emmy]

Dear OttomanScribe. Jesus told us: " if you pick up the sword, you must expect to die by it." Jesus also told us:" Love God with all your hearts, all your souls, and all your minds, a 2nd Commandment is to love your neighbour as you love yourselves. On these 2 Commandments hang all the Law, and all the Prophets." Love always is the first Commandment. If we pick up the sword, whatever the reason, we must expect to be killed by it. As for murder, or any other violence, where is the Love? Every action done without love, is a sin. The Love a Christian should have, must always be selfless, without any strings attached. I say this with love. Greetings from Emmy, sister in Christ.

 

[98cwitr]

war is murder, killing another person is murder. Murder is defined as:

"The killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation [...] (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder)."

Under the new covenant, we are not to kill another human being for any reason, but turn the other cheek. Turning the other cheek - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That all being said, if someone was to break into my house and try and hurt me or those I love, I will blow their freakin brains out. I can only imagine the remorse I would feel, or the lack there of, I don't know if the justification would allow the action to continue to sit well with me.

I have faith that God would not take me down such a path, but even the disciples carried swords Lk. 22.36-38

I dont find much in he Quran that would point to killing another humanbeing okay (but i am not well versed on the Quran yet). I would really like to know where Muslims get the notion that it's "righteous" to kill another person for that matter.

 

[OttomanScribe]

This is interesting Again I find myself liking the Eastern understanding the most.

I will try to be thorough, and pray that my computer doesn't conk out (as it has been doing of late) mid post.

To Drich, there seems to be a complicated relationship between works and belief. My understanding of Western Christianity is that it is more of a 'believing' religion than a 'doing' one... in that were one to describe what it is to be Christian, the majority of that explanation would be beliefs, rather than law? This is in contrast to Judaism and Islam, in which being a Jew or a Muslim requires not just a justification of faith, but also certain actions.

Would I be correct in this understanding. Forgive my reluctance to engage with scripture, I have inherited my religion's mistrust of translations without tafsir (scholarly explanation).

To Twisted,

So while the concept of a holy war (crusade) is abhorrent, the individual action of one killing in defence of family etc. could be seen as a 'holy' action, in that in many ways the risk involved could be seen as self-sacrifice, a worthy attribute? So you do not join the military because your role is essentially a state tasked killer, what do you think of Christians who do?

Coralie,

You mention one's king/ruler, in what sense is the King or ruler to act in the case that they are themselves Christian? It interests me that Christians are told to 'give unto Caesar', I always wondered what occurs when Caesar is Christian.

Emmy,

This answer seems to contradict the predominant theme of the other answers, is this due to a different understanding of scripture? Or some denominational difference?

to 98,

You would be correct in that understanding. Killing of an innocent is the third most grievous sin a Muslim can commit (after disbelief and idolatry). However the Sha'riah has a nuanced position on killing more broadly. Killing is an act of supreme finality, of immense consequence. Such is its gravity that even were one to act in self-defence and cause someone else’s death, it would still have a grave effect. This is the reason for the great status that true Mujahid (warriors in the way of God) have in the eyes of Allah, for one who can commit such an extreme act in defence of their community, and yet remain on the straight path, is truly of great worth. This is why it is seen as a righteous act, but only in the circumstance where a person is thus uncorrupted. The Messenger of God (sws) warned us against the assumption that all warriors were automatically Mujahid.

So essentially ‘turn the other cheek’ is not the final word on the matter?

 

[Jpark]

Never mind.

 

[OttomanScribe]

Abortion is unacceptable.

Even in the situation where Caesar makes it so?

War is acceptable.

Including wars of conquest?

 

[OttomanScribe]

My reply to this came up with a 'moderated' tag, did I do some wrong?

 

[berachah]

Perhaps the best way to understand Christianity is that we are not called to kill anyone that turns from the faith or blaspehemes the name of Jesus Christ - those that choose this way or pronounce violent action against those that oppose the Christian faith have yielded themselves to the desire of the flesh as opposed to the leading of the Holy Spirit that dwells within them through Jesus Christ.

In other words the direct opposite of the teachings of Islam.

Turn the other cheeck is the action you are looking for.

 

[Sketcher]

To Twisted,

So while the concept of a holy war (crusade) is abhorrent, the individual action of one killing in defence of family etc. could be seen as a 'holy' action, in that in many ways the risk involved could be seen as self-sacrifice, a worthy attribute? So you do not join the military because your role is essentially a state tasked killer, what do you think of Christians who do?

I would hope that they thought it over, and are joining to protect innocent people against vicious people. Every society needs people who do that. One could make the case that joining the military is an extension of protecting your own family, you're just protecting more people. That makes sense, but if I don't go to the killing myself, it will be less likely that I myself will have to kill. I don't want that on my conscience if I can avoid it; those who do have it on their conscience will have to deal with it.

 

[98cwitr]

You would be correct in that understanding. Killing of an innocent is the third most grievous sin a Muslim can commit (after disbelief and idolatry). However the Sha'riah has a nuanced position on killing more broadly. Killing is an act of supreme finality, of immense consequence. Such is its gravity that even were one to act in self-defence and cause someone else’s death, it would still have a grave effect. This is the reason for the great status that true Mujahid (warriors in the way of God) have in the eyes of Allah, for one who can commit such an extreme act in defence of their community, and yet remain on the straight path, is truly of great worth. This is why it is seen as a righteous act, but only in the circumstance where a person is thus uncorrupted. The Messenger of God (sws) warned us against the assumption that all warriors were automatically Mujahid.

So essentially ‘turn the other cheek’ is not the final word on the matter?

No offense, but it seriously sounds like a twisted view of "defense"

If someone breaks into my home and tries to hurt my family, I will kill them. I will not let them escape and then go burn down their house, kill their family and destroy his possessions. I will kill him and him alone, for he is responsible and there on the spot. If he is witty enough to escape, I will not give chase or retaliate, because he has left and the treat is gone (at least for the time being). What part of an offensive bombing seems defensive in the mind of a Muslim. I still do not understand because I do not share that perception on murder or the same outlook on God. I try to put myself into the shoes of a citizen of an American military occupied area and honestly it would infuriate me to no end. Would I kill these people? No, I'd pray for them.

Honestly I think God will destroy those that He means to, are "warriors" even necessary? Or it is quite frankly a perception out of a humanistic need for revenge?

 

[berachah]

The Christian journey is such:

At first we are filled with our own strength and purpose. We live for the things of Ceasar and of this world and we resolve conflict as only the carnal man knows how - through violence, intimidation and fear. We also cling to our own righteousness and believe that our good works and deeds are worthy of recognition before God.

As we mature in our faith we give way more and more to the leading of the Holy Spirit (who has been given through Jesus Christ). Now this Spirit is contrary to the ways of man. He leads us into peace, to overcome in love, to pray for others and to defeat the works of the devil through intercession and acts of obedience. (through a yielded life)

All Christians are at various levels of this walk of righteousness. God does not bind us up in strict rules and command us through fear. He wants us to make the decisions that lead to a more righteous life. From the outside, and to the critical, it may appear to be a compromising faith, but in reality is simply God wanting us to choose right, rather than having it forced upon us through fear.

That is the essence of the faith through Christ. The big difference between Christianity and Islam is that the more obedient Christians become in the faith, the more love, joy and peace they have. Obedient and devout Muslims on the other hand seem to have a lot more intolerance and dare I say it a lust for blood. Almost the reversal of the Christian's journey.....