WHAT GIVES?
The following is a rather long essay, but I believe it provides some items of interest and some food for thought. Please check it out from beginning to end, if you can do so without falling asleep. I find the politicization of fundamentalist Christianity to be a scary thing for our country. That's what much of the following is based on, so here goes:
I do not profess to be a Christian, although I have always held a deep admiration for Jesus and many of the things he said and did. This is primarily because I have always been a pacifist, and because I believe Jesus was, at least, against war. I have great difficulty with some of the major tenets of Christianity, particularly an immaculate conception, the resurrection, and the concept of salvation. (I also don’t care much for “either you are for us or against us” as it is applied by our current administration!) I tend to be a “show me” kind of guy, skeptical of most things that involve what I consider superstitious or magical thinking. If something can be proven, that is, by science, I’m more likely to be a believer. Believe me, I have tried to make the “connection” necessary for becoming a Christian but it has simply never worked to the point that I would be able to escape the Christian “hell”, which is another concept I have difficulty accepting as being real… For the past five or six years, I simply have not bothered with making the effort, and I have never felt as relaxed or free. This is not to say that some people might find the same kind of freedom through “turning their lives over to Jesus”. I try not to think in absolutes when it comes to the religious beliefs of others; if my own religion is agnosticism/skepticism, I don’t think I am really hurting anybody, and that those who practice Christianity as Jesus instructed aren’t really hurting anyone either.
As for my religious background, I have been a regular attendee at a very progressive United Methodist Church in the past, for a total of 12 years during two stints, and I have read the New Testament through four times. I have studied various sections of it multiple times. I have only read the Old Testament through once, and I found it a chore, although I have read the first five or six books through, four or five times. I have visited numerous other churches including Catholic, Mormon, Nazarene, Assemblies of God, Episcopal, Lutheran, Presbyterian and various Foursquare/Pentecostal, and I have friends who adhere to each of those sets of doctrines. I have also tried meditation and some pagan stuff. Anyway, I don’t consider myself a slouch when it comes to Bible knowledge. I don’t like the way I see the United States heading when it comes to religion, because I believe politics and religion need to be independent of each other in order for us to retain many of our basic liberties as Americans. Thus, I offer you the following opinions, even though it is basically a politically-oriented rant.
I don’t see how so many people who profess to be Christians nowadays can support an administration that supports war as a means for controlling other nations. Interesting information can be found on war and Christianity at http://biblia.com/jesusbible/joshua3b.htm . In agreement with the author(s) at that site, I believe “it is difficult to justify even the just, defensive war if one takes seriously the message of the Sermon on the Mount, which is the heart of the Gospel” (Mat.5:28-42).
Consider these frequently-quoted words. I believe all are open to various interpretations, but if one accepts the Bible as inerrant, then these words should be absolute truth:
“Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword…”(Mat.26:50-54)
“You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.” (Mat.5:33-41).
"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. So you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." (Mt.23:27-28).
Is the Iraq War at “just war”? It may well NOT be. The “Just War” concept has been around for a long time. St. Augustine considered war ethics in the 4th century, and St. Thomas Aquinas did similarly in the 13th century.
The following lengthy excerpt is from http://biblia.com/jesusbible/joshua3c.htm , and use here for illustrative purposes:
“The "Christian just war theory" (justum bellum), is a 1600-year-old attempt to answer the questions: 1- "When is it permissible to wage war?" (jus ad bellum), 2- And "What are the rules that govern just and fair conduct in war and after war, what are the limitations on the ways we wage war?" (jus in bello).”
Criteria of a Just War:
The criterion of just cause classically and explicitly included one or more of three possibilities: 1- Defense against wrongful attack, 2- Retaking something wrongly taken, 3- Or punishment of evil.
The just war theory is a largely Christian philosophy that attempts to reconcile three things: 1- Taking human life is seriously wrong, 2- States have a duty to defend their citizens, and defend justice, 3- Protecting innocent human life and defending important moral values sometimes requires willingness to use force and violence.
A war is only a Just War if it is both justified (Jus ad Bellum), and carried out in the right way (Jus in Bello). Some wars fought for noble causes have been rendered unjust because of the way in which they were fought.
Jus ad Bellum: The conditions under which the use of military force is justified:
1- The war must be for a just cause.
2- The war must be lawfully declared by a lawful authority.
3- The intention behind the war must be good:
- Good intentions include: creating, restoring or keeping a just peace, righting a wrong, assisting the innocent.
- Bad intentions include: Seeking power or imperialism, demonstrating the power of a state, grabbing land or goods, or enslaving people, hatred of the enemy, genocide, personal or national glory, revenge, preserving colonial power.
4- All other ways of resolving the problem should have been tried fist: War must be the last resort!
5- There must be a reasonable chance of success.
6- The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace.
B- Jus in Bello: How to conduct a war in an ethical manner:
7- Innocent people and non-combatants should not be harmed.
8- Only appropriate force should be used.
9- After the fighting is over:
- There must be respect and mercy for the defeated.
- There may be no acts of vengeance, nor cruelty, nor deeds of imperialism.
- If possible, the nation defeated should be helped to its complete restoration, physically, economically, and the welfare of the citizens... The USA did a good job after victory in Japan, Germany, Korea, Vietnam, and it is trying to do the same in Afghanistan, Iraq... North Korea is now a hell compared with the bliss of South Korea!
10- Internationally agreed conventions regulating war:
- Where countries have signed a convention governing warfare, soldiers are considered to merit punishment if they break any of the rules in that convention.
The "Just War" is a "theory", it has done good to educate authorities and to prevent some wars ... but it is not good enough! With it, hundreds of horrible bloody wars have occurred in the last 1600 years... and maybe it is time to think of a new way, for everybody, and most specially for Christians, considering the teachings of the Gospels and the personal pacifist attitude of Pope John Paul II and many other modern Christian leaders.
St. Thomas More in his "Utopia," or ideal society, allowed for war only as a defensive measure. But "in reality no war that he knew in history, in the present, or in the foreseeable future was just." So St. Thomas More used the Just War in theory to condemn all wars in reality.
Snave returns: Count me with Thomas More. Of course I am glad Hitler didn’t take over the world, and of course the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and we warred against them. Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade Center towers, and we have been trying to figure out how to stop terrorism. Just the same, I don’t see how any war can be considered “good”, or even “just” when it gets right down to it.
In my mind, a “culture of life” should be the same as a “culture of love”, and the “culture of love” doesn’t have to be driven by any particular religion. It needs to be driven by respect for humanity and for life in general. I think that people who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible or who look to the Bible as a guidebook for their lives should mostly heed the words of Jesus. He was Christ, and the faith is referred to as Christianity, after all… it isn’t Paulianity or Mosianity. Jesus didn’t organize or sponsor wars, and he also never mentioned abortion or denying civil rights to people based on their race, creed, religion or sexual preferences. Sure, he did speak about bringing a fire, and about bringing a sword… but I believe his weapons were his words, and the fire he spoke of was a fire within.
Some of us, like me, have had difficulty connecting with that fire. Those who continue to seek that fire, or who believe they have connected with it, might consider questioning their faith from time to time. Questioning leads to answers, and digesting answers can lead to growth. If we need to grow toward a “culture of love”, or even toward a “culture of life”, then I think Christians should question whether or not they are acting as Jesus instructed. Those who blindly support politicians who support war may be especially in need. If you are the praying type, pray for them. If you’re like me, try and at least send them some good vibes.
I do not profess to be a Christian, although I have always held a deep admiration for Jesus and many of the things he said and did. This is primarily because I have always been a pacifist, and because I believe Jesus was, at least, against war. I have great difficulty with some of the major tenets of Christianity, particularly an immaculate conception, the resurrection, and the concept of salvation. (I also don’t care much for “either you are for us or against us” as it is applied by our current administration!) I tend to be a “show me” kind of guy, skeptical of most things that involve what I consider superstitious or magical thinking. If something can be proven, that is, by science, I’m more likely to be a believer. Believe me, I have tried to make the “connection” necessary for becoming a Christian but it has simply never worked to the point that I would be able to escape the Christian “hell”, which is another concept I have difficulty accepting as being real… For the past five or six years, I simply have not bothered with making the effort, and I have never felt as relaxed or free. This is not to say that some people might find the same kind of freedom through “turning their lives over to Jesus”. I try not to think in absolutes when it comes to the religious beliefs of others; if my own religion is agnosticism/skepticism, I don’t think I am really hurting anybody, and that those who practice Christianity as Jesus instructed aren’t really hurting anyone either.
As for my religious background, I have been a regular attendee at a very progressive United Methodist Church in the past, for a total of 12 years during two stints, and I have read the New Testament through four times. I have studied various sections of it multiple times. I have only read the Old Testament through once, and I found it a chore, although I have read the first five or six books through, four or five times. I have visited numerous other churches including Catholic, Mormon, Nazarene, Assemblies of God, Episcopal, Lutheran, Presbyterian and various Foursquare/Pentecostal, and I have friends who adhere to each of those sets of doctrines. I have also tried meditation and some pagan stuff. Anyway, I don’t consider myself a slouch when it comes to Bible knowledge. I don’t like the way I see the United States heading when it comes to religion, because I believe politics and religion need to be independent of each other in order for us to retain many of our basic liberties as Americans. Thus, I offer you the following opinions, even though it is basically a politically-oriented rant.
I don’t see how so many people who profess to be Christians nowadays can support an administration that supports war as a means for controlling other nations. Interesting information can be found on war and Christianity at http://biblia.com/jesusbible/joshua3b.htm . In agreement with the author(s) at that site, I believe “it is difficult to justify even the just, defensive war if one takes seriously the message of the Sermon on the Mount, which is the heart of the Gospel” (Mat.5:28-42).
Consider these frequently-quoted words. I believe all are open to various interpretations, but if one accepts the Bible as inerrant, then these words should be absolute truth:
“Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword…”(Mat.26:50-54)
“You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.” (Mat.5:33-41).
"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. So you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." (Mt.23:27-28).
Is the Iraq War at “just war”? It may well NOT be. The “Just War” concept has been around for a long time. St. Augustine considered war ethics in the 4th century, and St. Thomas Aquinas did similarly in the 13th century.
The following lengthy excerpt is from http://biblia.com/jesusbible/joshua3c.htm , and use here for illustrative purposes:
“The "Christian just war theory" (justum bellum), is a 1600-year-old attempt to answer the questions: 1- "When is it permissible to wage war?" (jus ad bellum), 2- And "What are the rules that govern just and fair conduct in war and after war, what are the limitations on the ways we wage war?" (jus in bello).”
Criteria of a Just War:
The criterion of just cause classically and explicitly included one or more of three possibilities: 1- Defense against wrongful attack, 2- Retaking something wrongly taken, 3- Or punishment of evil.
The just war theory is a largely Christian philosophy that attempts to reconcile three things: 1- Taking human life is seriously wrong, 2- States have a duty to defend their citizens, and defend justice, 3- Protecting innocent human life and defending important moral values sometimes requires willingness to use force and violence.
A war is only a Just War if it is both justified (Jus ad Bellum), and carried out in the right way (Jus in Bello). Some wars fought for noble causes have been rendered unjust because of the way in which they were fought.
Jus ad Bellum: The conditions under which the use of military force is justified:
1- The war must be for a just cause.
2- The war must be lawfully declared by a lawful authority.
3- The intention behind the war must be good:
- Good intentions include: creating, restoring or keeping a just peace, righting a wrong, assisting the innocent.
- Bad intentions include: Seeking power or imperialism, demonstrating the power of a state, grabbing land or goods, or enslaving people, hatred of the enemy, genocide, personal or national glory, revenge, preserving colonial power.
4- All other ways of resolving the problem should have been tried fist: War must be the last resort!
5- There must be a reasonable chance of success.
6- The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace.
B- Jus in Bello: How to conduct a war in an ethical manner:
7- Innocent people and non-combatants should not be harmed.
8- Only appropriate force should be used.
9- After the fighting is over:
- There must be respect and mercy for the defeated.
- There may be no acts of vengeance, nor cruelty, nor deeds of imperialism.
- If possible, the nation defeated should be helped to its complete restoration, physically, economically, and the welfare of the citizens... The USA did a good job after victory in Japan, Germany, Korea, Vietnam, and it is trying to do the same in Afghanistan, Iraq... North Korea is now a hell compared with the bliss of South Korea!
10- Internationally agreed conventions regulating war:
- Where countries have signed a convention governing warfare, soldiers are considered to merit punishment if they break any of the rules in that convention.
The "Just War" is a "theory", it has done good to educate authorities and to prevent some wars ... but it is not good enough! With it, hundreds of horrible bloody wars have occurred in the last 1600 years... and maybe it is time to think of a new way, for everybody, and most specially for Christians, considering the teachings of the Gospels and the personal pacifist attitude of Pope John Paul II and many other modern Christian leaders.
St. Thomas More in his "Utopia," or ideal society, allowed for war only as a defensive measure. But "in reality no war that he knew in history, in the present, or in the foreseeable future was just." So St. Thomas More used the Just War in theory to condemn all wars in reality.
Snave returns: Count me with Thomas More. Of course I am glad Hitler didn’t take over the world, and of course the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and we warred against them. Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade Center towers, and we have been trying to figure out how to stop terrorism. Just the same, I don’t see how any war can be considered “good”, or even “just” when it gets right down to it.
In my mind, a “culture of life” should be the same as a “culture of love”, and the “culture of love” doesn’t have to be driven by any particular religion. It needs to be driven by respect for humanity and for life in general. I think that people who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible or who look to the Bible as a guidebook for their lives should mostly heed the words of Jesus. He was Christ, and the faith is referred to as Christianity, after all… it isn’t Paulianity or Mosianity. Jesus didn’t organize or sponsor wars, and he also never mentioned abortion or denying civil rights to people based on their race, creed, religion or sexual preferences. Sure, he did speak about bringing a fire, and about bringing a sword… but I believe his weapons were his words, and the fire he spoke of was a fire within.
Some of us, like me, have had difficulty connecting with that fire. Those who continue to seek that fire, or who believe they have connected with it, might consider questioning their faith from time to time. Questioning leads to answers, and digesting answers can lead to growth. If we need to grow toward a “culture of love”, or even toward a “culture of life”, then I think Christians should question whether or not they are acting as Jesus instructed. Those who blindly support politicians who support war may be especially in need. If you are the praying type, pray for them. If you’re like me, try and at least send them some good vibes.
2 Comments:
Thanks, OKLib. In large part my essay is a bit cathartic, a way for me to sort out my thoughts about Christianity. I know it's tough to consider absolute truths to some as relative to others. I guess my main gist is that Jesus didn't advocate people hurting each other, and some of his followers today seem to suggest that it's o.k. to do just that.
I think that if more of his followers were like you in their approach, things would be more peaceful in our political arena, particularly when it comes to foreign policy.
Good post, Snave. As you probably know, I'm right there with you in the land of Uncertainty. Though I have to admit you've been more adventurous about sampling other denominations and spiritual options.
I guess the bottom line for me is that this is one little planet in a universe that extends forever in every direction. As I've gotten older I guess I've decided it's highly unlikely any of my fellow humans could really understand the mind of a being who supposedly created all that real estate.
I totally understand the emotional need to live inside some spiritual framework but the judgemental attitudes makes it all seem ludicrous.
Post a Comment
<< Home