This is a question particularly for Christians who support the Bush administration and/or the War on Terror. And I'm not asking this facetiously... I'm serious. This seems like a HUGE contradiction and I honestly don't understand it. The Bush administration and their right-wing cronies claim to be Christians, and yet they've chosen to invade countries, kill terrorists and other "bad guys," and bomb places back to the stone age. They've argued for the necessity of torture, claimed that certain numbers of Iraqi civilian casualties are "acceptable," and assassinated opposition leaders.
How many bombs do you think Jesus would have dropped in retaliation if he had been President on 9/11? Would Jesus "waterboard" terror suspects?
2006-07-10
08:39:26
·
13 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
I'm neither Christian nor hippie (though some of your vitriol is amusing). I'm asking because I find it interesting that people claim to be Christian, but then completely ignore the message of the man they're supposedly following (citing other people's violence as a justification for their own violence).
Jesus, however, when faced with his own death, accepted it without a fight... Told his apostles to stop fighting and just accept it. If you, as a Christian, honestly believed and trusted in God and Jesus, you wouldn't worry about being bombed. Worst case scenario: you go to heaven, right?
But you do worry about it. And you want revenge. And you want protection through violence. And you're okay with torture, if it stops terror. But, if Jesus heard some of these supposedly "christian" people advocating war and violence, I think he'd vomit.
Being a Christian is about trying to walk Jesus's path, but many supposed Christians today are rejecting his path outright.
2006-07-10
09:04:24 ·
update #1
Mr. Gogee: At no point in this question or my comments have I intimated what my personal thoughts on the subject are. I'm simply asking people who claim to follow Christ how they justify indulging the violent solutions of humans when their own spiritual leader and "savior" advised exactly the opposite. It's a HUGE contradiction. You make a lot of justifications for violence (the "it's the way of the world" and "we're only human" approaches), but those justifications are exactly the OPPOSITE of what Jesus preached and did. When faced with his own death, he didn't fight back or "justifiably" defend himself. There were no reasons good enough for him to lead his apostles into war. He chose peace at the expense of his own pain and death. That was the nobility of his path.
Embrace whichever view you like... I don't care (and, yeah, I'd kill a burglar, without a second thought), but I'm curious how people who identify themselves as Christians justify the contradiction in themselves.
2006-07-10
09:49:26 ·
update #2
Quikzip: Turning the other cheek doesn't mean just sitting there and letting people beat up on you. It means that if you're standing on, say, your property and someone comes up and punches you to make you leave (or oppress you in some way), you don't fight back... but you also don't back down. You stand your ground, non-violently, and maintain your position.
In the case of 9/11, I believe President Jesus would've rebuilt the towers to demonstrate that terrorism is not going to drive us away or cause us to fall apart. He would blunt it's effectiveness as a tool by not allowing it to pull him into the human cycle of neverending, tit-for-tat violence.
Monie: I have read the bible If YOU read the bible, you'd see that, although there were wars and such, Jesus never led any. In fact, when asked, he refused to do so.
That goes for you too, Freebird. Jesus never "stamped out" anything. His message was love, even if that meant dying to further the cause of nonviolence.
2006-07-10
09:58:12 ·
update #3
For those of you "christians" who insist that Jesus would "crucify terrorists," "blow" his enemies "off the map," "lead a war," etc:
The Bible's final reference to "an eye for an eye" is in the gospels: "You have heard it said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I say unto you, do not resist him who is evil" (Matt. 5:38, 39). Jesus' standard fulfills and transcends " an eye for an eye." Governments are not merely forbidden to exercise arbitrary powers of coercion; Jesus forbids violence as a response to violence. This teaching is radical beyond belief and Christians have struggled with it ever since. Jesus saw what French philosopher Rene Girard calls "the inherent complicity between culture and violence"; Jesus saw the way humans have always employed scapegoating and severe, symbolic punishments to affirm their values and boost their egos. Indeed, He died at the hands of those who deemed Him a threat to the HONOR of Caesar.
--Paul Bischke
2006-07-11
13:58:21 ·
update #4