if you kill some one in a war, would you go to hell?

Question

or would you be deemed hell-bound?

Answer 1

Absolutely not: the commandment is to do no murder (defined as : lying in wait to do fatal harm) premeditated murder.
Warfare is to defend Country and family.
It is perfectly Biblical to do that, and even further, it is Biblical that if someone is breaking into your home to do harm to your family, blow them away with your shotgun. Anyone who would not defend their family deserves what they get. Its called self-defense.

Answer 2

The Fifth Commandment forbids the intentional destruction of human life. Because of the evils and injustices that accompany all war, the Church insistently urges everyone to prayer so that the divine Goodness may free us from the ancient bondage of war (CCC 2307). Thus, all citizens and all governments are obliged to work for the avoidance of war (CCC 2308).

The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor…The one is intended, the other is not (CCC 2263). However, the Fifth Commandment forbids doing anything with the intention of indirectly bringing about a person’s death without grave reason (see CCC 2269).

Unintentional killing is not morally imputable. But one is not exonerated from grave offense if, without proportionate reasons, he has acted in a way that brings about someone’s death, even without the intention to do so (CCC 2269).

Legitimate defense cannot only be a right but a grave duty for someone responsible for another’s life (CCC 2265). Preserving the common good of society requires rendering the aggressor unable to inflict harm (CCC. 2266). The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

1. The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave and certain;

2. All other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

3. There must be serious prospects of success; and,

4. The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what the Church calls the “Just War” doctrine (see CCC 2309). This doctrine was first introduced by St. Augustine in the fourth century, and later refined by St. Thomas Aquinas in the Middle Ages.

Answer 3

Loves these explanations from christians. More interpretations than you can shake a stick at. If you believe and follow the bible it very clearly states ..... Thou shall not kill..........it doesn't give a list of exceptions. So if you are a believer and have no doubt that the bible is the word of god then if you kill at all, you are doomed. But then I know it is confusing since the god of the bible kills on a regular basis. Is he being hypocritical of his own teachings or is he just the 'special case'?

Answer 4

Your or is the same as the first part of your question. All circumstances of taken another's life must be judged with all factors visible. One can kill innocently, accidently, with no malfeasance, and unintentionally. One can kill in defense of self and home. One can kill with evil, thus committing murder. All these can me done in times of war and/or times of peace.

Answer 5

Killing should be killing either way hell or no hell. Taking a life of someone is still taking their life if there is a reason or not. While yes you are defending yourself you are still killing someone else defending their self. So who is in the right?

Answer 6

The Buddha taught that while war is regrettable the soldier who kills for a just cause, for example to protect others will not be punished for his actions.

Answer 7

No. This question has been recycled so many times, it wins the award of Green Peace.

Answer 8

No, especially if you're an American soldier.

Americans are faced with the reality that if they don't kill terrorists, the terrorists will kill innocent women and children in the malls, in weddings, in funerals, and in mosques and churches.

So we're faced with the dilemma that if we don't use our superior training and equipment, we're guilty of being complicit in terrorism.

We therefore have a moral obligation to hunt terrorists down like the ditch-pigs they are and kill them where they stand, and God is pleased by our self-sacrificing acts on behalf of his children.

Answer 9

No. Its , not . Its still sinful - ish though, so I suppose it would go negative on your record.

And Darryl/ The Heretic, Im related to Sargeant York, and he did not go to hell. Sorry.

Answer 10

I would imagine that it depends.

killing a an innocent civilian in cold blood would definitely be wrong while killing an armed soldier who is trying to kill you would be self defense.