What would Jesus do?
According to those on the Republican right, Jesus would bomb or even nuke enemies of the US state to ensure they no longer pose an immediate or potential future threat to our national interest. The death of innocent people in pursuit of our national interests – – aka “collateral damage” – – while regrettable, is justified as they aren’t the intended target. And contrary to our enemy, we at least try to minimize those types of killings.
Pat Robertson is OK with war or assassinating Hugo Chavez…but assassination is cheaper. “God is Pro-War“; title of article written by Jerry Falwell in 2004. Ann Coulter wants to bomb civilians during war. Hannity would start a war to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon…you know, that same thing which the USA has thousands?
A biblical concept like practicing the golden rule in foreign policy got Ron Paul booed by South Carolina conservatives.
UPDATE: Link to a good follow up article and a few of my favorite lines
Suppose that the military of another country insisted that it had the right to build over 1,000 military bases in foreign countries. How would Americans feel about it?
Suppose that the military of another country insisted that it had the right to station hundreds of thousands of troops on foreign soil. How would Americans feel about it?
Suppose that the government of another country claimed it had the right to assassinate anyone in the United States. How would Americans feel about it?
Suppose that the military of another country bombed American soil. How would Americans feel about it?
Suppose that the intelligence agencies of another country flew drone planes at will over the United States. How would Americans feel about it?
You know exactly how Americans would feel about these things. So why is it that foreigners aren’t expected to feel the same way?
As a reformed Republican, my support of the warfare state was one of the last fig leaves of statism to be removed. I mindlessly regurgitated the party line about being patriotic and advocated a strong national defense towards protecting our citizens and national interests. My conversion back to sound Christian theology on this topic is thanks to reading Murray Rothbard, Laurence Vance, and Tom Woods. As noted in a speech given by Laurence Vance
What do Jesus and the Bible actually say about war?
Sadly, many Christians now seem to think the Jesus supports the US warfare state. But let’s go straight to the source – –
“Thou Shall Not Kill” (Exodus 20:13; Deuteronomy 5:17), and repeated again for emphasis in the New Testament (Matthew 19:18; Romans 13:9)
“Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. (Romans 12:14)
“Recompense to no man evil for evil.” (Romans 12:17)
“Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.” (Romans 12:19)
“Overcome evil with good.” (Romans 12:21)
“And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely and be content with your wages.” (Luke 3:14)
“Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9)
“Live peaceably with all men” (Romans 12:18)
“Follow peace with all men” (Hebrews 12:14)
Or perhaps they should listen to their instinct/guts when viewing the Prince of Peace in a way a bit more representative of their “righteous foreign policy”
What do the various Christian denominations say?
Churches historically have been very anti-war. Catholic Just War Theory essentially states that war is to be avoided and undertaken defensively as an absolute last resort. Even the Southern Baptists held a very anti-war policy as noted in their statement from 1940
Because war is contrary to the mind and spirit of Christ, we believe that no war should be identified with the will of Christ. Our churches should not be made agents of war propaganda or recruiting stations. War thrives on and is perpetuated by hysteria, falsehood, and hate and the church has a solemn responsibility to make sure there is no blackout of love in time of war. When men and nations are going mad with hate it is the duty of Christ’s ministers and His churches to declare by spirit, word, and conduct the love of God in all men. In time of war it is our Christian responsibility to prepare for peace. We would, therefore, urge our churches to think and work toward a Christian social order in which a just and lasting peace can be realized. http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods107.html
Today is a different story. It is very sad fact that theological and moral debates to “when is war just?” very rarely occur in our churches these days. Instead we get a mix of blind nationalism and “support our troops” rhetoric. When boiled to its essence, it is church support for the “kill them over there, before they come over here” doctrine. If Iran blockades the Strait of Hormuz (and disrupting a portion of the US supply of oil), then the US government and military would be Biblically justified to bomb Iran’s population centers until Iran removed the blockade. Of course our targets would be primarily military or infrastructure, but we readily admit that hundreds or thousands of innocent civilians might accidentally be killed in the process.
But what happened to the Southern Baptists? This resolution is more indicative of their current stance on the military and war
- That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Indianapolis, Indiana, June 15—16, 2004, express appreciation to our service men and women in all branches of the military who are serving faithfully and honorably, both at home and abroad;
- That we encourage Southern Baptists to pray for the safety and well-being of our military personnel at all times, with particular attention to those who are in harm’s way;
- That we express pride and strong support for our American military.
Pragmatic Concern to Protect Ourselves
Now, let’s move away from reviewing Biblical and church doctrine, and review current reality. I have a question for those Christians who believe that the regrettable death of innocents is justified in protecting ourselves from those who wish to harm us (Biblical Utilitarians…if there can even be such a thing). How do we determine when the cost (deaths of innocents) outweighs the benefit (your perceived increase in safety)? Is there a specific death ratio that is tolerable and acceptable? 100 hostiles to 1 innocent? What about 15 innocent dead for ever 1 hostile as is estimated in Obama’s current drone attacks in Pakistan? Put differently in a thought exercise — if you could kill every single suspected terrorist currently hiding in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the only requirement was you had to put a gun to an innocent 3 year old child’s head and execute her, would the cost/benefit be worth it for you to pull the trigger?
What would Jesus do?
For extra credit, the link below is for some recommended additional reading. Murray Rothbard provides a compelling case for justifiable responses to aggression, and how state warfare is actually mass murder.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard26.html
And for a brief moment of nostalgia…