Jesus Hated War -- Why Do Christians Love It So Much?

...and has been perverted to be so for a thousand years.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Interesting article, but the Jesus character in the New Testament said in Matthew 10:34 - "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword"

I'm not interested in getting into a discussion about "What Jesus really meant was . . ." I don't play games with interpretations and hidden messages. It says: "I come not to bring peace . . . " So, real Christians are advocates of war.

As an atheist, I believe in the Golden Rule which existed many hundreds of years before the books of the New Testament were written.

This statement: "Today however, it is obvious that the vast majority of professed Christians have been misled, intentionally or unintentionally, into believing that they can immerse themselves in un-Christ-like realities like war and killing and somehow still be following the gentle Jesus."

Very naive. How can someone be regarded as a gentleman when he goes around preaching about Hell fire and eternal damnation? And the followers of this Jesus character, like St. Paul, was a mean-spirited person himself--adding to the negativity of this religion.

No. The world would be a much better place without religion and other ideologies. My advice is to throw away the bible and don't expose your children to it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If confronted with a Christian Advocating war you should immediately grab a look at what their denomination professes. Either the person question is being disingenuous or he's be indoctrinated into something calling itself Christianity which denounces the teachings of Christ.

Historically Christians would pray for a brief and painless end to wars and work to reduce the pain of those suffering for them; that's the mark of a real Christian denomination.

Any Christian rallying for a war cannot be the real thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

he is just pointing out the hypocrisy of Christians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And few are better at looting, raping and murdering than Christians. It's a well-documented part of their religion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is a Cain and Abel thing

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

However, God does seem to be blessing America because, in theory, given the destruction and carnage, wreaked in Iraq and Afghanistan, America should be over-run with terrorists. The same goes for her allies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ohh that is pretty sharp I like it! make a good bumper sticker or t shirt

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus is not mentioned in the Roman Histories written at the supposed time and life of Jesus. The Jesus story may be based on the life of Yeishu ha Notzri who lived 150 years before the supposed life of Jesus. Yeishu ha Notzri was influenced by the Greeks and performed all the acts of the purported Jesus. The Romans might have massaged the story of Yeishu ha Notzri to more adequately reflect the Roman sensibilities in order to placate the Jews. It may be that their scheme backfired and the Christ movement began to take on a life of its own. Rome then began assimilating and directing the Christ movement for its on advantage in order to placate the disparate peoples of their far flung empire. Through Ignatius at Antioch, Rome then crafted the Bible to support their empire. There is a lot of historical support for this.

So when we say that Jesus was a man of peace we are saying that portion of the Bible that talks about turning the other cheek is talking about a man of peace.

But consider this from the introduction to the King James Bible: "It doth certainly belong unto Kings, yea, it doth specially belong unto them, to have care of Religion, yea, it doth specially belong unto them, to have care of Religion, yea, to know it aright, yea, to profess it zealously, yea to promote it to the uttermost of their power. This is their glory before all nations which mean well, and this will bring unto them a far most excellent weight of glory in the day of the Lord Jesus. For the Scripture saith not in vain, "Them that honor me, I will honor," [1 Sam 2:30] neither was it a vain word that Eusebius delivered long ago, that piety towards God was the weapon.

But then consider Ephesians(6:5)

"Servants, be obedient to them that are [your] masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; {6:6} Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart;"

We have two paragraphs here that suggest that the King is the rightful administrator of religion while at the same time we have servents being admonished to serve their masters as they would God.

As for using faith as a weapon, consider Corinthians 2 {10:4}

"For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling
down of strong holds;) {10:5} Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; {10:6} And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when our obedience is fulfilled."

So the only knowledge that is to be tolerated is knowledge in God, but history has shown that knowledge in God is obeisance to the ruler, be it the Assyrians, the Sumerians, the Akkadians, the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans etc. etc. etc. Religion has always been used to maintain control of the population. Whether that is good or bad depends on whether the current rule is mostly curative or mostly injurious.

Personally I like a Federal Democratic Republic that has no national religion, where creative though is allowed a chance to grow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Curious why the left wing media is afraid of muslims. They are responsible for more death and destruction on earth than any other group or religion. Yet, the leftwing nuts are afraid to say what is so obvious.

Are you afraid to get on their hit list like so many others who have dared to criticize them?

What else is so obvious is the author needs a history lesson. Gulf War 1 was in response to Saddam taking over Kuwait , plundering that nation and raping it's women on a large scale. I'm sure leftwing nuts would just as soon sit by and let that happen - again, no criticism of muslims ad surely nothing to do with religion. Gulf 2 and Afhanistan, nothing to do with religion, unless you're a muslim then for sure it's all about religion.

Why no mention of the enormous death in africa - again, by muslims! Next we'll see some articles on how the recent terror bomber was just a poor misunderstood muslim and it's America's fault that he tried to destroy a jet and kill hundreds if not thousands of people!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Being dominant in the 12th century, the Church persecuted Muslims, Jews and heretics. The Inquisition lasted till 1919, as I recall.

Protestants have battled Catholics for over 600 years. Many still reject the Jesus preaching against war. Bad habits die hard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If there's only one true God, then there's only one right way to live. Only one right way to eat, worship, screw, etc. Combine that with the need to proselytize and you've got a lovely mixture.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

we are overrun with terrorists. Alex Jones and the criminal Zionists incite wars and commit terrorism. They are engineering their own evil utopia.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ever heard of Ron Paul?

LOTS of Christians are opposed to war, including my mother who attends church every Sunday.

Why can't you Christian-hating bigots just once criticize Islam? And using Islam-specific language and not in that "Well, I think ALL religions are equally evil," crap.

Anyone who thinks all religions are equally evil is blatantly retarded. No honest person can possibly think that Buddhism is as violent as Islam or Judaism.

The War in Iraq is NOT a Christian Crusade! It's about three things: 1) Oil 2) Zionism 3) Weapons Contracts. It has nothing to do with Christianity!

I sincerely hope for a DeMint/Palin ticket in 2012, not because I'm gullible enough to think that "hope" or "change" will ever come (unlike some retarded sheep I can name), but just because their citations of God in their daily language will send you militant Marxists into such a panty-twisting fit, you might finally make good on your perennial promise to move to Canada.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Was it the followers of Christ who bayed for blood, or the Church-ite scum of the big box churches, their Zio-Nazi masters and the spiritually empty suits of Labour and the Socialist Party in Germany who supported it? Did not the Communist Party of Iraq jump into bed with the Chimp in his war for Oil and Israel in Iraq? Franklin Graham and the gutter animals of the Rapturist Lynchburg, Virginia persuasion...with their Scofield Bibles, their fat wifes and vapid offspring?


And, lets not forget Israel's friends in synagogue and church in America who earnestly support this racist, expansionist entity, led
by elements directly involved for decades in aggressive war and West Bank apartheid... wholesale murder, torture and corruption.

Was it not Labour under Blair and Brown that supported Bush? And, Merkle the Ferkel of the German socialist party who supported these wars as well?

Does anyone think it was organized Christianity that orchestrated the false flag operations of 9-11, planned the wars that followed, penned the strategy of the Cheney DoD at the end of the Poppy Bush's Administration for the move into the Balkans and the Persian Gulf Region? Was it the Christians who moved trillions to the bankers? Tanked the economy?

No! They simply followed along with the rest of the fatuous American crowd...watching reality TV, getting fat and trusting the little men and little women in the talking box in the family room.

To their eternal shame, the Church-ites were no different than their secularist neighbors in betraying right and embracing wrong and would do well to look beyond the yipping and yapping coming from the pulpit and listen to might be called 'the Christ within.'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

and have used it as a smoke-screen for imperialism; its a centuries old tradition.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

1) "If war-makers mix religion and politics by invoking God’s blessings on the cannons and the cannon fodder, shouldn’t the churches, which are supposed to be the consciences of the nation, apply core Christian ethical principles to the war question and refuse to cooperate with the slaughter of fellow children of God?"

"Fellow children of God"? I thought the Egyptians were also in this category, and yet the "all-merciful" god of the Christians slayed them as if they were lice. Weren't they "fellow children of God" too?

2) "Today however, it is obvious that the vast majority of professed Christians have been misled, intentionally or unintentionally, into believing that they can immerse themselves in un-Christ-like realities like war and killing and somehow still be following the gentle Jesus."

Well, these people have been misled into believing a snake spoke to a woman and led her into "original sin". They've been misled into thinking a man endured life inside of a big fish and that a man successfully gathered all living things inside of an arch. If people, adult people that is, believe in such fables, is not really surprising the kind of nonsense you can get them to believe, is it?

3) "Those PTSD-afflicted ex-church-going combat veterans who lost their faith in the wars, along with their traumatized families, found out much too late that they had not been warned by the very institutions that theoretically should have courageously and faithfully taken on the heavy responsibility to teach private and public morality."

Should they? Are you sure? How come an institution that condemns a man to live without sex and still thinks everything will be just fine for him be enabled to talk about "public morality"? What about the scandals involving priests and children? How moral is that, huh?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sorry, Jesus Christ wasn't based on any real historical figure, he was made up out of whole cloth using the Hebrew-Aramaic scriptures as the guide after the Romans destroyed the Temple of Jerusalem and wiped out its population in 70 C.E., then backdated 40 years to create an instant prophet of Jehovah who had been rejected and therefore had brought the calamity on. Check out my cool page on the subject at http://jehovahswitless.weebly.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He knew what was in the sky over Sodom he knew the terrible thing that took the life for look at what was over Gomorrah he will not need a sword because his voice is truth.
The closet thing you will ever be know to Christ is love.
there is no love in war so Christ is against it
there are things that where changed in the bible the flawed book of the account of Christ
there is another book written in every herart that can never be burned and the holy spirit of the only god can teach it to you.
I hope and pray i am getting threw to you people because I am one of the advocate between this world and another if this one cannot be salvaged because of the way mankind has put man's law over god's then it will be completely destroyed
I have hope that people will change
I have the hope Paul had in you.
Please don't let us down The god without a name wants you to no something that he is proud of his witnesses and I am one.
You will all hate me because I have to curse you all even whole cities for not listening to the shadow of Christ me.
I am like john before Christ and the end is near if we do not change
period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not one whit. All three warrior cults were a major threat to human existence ever since their invention. These sons of Abraham hate God's creation with a pathological vehemence. They are sick, twisted distortions of thought that bear no viable semblance to spirituality never mind reason.

I am so tired of these bastards pulling the reins on human achievement. God, I wish you would please remove these abominations from our planet. Please send them somewhere they can no longer do such harm--where they can slaughter each other to their hearts' content and where we don't have to be a party to their suicidal insanity any longer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I too have been deeply troubled by how so many people who call themselves Christians seem so warlike. The Christian right provided Bush with his most dependable base of support for the war on Iraq. I have come to believe that they support war because
they see the world as a stage for the war between good and evil. They see God in a
perpetual battle with the power of evil, a war between the light and the
darkness. They give great power to the darkness and essentially worship a God
of War that they believe can destroy the darkness. Their worship of a God of War
leads them to support violence and the use of military force. They see everything in terms of battle and personify their enemies as the agents of darkness. They believe that their enemies must be completely destroyed.
However, as a Quaker, I believe in the God of Love, not the God of War. Evil is not the presence of some dark power outside of us. Evil is the absence of the light of God within us. The fundamental Quaker belief is that the light of God is present within each of us and is only revealed by love which is why we are commanded to love our enemies. Only the light of God can displace the darkness. The fact that
many churches worship the God of War makes them
Christian in name only.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When the soldiers asked John the Baptist, "And what shall we do?" he replied, "Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages." Since they could not remain soldiers and practice nonviolence, this passage suggests he told them to put down their weapons and seek a peaceful profession.

Jesus, in his Sermon on the Mount, said: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God." (Matthew 5:9) Expressing concern for God's children, he said, "Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness sake; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

"In concrete and vivid precepts," writes Professor G.J. Heering in The Fall of Christianity, "the Sermon on the Mount set forth the character and conduct of those who really follow Jesus: of those who may really be called God's children; of those who shall submit to the rule of God, of those who shall enter His Kingdom; in short, of true Christians: the pure in heart, the meek, the peacemakers, those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, and are willing to suffer for its sake. They are the salt of the earth and the light of the world.

"And then follow the commandments; 'Ye shall keep yourselves from killing but also from revenge. And in place of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, resist not that which is evil; but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.' Can one find one little implication in these words that does not plead for peace or that does not shrink from violence in every degree or form?

"Jesus does not give detached commands. He brings you whole being and doing and suffering under the compulsion of one single principle. 'Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy, but i say unto you: love your enemies, do good to them that hate you, bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you: that ye may be sons of your Father which is in heaven.' (Matthew 5:43-45; Luke 6:27-38)

"'Love even your enemy!' This is the highest demand that can ever be made. This love of enemy is not just one virtue among many, but the fairest flower of all human conduct.

"It is recognized that these commands though lay stress on the inward disposition and have not the force of law, were certainly meant as concrete instructions for the followers of Jesus. They had to be obeyed. Their carrying out was counted on. Behind these injunctions, which admit no cleavage between conduct and character, stands the newly sent Ambassador of God with His 'But I say unto you.'

"Not only the war of aggression but also defensive warfare is ruled out by the Sermon on the Mount...the gospel condemns war...We have primarily to recognize, however hard it may be to do so, that the waging of war has no place in the moral and spiritual teachings of Jesus.

"Hippolytus, second century Christian father and historian, wrote what he considered the Apostolic tradition and so the authentic Christian teaching, maintained, that when he applied for admission to the Christian fellowship, a solider must refuse to kill men, even if he were commanded by his superiors to do so and also must not take an oath.

"Justin Martyr...(Cir. AD 150) wrote:

"'Christians seek no earthly realm, but a heavenly, and that this will be a realm of peace. The prophecy of Isaiah--that swords shall be beaten into plowshares and spears to pruning hooks begins to find fulfillment in the missions of Christians. For we refrain from the making of war on our enemies, but gladly go to death for Christ's sake. Christians are warriors of a different world, peaceful fighters. For Caesar's soldiers possess nothing which they can lose more precious than their life, while our love goes out to that eternal life which God will give.'"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The apostle Paul taught that Christian warfare is spiritual. (Romans 13:12) According to Professor Heering: "Origen, the great Christian father of the second century, would hear nothing of earthly military service: he regarded it as wholly forbidden:

"'We Christians no longer take up sword against nation, nor do we learn war any more, having become children of peace for the sake of Jesus who is our leader. We do not serve as soldiers under the Emperor, even though he requires it.

"'Persons who possess authority to kill, or soldiers, should not kill at all, even when it is commanded of them. Every one who receives a distinctive leading position, or a magisterial power, and does not clothe himself in the weaponlessness of which is becoming to the Gospel, should be separated from the flock.'"

Although he was the son of a military officer, the early Christian father Tertullian (AD 200) was a vegetarian opposed to militarism and violence. Professor Heering observes: "The question Tertullian faces is not whether a Christian may be a soldier, but even whether a soldier may be allowed within the Church. He answers 'No.' The soldier who becomes a Christian ought to leave the army. 'One soul cannot be true to two lords'God and Caesar. How shall a Christian man wage war; nay, how shall he even be a soldier in peace time, without the sword, which the Lord has taken away?--for in disarming Peter he ungirded every soldier.'"

The great Church father Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, denounced war and wrote:

"The whole earth is drenched in adversaries' blood, and if murder is committed, privately it is a crime, but if it happens with State authority, courage is the name for it: not the goodness of the cause, but the greatness of the cruelty makes the abominations blameless."

Attacking even capital punishment, Cyprian wrote: "Christians are not allowed to kill, it is not permitted to guiltless to put even the guilty to death."

The Christian writer Lactantius of Bithinia wrote about the Sixth Commandment ("Thou shalt not kill") as follows:

"When God prohibits killing, he not only forbids us to commit brigandage, which is not allowed even by public laws, but he warns us not to do even those things which are legal among men. And so it will not be lawful for a just man to serve as a soldier for justice itself is his military service, nor to accuse anyone of a capital offense, because it makes no difference whether they kill with a sword or with a word, since killing itself is forbidden."

Erasmus, a fifteenth century Christian father, scholar and theologian, considered it a sacrelige for a soldier to stitch the cross on his standard. "The cross," he said, "is the banner and standard of Him who has overcome and triumphed, not by fighting and slaying, but by His own bitter death. With the cross do ye deprive the life of your brother, whose life was rescued by the cross?

"O, you cruel, shameless lips: how dare ye call Father whilst ye rob your brother of Life?

"'Hallowed by Thy name': how can the name of God be more dishonored than by war?

"'Thy kingdom come': will ye pray thus while ye scraple at nought and shrink from no bloodshed, however great?

"'Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven': God desires peace and ye make war.

"Ye pray your common Father for daily bread, and meantime ye burn all your brother's rye and corn.

"How shamefully will ye say: 'Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them who trespass against us, while ye desire nothing else but to slay and to do mischief.

"Ye pray that ye may not come into danger or temptation and ye lead your brother into every sort of danger and temptation."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In her 1991 essay, "The Bible and Peace and War," Ursula King asks, "how are we to explain that Jesus, the founder of Christianity, is often called 'the Prince of Peace' and yet Western civilization so deeply shaped by the Christian story which is clearly pacifist in origin and essence, has become so militaristic from an early stage in its history?"

King quotes Christian pacifist John Ferguson from his 1977 study War and Peace in the World's Religions:

"The historic association of the Christian faith with nations of commercial enterprise, imperialistic expansion and technological advancement has meant that Christian peoples, although their faith is one of the most pacifistic in its origins, have a record of military activity second to none."

According to King, "In the early Church, pacifism was the dominant position up to the reign of Constantine, when Christianity became a state religion. Until then no Christian author approved of Christian participation in battle, whereas in AD 314 the Council of Arles decreed that Christians who gave up their arms in time of peace should be excommunicated."

In Theology and Social Structure, Robin Gill has written:

"The situation of the pre-Constantinian church appears all the more remarkable when it is realised that no major Christian church or denomination has been consistently pacifist since Constantine. Indeed, Christian pacifism has been largely confined to a small group of sects, such as the Quakers, Anabaptists, Mennonites, Brethren and Jehovah's Witnesses. Further, pacifists within the churches, as distinct from sects, have in times of war been barely tolerated by their fellow Christians."

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said that in today's world the choice is either nonviolence or nonexistence.

These quotes against killing and war and in favor of pacifism also serve to indicate that religiously-based nonviolence towards animals as well as humans is not at all extreme or absurd, but rather, consistent with the Christian doctrines expressed above. History reveals to us that the earliest Christians were both pacifists and vegetarians. Ethical vegetarianism is, in itself, a form of pacifism--nonviolence towards animals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Are both are both a collectively induced socially infectious mental illness. Every since The US Government put "in God we trust on their money" and "one nation under God" in their pledge of allegiance the US has not won a war. They and their Holy allies Israel have only committed genocide for the economic control of weaker and oppressed nations. Does any one see a connection here?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...so there's nothing to compare Christians *to*. Christians do whatever they want -- they always have -- and just pick some biblical passage to support their murderous, thieving, looting, raping rampages. That's just what Christianity is all about: Taking what you want and never respecting other people's rights.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gee, perhaps at least one American author besides myself is finally waking up to the obvious fact that Jesus and Christianity are not the same thing. It would be refreshing if a few more so-called "progressives" who write for AlterNet were as open-minded to the obvious historical truth.

Who Would Jesus Bomb?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh my name it is nothin'
My age it means less
The country I come from
Is called the Midwest
I's taught and brought up there
The laws to abide
And the land that I live in
Has God on its side.

Oh the history books tell it
They tell it so well
The cavalries charged
The Indians fell
The cavalries charged
The Indians died
Oh the country was young
With God on its side.

The Spanish-American
War had its day
And the Civil War too
Was soon laid away
And the names of the heroes
I's made to memorize
With guns on their hands
And God on their side.

The First World War, boys
It came and it went
The reason for fighting
I never did get
But I learned to accept it
Accept it with pride
For you don't count the dead
When God's on your side.

When the Second World War
Came to an end
We forgave the Germans
And then we were friends
Though they murdered six million
In the ovens they fried
The Germans now too
Have God on their side.

I've learned to hate Russians
All through my whole life
If another war comes
It's them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side.

But now we got weapons
Of the chemical dust
If fire them we're forced to
Then fire them we must
One push of the button
And a shot the world wide
And you never ask questions
When God's on your side.

In a many dark hour
I've been thinkin' about this
That Jesus Christ
Was betrayed by a kiss
But I can't think for you
You'll have to decide
Whether Judas Iscariot
Had God on his side.

So now as I'm leavin'
I'm weary as Hell
The confusion I'm feelin'
Ain't no tongue can tell
The words fill my head
And fall to the floor
If God's on our side
He'll stop the next war.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But don't say that all Christians love war. True believers in Jesus don't and that's a fact. There are people who abuse religion to justify wars but that doesn't make the religion bad in any sense. Every religion has its pack of warmongers. Talk about the Muslims who engage in suicide bombings all over the world. What about atheists? I've met Army and Navy soldiers who are atheist in Norfolk so it isn't limited to Christians. Sorry but this article is limited to blaming Christians only.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I was a little disappointed that "Just War" doctrine was not discussed here. For a good introduction, I suggest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_War

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Still trying to peddle tin-foil hats, "truther" scum?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

that of the Puritannical Christianist Invaders of this "Great Turtle Island" as they were killing off the Native Indians left and right and stealing all of their resources declaring, "GOD wants us to have this land"!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In an article entitled “The Primacy of Nonviolence as a Virtue,” appearing in Embracing Earth: Catholic Approaches to Ecology (1994), Brother Wayne Teasdale wrote: “One key answer to a culture’s preoccupation with violence is to teach, insist on, and live the value of nonviolence. It can be done successfully, and it has been done for more than 2,500 years by Jains and Buddhists.

“Neither Jainism nor Buddhism has ever supported war or personal violence; this nonviolence extends to all sentient beings. Christianity can learn something valuable from these traditions. This teaching on nonviolence has been incarnated in the lives of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Fourteenth Dalai Lama with significant results...”

According to Teasdale: “...it is necessary to elevate nonviolence to a noble place in our civilization of loving-compassion because nonviolence as ahimsa in the Hindu tradition, a tradition that seems to possess the most advanced understanding of nonviolence, is love! Love is the goal and ultimate nature of nonviolence as an inner disposition and commitment of the heart. It is the fulfillment of love and compassion in the social sphere, that is, in the normal course of relations among people in the matrix of society.”

Pythagoras warned: "Those who kill animals for food will be more prone than vegetarians to torture and kill their fellow men."

From history, too, we learn that the earliest Christians were vegetarians as well as pacifists. For example, Clemens Prudentius, the first Christian hymn writer, in one of his hymns exhorts his fellow Christians not to pollute their hands and hearts by the slaughter of innocent cows and sheep, and points to the variety of nourishing and pleasant foods obtainable without blood-shedding.

According to St. Francis, a lack of mercy towards animals leads to a lack of mercy towards men: "If you have men who will exclude any of God's creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow men."

At a Seamless Garment conference at the University of San Francisco in September 1997, Reverend Heng Sure, an American Buddhist monk, told the mostly Catholic audience that as long as people are eating meat, there will be abortions.

I'm not singling out pro-lifers for special criticism here, either. War, like abortion, is also the karmic reaction for killing animals. Many in the peace movement are unaware of this. In the April 1995 issue of Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a "consistent-ethic" periodical on the religious Left, Catholic civil rights activist Bernard Broussard concludes:

"...our definition of war is much too limited and narrow. Wars and conflicts in the human kingdom will never be abolished or diminished until, as a pure matter of logic, it includes the cessation of war between the human and animal kingdoms. For, if we be eaters of flesh, or wearers of fur, or participants in hunting animals, or in any way use our might against weakness, we are promoting, in no matter how seemingly insignificant a fashion, the spirit of war. All are manifestations of a 'survival of the fittest philosophy.'"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

According to the editors of World Watch, July/August 2004: "The human appetite for animal flesh is a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future--deforestization, topsoil erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities and the spread of disease."

Brother David Steindl-Rast, a Benedictine monk, similarly says: "...the survival of our planet depends on our sense of belonging--to all other humans, to dolphins caught in dragnets to pigs and chickens and calves raised in animal concentration camps, to redwoods and rainforests, to kelp beds in our oceans, and to the ozone layer."

America's largest animal rights organization, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), over 1.6 million strong, is challenging those who think they can still be "meat-eating environmentalists" to go veg, if they really care about the planet.

My friend Dave Goggin from the San Francisco Vegetarian Society, who receives his news from conservative blogs, once commented that talk of global warming sounds like "a secular apocalypse." Conservatives think the jury is still out on global warming, but if it could be shown that meat-eating leads to abortion and war, would this be enough to cause our friends in the pro-life and peace movements to go veg as well?

Becoming a vegetarian or a vegan is not merely helping the pro-life and peace movements, it is literally pro-life!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Once, during a brief marriage, I had a teenage stepson of little ability to think abstractly. He declared once, "Gosh! Aren't humans great!?" This being on a day when I was even more than usually misanthropic and dispeptic, my response was a surly "Humans are horrible creatures. Why do you say they're great?"

His answer was astounding: "Well...they do stuff like clean up pollution." I don't need to post my retort.

I think that Christianity is like that: it is largely responsible for 99% of the mess this world is in today, but goes about patting itself on the back for attempting to clean up the very pollution it has caused in the first place. E.g. -- the underlying disaster of growing overpopulation, coupled with the arcane view that god created the non-human world in all its wondrous variation, for our own species to bring to the verge of extinction and utter annihilation.

So, despite the avatar the Christ may have been, we humans (through and led by The Church) have utterly brought things to self-inflicted cataclysm. That includes the appallingly frequent waging of cruel wars by "christian" nations, justified by distorting whatever beneficence the Prince of Peace left us. Who are the real barbarians here?

I include aggressive proselytizing to be a form of genocide; bellicose attempts at Killing a Culture for Christ.

I too, (as is another poster above) am now a pagan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

is just another oppression tool. period. humanity has suffered for it(religion),and will continue to suffer the blind faith of the religious. take a good look at the religious leaders of the world and ask yourself. would this person die for me? hell no. but they would let you die and say it was for them. bullshit. religion creates convenience for all atrocities. schwarkopf can go suck an egg. no hgeneral has died in a war in a hundred years. fuck him and his religious pontifications. military intelligence is still an oxymoron.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is an error you made.

Anti-christions love war.
Lose the satanic catholic "Doctrine of Discovery"

Get an eternal life with GOD.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

[1 = poor;]

Soldiers need picked women, Need to sow there uniforms you need to go to your neighbor and enlist a war' Once you have 1000 people call the media and tell them you have declared war on who nae ever your against who is that? find A media that will help you enlist people for your new cause declare yourself a name" Anything besides army your not in the air yet so. Not air force what will you call yourself the broken people/'
I here you once I here this new broken word I will join bet' On that you just need to get your women involved it's there war to. It's your children that will suffer' Even the ones that think there the winner' Will because angels are here and they can defend which ever one they think is the best. Even if it's one mans war.
Are you a good person are you fighting for love or more war?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Old Testament is filled with gory accounts of an "eye for an eye" retribution whereas the New Testament is more in line with forgiveness, Love and the benefit of others. Unfortunately there have been many unscrupleless and evil people who have misconstrued the teachings of Jesus to fit their own murderous greedy needs. If they felt like using the name of Jesus or the omnipotent powerful "God" to give sanctity
to their need to kill and enslave others and steal their lands and the lands of others so be it. All they had to say was "They Had God on Their Side" Ironically most leaders, demigods and Tyrannts have sheer contempt of religion or the word of any "God", dismissing it as just so much "Mumbo-Jumbo" but they would order mass murders of entire civilizations for not knowing about the very same teachings and words of the same "God" they themselves saw as no more than a tool they could use with impunity to promote their practice of murder,rape and enslavement of millions of innocent victims.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

From Samuel L. Clemens "War Prayer" - who today could improve on it?


"I come from the Throne – bearing a message from Almighty God!" The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. "He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd, and will grant it if such be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import – that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of – except he pause and think.

"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two – one uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of Him Who heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this – keep it in mind. If you would beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon some neighbor's crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

"You have heard your servant's prayer – the uttered part of it. I am commissioned of God to put into words the other part of it – that part which the pastor – and also you in your hearts – fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard these words: 'Grant us victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient. The whole of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory – must follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God the Father fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle – be Thou near them! With them – in spirit – we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with hurricanes of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with their little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it – for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen."

[After a pause.] "Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits."

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

False flags terrorism is known to stir ignorant masses (yes, including contemporary 'Christians') to war. False flags terrorism is a regular habit of Israel and the Globalist Jewish mass media stirs animus for the Islamic world with distortions and lies--especially lies about 9/11 and its causality. REDISCOVER911 and the "desire for war" is actually the beguiling false flags terrorism and media lies which, as ruthless hoaxes use Judas goats (like our very dear GuitarBill) to lead the masses to slaughter.

Wipe that grin off your face, GuitarBill.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Vee encourage all der Wal-Mart consumer/citizens in der United $tates of Perpetual War Profiteering... to $upport der glorious foreign invasions and occupations of der infidels... all for der love of der father skygod man who rules Planet Over-Birth Earth from his throne in der Dictatorship of Heaven (and also for der Zionists wackos in der theocrazy of Israel). Indeed! Let us in-Heil to der Chief rat $ewertown!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In the author's article above is this quote:

"It was not until the church was co-opted by the Emperor Constantine in the early 4th Century that power and wealth changed the priorities of church leaders."

Replace "Constantine" with Hitler or any other self-anointed "emperor" and you have relgion perverted FOR war... In the service of the fascist state. Billy Graham, the current Pope who also pledged allegiance to the Third Reich during WWII, the rise of the right-wing mega churches throughout the USA, all these are pursuing the same power benefits and ego-gratification that comes with their hierarchical interpretation of man kind.

Contrary to the opinions of some ignorant atheists posting here, Jesus was not teaching a "hierarchical" religion according to the 4 Gospels we have. His most angry teachings were directed against those religious leaders and institutions that cloaked themselves in riches and long robes, placing their closeness to God as more divine than than the divinity and closeness of their flocks. Jesus condemned the notion that any man needed a man-made mediator "between man and God". That the very reason he came was to provide a direct connection to God the Father. That there were no "deeds" that could make this connection, that only the sacrifice of the Son could redeem man kind.

Jesus also refused violent arms on multiple occasions including when Barabas offered to raise an army uprising to secure Jesus' success, and when Peter cut off the ear of the soldier arresting him, saying "Live by the sword, die byy the sword".

Jesus also taught turning the other cheek when violently attacked, that praying for your enemy was the right answer, not an eye-for-an-eye as preached in the old Jewish testament.

Whether you believe in the existence or validity of Jesus, it is simply untrue that the four Gospels which claim to record his teachings in any way advocate war or encourage his followers to pursue violence as a means to any end or an answer to any enemy.

The lesson anyone can take out of the constant Christian-institutional coddling of war-mongers throughout history is this:

The institutions of religion, whether Christian or not, are large and powerful and man made. That within this powerful context comes power-seeking men who set themselves above those they claim to serve, and that in their secret desire for more power and wealth for themselves it is only natural that they should align themselves with powerful influences, and in most cases in history, that means war and the machinery of war, even though that means deceiving their own flocks.

That is the power of man-made power on Earth. Those like Jesus and Ghandi who were enlightened to rise above man-made power convinced large numbers of enlightened others to realize that life and liberty will not be won with a sword, but with that very enlightenment.

All I can say is:

"Pharisees and Scibes, Hypocrites!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

well, jesus h christ, who would he bomb and torture? as for his alleged followers; they are a 2,000 year long killing machine; the most murderous organization in human history by miles. jews, moslems, hindus don't even come close. vatican documents boasted of a million 'heretics' killed in the first millennium; mostly those who abided the gnostic gospels which were censored, edited and thought to have been destroyed. then we get the millions of women and gays burned at the stake in inquisitions along with jews, artists, dissidents in these and pogroms. then the crusades, which included the 140,000 of europe's poorest-only who died marching over the alps in the 'children's crusades.' then came the big one, the extermination of the native peoples by the hundreds of millions worldwide. then there was the reformation that killed 25 million.of the 162 million war deaths in the 20th century; 2/3 were by and between 'christia' nations and 2/3 of deaths were children. in 1872, a survey showed that 70% of americans favored the compleete elimination of 'indians' and they basically got their wish. it is rabies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Other than the fact that humans are the most savage and ferocious creatures that ever infested the Earth is the fact that there's MONEY to be made when there's a war or two going on.
The current situation we're involved in amply proves this. War without end is the wet dream of corporate and military criminals. The money just keeps on rolling in, and the military crazies get to try out all their hideous new toys.
As usual, those who foment and promote the carnage, keep themselves safe from any danger. Their battle cry is "Let's you and him fight".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I want to know when the peace-loving Christians of this country are going stand up to the other brand of Christians who invoke their God when calling for assassinations, war, and blaming everything on feminism and gays and atheists!

Pat Robertson, Phelps, and the others have been getting away with preaching non-peaceful invective and spewing wretched, twisted nonsense for years! I have not heard any of the peacenik Christians ever stand up to them and call them out for what they really are.

So either: 1) the love-filled ones don't have the desire or the strength to call them out, or 2)you've all been silently nodding in agreement with them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In an e-mail dated December 12, 2005, my friend Matias Carnevale Cano in Argentina, wrote:

I am re-reading Keith Akers' book, because I keep on finding Christians who deny the relevance of a correspondence between life and faith. Many think that faith is just believing in Christ, thus they can do whatever they please...Thanks God I do not follow that idea. These persons would not accept the importance of vegetarianism or even leading a simple life, such a pity. If what they have to give is "love", it takes just a look to see what the world is becoming because of this Christian 'love.'

Repeating Psalm 37:11, Jesus said, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” (Matthew 5:5) Here Jesus refers to Isaiah’s vision (11:6-9) of the future Kingdom of Peace, where the earth is restored to a vegetarian paradise. (Genesis 1:29-31) Jesus taught his followers to pray for the coming of God’s kingdom and to do God’s will “on earth as it is in heaven.” (Matthew 6:9-10)

The kingdom of God belongs to the gentle and kind. “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” (Matthew 5:7-9) “Be merciful, just as your Father is also merciful.” (Luke 6:36)

Jesus called the peacemakers or pacifists sons of God, because they emulate God’s universal and unconditional love. “He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Therefore, be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.” (Matthew 5:45-48; Luke 6:32-35)

Although the Ten Commandments teach “thou shalt not kill,” Jesus extended this morality to the point where one must never even get angry without cause. (Matthew 5:21-22) And although the Ten Commandments teach “thou shalt not commit adultery,” Jesus taught that “whoever looks upon a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matthew 5:27-28)

The Bible limits compensation to “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” but Jesus taught his followers not to defend themselves against attack or aggression. “All who take up the sword must perish by the sword,” Jesus warned. (Matthew 26:52) The Bible teaches men to love their neighbors and hate their enemies, but Jesus taught them to love their enemies and bless and pray for their persecutors. (Matthew 5:38-44; Luke 6:27-29)

Jesus forbade divorce, except for unfaithfulness. When asked why Moses permitted divorce, Jesus replied that it was a concession to the hardness of the heart. He insisted upon the moral standards given by God at the beginning. (Matthew 5:31-32, 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18)

Jesus told his followers there is no need to pray to God for material blessings or even necessities. (Matthew 6:8,31-33; Luke 12:29-30) God’s compassion extends to all creation and He will easily provide for all of man’s needs:

“Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them...Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow, they neither toil nor spin. And yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Now if God so clothes the grass of the field...will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?" (Matthew 6:26-30; Luke 12:24-28)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus and his disciples lived lives of voluntary poverty and preached God’s word among “the poor.” When asked why he ate with sinners, he replied, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. But go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” (Matthew 9:10-13; Mark 2:15-17; Luke 5:29-32)

In the 1986 edition of A Vegetarian Sourcebook, Keith Akers notes that there was a link in Judaism between meat-eating and animal sacrifices, that the prophetic tradition to which Jesus belonged attacked animal sacrifices, and that Jesus attacked the practice of animal sacrifice by driving the money-changers and their animals out of the Temple. He concludes, “The evidence indicates that for those who first heard the message of Jesus... the rejection of animal sacrifices had directly vegetarian implications.”

Jesus taught humility and servitude. “You know the rulers of the gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you, but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave.” (Matthew 20:25-27; Mark 10:42-44; Luke 22:25-27) When his disciples argued amongst themselves who would be the greatest, Jesus told them, “If anyone desires to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.” (Matthew 23:11; Mark 9:33-35) On another occasion he explained, “For he who is least among you all will be great.” (Luke 9:48) According to Jesus, “Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” (Matthew 23:12; Luke 14:11)

Jesus told his disciples they were to think of themselves as unprofitable servants who simply do their duty. (Luke 17:7-10) Jesus even washed the feet of his disciples after the Last Supper, to set an example to his disciples about humility and equality before God. (John 13:1-16)

Jesus taught that before God, no one can be called good. (Matthew 19:17; Mark 10:18; Luke 18:19) He saw the righteous and the wicked with equal vision. When Jesus was informed about Galileans who suffered at the hands of Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, he responded: “Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.

“Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them,” Jesus continued. “Do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.” (Luke 13:1-5)

The Pharisees apparently claimed religious leadership without such humility before God. “If you were (spiritually) blind,” Jesus told them on one occasion, “you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore, your sin remains.” (John 9:41)

According to Luke, the Pharisees trusted in their own righteousness and therefore looked down upon others. Jesus told a parable of two men—a Pharisee and a tax collector—praying at Temple. The Pharisee prayed, “God, I thank You that I am not like the other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all I possess.”

Meanwhile, the tax collector stood off in the distance. He would not even raise his eyes towards heaven, but merely prayed, “God, be merciful to me a sinner!” Jesus said it was the tax collector who went home justified, not the Pharisee, for “everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” (Luke 18:9-14)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus instructed his followers to perform their charity, prayer and fasting in private. Religious devotion must never become a means to adulation, fame and social recognition. (Matthew 6:1-6,16-18) Jesus’ disciples did not fast in the same manner as the disciples of John the Baptist or the Pharisees (Matthew 9:14-17; Mark 2:18-22; Luke 5:33-39), but they did fast. (Matthew 6:16-18) Jesus even taught that certain kinds of demons could only be exorcised through prayer and fasting. (Matthew 17:14-21; Mark 9:17-29) Jesus taught constant prayer. (Luke 21:36) He often withdrew into the wilderness to pray. (Luke 5:16) At least once, Jesus went to the mountains and spent the night in prayer. (Matthew 14:23; Mark 6:46; Luke 6:12)

Jesus explained that celibacy is not something everyone can practice; it is meant only for those whom God has ordained it. He used the euphemism “eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven,” recalling his euphemism about denying or dismembering bodily urges rather than having the entire body destroyed by sin. (Matthew 5:29-30, 18:8-9, 19:10-12)

The apparent celibacy of Jesus is unusual by ancient Hebrew standards. The Bible does call for temporary abstinences, under certain circumstances. According to the Talmud, Moses voluntarily chose to give up sexual relations with his wife after he received his call from God. He reasoned that if the Israelites, to whom the Lord spoke only once and briefly, were ordered to abstain from sexual relations temporarily (Exodus 19:10,15), then he—being in continual dialogue with God—should remain celibate.

Philo of Alexandria tells us that to sanctify himself, Moses cleansed himself of “all the mortal calls of nature, food and drink and intercourse with women. This last he had disdained for many a day, almost from the time when, possessed by the Spirit, he entered on his work as a prophet, since he held it fitting to hold himself always in readiness to receive the oracular messages.” Given this information, Jesus’ apparent voluntary embrace of celibacy, from the time of his baptism and reception of the Spirit of God, becomes meaningful to Jews and Christians alike.

John the Baptist told the people to share half of their food and clothing with the needy. (Luke 3:11) Jesus was pleased when Zacchaeus, a wealthy tax collector, promised to give half his goods to the poor. “Today salvation has come to this house, because he is also a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man has come to seek and save that which was lost.” (Luke 19:2-10)

However, Jesus went even further, and called for renunciation of worldly goods. He did not regard the accumulation of material possessions as a meaningful goal in life. “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy...But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven...for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” (Matthew 6:19-20; Luke 12:33-34)

Jesus told the multitudes that followed him, “...whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:25,33) “No one can serve two masters,” Jesus explained. “...he will be loyal to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and Mammon.” (Matthew 6:24; Luke 16:13)

Jesus had no interest in worldly disputes over money and property. (Luke 12:13-14) “Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.” Jesus condemned those who lay up treasures for themselves, but are not rich towards God. (Luke 12:15-21)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In his parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31), Jesus expressed concern for materialistic persons. When a rich, young ruler came to Jesus and said he had kept God’s commandments since youth, Jesus prized him dearly and replied, “You still lack one thing. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come follow me.” The man went away, saddened. Jesus observed that it is hard for those attached to earthly riches to enter the kingdom of God. (Matthew 19:16-24; Mark 10:17-23; Luke 18:18-25)

Jesus even demanded the renunciation of family ties. (Luke 14:26) It appears Jesus had little contact even with his own family; he regarded only those who do God’s will as his brethren. (Matthew 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21) When a woman said to Jesus, “Blessed is the womb that bore you and the breasts which nursed you,” Jesus replied, “More blessed still are those who hear and keep the word of God.” (Luke 11:27-28)

Perhaps the most famous narrative depicting Jesus as a Jewish religious reformer is John 8:1-11. Jesus was teaching people at Temple early in the morning. The scribes and Pharisees brought to him a woman caught in the act of adultery. “Now Moses, in the Law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do you say?”

“Let he among you who is without sin,” Jesus responded, “cast the first stone.” The woman’s accusers all found themselves convicted by their own conscience. They released her and went away. No one was left to condemn her. “Neither do I condemn you;” Jesus told her, “go and sin no more.”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The age now passing, the Piscean, in ancient wisdom teachings is known to have expressed during its approximate 2,150 year cycle - which is now ending - the sixth ray quality of devotion and idealism. The personality of the United States is stated to be sixth ray.

When looking at the vices of this ray - which is that which colors the Christian religion, one can see the challenges being discussed. From A Treatise on the Seven Rays by Alice Bailey:

Ray Six
Violence. Fanaticism. Wilful adherence to an ideal.
Short sighted blindness.
Militarism and a tendency to make trouble with others and groups.
The power to see no point except one's own.
Suspicion of people's motives.
Rapid reaction to glamour and illusion.
Emotional devotion and bewildered idealism.
Vibratory activity between the pairs of opposites.
Intense capacity to be personal and emphasise personalities,

Leading to (virtues)
Directed, inclusive idealism.
Steadiness of perception through the expansion of consciousness.
Reaction to, and sympathy with, the point of view of others.
Willingness to see the work of other people progress along their chosen lines.
The choosing of the middle way.
Peace and not war. The good of the Whole and not the part.

Unfortunately, the expression of the vices of this ray have predominated during its time of dominance more than the virtues.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This conjecture about Christians makes about as much sense as "Why do liberals and progressives, while they sit in the safety of their own militarily strong country, love to accept the suffering and depravity of others, especially women and children, brought upon them by tyrants in other countries?" Both conjectures are wrong because those making them do not really understand the other side. Sometimes, this is the result of blind ideology, other times by heart felt convictions, while not knowing all the facts, nor understanding the consequences of non-action. Clearly, going to war against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan was a must to save humanity from a very dark future. Comparing all of the United States actions with that of Germany and that of Japan is ludicrous. In most cases (not Vietnam) while there are individual cases of non-Christian brutality by Americans, the goal of the United States to free a people from tyranny was/is laudable. WWII is a prime example. Yes, people made money from our efforts, but a greater good was served.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The life and teachings of the historical Jesus are problematic. Except for those who take the matter on faith, there is no uncontrovertable evidence that such a man ever existed. What's more, even for those who accept his existence, there is considerable disagreement about the accuracy of the words attributed to him. Furthermore, there are abundant apparent contradictions in those words. Deemed the "Prince of Peace," he is nonetheless reported to have said that "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" Matthew 10:34.

The rich argue the futility of efforts to promote economic equity on the basis of Jesus' alleged observation that "ye have the poor always with you," Mark 14:7.

In the alternative, social democrats such as the founders and followers of the North American "Social Gospel" movement, take inspiration from his reported explanation of his own mission to our species: "I am come that they might have life, and live it more abundantly" John 10:10.

As well, every Marxist must be encouraged by the stated practices of early Christians as set down in the Book of Acts: 4:34-35; namely, that "neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need." Now, Marx and Engels can be accused of many things, but plagiarizing the climax of The Communist Manifesto is the most easily proven.

The result?

A careful reading of Christian texts and even a routine examination of the past two millennia of human history will reveal that Christianity has been invoked in support of ruling classes and successive world empires from the early centuries of the Christian era to the so-called "clash of civilizations" and the "war on terror" today. Christianity has been cynically used to promote the interests of the powerful and to justify slavery, misogyny, torture, oppressions and repressions of every sort. It has, of course, also been a banner for people promoting emancipation and equity.

The blood that has been spilled in defence of tyranny, racism, sexism and the like (all in Christ's name) probably outweighs the blood that has been spared in struggles for peace, democracy and social justice. Only one thing is certain, Christianity is mainly a rhetorical device used to win support for various social, political and economic projects. And, let's not forget that our some of our Muslim planetary co-inhabitants are quick to use their hatred of Christianity as a rallying point in their own way and for their own ambitions!

One way or another, however, whether confronted with the ranting of Sarah bin Palin or the ravings of Osama bin Laden, the historical Jesus (if he existed, and if he said at least some of the things he is said to have said), would be gobsmacked by the way his life and his teachings have been cynically used for noble and nefarious purposes alike. And, if he really was the "Son of God" (aren't we all?) or the "Saviour" or the "Redeemer" or ... whatever (which, of course, I seriously doubt), methinks he would be ashamed and embarrassed; of this much I am convinced, he certainly would not be amused.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Christians argue they are no longer under Mosaic Law, because Paul referred to his background as a former Pharisee and previous adherence to Mosaic Law as "so much garbage."

Nothing in the synoptic gospels suggests a break with Judaism. Jesus was called "Rabbi," meaning "Master" or "Teacher," 42 times in the gospels. Jesus' ministry was a rabbinic one. He went to the synagogue (Matthew 12:9), taught in the synagogues (Matthew 4:23, 13:54; Mark 1:39), expressed concern for Jairus, "one of the rulers of the synagogue" (Mark 5:36) and it "was his custom" to go to the synagogue (Luke 4:16).

Jesus himself said, "Do not suppose I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill...till heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or tittle pass from the Law till all is fulfilled. Whoever, therefore, breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven...unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-20)

Jesus also upheld the Torah in Luke 16:17: "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest portion of the Law to become invalid."

Nor do these words refer merely to the Ten Commandments. Jesus meant the entire Torah: 613 commandments. When a man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Jesus replied, "You know the commandments." He quoted not just the Ten Commandments, but a commandment from Leviticus 19:13 as well: "Do not defraud." (Mark 10:17-22)

Jesus' disciples were once accused by the scribes and Pharisees of violating rabbinical tradition (Matthew 15:1-2; Mark 7:5), but not biblical law. Jesus never says anywhere in the entire New Testament that the Law is abolished; this was Paul's theology.

Sometimes Christians cite Matthew 7:12, where Jesus says "Do unto others..." and this "covers" the Law and the prophets. But Jesus was merely repeating in the positive what Rabbi Hillel taught a generation earlier. No one took Hillel's words to mean the Law had been abolished--why should we assume this of Jesus?

If Jesus really came to abolish the Law and the prophets, Simon (Peter) would not have resisted a divine command to kill and eat both "clean" and "unclean" animals (Acts 10), nor would there have been a debate in the early church as to what extent the gentiles were to observe Mosaic Law (Acts 15). When Paul visited the church at Jerusalem, James and the elders told him all its members were "zealous for the Law," and they were worried because they heard rumors Paul was preaching against Mosaic Law (Acts 21). None of these events would have happened had Jesus really come to abolish the Law and the prophets.

Paul says if anyone has confidence in the Law, "I am ahead of him."

Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who said he did not come to abolish the Law and the prophets? Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who said whoever sets aside even the least of the Law's demands shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17-19)?

Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who taught that following the commandments of God is the only way to eternal life (Mark 10:17-22)? Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus who said that it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest portion of the Law to become invalid (Luke 16:17)?

Paul regarded the Law as "so much garbage," but it's obvious JESUS DIDN'T THINK THE LAW WAS "GARBAGE"!

Christians believe in Paul, not Jesus. Bertrand Russell called Paul the "inventor" of Christianity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Aside from the Pharisees, the gospels and Book of Acts mention the Sadducees as the only other major school of Judaic thought. The Sadducees tended to be rich, nationalist and secularist.

The Jewish historian Josephus, who lived during the time of Jesus, wrote that the "Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances...which are not written into the laws of Moses and" which "the Sadducees reject," but they "are able to persuade none but the rich," whereas "the Pharisees have the multitude on their side."

Thus Jesus never rejected Mosaic Law (Matthew 5:17-19; Mark 10:17-22; Luke 16:17); only the excesses of the Pharisees with regards to its observance.

It was Paul, not Jesus, who taught that the Law was abolished.

With regard to Christians, the apostle Paul taught his followers to bless their persecutors and not curse them (Romans 12:14), to care for their enemies by providing them with food and drink (12:20), and to pay their taxes and obey all earthly governments (13:1-7). He mentioned giving all his belongings to feed the hungry (I Corinthians 13:3), and taught giving to the person in need (Ephesians 4:23). He told his followers it was wrong to take their conflicts before non-Christian courts rather than before the saints. (I Corinthians 6:1)

Paul taught that "it is good for a man not to touch a woman," i.e., it is best to be celibate, but because of prevailing immoralities, marriage is acceptable. Divorce is permissible in the case of an unbeliever demanding separation. (I Corinthians 7)

Paul repeatedly attacked sexual immorality.

"This is God's will--your sanctification, that you keep yourselves from sexual immorality, that each of you learn how to take his own wife in purity and honor, not in lustful passion like the gentiles who have no knowledge of God." (I Thessalonians 4:3-5)

Paul told his followers not to associate with sexually immoral people (I Corinthians 5:9-12, 6:15,18). He condemned homosexuality (Romans 1:24-27) and incest (I Corinthians 5:1).

"Make no mistake," warned Paul, "no fornicator or idolater, none who are guilty either of adultery or of homosexual perversion, no thieves or grabbers or drunkards or slanderers or swindlers, will possess the kingdom of God." (I Corinthians 6:9-10 [NEB])

Paul condemned wickedness, immorality, depravity, greed, murder, quarreling, deceit, malignity, gossip, slander, insolence, pride (Romans 1:29-30), drunkenness, carousing, debauchery, jealousy (Romans 13:13), sensuality, magic arts, animosities, bad temper, selfishness, dissensions, envy (Galatians 5:19-21; greediness (Ephesians 4:19; Colossians 3:5), foul speech, anger, clamor, abusive language, malice (Ephesians 4:29-32), dishonesty (Colossians 3:13), materialism (I Timothy 6:6-11), conceit, avarice, boasting and treachery. (II Timothy 3:2-4)

Paul told the gentiles to train themselves for godliness, to practice self-control and lead upright, godly lives (Galatians 5:23; I Timothy 4:7; II Timothy 1:7; Titus 2:11-12). He instructed them to ALWAYS pray constantly. (I Thessalonians 5:17)

Paul praised love, joy, peace, kindness, generosity, fidelity and gentleness (Galatians 5:22-23). He told his followers to conduct themselves with humility and gentleness (Ephesians 4:2), to speak to one another in psalms and hymns; to sing heartily and make music to the Lord. (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16)

Paul wrote further that women should cover their heads while worshiping, and that long hair on males is dishonorable. (I Corinthians 11:5-14) According to Paul, Christian women are to dress modestly and prudently, and are not to be adorned with braided hair, gold or pearls or expensive clothes. (I Timothy 2:9)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... but a sword."

As much as I liked this article, did it not occur to the author that Christianity is, in and of itself, a violent religion, regardless of what one or two loner pacifist Christians try to say?

Jesus' never-ending warnings about sending people to hell and even going so far as to punish a poor little fig tree for not giving him fruit (off the growing season) seems a bit, well, belligerent. To say the least.

Every Christian I know today doesn't bother to pray for a leader to STOP war or not consider war in the first place. All they pray for is "the victims" of said war, or "pray for the president" who started said war.

Out here in the midwest, where Christianity is everything to those over 35 years old, it's pretty sad to see the "I love gentle Jesus" tied in with "blow those smelly ay-rabb brownies back to the stone age."

The problem is... they don't see the contradiction. They really don't.

It ties into the issue of the "end times." Many Christians are convinced that we're living in the end times. That WITHIN THEIR LIFETIME, Jesus is going to come back. It ties into every issue. War, the environment, politics, etc.

What do you say to someone who belongs to a religion that believes a dead, 2000-year-old, fictitious Jew is going to come back to judge people in a few years? Really. What do you say to them?

Christians are war-like in general, until they're in the complete minority. When they're there, as the early Christians were, THEN, and ONLY then will they start acting peacefully. Knowing that trying to gain power (even though they're on top) is a pointless endeavor. Simply offering love and tolerance of others should be sufficient.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Elsewhere, I elaborated on that as well as how his depiction in the Gospels is standard heroic archetype.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

After all weren't they in cahoots as writers of the Bible, were they not in collusion in dreaming up The Doctrine of Discovery? So I would think the lovers of all these Wars should aptly be termed Judeo-Christians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those of us who are members of peace church traditions (Mennonite, Quaker, Church of the Brethren) are followers of Jesus who believe that Christians should not participate in war. The early church believed Jesus called them to be peacemakers based on both the life and teachings of Jesus. If one understands the Sermon the Mount (Matthew 5-7) to be the essence of Jesus' teachings, it is difficult to argue that his followers would be nationalistic and militaristic. Christians who support war almost always hold a "flat book" view of the Bible, quoting from the Old Testament to support that position. Even if one argues for a "Just War" position, it is nearly impossible to justify most modern wars, particularly those of a preemptive nature, as "just."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The spasm of fratricide launched in Europe by Hitler one and (hopefully) for all exhausted the capacity for internecine warfare in old Europe. I think a fast cauterization was better than a slow 1000 year burn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's see. Not the Catholics. Not the Anglicans or Episcopalians. Not the Presbyterians. Not the Lutherans. Not the Methodists. Not the Unitarian Universalists. Not the Quakers. Not the leaders of any world-wide Reformed Churches.

These groups all issued declarations protesting the United States failure to work within the framework of the UN, or issued an outright condemnation of a pre-emptive war, which met no "just war" criteria. Some, if not all, of these churches condemned our first Iraq adventures, along with previous military acts of aggression. Some had actively protested our decade long sanctions against Iraq.

Apparently our use of the terms "mainstream" and "Christian" must not agree. GW used Billy Graham only after being turned down by others, including the Presiding Bishop of his own church. Bush the 2nd didn't even bother asking them, and he and Blair turned a deaf ear to the many protests.

Anti-war religious groups were placed under surveillance (See Thomas Merton Center and others) and harrassed(see All Saints Church, Pasadena, and others).

You can find things to fault organized religious structures for, but an endosement of our Iraq adventures is not one them. "Know the truth, and the truth shall make you free". I found nothing resembling truth or competent, fatual research in this article.

Perhaps less TV with Rev Jerry and Brother Pat, who always looks like he's praying about his hemorrhoids, and a little journalistic research would produce something resembling journalism.

Maybe Bill Moyers could help. He was affiliated with the Baptists, the only mainstream religious denomination I know of that did not openly disagree with U.S. policy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus taught his disciples to pray for the coming of God's kingdom (Matthew 6:9-10), the kingdom of peace, in which the entire world is restored to a vegetarian paradise (Genesis 1:29; Isaiah 11:6-9). Recalling Psalm 37:11, he blessed the meek, saying they would inherit the earth. (Matthew 5:5) The kingdom of God belongs to the gentle and kind (Matthew 5:7-9) Christians are to "Be merciful, just as your Father is also merciful." (Luke 6:36) Those who take up the sword must perish by the sword. (Matthew 26:52)

Jesus repeatedly spoke of God's tender care for the nonhuman creation (Matthew 6:26-30, 10:29-31; Luke 12:6-7, 24-28). Paul, on the other hand, asked scornfully in I Corinthians 9: "Does God take care for oxen?"

From history, we learn that the earliest Christians were vegetarians as well as pacifists. For example, Clemens Prudentius, the first Christian hymn writer, in one of his hymns, exhorts his fellow Christians not to pollute their hands and hearts by the slaughter of innocent cows and sheep, and points to the variety of nourishing and pleasant foods obtainable without blood-shedding.

It's possible historically that Christianity began as a vegetarian religion, but was corrupted over the centuries. Secular scholar Keith Akers writes in Broken Thread:

"The 'orthodox' response to vegetarianism has been somewhat contradictory...The objection to meat consumption has been taken as evidence of heresy when Christians have been faced with outsiders; however, vegetarianism met with a kinder reception among the monastic communities...Vegetarianism does attain a certain status even in orthodox circles.

"Indeed, a list of known vegetarians among the church leaders reads very much like a Who's Who in the early church. Peter is described as a vegetarian in the Recognitions and Homilies. Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius, said that James (the brother of Jesus) was a vegetarian and was raised as a vegetarian. Clement of Alexandria thought that Matthew was a vegetarian...

"According to Eusebius, the apostles--all the apostles, and not just James--abstained from both meat and wine, thus making them vegetarians and teetotalers, just like James. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Basil, Gregory of Nanziance, John Chrysostom, and Tertullian were all probably vegetarians, based on their writings...they themselves are evidently vegetarian and can be counted on to say a few kind words about vegetarianism. On the other hand, there are practically no references to any Christians eating fish or meat before the council of Nicaea.

"The rule of Benedict forbade eating any four-legged animals, unless one was sick. Columbanus allowed vegetables, lentil porridge, flour, and bread only, at all times, even for the sick. A fifth-century Irish rule forbids meat, fish, cheese, and butter at all times, though the sick, elderly, travel-weary, or even monks on holidays may eat cheese or butter, but no one may ever eat meat.

"The Carthusians were especially strict about vegetarianism. The origin of their order is related by the story of St. Bruno and his companions, who on the Sunday before Lent are sitting before some meat and are debating whether they should eat meat at all.

"During the debate, numerous examples of vegetarians among their monastic predecessors are mentioned--the Desert Fathers, Paul (the Hermit), Antony, Hilarion, Macharius, and Arsenius, are all cited as vegetarian examples. After much discussion, they fall asleep--and remain asleep for 45 days, waking up when Archbishop Hugh shows up on Wednesday of Holy Week! When they wake up, the meat miraculously turns to ashes, and they fall on their knees and determine never to eat meat again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keith Akers continues:

"It is true that the church rejected the requirement for vegetarianism, following the dicta of Paul. However, it is interesting under these circumstances that there are so many vegetarians. In fact, outside of the references to Jesus eating fish in the New Testament, there are hardly any references to any early Christians eating meat.

Thus vegetarianism was practiced by the apostles, by James the brother of Jesus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Basil, Gregory of Nanziance, John Chrysostom, Tertullian, Bonaventure, Arnobius, Cassian, Jerome, the Desert Fathers, Paul (the Hermit), Antony, Hilarion, Machrius, Columbanus, and Aresenius--but not by Jesus himself!

"It is as if everyone in the early church understood the message except the messenger. This is extremely implausible. The much more likely explanation is that the original tradition was vegetarian, but that under the pressure of expediency and the popularity of Paul's writings in the second century, the tradition was first dropped as a requirement and finally dropped even as a desideratum."

In the (updated) 1986 edition of A Vegetarian Sourcebook, Keith Akers similarly observes: "But many others, both orthodox and heterodox, testified to the vegetarian origins of Christianity. Both Athanasius and his opponent Arius were strict vegetarians. Many early church fathers were vegetarian, including Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Heironymus, Boniface, and John Chrysostom.

"Many of the monasteries both in ancient times and at the present day practiced vegetarianism...The requirement to be vegetarian has been diluted considerably since the earliest days, but the practice of vegetarianism was continued by many saints, monks, and laymen. Vegetarianism is at the heart of Christianity."

History shows that Christianity, like Buddhism, began as a pacifist religion, and Christianity was pacifist until the time of Constantine, when it became a state religion. Before Constantine, Christians who took up arms were excommunicated. After Constantine, Christians who laid down their arms were excommunicated!

I'm not saying we should lay down our arms (the Bhagavad-gita, after all, was spoken on a battlefield!), but that it's not hard to imagine Christianity similarly beginning as a vegetarian religion, and being corrupted over the centuries...the corruption beginning, perhaps, with the apostle Paul?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That was the proposition for a recent debate in England a few weeks ago. A Vatican spokesman took part in the debate but many people in the voting audience weren't impressed with his argument. In fact, the audience voted overwhelmingly that Christianity was not a force for good in the world. I wholeheartedly agree with the audience finding.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Give it time. Unfortunately in the future there will likely be consequences for our bad actions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think there are a lot of things about America that Jesus would not approve of.

I've heard it said that Jesus would not recognize some Christians today but I think he would recognize them all too well. Violence and greed aren't new inventions, he dealt with them in his time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Nazis, during the rise of Hitler, did not need to get the support of the Christian churches in Germany. All they needed was to stop a rebellion in the churches. Nevertheless, there was a rebellion within the Christian churches in Germany during the time of the Nazis. This resistance is captured in the text of the Barmen Declaration. Any discussion of what German churches did (or didn't) do needs to include a discussion of the Barmen Declaration.

In the same way, Bush and his friends did not need to get the the support of the American clergy, they just needed to make sure that there wasn't a general rebellion in the churches. In this, they succeeded. Many mainline American churches issued statements noting that the invasion and occupation of Iraq did not meet the theological criteria for a "just war." As such, these institutions were also free to announce that support of the invasion and occupation of Iraq was contrary to traditional Christian doctrine and ethics.

The draft was ended in the U.S. in order to create a compliant military insulated from the effects of a general popular revolt against unethical wars prosecuted by violent, insular leaders. Government doesn't care what churches think, as long as these churches don't meddle in the organization and execution of mass violence. It's when churches actually begin to resist government wrongdoing that the government begins infiltrating them with FBI agents.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If they really believed their bibles they'd know that if God wasn't an anarchist he never would have given them free will. Their own 'heaven' is a place where there is no community based on authoritarianism or threats of punishment, but is theoretically a place where people have chosen to conduct themselves with respect and compassion, and with true love for their creator. Punishment has nothing to do with it. If they really believed their own bullshit they'd readily die for love, but would never kill for it. And they'd damned sure understand that the 'charity' that they so often fight for (preferring to make others beggars - so that they can pat themselves on the backs for their 'kindness'), as opposed to 'socialism', is something they OWE their fellow men IF they wish to lay claim to the 'charity' that their God performed for them on the cross.

Anything else is just Hebrews v.2.0, and as it stands right now we'd all starve if we had to depend on the 'charity' of Christians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here is something new for rich Hippies, desperate sick people and true believers Congregation Kit

I have some holy anointing Cannabis oil from a manufacture in California and I put it on my hand. The doctor said the skin would die, but it didn't. It grafted back on and is pink and healthy. I want to show it to him in case it was the oil.

I am rather curious about delivery myself. I don't think I would risk it being as I am always so law abiding (I find it keeps me out of jail).

For people more adventurous (or desperate) than I, it sure sounds interesting. Get the right tax and accounting advice and it sounds like a very effective way to establish a Cannabis church and ministry.

Documenting enough intent and legal cover to keep your local predatory pothead hunters off is always a bit iffy, especially in hostile legal territories. I wish anyone who tries it the very best of luck. I also suggest they send some money to the ACLU.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Many people have grown up believing that Communism, especially Soviet Communism, is by definition, atheist. Indeed, the McCarthyites in congress added the words, "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance in the mistaken belief that no communist could then recite it. They actually thought they were creating an impediment to citizenship for reds; a clever end-run around Article 6, Section 3 of the Constitution, and the First Amendment. It's really too bad that out of the volumes of work produced by Marx the only quote most Americans know is, "Religion is the opiate of the masses."

In fact, the Soviet Union had an officially secular, not atheist, government. While it is true that the Russian Orthodox Church was actively suppressed, it was never actually outlawed. Some Soviet leaders, like Khrushchev, openly disdained and harassed the Church, while Stalin, who amused himself appropriating and occasionally destroying Church property, became a surprising patron of the Church during the Great Patriotic War (WWII).

Apropos to the current discussion of Christianity and warfare, Stalin realized the immense popular sentiment for war that the Church could provide, so he brought it out of hiding, and used the Orthodox pulpits to whip up public support for his patriotic war against Germany. From that time until the dissolution of the Republic, the Church in Russia was seen by many to be nothing more than a branch of the KGB.

The whole incident serves as a reminder that cynical political leaders will readily exploit the religious sentiments of the masses for decidedly irreligious purposes. That religious people in their haze never cotton on to this obvious manipulation seems to prove Marx's maxim.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

People like war. More people like to kill others or have them killed by the army etc than not or else we would not have anymore wars. War is good for business. War is easier than talking and compromising, understanding and being tolerant. War is exciting, peace is dull.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is one group that has kept a true and courageous path towards true Christianity since 1650 and that is the Quakers. Although some are evangelical, many are followers of what is good and true be they Buddist, Pagan, Christian or even non-beleivers. They subscribe in the slogan "Live simlpy so others may simply live". They do pratice what they preach and have so for centuries. They are the ones who brought seperation of church and state, protested against slavery in the 1690's, and had ecuality of all races and sexes and helped to create the underground railway. They kept thier word with the native peoples with whom they made treaties with.
I suggest those who care for a truer path to do a search with the word "Quaker". Atend a "Meeting" and you will see a different Christanity. The name Quaker is by the way a slight they adoppted (The seekers of light or the Society of Freinds). Maybe if all of us whether you are a believer or not, would follow their path we would not be in such a self-righteous fix as we are now. They truely believe in the basic "Golden Rule".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

bastards have there money invested. It pays so well and they don't have to dirty there own hands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've been thinking, about how religous leaders can be such fucking hypocrites when it comes to war for the last two millenia. And the theory goes like this:
1.) Immoral,corrupt, and selfish assholes seek avenues to safely practice immoral,corrupt,and selfish behavior covertly, and they seek professions and titles that provide a shield to protect them from criticism,as well as people snooping around in their private life. They prefer professions that don't require self sacrifice and actually being good,but rather have a reputation for appearing good.
2.) Jobs that are seen as pillars of the community,but don't neccessarily require self-sacrifice or performing good deeds, but are stereotypically good, such as judge,mayor,city councilman, churchleader,teacher,coach,Boy's/Girl's Scout leader, provide excellent cover from criticism.
3.)Thus, its a very easy leap to see that corrupt,evil people are attracted to, and become, apart of religous institutions, and they, like a wolf in the hen house, will begun to curry favor with the power brokers, manipulate people to do evil by saying "God ordains it" and secretly victimise those who can't protect themselves. I mean look at the list of the churches crimes:witch burnings, the Spanish Inquisition,sanctioning and participating in the slave trade,the Crusades,sanctioning the US's genocide of the Native peoples of Great Turtle island,killing and abusing gay people, approving of racial segregation and lynchings, covering up child molestation... The list never ends. While there have been many great and compassionate men of religion, such as MLK and the SCLC during the civil rights movement, as well as those pastors and religous leaders that protest war and are actually pacifist, they are the exception that proves the rule. No sane human being should listen to any clergyman, not without a grain of salt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

UGG Boots
UGG Bailey Button 5803 Boots
UGG Classic Cardy 5819 Boots
UGG Classic Short 5825 Boots
UGG Classic Tall 5815 Boots
Classic Tall Patent Paisley 5852 Boots
ghd
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners
UGG Classic Boots
ugg shoes boots
Ugg Sundance Limited Edition 30th Anniversary
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners
ghd mk4 styler
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The author of this article did an excellent job of questioning the hypocrisy of the Christian church in supporting "just wars." However, I take contention with two items in this article that were not mentioned at all. The first being that there was not one mention of Christians who vehemently opposed wars or other "Christian sanctioned" slaughters. Another problem I have with the article is the lack of a through explanation of how Constantinian Christianity polluted the teachings of Jesus. The author mentions it so briefly that it really needs to be expanded. While this article works in explaining the hypocrisy of "just wars" it should take more time to address the work of anti-war Christians and explain more on the role of "Constantine's Sword" in militant Christianity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't think that the latest event or any event from the 1990s can be an indication that Christian love war. They might be fighting wars but they were never the ones who initiated them. there is a big difference there. weight loss fast, Soccer moves, violin lessons, best weight loss pills

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

UGG Bailey Button 5803 Boots
UGG Classic Cardy 5819 Boots
UGG Classic Short 5825 Boots
UGG Classic Tall 5815 Boots
Classic Tall Patent Paisley 5852 Boots
ghd
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners
UGG Classic Boots
ugg shoes boots
Ugg Sundance Limited Edition 30th Anniversary
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners
ghd mk4 styler
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pre-Christians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Kohls is on the mark that Christianity has been highjacked by warmongers. Although the Old Testiment glorifies war in many passages, the New Testiment is completely void of a single passage that sanctifies war by God. Jesus does not bless or sanctify warfare at all. But here is what Gary Kohls completely missed: The Holy Koran is filled with references of Jihad and holy war against infidels. At least Christians are only guilty of misinterpreting their holy writings. Militant mulsims, on the other hand, are guilty of adhering to the hate-mongering dogma written into their scriptures. Why didn't you address that Kohls? You are either a one-sided irresponsible journalist, or your are a hate mongering bigot who loathes Christians. Which is it Khols? www.RhodesNews.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The human race is doomed as a species.
The only few humans who are smart enough to know better, well there's just not enough of them to make a difference.

So, it does not matter if you are Christian or Muslim or whatever other religion you think is right, the human race does not stand a chance.

Take a long look at the human history of wars and more wars.
Smart? Not!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh god, here we go again! Another person who claims to know all about what Jesus would want. And like all such people who just make such things up this writer cites to no specific authority. “Jesus hated war”? Really? Where he say that? The “gentle Jesus”? Pulease!

He went to the temple steps and kicked over the tables of the money lenders. This is NOT non-violence.

He told his mother and brothers that they were not his family and he rejected them and instructed his apostles to leave their families. These are not family values.

When the fig tree failed to give him fruit OUT of season he cursed and destroyed it. What infantile, psychotic, hysterics. This is neither tolerance or non-violence. Why curse a fig tree because it (as God apparently intended) did not produce fruit out of season?

And the comments of the commentators are just, well, brain dead. E.g., “He (Jesus) knew what was in the sky over Sodom he knew the terrible thing that took the life for look at what was over Gomorrah he will not need a sword because his voice is truth.”

Do the people who pontificate on this blood-soaked book of a Bronze Age nomadic tribe even bother to READ the thing? Clearly not. Forget that this sentence (for lack of a better word) is the concoction of a mediocre 5th grader does this know-it-all even have a clue that Sodom and Gomorrah are Old Testament stories written long, long, before Jesus was born?

What would Jesus want? Who the hell knows? What we DO know is that no one who ever knew or met Jesus ever wrote one word of the New Testament and all that was written (except for Paul who never met Jesus) was written at least 60 years after the crucifixion - don’t argue with me go argue with 200 years of Biblical scholarship.

Pulease! We are in the mess we are in because of people who claim to know what Jesus would want and this writer, just like them, plays the “my religion is better than your religion” game because I, I, I, I, know what Jesus would want.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WRITER LIES

Leadership of major religions were polled before Invasion of Iraq.

Each was anti-invasion except one.

Southern Baptist

Writer should get his facts before his ranting

cswinney2@triad.rr.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our Pentagon is now run by Evangelical Christians who are forcing Cadets to watch the Passion of Christ and are handing out bibles to Muslims before they kill them. We murdered a million people in Iraq and now countries have moved in there to take the oil. It's sickening when you think we have plenty of gas here. They call themselves Christians but they have no regard for life human at all. They are sick twisted freaks and they are running our Pentagon! Wrap your mind around that. They are fanatics who believe in end times and make Dr. Strange Love look good!
This is a documentary made by the Pentagon. They are carrying out a " Christian Crusade" for oil before the they end the world when Jesus will come down and save only them. They are also mentally ill.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

right after 911 the mood of the world? How supported the US was? Now remember when the Amish children were murdered in the school. The community offerred the murder's widow (he killed himself, too) shelter and a place in their homes. Very christian of them. Now back to right after 9/11. How the world felt about us here. (most of the world anyway) What if we had reacted in a non violent manner? What would have happened then? Very difficult to do after you've been hurt, but very effective if you can do it. No way to recruit more US haters. Maybe find a way to peace. I am not talking about being too weak to fight I am talking about being strong enough not to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I TOLD you over and over again the truth about the a-hole... NOW at last you finally see it.
Bet you're wishing you didn't stab you’ in the back NOW, huh?
MKV Converter for Mac\MKV to WMV MAC\MKV to PSP MAC\MKV to iPod MAC\MKV to Xbox MAC\MKV to iPhone MAC\MKV to Apple TV MAC

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

процесуальна форма, відносини і гарантії кримінального процесу створення оун міфологія та вірування праслов’ян український романтизм. микола васильович гоголь захист фахових інтересів педагогів – основне завдання товариства “взаємна поміч українських вчителів стаціонар-поліклініка маркетингові проблеми співвідношення українська література 60-их років about myself and my family лфк при ліктьових і плечових травмах світове господарство - глобальна географічна система та економіко-географічний вимір seropol5

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Welcome to the fashion handbags house.We are pleased to offer you feminine Fendi Handbags,do you like it?Don't worry,there are other brands handbags,such as Lancel Handbags,which are my favourite,so I especially recommend them to you.And how about Coach Handbags?We are very familiar with this brand hadnabgs.Maybe you seldom heard the Yves Saint Laurent Handbags that are very perfect.I also like the red Burberry Handbags.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

castle dollhouse 24 flashforward ugly betty nip/tuck better off ted big love reaper angel seropol5

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No matter who tells you that war is somehow 'blessed' or 'righteous', they are flat out wrong.

This issue is where Jesus himself was the most radical. There is no reference anywhere of Jesus condoning or even tolerating armed conflict. No person can ever be a follower of the Christ while advocating armed conflict. I don't care if that person is the Pope. I don't care if that person is the most popular evangelist on the planet. If he advocates armed conflict, he is NOT a Christian.

And yes, that makes about 98% of the so called 'Christian' world fakes, charlatans, false Christians. Real Christians are completely swallowed up in a sea of false Christians.

There is NO instance where organized armed conflict is Christian. I accept personal self defense only as a compromise for self preservation and even that must be carefully metered.

Simply put, THERE ARE NO MILITANT CHRISTIANS. Anyone who is a militant is NOT a Christian.
Period.

So you see, what the author is actually commenting upon is the fakers, not the Christians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

شات الشرقيه
دردشه الشرقيه
شات الشرقية
دردشة الشرقية
دليل الشرقيه
العاب بنات
دردشه بنات
المشتاق
شات المشتاق
شات شموع
شموع

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]