I, too, have noticed that many pro-life people tend to be pro-war. The first casualty of war is the truth with the result that establishing its "justness" according to St. Augustine becomes very difficult. Those in power probably have a closer idea of the truth and they're not about to divulge it readily to the average the citizen if it's not in their interest. Instead, it dribbles out over the years and often we discover that we have supported a war that was not just at all.
It’s easy to be anti-war from the safety of your Western Civilization recliner. Until the war comes to you in the form of attacks by airplanes, hijacked by psychos who trained in a backwater country not being bombed by anyone, because that costs money and eventually lives. Peace doesn’t magically happen, and Nature (and criminals) will quickly fill a vacuum.
Of course. But how is that an argument against Dr. Christian's position? He didn't deny evil, or argued for peace magically happening. He only stated the incompatibility of two positions simultaneously held by many people.
“War” and “The Bible” are certainly not incompatible, nor is the concept of “War” bad, in and of itself. “The Bible” and “Pro-Life” are always good, when practiced in good faith and good intentions.
Not really, Most of the Islamic world is the same way, no abortions but plenty of war. What he writes is nothing special, that is the lot of humanity. Why is this a surprise?
Most understand your position. It is an understandably human position to take. And in my most unguarded moments, I would agree with you.
However, one of Augustine's conditions is that war not be for the purposes of revenge or out of hatred. And another is that no preemptive wars are just.
A better option would be to target those who are directly responsible (the perpetrators), or their immediate sponsors. That would not justify laying waste to a sovereign country for 20-odd years. And, who were the perpetrators of the obliquely-referenced attack? Surely they are dead now, if we are to believe the standard narrative. I don't want to open another can of worms.
But I hope you see what I'm getting at. According to the author's post, Augustine's conditions were so numerous and specific that the whole point was that no war could actually be justified if you followed his prescriptions.
I understand your point, but truly just wars must be extremely rare, and extremely limited. No doctrine of total war, a war which also targets civilians intentionally, could ever be justified. Wars of regime change could never be justified. Preemptive wars could never be justified.
In the pagan world, all of these things could be justified, but we are not pagans..., are we? We answer to a much higher authority, and the world's problems are not necessarily our concern. We can't solve the world's problems. Our mission is to preach the Gospel and meet our neighbor's needs to the greatest extent possible. We are not to entangle ourselves with the world's cares and intrigues.
You’re preaching to the choir. Literally. Military people and veterans are the last people who want war. But we also understand that sometimes it’s also necessary. When that time comes, you better be ready. Your enemy most certainly will be.
When was the last time that war was necessary, meaning, there was no other option as all other options were exhausted?
As we have seen in recent history, war is many times the first option, never the last. We are constantly being told, with very little evidence, who is our enemy, and why we should hate them. We are constantly told half-truths or outright lies to justify attacking another country.
I think you are also preaching to the choir. Nobody here is denying that war is "sometimes" necessary. We should, however, insist on a very high bar for proof that somebody attacked us, that we did not provoke them, and that attack justifies war. Too often, we are carried away by emotions, the very thing that Augustine warned against.
Can we at least agree that we have been lied into war many times?
It is your decision to make! A soldier has an obligation to refuse a command if it does not align with the military values. Otherwise he is just an automaton, stripped of any sovereignty.
Understanding the Biblical explanation for the origin of wars has been helpful to me. One Biblical passage that does this is: (James 4:1-4)
1 From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
2 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
3 Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
People tend to color reality in terms of good and evil; that “we must fight darkness with light”. But this is all subjectivity.
This reductionist binary approach is derivative of religious misunderstanding and deep indoctrination of the “good” and “bad” propaganda over the years. Unfortunately, it’s still devoutly followed nowadays with great zeal, not really reflecting the progression in cognition and awareness potential in humanity since the 9th century.
I am a profound dualist and I understand that there is no light without darkness and there is no darkness without light. (actually, in terms of pure physics, it is known that light comes from darkness, not the other way around). So it’s not really about one or the other.
Those who say “war is bad; killing is bad”, and “peace is good”, and how the former must be eradicated, show lack of acceptance and understanding of the duality that exists in what it is to be human.
You can't take away the killer monkey that is within each of us because this is not for us to choose. These vehicles, our bodies, are able to make love as well as to maim and kill. It’s predetermined in the specifications of the vehicle before we inhabit it.
All our civilizations and the privilege we’ve come to enjoy today are a byproduct of bloodshed, killing and death as well as peace, love and birth. One goes with the other. It's the wheel of life of what it is to be human. It is what it is.
It's exactly this belief that one should, and can be isolated from the other, - the desire to reach permanence of goodness and peace - is what leads to distortion: The madness of humanity.
It was never about denying our bestial qualities within, but being able to accept and see them for what they are, and by that, transcend them.
Same goes with birthing children. Many people bring children not from the place of love, and therefore keep distorting the planetary balance, which then brings consequences in terms of “genetic pruning”. That is, when population grows too rapidly, nature will make sure to curb its growth. One of them means is wars. It’s just the way it goes.
It all comes down to ignorance.
The heresy here is that killing someone may be entirely correct, or alternatively, bringing a child to the world may be entirely incorrect when they’re a derivative of right action (Dharma).
Right action is frightening, however, from the perspective of tribal values (religion and morality), because it insinuates lack of control and therefore, lack of order. But when one is living their Dharma, they do not need to be controlled or organized. They become a law in itself.
Only the not-self - the prevalent existence in which Man does not know himself; in which he’s controlled by whims and desires that oscillate as the wind changes direction - needs rules, threats and promises of salvation as a means of control.
Everything we see in the world, like dictators, ruthless rulers, provocateurs, petty tyrants and other things we have learned to color with subjective bias as “bad” and “undesired things”, are merely reflection of the cumulative level of self-awareness in humanity at large. One creates the other. And it paints a rather dark picture.
Nonetheless, they’re allowed to exist because they serve as a counterpoint to this enslaved existence; the not-self trapped beast in a cage.
Only when Man awakens to themselves - not that we will see the end of wars - will we only see Just wars, by the conditions laid out by Augustine.
However, this is not going to happen en masse. Only a tiny minority. In fact, we are marching towards decades of world wars like we’ve never experienced before. A cumulative effect to the rapid slumbering of human beings, the rapid relinquishment of self responsibility and the loss of human integrity.
Not only are almost all pro life people pro war, according to posts around the net almost 99% of pro life people are now for Genocide in Gaza. They are now for the killings of thousands of life babies and babies in the womb when the women are killed in the thousands as well.
"He makes wars cease to the ends of the earth. He breaks the bow and shatters the spear; he burns the shields with fire. He says, “Be still, and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth.” In the light of Psalm 46: 9-10, I would add to Augustine's "Just War" conditions: Pray for God to intervene and establish peace.
"I see that it is terrible; I see it on the news. I understand enough to hold up my protest sign and let the world know I want it to stop; therefore I am doing the right thing and I have the true and unquestionable Moral stance"
This is the mindset of true leftists who maintains the false belief that they absolve themselves from looking deeply into a problem and they know that their stance is the right stance; the solution is simple; chant a few partial truths that are beyond question; such as was is terrible and anyone who thinks otherwise is terrible and a Hypocrite.
Before ANYONE academic or otherwise wants to hold up their protest sign re the horrific situation in the Middle their grip on the sign is thoroughly limp until they can look the problem deep in the eyes without flinching; genuinely open to taken an alternate reality to what they have been shown on CNN or by the UN or any other globalist platforms.
Video 1: Jordan Peterson with Mosab Hassan Yousef (the Son of a Hamas Founder - he himself raped at the age of 5 who explains the culture he grew up in)
Like many awake academics and critical thinkers, Jordan Peterson is an academic that was set upon by Globalists
Far from being recollections decades after one of those darkest moments in Human History (allowed to happen ; in part by protesters with their signs) these are indisputable records of what is almost unbearable to watch.
watching this 2nd video (ONLY after watching video 1) will enable a partially understanding of what you are truly dealing with.
As rational thinkers do this, I am sure they will loosen their grip on their "I want it to stop" protest sign (figuratively speaking).
Video 3: UN Address of Israel's Ambassador Gilad Erdan - May 10th
" .. Many who are “pro life” are also “pro war .... ”
This is trying to establish a false equivalence.
It implies that both moral positions are fixed and immutable in "many" cases; whereas the first may be, but the second position is invariably highly circumstance-dependent.
For example, I can be unequivocally in favour of the former position; but in a case where a state wages war against its civilian population for eight years, describing it as an "anti terrorist operation," then any man from a neighbouring state who signs up to resist that murder and maiming process would be fulfilling Christ's dictum that laying down one's life for one's friend is the highest form of love.
Given, of course, that God Himself has in times past also commanded men to take up arms against other men, then I think we can see what His position is on the matter.
I mean killing another life, in the process of laying down your own. I would (hopefully, because it's easy to say when you don't need to) lay my life down for someone else in a war because I am helping them, but I don't think I could take up arms and kill someone.
I, too, have noticed that many pro-life people tend to be pro-war. The first casualty of war is the truth with the result that establishing its "justness" according to St. Augustine becomes very difficult. Those in power probably have a closer idea of the truth and they're not about to divulge it readily to the average the citizen if it's not in their interest. Instead, it dribbles out over the years and often we discover that we have supported a war that was not just at all.
It’s easy to be anti-war from the safety of your Western Civilization recliner. Until the war comes to you in the form of attacks by airplanes, hijacked by psychos who trained in a backwater country not being bombed by anyone, because that costs money and eventually lives. Peace doesn’t magically happen, and Nature (and criminals) will quickly fill a vacuum.
Of course. But how is that an argument against Dr. Christian's position? He didn't deny evil, or argued for peace magically happening. He only stated the incompatibility of two positions simultaneously held by many people.
“War” and “The Bible” are certainly not incompatible, nor is the concept of “War” bad, in and of itself. “The Bible” and “Pro-Life” are always good, when practiced in good faith and good intentions.
Not really, Most of the Islamic world is the same way, no abortions but plenty of war. What he writes is nothing special, that is the lot of humanity. Why is this a surprise?
When one is arguing from a Christian perspective, what does it matter what Muslims do?
And abortion is also not viewed the same in conservative Islam as it is in conservative Christianity.
Most understand your position. It is an understandably human position to take. And in my most unguarded moments, I would agree with you.
However, one of Augustine's conditions is that war not be for the purposes of revenge or out of hatred. And another is that no preemptive wars are just.
A better option would be to target those who are directly responsible (the perpetrators), or their immediate sponsors. That would not justify laying waste to a sovereign country for 20-odd years. And, who were the perpetrators of the obliquely-referenced attack? Surely they are dead now, if we are to believe the standard narrative. I don't want to open another can of worms.
But I hope you see what I'm getting at. According to the author's post, Augustine's conditions were so numerous and specific that the whole point was that no war could actually be justified if you followed his prescriptions.
I understand your point, but truly just wars must be extremely rare, and extremely limited. No doctrine of total war, a war which also targets civilians intentionally, could ever be justified. Wars of regime change could never be justified. Preemptive wars could never be justified.
In the pagan world, all of these things could be justified, but we are not pagans..., are we? We answer to a much higher authority, and the world's problems are not necessarily our concern. We can't solve the world's problems. Our mission is to preach the Gospel and meet our neighbor's needs to the greatest extent possible. We are not to entangle ourselves with the world's cares and intrigues.
You’re preaching to the choir. Literally. Military people and veterans are the last people who want war. But we also understand that sometimes it’s also necessary. When that time comes, you better be ready. Your enemy most certainly will be.
The rub is how often is "sometimes".
When was the last time that war was necessary, meaning, there was no other option as all other options were exhausted?
As we have seen in recent history, war is many times the first option, never the last. We are constantly being told, with very little evidence, who is our enemy, and why we should hate them. We are constantly told half-truths or outright lies to justify attacking another country.
I think you are also preaching to the choir. Nobody here is denying that war is "sometimes" necessary. We should, however, insist on a very high bar for proof that somebody attacked us, that we did not provoke them, and that attack justifies war. Too often, we are carried away by emotions, the very thing that Augustine warned against.
Can we at least agree that we have been lied into war many times?
That’s not my decision to decide. The POTUS and Congress decide that. I’m out, so I don’t have to worry about it.
It is your decision to make! A soldier has an obligation to refuse a command if it does not align with the military values. Otherwise he is just an automaton, stripped of any sovereignty.
I said I’m out. 30 years and almost 2 months.
Understanding the Biblical explanation for the origin of wars has been helpful to me. One Biblical passage that does this is: (James 4:1-4)
1 From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?
2 Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
3 Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
Also, understanding the purpose of our existence and the plans God preordained for humanity can explain this country's and the world's situation. Here is a document that further explains: https://www.eaec.org/The-Hidden-History-of-the-Antichrist--Summary-of-Lucifer-and-the-Kabbalistic-Jews--Teresa-Hillebrandt.pdf
People tend to color reality in terms of good and evil; that “we must fight darkness with light”. But this is all subjectivity.
This reductionist binary approach is derivative of religious misunderstanding and deep indoctrination of the “good” and “bad” propaganda over the years. Unfortunately, it’s still devoutly followed nowadays with great zeal, not really reflecting the progression in cognition and awareness potential in humanity since the 9th century.
I am a profound dualist and I understand that there is no light without darkness and there is no darkness without light. (actually, in terms of pure physics, it is known that light comes from darkness, not the other way around). So it’s not really about one or the other.
Those who say “war is bad; killing is bad”, and “peace is good”, and how the former must be eradicated, show lack of acceptance and understanding of the duality that exists in what it is to be human.
You can't take away the killer monkey that is within each of us because this is not for us to choose. These vehicles, our bodies, are able to make love as well as to maim and kill. It’s predetermined in the specifications of the vehicle before we inhabit it.
All our civilizations and the privilege we’ve come to enjoy today are a byproduct of bloodshed, killing and death as well as peace, love and birth. One goes with the other. It's the wheel of life of what it is to be human. It is what it is.
It's exactly this belief that one should, and can be isolated from the other, - the desire to reach permanence of goodness and peace - is what leads to distortion: The madness of humanity.
It was never about denying our bestial qualities within, but being able to accept and see them for what they are, and by that, transcend them.
Same goes with birthing children. Many people bring children not from the place of love, and therefore keep distorting the planetary balance, which then brings consequences in terms of “genetic pruning”. That is, when population grows too rapidly, nature will make sure to curb its growth. One of them means is wars. It’s just the way it goes.
It all comes down to ignorance.
The heresy here is that killing someone may be entirely correct, or alternatively, bringing a child to the world may be entirely incorrect when they’re a derivative of right action (Dharma).
Right action is frightening, however, from the perspective of tribal values (religion and morality), because it insinuates lack of control and therefore, lack of order. But when one is living their Dharma, they do not need to be controlled or organized. They become a law in itself.
Only the not-self - the prevalent existence in which Man does not know himself; in which he’s controlled by whims and desires that oscillate as the wind changes direction - needs rules, threats and promises of salvation as a means of control.
Everything we see in the world, like dictators, ruthless rulers, provocateurs, petty tyrants and other things we have learned to color with subjective bias as “bad” and “undesired things”, are merely reflection of the cumulative level of self-awareness in humanity at large. One creates the other. And it paints a rather dark picture.
Nonetheless, they’re allowed to exist because they serve as a counterpoint to this enslaved existence; the not-self trapped beast in a cage.
Only when Man awakens to themselves - not that we will see the end of wars - will we only see Just wars, by the conditions laid out by Augustine.
However, this is not going to happen en masse. Only a tiny minority. In fact, we are marching towards decades of world wars like we’ve never experienced before. A cumulative effect to the rapid slumbering of human beings, the rapid relinquishment of self responsibility and the loss of human integrity.
Not only are almost all pro life people pro war, according to posts around the net almost 99% of pro life people are now for Genocide in Gaza. They are now for the killings of thousands of life babies and babies in the womb when the women are killed in the thousands as well.
Thank you, Dr Christian, for your excellent and thought-provoking essay!
"He makes wars cease to the ends of the earth. He breaks the bow and shatters the spear; he burns the shields with fire. He says, “Be still, and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth.” In the light of Psalm 46: 9-10, I would add to Augustine's "Just War" conditions: Pray for God to intervene and establish peace.
"I see that it is terrible; I see it on the news. I understand enough to hold up my protest sign and let the world know I want it to stop; therefore I am doing the right thing and I have the true and unquestionable Moral stance"
This is the mindset of true leftists who maintains the false belief that they absolve themselves from looking deeply into a problem and they know that their stance is the right stance; the solution is simple; chant a few partial truths that are beyond question; such as was is terrible and anyone who thinks otherwise is terrible and a Hypocrite.
Before ANYONE academic or otherwise wants to hold up their protest sign re the horrific situation in the Middle their grip on the sign is thoroughly limp until they can look the problem deep in the eyes without flinching; genuinely open to taken an alternate reality to what they have been shown on CNN or by the UN or any other globalist platforms.
Video 1: Jordan Peterson with Mosab Hassan Yousef (the Son of a Hamas Founder - he himself raped at the age of 5 who explains the culture he grew up in)
Like many awake academics and critical thinkers, Jordan Peterson is an academic that was set upon by Globalists
Link: https://youtu.be/I5VPFw0vI6U
Video 2 : "Silence before the Scream"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAr9oGSXgak&rco=1
Far from being recollections decades after one of those darkest moments in Human History (allowed to happen ; in part by protesters with their signs) these are indisputable records of what is almost unbearable to watch.
watching this 2nd video (ONLY after watching video 1) will enable a partially understanding of what you are truly dealing with.
As rational thinkers do this, I am sure they will loosen their grip on their "I want it to stop" protest sign (figuratively speaking).
Video 3: UN Address of Israel's Ambassador Gilad Erdan - May 10th
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPixVlc2EEs&t=2334s
No one on the other side (of the protest sign) has such a thorough understanding
Finally - Below you will find a link to the most accepted English Translation of the QUR’AN
Because it is in a PDF format it is very easy to do a word search.
Please do the word search “Jew”
https://ia802301.us.archive.org/10/items/quran-english-translation-and-commentary-by-yusuf-ali/quran-english-translation-and-commentary-by-yusuf-ali.pdf
In a phrase that Jordan Peterson might use "Of course we want it to bloody stop!"
Simply holding up a sign such as "I can see a Hypocrisy in groups of people that are pro-life and yet do not condemn war" is:
- a self-serving affirmation
- suggest a superior moral stance and understanding
- unwittingly enables the disease behind war to thrive
- takes credit for doing absolutely nothing
A similar set of achievements can be attributed to all those vending machine physicians prior to and during Covid-19
Who wants wars? It's literally Satanic - https://crushlimbraw.blogspot.com/2022/12/satans-wars-christians-killing.html?m=0 - and destruction of man is his mission.
" .. Many who are “pro life” are also “pro war .... ”
This is trying to establish a false equivalence.
It implies that both moral positions are fixed and immutable in "many" cases; whereas the first may be, but the second position is invariably highly circumstance-dependent.
For example, I can be unequivocally in favour of the former position; but in a case where a state wages war against its civilian population for eight years, describing it as an "anti terrorist operation," then any man from a neighbouring state who signs up to resist that murder and maiming process would be fulfilling Christ's dictum that laying down one's life for one's friend is the highest form of love.
Given, of course, that God Himself has in times past also commanded men to take up arms against other men, then I think we can see what His position is on the matter.
Laying down one's life is one thing. Killing another life, in the process is a whole different matter.
Exactly.
I mean killing another life, in the process of laying down your own. I would (hopefully, because it's easy to say when you don't need to) lay my life down for someone else in a war because I am helping them, but I don't think I could take up arms and kill someone.
It just takes practice.
Try it - you'll like it.
Spoken better than me.