LT,
I was referring in the first place to events in Sarajewo in 1914. The whole sequence of events may have been stopped there and then by non-aggressive means. As far as Hitler is concerned, Europe looked the other way when he rearmed in the thirties. The reoccupation of the Rhineland in 1936 was a pivotal moment then imo. What I am saying is that “national feeling” justified war for the German nation and the individual German soldiers just the same. The “just war” thing can be used by both sides – to start a war as well. An unjust system does not produce just wars. I am approaching the subject from the perspective of preventative policies instead of actual military action when push comes to shove. This is where Christian morals could be focusing on more. But in the end the key question to answer here, without hiding behind convenient morals, is when an individual Christian can or even should take action.
I am not genuinely suggesting that, in the end, in the real world, the Allies had a non-aggressive alternative that didn't involve acceding to foreign dictatorship and eventual ethnic cleansing. So yes, pacifism can only exist by virtue of those that fight to protect it. A true pacifist will in the end give up his/her life by not interfering and perhaps leaving others to suffer perhaps more than they would through war – who knows? IMO, Rwanda only served to demonstrate that politics did NOT override either genuine or misplaced "altruism": no military peacekeeping force prevented the slaughter. I think pacifism is an overly idealistic and unworkable thing to hide behind. So no, I am not a pacifist and have to accept we live in an unjust world with which we just have to make do. As far as a Christian’s position is concerned, it depends on determining what his/her place and purpose is in “this world”, and where to draw the line with the other “Kingdom”. Within that position you either reject only overtly unjust wars based on your individual conscience, or you reject all wars, leaving you with the problem of essentially turning into a pacifist on the macro level, otherwise having to determine where to draw the line as far as self-defense is concerned on a more personal level.
VG
True Christians neutral in War?
by Van Gogh 74 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Van Gogh
-
LittleToe
Distinguishing between a nation arming itself for self-defense, and arming itself for aggressive military action, will always be difficult. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Surely there is a global responsibility to interfere where there is loss of human life?
Of course drawing the line will always be a problem while ever there is a huge divide between rich and poor, weak and strong, educated and uneducated, peace and abuse.
I agree entirely with your point that all too often politicians look the other way, though I'm not quite sure where the "Christian" bit fits in. There is no black and white answer, as can seen by many following the dictates of their individual consciences.
-
AuldSoul
Van Gogh,
I am aware of the meaning of the word pacifism, however I dispute that its origins (derived from "peace") are justifiable. What we call a pacifist is actually a neutralist. A true "pacifist" would recognize the realities you stated in your last post; peace can only be maintained by those willing to die for it and kill for it. The reasons are obvious in your most recent post.
Materialism, religionism, nationalism, racism, etc. will always be spawing "ideals" that are "justification" for war. Pacifism is also an ideal, someone who truly works for peace and holds it as an ideal, will be vigilant to the reality that eradication of these other competing ideals is impossible, whereas, minimization of their impacts on the world is possible. However, it is only possible through force.
Many Bhuddists have died proving the point. Massacre and genocide only seem unconscionable to those who aren't driven by a selfish ideal.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul -
jgnat
Switzerland is an excellent example of a nation arming itself for self-defence only. It's worked so far.
-
heathen
If we truly are Lords of this planet, don't we have a responsibility to do our best to improve it, including resort to equal and exacting force if required?
It's clear we are not the lords of the planet . All authority in heaven and earth were given to christ . He ordered his followers to remain separate from the human persuits of justice and vengeance. As far as I can see the christian prime directive is to love, suffer and die in persuit of heavenly interests of peace . To have complete and total trust in Gods promise of rewards in an afterlife or perhaps never to die by surviving these trials and tribulations of a cataclysmic time . The belief that human intervention can bring peace and security is blaspheme .