Could a Real Christian Torture or Murder a Prisoner?

[Philosoraptor]

I just wonder, how many of the soldiers, interrogators, officers, and upper echelon generals and war lovers who claim to be lovers and followers of Christ think of the words of Jesus as they kill children and mothers, and torture prisoners?

How can a person say his prayers to Jesus in the morning and then go out and commit these deeds? Is he still a Christian after committing such acts? Or does he rely on the loophole of forgiveness?

How do they maintain their Christianity and vows to the prince of peace while indulging in the most sinful of acts? Those who support such actions are equally as guilty in the "eyes of God", and the large majority of them also claim Jesus as their main guy.

Imagine you are a soldier and also a follower of the teachings of Christ, how do you pull the trigger? How do you flip the electric wires and how do you hang onto your soul while you are water boarding a terrified prisoner?

How can a person claiming to love The Lord sign documents to permit rampant torture and mass murder and still have the nerve to attend church on Sunday?

Did the baby Jesus turn his face away just long enough for you to commit these sins, or did you simply turn your face from Him?

------------if this thread needs moved or iced, I'll understand Mods...........

[southpaw]

1. The question is...

Could a real Human Being torture or murder a prisoner?

Christians have proven throughout their history that they can and will torture and murder whoever gets in their way.

[Philosoraptor]

4. Of course they can, and have,

But then haven't they automatically forfeited their faith?

[Rageneau]

31. Torture others as you would have others torture you?

[greyl]

2. Yes.

Especially if they took Jesus at his word when he advocated beating slaves.

[Ezlivin]

3. Yes.

Christians can torture with the best of them.

Think: The Inquisition.

Christians can war with the best of them.

Think: The Crusades.

Look, a guy spills his seed and God whacks him. A man and woman don't give enough money, God whacks 'em. A city isn't godly, God whacks them all, including children and animals.

What did the "Prince of Peace" say? "Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household." (Matthew 10:34-36 NASB)

There is nothing a Christian won't do in pursuit of his/her faith. They are, after all, human.

[Philosoraptor]

6. I just think they should no longer be called Christians.

Stop making all these public pious claims to be lovers of Christ.

[southpaw]

14. Why?

Christ himself advocated conflict, violence and division in his name... at least he is said to have in a gospel passage already quoted in this thread. In all likelyhood, a literal 'Christ' never existed.

So, is a 'Real Christian' a Christian who follows the teachings of Christ?
Or is a 'Real Christian' a Christian who follows the traditional behavior of those Christians who came before him?

Either way, murder, torture and other atrocities are apparently acceptable.

edited for tragic spelling error

[Philosoraptor]

16. To me, an atheist, the whole concept is silly.

I'm just calling hypocrites on their bullshit prince of peace worship.

[Warpy]

5. First, what is a real Christian?

Is is someone who tells you he loves Jesus and that Jesus is a god and his personal savior but who seems to have forgotten every word in red in his bible? Or is it someone who silently tries to follow the teachings in his daily life?

Christians on this board have argued that both are true Christians. I'm not so sure, but I guess they're the experts.

The former true Christian would have no trouble torturing a fellow human being to death.

[ContraBass Black]

12. "what is a real Christian?"

People will argue. People will point to examples. People will make assertions. People will set up categories.

But the final decision about who has been true and who has not will not be made by people.

[gratuitous]

7. I have no idea

That's why I belong to the Church of the Brethren, which along with the Quakers and the Mennonites believes that all war is sin.

I understand the Air Force and particularly the Air Force Academy is chock full of folks who fancy themselves Christians, but I can't fathom what sort of mental and spiritual gymnastics it takes to fly jets or bombers, push a button, and know that you're vaporizing a bunch of people who never did anything to you, who can't fight back, and who can't get away -- if they're even aware of their own imminent annihilation.

[lonestarnot]

8. Nope. A they would not.

[leftofthedial]

9. if by "real" we mean the actual kind that has existed through history,

of course

[Philosoraptor]

11. By real I guess I mean one who takes Christ's words literally.

Which so many claim to do. They also claim to obey all ten commandments.

[leftofthedial]

21. it's hard to answer.

According to my personal interpretation of Jesus' words, I can't imagine him condoning that kind of violence.

However, "Christians" (with a capital "C") have always interpreted the bible pretty much in whatever way suits their leaders' political aims. It's been used to justify almost any act, from torture to murder to war (and for good acts as well).

[greyl]

23. I think it's probable that you're concept of Jesus

is better than the real thing, at least as far as statements attributed to him in the Bible.

It's a fact that the Bible states he advocated beating slaves, which of course means that slavery was effectively condoned by him.

# They should be beaten for disobedience, but not more severely then they deserve. --Jesus never denounced slavery: he endorsed it! He incorporated it into his teachings as if it were the most natural order (which it was for the biblical writers who didn't know any better). Why doesn't the bible--supposedly inspired by an all-loving deity--ever hint that there is something wrong with such a brutal social institution? If it were not for the influence of the bible (see answer 'd' below), the appalling American slave trade might have been curtailed, along with the bloody Civil War.

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes." (Luke 12:47-48) The entire context (Luke 12:41-48) shows that this is not part of a parable--it is the explanation of a parable, after Peter asked a question. But even if it were a parable, it would carry the same weight as a teaching of Jesus.

The word "servant" above is doulos, which means "slave" in Greek, and is correctly rendered "slave" by the NRSV, NAS, Scholar's Version, and others. "Shall" meant "should," as Jesus adds: "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required." (Luke 12:48)
http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/bquiz.php

Finally, this really highlights the disadvantage of written traditions vs oral traditions. Oral traditions of religion change from generation to generation so that they continue to make sense and become more relevant. With dogma, everyone gets split up over interpretations and misinterpretations.

[leftofthedial]

25. so jesus was a slave mongering thug?

he did not eschew violence directly, but his words provide and ambiguous and sometimes contradictory view of what he may have believed.

that is, for those who believe he even existed.

[greyl]

26. That wasn't quite my point, no. nt

[bleedingheart]

10. The Inquisition

[peacetalksforall]

13. The question by itself and the way you ask it cries out for sincerity.

I wanted to say someting mean (not to you), but I stopped. I truly hope this thread won't turn in to an opportunity to just throw out quips.

I think the answer might end up being wrapped up in the Bible.

My thought -

Just as the military sent the message from the top that it was OK to torture and torment - the Churches through their Reverends send the message that it is OK to go to war. The same for other religions.

However, Christians in this country are always claiming superiority. Which religion will break away and come out full force condemning war? Don't the Christian Scientists take that position?

The organized part of religions seem to embrace war. Believing in the spirit of love and honoring the universe in general is more honorable to me.

Again, I hope your posting will be taken seriously.

[Philosoraptor]

17. And the crusades are generally cited.

But really I'm talking about today's Christians, who say they want peace on earth and goodwill toward men every winter, and approve of killing all the Muslims.

[AndyA]

15. This topic opens up a can of worms.

I believe that the words in The Bible are the interpretation of the people who wrote them, and you must also consider the time frame when they were written. Human knowledge has grown considerably since those times, and I believe the purest words in The Bible are The Ten Commandments.

They are pretty easy to understand. You don't kill, you don't lie, etc. It would be difficult to justify being a Christian if you don't abide by those commandments. They are commandments, not recommendations or options.

This may be very simplistic, but I generally think Christians are expected to treat others as they themselves would want others to treat them. Few people would want to be discriminated against, killed, abused, ridiculed, tortured, etc.

Do unto others. If a person can't do that, they are not a Christian in my opinion. You've got to walk the walk as well as talk the talk.

[LittleClarkie]

18. At the least, that real Christian and God would be having a "little chat"

later.

[joneschick]

19. it has to involve a great deal of denial

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/sundancesolar_1903_1429070

[Touchdown]

20. Since the only real criteria for being a Christian is...

believing that Jesus died on the cross for your sins, and to believe in him as the savior, then there's really no other rules to that. Following and acting on his teachings or not, may make one a better or less than good Christian in some opinions, but a Christian nevertheless one remains.

So any atrocity imaginable can be done by a Christian, as has throughout history.

[Solon]

22. A Christian is someone who belives in the divinity of Jesus, that he...

was the Son of a God and worships him in that manner, this says nothing about their moral or ethical activities.

[NNN0LHI]

24. Then what about that Ten Commandments stuff?

Any ideas?

Don

[Solon]

30. Subject to interepretation depending on the individual...

The first 4 commandments are religious edicts for the actions of Christians and Jews, also, the actions of Yahweh in the Bible seems to provide ample evidence that the other commandments can be broken when the victims are unbelievers.

[derby378]

27. You should check out Stanley Milgram's obedience experiment

It's an eye-opener, that's for sure. Milgram designed the experiment as a direct result of the "We were only following orders" defense at Nuremburg.

[noonwitch]

28. Yes, if was genuinely repentant afterwards

People do bad things, even good people do, sometimes.

[The Stranger]

29. If one were to look at the centuries of the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem

Witch Trials, the Crusades, European Pogroms murdering Jews (and I could go on and on and on) one would think that it is downright Christian to engage in such atrocities.