Is War/Violence- 'Evil' and is 'Peace'- Good?

[Turbo]

Some of the threads on here regarding violence and war in Islam created some interest and some questions in my mind regarding the nature of war. We are taught that war is an evil, perhaps sometimes a necessary evil, but an evil none the less. Is this however the way the Koran and the Bible depict war and peace?

Is war "evil" and "peace" good according to Christianity and Islam? Historically neither religion has been one of peace. Does the message of peace both religions preach actually result in more violence and war?

Does the Bible and the Koran condone violence and war? Is the Koran inherently more violent that the Bible? Or, is the bible more violent than the Koran? Please support your opinions using direct quotes from either book.

Does God in Christianity and/or Islam support the use of violence and war?

[Spiff]

Well, from what i know, some people translate one of the commandments as:

"Thou shalt not kill"

while others translate it as:

"Thou shalt not murder"

depending on which you prefer, you can possibly kill without being evil, for i assume it is evil to break the commandments

[Richard the Lionheart]

Ok so here's something I posted in one of the other threads in regards to Islam:

In Islam, jihad is a comprehensive process, which takes in the striving of an individual or a group of Muslims, to adhere to the divine teachings and values. The Arabic word "jihad" means "to struggle" or "to strive." In as much as jihad is a struggle, it is a struggle against all that is perceived as evil in the cause of that which is perceived as good, a cosmic and epic struggle spanning time and all dimensions of human thought and action, and transcending the physical universe. Muslims often do not refer merely to "jihad" but to jihad fi Sabilillah (in the path of God).

Literally, jihad means that Muslims should fulfill their duties to promote the cause of Islam. Traditionally understood, jihad enunciates a paradigm of struggle which is for the most part internal, spiritual and peaceful, but which also expresses strategic, legal and collective justification, ratio legis, for going to war. It is a struggle to perform and maintain goodness, abolishing injustice, oppression, and evil from within oneself, as well as from the whole society. Thus, jihad takes many forms; spiritual, social, economic, as well as political It is not only an outward act, but also an inward one to strengthen one’s own self and correct one’s own mistakes. Clearly, the exertion of the self in all directions - in every effort and act, personal and collective, internal and external - is the essence of jihad in the Islamic sense. This rule illustrates that jihad does not necessarily involve waging a war.

In other words, jihad is supposed to run through all aspects of a Muslim’s life, as it is his duty in the world to do good and prevent harm and evil. This can, of course, entail the use of force when peaceful means are not successful.

It is a serious, continuous, and sincere struggle, on both the personal, as well as on the social level.

[Turbo]

Honor & Glory,

Is the act of war on behalf of a government considered evil? There are unjust wars waged sometimes even against those of the same faith. Is fighting in an unjust war 'evil' according to the Muslim faith? It is unclear to me whether this is the case in the bible.

In the bible for example, God visits war on his enemies and even on his chosen people when they turn their back on God. Peace seems to be a reward for following God's path. Is the Koran similar in this portrayal?

The second most important commandment in Christianity is to "Love thy neighbor like thyself" which means love others. War, when neccessary to help people and bring them freedom, or protect them from those who wish to harm them, is a good thing. War for the sake of profit or conquest is usually not good...

Yet, Christ withheld the hand of Peter when Peter was prepared to fight and probably die for Christ when the Romans arrested Christ. Christ even healed the injury that Peter inflicted. John 18:10-11. There is certainly no more righteous and just cause than that of Peter yet Christ went peacefully.

Merged double post, please use the edit button whenever you want to add something-Valus

[Richard the Lionheart]

Is the act of war on behalf of a government considered evil?

That would depend on what the government is fighting for.

Is fighting in an unjust war 'evil' according to the Muslim faith?

Obviously, yes.

[Farnan]

The second most important commandment in Christianity is to "Love thy neighbor like thyself" which means love others. War, when neccessary to help people and bring them freedom, or protect them from those who wish to harm them, is a good thing. War for the sake of profit or conquest is usually not good...

[Farnan]

Christ didn't rebuke Peter for fighting, rather Christ rebuked Peter for trying to stop God's Will. The first Gentile Christian was a Roman Centurion, which means that Christianity is against violence, only unjust violence...

[Fenris]

Christ didn't rebuke Peter for fighting, rather Christ rebuked Peter for trying to stop God's Will. The first Gentile Christian was a Roman Centurion, which means that Christianity is against violence, only unjust violence...

You like to twist stuff to fit your view huh? Happens a lot in all religions though, don't feel bad.

[MasterAdnin]

Depends on what you are fighting for, such as what you said, Peter was fighting for Christ, and was doing what was right for the religion at the time, while others will say that he as wrong in fighting the Romans and trying to kill them, so it depends on your point of view.

ADnan

[Farnan]

According to the Book of Matthew, Jesus merely said to Peter after he cut off the servants ear "Put away that sword, those who live by the sword die by the sword." Also, the reason Peter had the sword was because Jesus told him to get it...

[Confederate Soldier]

From a Christen point of view the ideas of war can not be seen in just Black, and White. War is a thing that is needed for mankind within a matter of speaking. And in terms of dose God support them I'll have to go with a yes. However even if he doesn’t the Holy Bible dose state that a man should follow the laws of his country and obey the leaders. So should your country go to war and you go in and fight, kill, and etc... Then you need not worry for you were serving your country. However stuff such as assassins one should never be. Its one thing to kill a man but to plot to kill one waiting, and watching his ever move right before you pull the trigger is just murder.
The Bible also states that if one should take a city then you should put it to the sword. Then there is when Jesus says that if a you own two coats then you should sell one to buy a sword so you can defend yourself. So I guess all in all war is ok but should only be used in terms of a defense/offensive defense. Again this is just my views so they may not be right.

[Turbo]

From a Christen point of view the ideas of war can not be seen in just Black, and White. War is a thing that is needed for mankind within a matter of speaking. And in terms of dose God support them I'll have to go with a yes. However even if he doesn’t the Holy Bible dose state that a man should follow the laws of his country and obey the leaders. So should your country go to war and you go in and fight, kill, and etc... Then you need not worry for you were serving your country. However stuff such as assassins one should never be. Its one thing to kill a man but to plot to kill one waiting, and watching his ever move right before you pull the trigger is just murder.
The Bible also states that if one should take a city then you should put it to the sword. Then there is when Jesus says that if a you own two coats then you should sell one to buy a sword so you can defend yourself. So I guess all in all war is ok but should only be used in terms of a defense/offensive defense. Again this is just my views so they may not be right.

Good post. After a bit of reading of the bible, I am wondering if war and violence is neutral. God uses it against his enemies and to punish his people in the OT. However in the New Testament, peace is clearly prefered over war. THe bible

Could you provide me with the verse in the NT that deals with the owning of 2 coats and the buying of the sword? I am not familiar with it.

[Hellenic Hoplite]

Look at war with a cold eye and no emotional attachment to your life and past. War, no matter how poetically one wants to describe it, it about killing people and destroying civilization. Peace is the opposite process, where no war exists, and is the situation in which people are raised and matured and civilization is developed. You can see yourself if war is good or bad or 'justified' or not.

War is a matter of greed. Somebody wants more than he has (not that he needs it, but he wants it nevertheless) and gets many fools to follow him by convincing them in one way or another to sacrifice their blood for him. And that's when war takes place.

P.S.: Don't mistake war with defence. Defence is the protection of the civilization that is being trespassed, and the exact opposite of war.

[Ummon]

Indiscriminate, single-minded, aprioristic recommendation of violence against a certain group, is evil. Violence, furthermore, is always the worst solution. Only, in many cases, the worst solution is the only one left to obtain something important. It is thus important:

1) to be forebearing and avoid being put in the position of having to use violence
2) to learn to stop violence whenever it isn't absolutely necessary
3) to try to pass to a level where violence is never necessary

[Hellenic Hoplite]

I believe the buying of the sword had two parts. The one was the part everybody can understand, but it was for self defence. The other was the symbolic part, 'buying a sword' could mean 'arming yourself' in a time where symbolism was used much more often than today. Jesus certainly prefered peace, because he was an intelligent person. He could probably have raised an army and taken over anything he likes, but he prefered to go through what he did instead, showing the best way to solve your differences and one that can always apply. To help yourself you don't need the others' permission, and to help the others you don't bash them in the face! You help them understand, those that want to.

[Xyston]

I agree with what Ummo said. War is indeed the worst solution and should be avoided whenever possible. However, when all other options have failed, war can sometimes be the only thing left.

[Mangalore]

Well, Jesus rather had himself killed than commit any act of violence. The OT is the basis for the NT and for Christians thus the NT is the essential part, not the OT as it is what differentiates between the "old" and "new" faith. In the old testament you have a wrathful, punitive god which is the exact opposite of Jesus' teachings and one main difference between his ideas and the older Judaism.
In the NT the words are very onesided to only one option towards war or violence: offer your other cheek. The whole basis is that you should not harm anyone whatever he might do to you as the life is only one step from eternity in heaven. Afterall you have the son of God allowing himself to be crucified for this one reason.

In my eyes war is not an option, it is failure, it marks the incapability or unwillingliness to forsee the developments or reasoning of the opposing side and forces a decision by force to resolve an unsolvable situation which you allowed to occur in the first place. There is imo no justification for war, there might be only a necessity due to the own imperfection and ignorance to prevent it.

Now in the 21st century is even worse as only few wars are waged controlled by its respective governments but instead are fought out of predjudice or ignorance by a wide range of individuals. Private/political Militias are taking the place of armies and won't adhere to any kind of treaty or peace negoatiation if they see their power base threatened. From Bosnia to Uganda there are so many people involved outside the hierarchy of "orderly" nation warfare, that the UN has an own term of this new kind of war where no real goals or measures of victory or defeat exist.

[Farnan]

I am? Wow, I never knew I was...

Who are you to say I am twisting my religion? Never did I say that violence for the sake of violence was good. Tell me where I am contradicted by the Bible, and I'll consider your POV...

[Fenris]

I am? Wow, I never knew I was...

Who are you to say I am twisting my religion? Never did I say that violence for the sake of violence was good. Tell me where I am contradicted by the Bible, and I'll consider your POV...

You're twisting it by saying that Jesus wasn't against Peter using violence. Oh and I wonder what's the point of that bold ? Because it's YOUR religion, your interpretation has more value? Man that's a good one.

[Farnan]

Yes, Christians interpret Christianity better than non-Christians, just like Muslims interpret Islam better than non-Muslims...

Also, Jesus wasn't against the violence, he told Peter to buy the sword...