Would Jesus support the war on Iraq?

[citizenkyle]

I'd like to see the various opinions on this issue:

If Jesus was walking around on present day earth, would he support the war on Iraq? Why or why not?

[Socrates]

Kyle

I've never like the WWJD thingy, because of rampant subjectivity in most cases. The only exception is when it's backed up by what Jesus actually said or did according to the only reliable source, the New Testament.

I've mentioned before that Jesus praised peacemakers not "pacifists". He praised a Roman centurion for having greater faith than anyone in Israel, without the slightest hint that his military calling was wrong. He even presented an illustration of a king with 10,000 men facing a king with 20,000 men, and the former would try to seek peace terms. So He affirmed that a strong national defence can prevent war.

His Apostles, to whom He gave authority, also used military analogies positively. Consider Cornelius, the first gentile convert: he was a centurion in the Italian Regiment, but highly regarded by Jews and Gentiles alike as a godly man. When the chief Apostle Peter was sent to present the Gospel to him, there wasn't the slightest idea that Cornelius should resign from the army. Paul affirmed that the Government does not bear the sword in vain.

Jesus' forerunner John the Baptist was asked by two soldiers what they should do. His response was NOT, "leave the army", but "Extort no one and be content with your pay."

In the case of a war against Iraq, this would be some killing to get rid of a killer who is responsible for far more deaths. But in a war, the target would be the military and Saddam, and there would be some unfortunate collateral damage in civilian lives, which should be minimised. But the liberal left and the oxymoronic United Nations prefer sanctions, which target civilians with the vain hope that Saddam would be "collateral damage" as it were.

[Jin-Roh]

I'm inclined to agree with Socrates on the WWJD. I actually did look up "blessed are the Peacemakers" in a Strong's Concordance, and it does mean "pacifictory," but nothing in the sermon on the Mount was a politcal teaching.

The only time Jesus ever gave a politcal view in my oponion was when he demonstrated obedience to civil authority on civil matters and when he called king Heroad a "fox".

I also think its a slippery slope to try to use the Bible to justify a complete political line of thinking.

[bigsplit]

I am merely stating my own struggle, I too would kill to protect my child, but is it right is the question I am asking? The live by the sword die by the sword. turn the other cheek ideas, what do they imply. As for David, had his life been the correct example for the world there would have been no need for Jesus to come in the first place.

Why did Jesus not bare Arms against the powers that be, why did he not lead his followers to do so. We know he could have prevailed. But why did he not smite his enemies. Why did God allow his son to be murdered. Is this an example for us, must we make the same sacrifice to spare the wicked so that they may oneday find salvation? Or are we to ignore these examples and protect our way in this world...and does our love for this life cause us to Murder even if "justified".

These are just questions that I struggle with and on an intellectual level am unable to just shake off.