Originally from here, but be mindful that some colorful metaphors exist on said site.
More pearls of wisdom from that bastion of politicized Christianist exceptionalism:
It’s likely even Jesus would have OK’d water boarding if it would have saved his Mom. He would’ve done the same to save his Dad, or any one of His disciples. For that matter, He even died to save all humans.
It’s obvious He would not be happy with those who voted for the candidate who kills because it’s above his “pay grade” to know if they’re alive. Checking the Commandments, killing innocents is against the 5th. Because pro-aborts don’t know for sure life does not exist at conception, they are still willing to risk that it’s not killing.
(h/t John Cole)
There was also this gem of a quote from Christian Right leader Jack Gary Bauer:
There are a lot of things Jesus wouldn’t do because he’s the son of God. I can’t imagine Jesus being a Marine or a policeman or a bank president, for that matter. The more appropriate question is, ‘What is a follower of Jesus permitted to do?’
I think if we believe the person we have can give us information to stop thousands of Americans from being killed, it would be morally suspect to not use harsh tactics to get that information.
Granted, Christ did die for our sins, after being tortured, but do you think that He who commanded for us to turn the other cheek would have approved of torture?
May 25th, 2009 6:52 pm
Ridiculous.
May 25th, 2009 7:26 pm
What an asinine statement.
I guess this moron thinks that Jesus was kidding when he said “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”
May 25th, 2009 7:52 pm
Looking at the quotes you cite, I notice a theme. It is the defense of innocents and the use of harsh measures to gain information. It is NOT about punishment or retribution. Hence, turning the other cheek is not applicable to those quotes.
Just a thought…
May 25th, 2009 10:25 pm
The Human ego is essentially idolatrous. First it creates a God who punishes his creation in an eternal gulag in the tradition of Stalin et al . Secondly, it conjures a Savior-Redeemer who will consider justifying torture in certain situations. We have indeed made God in our own image. Man’s injustice and cruelty to one another which is the product of the human ego is the root cause of the pain and suffering ravaging the world today.
May 26th, 2009 9:28 pm
Jonolan … how about that command about walking a second mile? It refers to oppression under the Romans and accepting it.
Or the instruction to give over your coat and tunic?
The point is that we’re not supposed to live like part of the world, and we’re not supposed to play by its rules.
Rationalize however you will, I don’t think that any kind of Just War theory would have accepted this kind of practice until it was being sanctioned by a Republican, at which time the politicized segment of the church had to make excuses for it.
September 17th, 2009 2:24 am
[...] in which several religious conservative leaders came out in support of torture as something that Jesus would have supported, including Fox News host, Sean [...]
May 25th, 2009 7:24 pm
I agree
May 25th, 2009 7:36 pm
Maybe it’s not in his translation, or perhaps he, like so many others, are reading it according to his own doctrine and needs
May 25th, 2009 8:11 pm
It is still not violence to violence? Do we first give violence to that which has not yet happened? Or, rather, to the extreme, do we kill based on theories? We are to love our enemies, and pray for those that persecute us, and when attacked, turn the other cheek.
May 26th, 2009 11:54 am
The concept of violence to violence or violence for violence is intrinsically retributive in nature. None of the quotes you cited was of that retributive nature. They’re were advocating violence as a means of defense, which is generally considered sad but allowable under Christian doctrine.
May 26th, 2009 11:59 am
While self-defense to a degree may be allowed, preemptive self-defense (not that I believe in such a thing) is not. We are told not to give back what we get in the way of violence, so how can we first use violence against those that only seemingly threaten violence?