Customer Reviews

Christianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Just read of the 'Silent Night' truce between the Germans and British 90 years ago for a stunning, tear-jerking account of the inherent goodness and lack of ill-will in man's heart. The massive slaughter of war is not found in such hearts, it is shoved upon us as a few old men barter with the lives of many young men. As humans let alone Christians we should reject the few warmongers, close our ears to their calls for killing, maiming and war.

Don't let the few rot the rest of us.

Very informative and scripturally truthful. As a Christian minister,I knew my view of war, and this book helped support it. It also supported the direction in which I want to lead my congregation. I highly recommend this book to anyone wondering whether this, or any other war, is moral and just. If you know where you stand, this book will help support your belief. If you are unsure, this is a great tool to use in forming a position.

Laurence Vance's book titled CRISTIANITY AND WAR is an informative little book that should urge those who claim to be Christians to think. The book is also to those who are of different religions or have no religious affiliation at all. The book provides a careful yet scathing denounciation of well known clergy who support the current disasters in Western Asia, a good assessment of the Anti-Federalists' fear of standing armies,and a good assessment of George Washington's and Thomas Jefferson's warnings against "entangling alliances." This termed was coined by Jefferson rathet than Washington even though Washington made similiar warnings. The book ends with the horrors of war and a detailed presentation of the vastness of the American empire.


The first essay of this book is a biblical refutation of those teleision clergy who breathe and shout for war using weak biblical arguements to support their wild claims. Vance cites other biblical references to cancel these statments. One should ask how many of the televison pastors ever went to war or heard gunfire fired in anger. One gets a good view of them in George Orwell's HOMAGE TO CATALONIA. One should also refer to Andy Jacobs THE 1600 KILLERS:THE IRAQ EDITION. Mr. Jacobs is the former member of the House of Representatives who was a battle decorated Marine during the Korean War. He calls such clergy and arm chair patriots as War Wimps and Chicken Hawks.

The second set of essays consists of excerpts from THE ANTI-FEDERALIST PAPERS challneging the establishment of standing armies. Vance quotes some of the ANTI-FEDERALIST authors. These men were learned and thoughtful and presented good examples of members of representative bodies who voted for standing armies only to have the leaders of these armies force legislators out of office at the point of a sword or end of a gun. Those who dismiss the Anti-Federalists as obstrepeous men who tried to stop progess by opposing ratification of the U.S. Constitution are decidedly wrong. The Anti-Federlists were crucial to ratification of the U.S. Constitution. One of their main objections was the lack of a bill of rights. Had The Bill of Rights not been promised for ratification, the U.S. Constitution would not have been ratified. The historical formuls is that without the Anti-Federalists, there would have been no Bill of Rights. Without The Bill of Rights there would have been no U.S. Constitution.

Along with comments on the Anti-Federalists, Vance presents thought excerpts from George Washington and Thomas Jefferson about an intrusive foreign policy. These excerpts were written by intelligent men who studied history and could articulate their views in clear, logical, and concise language. One can read these excerpts and easily distingush intelligent political writing from the current stupid, ad hominem current presentations that are passed off by current media ignoramuses.

Vance makes a good transition when he includes essays on the horrors of war based on the warnings of the Founding Fathers. Vance gives vivid examples of combatents and observers who write of the tragedies of war. Some of these comments were written by observers and nurses. Some were written by soldiers on both sides of the conflict. These comments reveal the effects of war on character, moral codes, and destructive behavior.
The most graphic are those of soldiers and civilians caught in combat zones. The horrors of death, maiming, and fear are well worth noting.

The last part of the book is a good look at the vastness of the American Empire. Vance documents that the U.S. has armed forces in at least 136 nations and may have armed forces in as many as 150 countries. This section of the book has amusing anecdotes. For example the present Administration denied having a huge military base in Kosova even thought Pres. Bush recently gave a speech there. Vance obtained a document titled "Active Duty Military Personnel Strenghts by Regional Area and by Country." When he questioned military and poltical leaders about this document, they said no such document existed. Yet, these liars got angry when he presented it to them. They refused to discuss the document or answer telephone calls.

This book has another important consideration. The question is who and how will an American Empire be financed without ruinning the economy. So far, there has been serious discussion of the potential for ruinning the economy. If such economic ruin ever occurs, it will be too late to do anything about.

Laurence Vance's book is not a large book. However it is an important book for anyone concerned that a warfare state can and will destroy individual liberty and economic welfare. The book is written by an honest, conscientious Christian who is well read and informed. Mr. Vance does not preach to his readers. He makes them think.

This is the best book of essays on the subject of war for the Christian that I have come across. It is must reading for all the "right wing" conservative Christians that seem to be mesmerized by the Republican Party and the neo-conservatives.

The more and more I studied the Bible, the more and more I hated war. As a former Army grunt and former warmonger, I stumbled upon this book and realized that not all Christians in America are "rah, rah, kill'em all for the USA" individuals. This is an awesome book. Of course it would not get good reviews from the likes of Fox News nor would Fox ever interview the author.

The author's style is both enjoyable to read and specific in laying out the facts. Well researched book on the subject of war. This country has been fooled for too long believing that murdering others is justifiable, simply because the government says it's "OK." We have led our children down a road with a poisonous teaching that wearing the uniform for this country will be for noble and just causes.

The German's thought they were attacked. Their emotions were manipulated and a "righteous" war they fought, until Nuremberg war crime trials. Every true Christian ought to exam their hearts and be honest with evaluating what this author has clearly laid out.

This book is a MUST READ. I have it on my book shelf with plans to re-read it!

For those looking for a true Christian-based viewpoint on war, the warfare state, and the military, look no further! Laurence Vance presents the anti-war tradition of Jesus, the early Christians, and great ministers like Charles Spurgeon. Of course it is easy to find so-called 'Christian' support for killing, torture, bombing, maiming, and empire-building, as long as the United States is the country committing these atrocities. Here you can find the alternative to all the noise, as all the hypocritical arguments of the warmongers are torn to shreds. For those who are ready to find the truth, this is a must read. WARNING: IF YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN WARMONGER, PREPARE TO HAVE YOUR LIFE CHANGED. Mine was.

This collection of essays utterly destroys the view held by a majority of American Christians that somehow God has mandated that America is to be the world's liberator via our military. This view has caused many Christians to rationalize the torture and murder of civilians as well as the "enemy" military personnel, in countries that have never been a credible threat to us. The author addresses the evil of our foreign policy which justifies meddling and interfering in the affairs of other nations because after all, when Americans do these things, we only have the best of intentions. As both a Christian and an Army veteran, I am very convicted by these essays to re-look our nation's intentions and acknowledge our wrongs. I have bought a second copy for my pastor and I intend to share this information with as many people as I can. I highly recommend this book for those who really want to get to the root of our nation's problems and are not afraid of the truth.

A collection of informative,emotion-packed,persuasive essays on a topic that has been around and divided christians for centuries. Vance points out that only a defensive war is a just or legitimate war for christians to participate in. The reality is, as the build-up to the Iraq war has shown, it is not clearly evident whether an impending war is for a just cause. There is a time for everything under the sun.

A wonderful exposition of politically correct and liberal pacifist Christian belief. Congrats! So good to see Christians concerned with war open to the larger and more honest dialogue currently available. It seems likely, however, that had Vance's ideas prevailed during World War II, our combatants would have been annihilated on the sands of Normandy and Iwo Jima. Yes, we can hunker-down into our shell of comfortable sectarian and anti-war belief, but doesn't this suggest a sign of weakness, opening our best hopes to ridicule by possibly inferior forces? Hatred and intolerance of opposing viewpoints (mine included) is, of course, a primary germ of the warfare state.

Ironically, the anti-war movement itself is responsible for unspeakable death and suffering, perhaps rivaling that resulting from actual fighting in the Vietnam War, emasculating fighting prowess at every turn. But should we turn our combatants into media or entertainment victims? Oh, the wives that are distraught! And LO the children who suffer from not having an immediate father! Well, let's pretend that the military are there for humanitarian puposes to help alleviate suffering--anything that Charles Gibson and similar sugar-coated voices will deem marketable. It seems certain that politically correct social scientists will never voluntarily attempt to measure something that calls into question their own selfish contradictions.

Even so, let's at least admit what's true: Christianity is central to the defense of Western Civilization, perhaps even more so than tanks or warplanes or other implements of technological warfare. Individual resolve is galvanized, while entire populations are mobilized under a single banner.

Is the Christian soldier on the battlefield afraid of death? Should his relatives mourn his tragic demise, or rejoice in his heroic fulfillment of life's sacred purpose, being with God? Another way of asking this question is "do you have a problem meeting God face-to-face right now?" We think of Quakers in Colonial America who, sentenced to hanging for their less-popular beliefs, confounded spectators at the gallows with smiles on their faces. They asked "We will soon be with Jesus, so why should we lament?" Similarly, Christian soldiers on the battlefield have less fear of death than those without faith.

Because of the nature of the Trinity, the God of the Old Testament should not be separated from the God of the New Testament (Jesus and God of both Testaments being the same). As we well know, Jesus stands behind and is the-same-as the Old Testament God who sometimes ordered the destruction of large populations. Christians know that the Son was "with" His Father when military decisions were made in the Old Testament. Jesus was with Joshua even while being guided by the Father! There is no meaningful conception of the Trinity that favors the Son over the Father. Nor should Christians simply cull those parts of the Bible that foreshadow and later support the New Testament Gospel.

The Bible is the Bible, both New Testament and Old. It all has standing--and must pull together if a stronger, more ecumenical resurgence of the West's Judeo-Christian foundation is to move forward. Yes, Jesus tried to extend Judaism, not defeat it. Yes, Martin Luther wanted to make Catholicism stronger, rather than end it. Whatever, Christianity and Judaism must "cleave unto itself" to establish common ground and strength against its historical enemies, jihadist Islam and progressive, atheistic secularism.

Christ's example on Calvary reinforces the resolve of the heroic Christian soldier, also fully human. It is the story of a young man who dies violently at the hands of the enemy, for what He believes, absolutely refusing surrender, sacrificing Himself for the survival of those "back home," confident of being immediately reunited with God. His martyrdom provided the best tactical and strategic advantage for that time, not armed resistance, considering the overwhelming Roman military presence. The same applies to "unwilling-to-fight" early Christians in general, though I have no doubt that these men would have fought to protect their wives and children when appropriate. We will not forget that the first Christians were real flesh-and-blood people, not etherealized abstractions.

It's easy to quote verses to represent the softer or harder elements in God's "personality", but when it comes to war, Sunday School simplicity (however beautiful and guiding while emphasizing a pacifist Christ) must also allow maturer concepts of struggle and suffering, supported in the Bible as well.

ALL OF US WORSHIP JESUS'S VISION OF PEACE AND NONVIOLENCE. But, be assured even in vernacular terms, His most-recited Gospel teachings point to a much-loved END-product or utopian goal--and a rule-of-thumb guide to daily decisions whenever possible and appropriate. He tacitly stands with the Father in supporting a militarily secured MEANS of obtaining that vision. Even random selections of human history will bear out that peace tends to follow military superiority. Must we ignore the lives saved in the Holy Lands when Pax Romana all but ended regional warfare? Or the millions of lives lost in the wake of Mohandas Gandhi's "nonviolent" rebellion? Should we too quickly dismiss the umbrella of peace that accompanied the great empires of history?

Let us stand with the Trinity-revealed Jesus in forcibly chasing the money-changers from the temple. Let us not forsake His final words in the Luke 19:11-27 parable: "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me." Jesus was neither kidding nor hoping that experts-only could interpret away His Words. The Father of the Old Testament will join with the Prince of Peace of the New Testament to guarantee our means-and-end salvation. Shame on collection-plate wariness. The Trinity will have force if Christianity is to prevail.

Pretensions, posturing, and spin-savvy grandstanding aside, is there even one pacifist minister who isn't relying on the indirect violence of an armed police force and standing army to protect his wife and family? It will be a sad day indeed when cravenness is elevated to a Christian virtue. Is there no truth to the adage that "Good people sleep peacefully at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf"?

God gave His entire creation the means of self-defense, including preemptive first strikes if self-preservation is threatened. No need to ask God for more protection than He has already given. To refuse to own a gun to protect your family might be seen as risky endangerment of their lives. Sure, most of us will never be in a dire car accident, but shouldn't we wear seatbelts just in case?

As Robert Spencer has pointed out, "Christianity is at the heart of Western civilization. It has formed who we are as Americans, and influenced Europeans and others around the globe for even longer. Like it or not, it has even formed those who reject the Christian faith. Christianity also shares key moral principles with Judaism--principles that pervade the West but do not universally carry over into Islam. These principles are the fountain from which modern ethicists have drawn the concept of universal human rights--the foundation of Western secular culture."

Woe betide self-defeating sectarian rankling. Let some shallowly fashioned academics confound themselves into elitist oblivion. The Crusaders were divinely inspired (we should respect their proclamation) in their military mission TO SAVE CHRISTIANITY AND EUROPE, despite fully-human/divine amalgams. Protestants respect this vantage, just as they hope that others won't unfairly deride Martin Luther's intentions in forfeiting celibacy (nor will we tally the millions of lives lost in religious warfare because of the Reformation). "The Crusaders do not deserve the opprobrium of the world, but (Spencer contintues) the world's gratitude...Although the Crusades failed in their primary objective, they played a key role in staving off the jihad conquest of Europe."

As the slogan reads, "The day we lose our will to fight is the day we lose our freedom." Add peace and human lives to the list of what will be lost. Let Mark Steyn help us measure how far the West has devolved since WWII: "in the space of two generations, a bunch of tough hombres were transformed into a thoroughly feminized culture that prioritizes all the secondary impulses of society--welfare entitlements from cradle to grave--over all the primary ones." Sadly, this is "the post-war history of almost the entire developed world."

Oh, the ignorance of those who think that self-defense, security, and peace have no costs. Oh, the ignorance of those who don't see the blood upon the hands of the anti-war movement during the sixties and afterwards.