Yes, Christians Can Support Torture: And They're Not Bad Christians For Doing So

The Federalist ^ | 12/18/2014 | D.C. McAllister

[SeekAndFind]

In a recent post cited by Patheos, nondenominational pastor Brian Zahnd brashly proclaims “You Cannot Be Christian and Support Torture.”

There is no possibility of compromise. The support of torture is off the table for a Christian. I suppose you can be some version of a ‘patriot’ and support the use of torture, but you cannot be any version of Christian and support torture. So choose one: A torture-endorsing patriot or a Jesus-following Christian. But don’t lie to yourself that you can be both. You cannot.

…Any thoughtful person, no matter their religion or non-religion, knows that you cannot support torturing people and still claim to be a follower of the one who commanded his disciples to love their enemies. The only way around this is to invent a false Jesus who supports the use of torture. (The Biblical term for this invented false Jesus is “antichrist.”)

Those who argue for the use of torture do so because they are convinced it is pragmatic for national security. But Christians are not called to be pragmatists or even safe. Christians are called by Jesus to imitate a God who is kind and merciful to the wicked.

Zahnd edited this piece. He states in a “PS” that he originally wrote, “You cannot be a Christian and support torture.” He took out “a” probably because he received a lot of backlash, and rightly so. So he qualified it: “You cannot be Christian and support torture. . . . Can you support torture and go to heaven? Maybe. Can you support torture and be Christlike? No.”

[Old Sarge]

I couldn't care less what this sanctimonious egghead thinks.

I am reminded of a line of dialogue from a movie by a famous Leftist producer:

"I don't have the time or patience to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the very blanket of protection I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just say 'Thank You', and be on your way. Otherwise, pick up a rifle and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!"

[RC one]

One should not encourage one’s government to torture under any circumstances ever. A government empowered with the right of torture is not in any way shape or form a small government.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: One should not encourage one’s government to torture under any circumstances ever

Does it not follow from the above argument that nuking 250,000 people in Japan is also encouraging our government to commit genocide?

[Wiser now]

You have been attacked by an army of religious fanatics and 3000 innocent civilians have been murdered. You have captured the mastermind of this attack, and need to know if more attacks are planned, and if so, when and where. How do you get the mastermind to tell you the truth?

[SeekAndFind]

RE: How do you get the mastermind to tell you the truth?

Here’s a question for those who want to use slogans: WWJD?

[sitetest]

Depends on your definition of torture. Sawing folks’ heads off with rusty knives is torture. It is difficult to imagine any circumstances at all where this barbaric, savage, uncivilized muslim act can ever be justified, and the perpetrator of such an act is likely damned.

So, too with mass rape, and crucifixion, especially of little children. Muslims are less than animals when they commit these heinous acts because, unlike animals, they have free will and lower themselves to beneath vermin by their own choices. No one should emulate muslim ways, as they are the ways of Satan.

But waterboarding?? Give me a break. Sheesh.

[P-Marlowe]

Making life extremely uncomfortable for terrorists is not torture. If you are not permanently physically injured, maimed or killed in the process, then it is merely a legitimate method of extracting information and cooperation.

[NKP_Vet]

Nothing reported in the democrat hit-piece on the CIA was torture. That’s the first thing everyone should get in their head.

[Wiser now]

He might just surprise you since He took a whip to some shysters in the Temple.
Turn the other cheek was for one on one situations, not nations who have been attacked by another over religious differences.
Jesus said if we deny Him, He will deny us. That means Christians do not surrender to Islam just so we do not appear to be “hypocrites”. I don’t think Jesus would have a problem with scaring a man into believing he is drowning in order to save thousands. I reject the notion that waterboarding is torture.
Now, are you going to answer my question? How would you get information out of him?

[piasa]

It all comes down to how many US citizens you consider to be expendable for the sake of a foreign enemy’s comfort.

[RC one]

what torture is and isn't is the right debate IMO. Arguing about whether torture is acceptable or not is another story. Frankly, this just isn't a tool that I want in this government's tool bag because I don't want them looking for new ways to use it. Read a little about Diyarbakır Prison and see if what you're just a little less enthusiastic about giving our government such a tool. Keep in mind, they already think we're enemies of their state.

[grumpygresh]

I think that you’ll get info, but it’s probably not going to be accurate. A typical terrorist is a liar and you’ll probably get more lies.

The other question back to you is whether you can show that water boarding is scientifically proven (controlled prospective randomized double blinded studies) to be more effective than other methods. Anecdotal evidence and Jack Bauer is inadequate. If you advocate water boarding, you should be able to provide the evidence especially since water boarding is controversial.

That being said, I do believe that such a study would be unethical because I do consider water boarding to be torture.

[RC one]

How long before foreign enemy’s comfort because domestic enemie’s comfort? 10 years maybe? 20? I understand the difference between matters of extenuating circumstances and matters of general policy. Under rare circumstances, a president may have to authorize extreme measures in the interest of the country. I get that and I’m fine with it but making those extreme measures a matter of general policy is a pretty dangerous path. And again, how long till they decide they have the right to make American citizens really really really uncomfortable for very very very long periods of time? because it isn’t technically torture? There was recently a case in Pennsylvania that crossed the line into what I’m talking about. I’m not interested in encouraging these goons.

[IronJack]

Or worse yet, your own moral smugness.