| Answer
from Jesus:
There has never
been a war on this planet that was not a just war. That is, if you define
just by a human standard. All of the people who started a war felt that
their war was justified. Many of them even felt that their war was justified
by some form of divine authority. However, I must tell you that it was
a "divine authority" defined by human beings.
One of the central messages on this website is that human beings have
fallen into a lower state of consciousness, what I call the carnal mind,
which is dominated by relativity and conditionality. When people are
caught in this state of consciousness, all of their viewpoints are relative
and therefore they can justify absolutely anything.
People will often attempt to use a higher authority, even a divine authority,
to justify their beliefs. Another common occurrence is that people will
define someone as the enemy or scapegoat. By portraying the enemy as
being evil, even as belonging to an "Axis of Evil," it suddenly
seems justified that people violate the laws of God to combat evil.
I have stated
elsewhere on this website that no evil act was ever committed on planet
earth. Seemingly evil acts were always committed out of ignorance. This
ignorance is always caused by the fact that people are caught in the
relativity of the carnal mind and therefore have no absolute standard
for evaluating their actions.
If you look at the rhetoric surrounding the war with Iraq, especially
the rhetoric that comes from the American government, you will see that
the decision makers in this government actually believe that this is
a just war. It even seems that the president himself, and some of his
close advisers, feel that they have some kind of divine authority for
this war. Even some Christian ministers in the United States have declared
their support for the war and their belief that this is a just war in
the eyes of God.
If you are willing to reach beyond the relativity of the carnal mind,
the real question should be, “Is the war with Iraq a just war
seen with God‘s eyes?” The answer to that question is a
clear no. When you see things with God’s eyes, there has never
been a just war on this planet. When you see things with God’s
eyes, the killing of other human beings is never justified. When you
see things with God’s eyes, you clearly realize that the ends
cannot justify the means and that no representative of God ever spoke
the words, “Let us do evil that good may come.”
Old Testament
wars
I know these statements will seem shocking to both Jews, Christians
and Muslims who believe that the Old Testament is the infallible word
of God. After all, the Old Testament contains several examples of wars
that were supposedly fought with God’s help and with God’s
authority. My comment on the Old Testament wars is that there are several
possible explanations why it seems like the Old Testament has God justifying
the act of war:
- Not every part
of the Old Testament is the infallible word of God. Some parts have
been influenced by the relative interests and beliefs of human beings
who attempted to claim divine authority for their own self-interest.
I have explained this in greater detail elsewhere.
- The God that
supposedly authorized the Old Testament wars is not the God that I
recognize as my Father in heaven. My God is a God of unconditional
love. Do you seriously believe that a God of love would ever authorize
war? If you believe that, then I must tell you frankly that you are
caught in a relative state of consciousness and you need to make a
sincere effort to reach beyond that state of consciousness.
- The people who
claimed that their wars were justified by God made incorrect claims.
They either made these claims in good faith because they were misled
(by the relativity of the carnal mind) into thinking that God had
justified their war. Or they made these claims deliberately in an
attempt to mislead the people into fighting their wars of relative
self interest.
- The war fits
in the category of unavoidable wars that I will describe in the following
sections.
Thou shalt not kill
Let me make it very clear that God does not authorize war. God never
has authorized a war on planet Earth and God will never do so. His eyes
cannot behold the iniquity of the relative state of consciousness that
causes people to engage in wars. Therefore, God will never take sides
in a relative conflict, and there is no other type of conflict on this
planet.
There is no such thing as a holy war. A person who claims to be fighting
a holy war has demonstrated that he does not understand the nature of
God, and therefore he cannot rightfully claim to have divine authority.
I realize that this message sounds very uncompromising. It is my intention
to sound uncompromising, because there truly is no cause which justifies
the killing of other human beings. The Ten Commandments state clearly,
“Thou shalt not kill.” The Ten Commandments do not specify
conditions under which it becomes acceptable to kill. In my sermon on
the mount I told people to do unto others as they would have others
do unto them. I told people to turn the other cheek. I told people that
if someone wants your coat, give him your cloke also. I told people
to forgive seventy times seven.
Do you see any room in these statements for an interpretation that justifies
the killing of another human being? I can tell you that I see no room
for such an interpretation, and I see no circumstance that, in a divine
sense, justifies the killing of another human being.
Self-defense
I am aware that many people will immediately raise the question of self-defense.
Should a person simply let someone else kill him? Should a nation let
another nation conquer it without resisting? I must tell you frankly
that the relativity of the carnal mind makes people prone to respond
to attacks with violence. Therefore, they tend to think that it is always
justified that you defend yourself when attacked. In reality, this question
doesn't have a black and white answer. In some cases, people should
resist attacks and defend themselves, but in other cases it would be
in people’s own best interest to respond to all attacks with nonviolence.
To fully understand these matters, you need to understand and accept
the Law of Cause and Effect, the law of karma, as explained elsewhere.
The truth of the matter is that when God gave human beings free will,
God was fully aware that people might use their free will to go against
the laws and principles that God used to create this universe. God was
also aware that if people did so, they would immediately set themselves
apart from his Presence. God’s eyes cannot behold inequity and
imperfection, because whatever God looks upon will be magnified by the
immense creative powers of God.
Therefore one might say that there is a horizon beyond which God does
not see. When human beings violate the laws of God, they immediately
descend or fall below that horizon. They have literally fallen away
from the Presence and grace of God; they have fallen from grace.
Because God knew this could happen, God created a completely impersonal
law that is designed to teach people who have fallen from grace. This
law is the Law of Cause and Effect, also called the law of karma. The
simplest, although not the complete, description of this law is that
everything people do it is done with God’s energy and the law
of karma returns all imperfect energy to the person who generated it.
After the Fall, human beings created a situation on planet Earth that
is very far removed from the original design and intention of God. The
current conditions found on this planet are so far removed from God’s
original intention that most people would refuse to accept the differences.
For example, how many people would believe that the density of the human
consciousness has actually increased the density of physical matter
so that matter on planet Earth is denser today than when the Earth was
created by Elohim?
My point here is that people have created a situation that has set aside
or suspended God’s original design for this planet. Therefore,
some of God’s original laws have been set aside or replaced by
other laws, such as the Law of Cause and Effect. This law will return
all misqualified energy to the person who generates it.
I cannot imagine that it would be possible to kill another human being
without generating imperfect energy. Therefore, I can assure you that
if you kill another human being, you will generate negative energy and
you will inevitably reap as you have sown in the form of negative personal
karma.
When people are caught in a relative state of mind, they find it virtually
impossible to accept personal accountability and responsibility. That
is why so many people, in their own minds, have created conditions under
which it becomes acceptable to kill or perform acts of violence. Yet
the simple fact is that killing another human being will always produce
negative karma. There is simply no way to escape this.
I am aware that it is highly unlikely that a fundamentalist or literal
Christian will ever read these teachings. Yet I would like to mention
that there is an indication of this in Scripture. Consider the situation
in the garden of Gethsemane, when the soldiers came to arrest me. One
of my disciples drew his sword and cut off the ear of a soldier. I instantly
healed the soldier, and I did so because I did not want my disciple
to incur the karma of that act of violence. My disciple felt that the
cause of defending the Messiah could justify what he saw as an act of
self-defense. I knew that this was an incorrect assumption.
The brutal fact is that the law is the law. The law of cause and effect
is completely impersonal. Like the law of gravity, it is no respecter
of persons or the motives of human beings. Because human beings have
created a situation that is very far removed from God’s original
design, we now see a situation in which some people have become so unbalanced
that they are prone to violence. In many cases such people have managed
to attain positions of power as the leaders of nations. In God’s
original design, such souls simply could not have embodied on planet
Earth. Yet because humankind has fallen into such a low state of consciousness,
such souls are currently allowed to embody on this planet.
Obviously, such unbalanced souls will commit acts of violence, and therefore
it is foreseeable that more balanced people will face the difficult
choice between allowing themselves to be killed or defending themselves.
My point of describing the law of cause and effect is to make you realize
that everything you do with God’s energy will create an effect
that will come back to you. If you kill another human being in self-defense,
you will still make karma. However, your karma will not be as severe
as if you killed in an act of aggression. Furthermore, the feelings
with which you engage in acts of self-defense will also influence the
severity of your karma. If you go to war and truly hate your enemy,
your karma will be more severe than if you kill the enemy only as a
last resort.
Difficult questions
My long association with this planet and my knowledge of the carnal
mind has made me somewhat of a practical realist. Therefore, despite
my teachings about turning the other cheek, I realize that self-defense
is sometimes unavoidable. In certain situations, self-defense can be
the lesser of two evils. However, I want to make it very clear that
even killing in self-defense is not justified in the eyes of God. Killing
in self-defense does not prevent you from making personal karma.
The lesson that humankind needs to learn is that people are ultimately
responsible for their use and misuse of God’s energy. Human beings
have, over numerous lifetimes, created the current situation on planet
Earth. This situation leads to violence, and responding with violence
will not improve the overall situation. The situation can only be improved
by removing the misqualified energy that pulls people into these negative
spirals of violence and hatred.
You might be a saint in this
lifetime, but there is no guarantee that you have not been a savage
in a previous life. When the karma from that lifetime comes due, it
might play out in the form of a savage attempting to kill you.
The question then becomes how you should deal with that situation. Should
you passively allow the other person to kill you in an attempt to avoid
making personal karma? Or should you defend yourself, possibly killing
the other person and thereby reinforcing the karmic spiral?
I must tell you frankly that these are questions that cannot be answered
in a general way. They can be answered only on an individual basis.
In other words, because the current situation on Earth is so far removed
from God’s original intent, there can actually be situations in
which defending your life, even if it involves killing your attacker,
would be the lesser of two evils and therefore the practical thing to
do. The dilemma of action versus non action is illustrated in the Bhagavad
Gita and in Shakespeare’s play Hamlet.
However, there can also be situations in which it is better for your
spiritual growth to respond to any situation with nonviolence. What
I am showing you here is that because human beings have removed themselves
so far from divine law, they have created situations in which none of
the available options are in accordance with God’s law. Any option
will lead to negative consequences, so the most practical option is
the one that creates the lesser consequences. However, the lesser of
two evils is still an evil in the eyes of God.
How can you know what is the right thing to do in a given situation?
If you approach this question with the relativity of the carnal mind,
you will always come up with a justification for your short-term interest.
Therefore, the only way to determine the best course of action is through
personal Christhood.
If you have not attained personal Christhood, you would do well to err
on the side of caution and respond to all situations by turning the
other cheek. My sermon on the mount was designed as a guideline for
people who had not attained Christhood and therefore had no way to reach
beyond the relativity of the carnal mind.
Unavoidable wars
I must tell you that there are instances in which human beings have
received direction from a higher source which correctly told them that
self-defense, even involving the killing of other human beings, was
the best course of action in that specific situation. However, I want
to make it perfectly clear that this does not mean that the killing
of other human beings was justified by God or by God’s law. The
killing was merely the lesser of two evils in a situation where the
violation of God’s law had made killing unavoidable.
In other words, even though people might have felt that this self-defense
was justified according to a standard that was above and beyond self-interest,
their actions were still not justified according to God’s law.
Therefore, the people made karma for their actions.
I am aware that this distinction will seem contradictory or be difficult
to understand for people who are caught in the relativity of the carnal
mind. Yet, the distinction is real. There are situations in which self-defense,
even a war in self-defense, is the lesser of two evils and therefore
the most practical response to a situation that is outside of God’s
law. Yet I must also tell you that these situation are few and far between,
and in most cases where people believe they are fighting a just war,
they are deceived by the relativity of the carnal mind.
Some of the Old Testament wars fit into the category as unavoidable
wars. In modern times, it was the lesser of two evils that Western nations
resisted communism instead of allowing this ideology to spread to the
entire world. If a person is caught in the relativity of the carnal
mind, that person will reason that these wars were just wars, and the
person will not attempt to attain a deeper understanding.
Yet when you look at the situation with the clarity of the Christ mind,
you see that no war was ever a just war. Certain wars were unavoidable,
certain wars could be considered necessary in order to prevent a greater
calamity that would have caused an even greater loss of life. Yet these
wars were still not justified, because there is no divine justification
for killing a human being.
I must tell you frankly that I do not consider the war with Iraq to
be unavoidable or necessary. There are far more constructive ways of
dealing with the threat of terrorism.
The risk of war
I am giving this message on March 5, 2003, at a time when the war with
Iraq has not officially started, yet is considered unavoidable by most
people. I do not consider any war unavoidable, but I realize that if
the United States were to stop or even postpone this war, the current
leadership of this nation would see it as a loss of credibility, even
a loss of face.
I must tell you frankly that this dilemma is a situation that is entirely
self-created. The Bush administration has created the current state
of tension. It has backed itself into a corner, and if it goes to war
out of an unwillingness to reverse course, then I can assure you that
there is nothing unavoidable or necessary about such an act. It is an
act that is largely caused by arrogance.
I will prophesy that if the administration decides to launch a war against
Iraq, it is highly likely that it will later be seen as the greatest
mistake of the Bush administration. I will also predict that such a
war will not minimize the risk of terrorist attacks on American interests.
On the contrary, it is likely to fuel further attacks. Furthermore,
a war with Iraq will not help bring about world peace. On the contrary,
it will only make many other nations, including Iran and North Korea,
feel threatened by what they will inevitably see as American aggression.
I will even state that I do not find such viewpoints to be unfounded.
The simple fact is that after the attacks on September 11, 2001, the
United States was in the position of being seen as the victim, and therefore
it had widespread support and cooperation. A war with Iraq will almost
certainly remove the impression that the United States is a victim.
Instead, it will be seen as an aggressor and international support and
cooperation will begin to evaporate, as is already evident in the United
Nations.
I will prophesy that if the Bush administration goes to war against
Iraq, this war will have ramifications that will haunt the United States,
and indeed the entire planet, for a long time to come. Taken to the
extreme, there is a risk, not a high risk but still a risk, that the
war with Iraq can escalate into a worldwide conflict. If such a conflict
ensues, it is likely to begin with an increase in the number of terrorist
attacks. Yet there is a real risk that the situation can escalate into
a full-blown war between nation states. Who can tell how far such a
conflict might escalate?
A slippery slope
The real question concerning the war with Iraq is how far the United
States is willing to go down the slippery slope of using its military
might in preemptive strikes against nations that are considered to be
a threat to American interests or national security.
Considering my teachings on the carnal mind, I hope many people will
see that any definition of American interests or national security will
almost certainly be influenced by relative self-interest. The sad fact
is that many Americans, leaders and citizens alike, seem to believe
that because the United States is a free nation and a democracy, it
is somehow above becoming the victim of relative self-interest.
Many people seem to think that the United States could never make any
serious mistake or do something really wrong. I have studied the carnal
mind for a long time, and I can assure you that no nation is above becoming
the victim of self-interest. In fact, it is precisely the nations that
think they are above this that are the most likely victims. Pride does
often precede the fall.
I earlier said that the Western resistance to communism avoided a greater
evil. The United States deserves credit for the fact that it provided
the main bastion against the spread of communism without engaging in
an all-out war with the Soviet Union. Once again, I am not saying that
the methods used during the Cold War were justified according to a divine
standard. However, I am saying that the United States did represent
the higher of the two sides in the conflict.
Nevertheless, in any conflict there is a real risk that a nation, even
though it fights for the greater good, may end up becoming worse than
the enemy it is fighting. There are strong forces in the United States
who are arguing that after winning the Cold War this nation should use
its superior military capacity to further American interests.
Some people actually believe that American interests are synonymous
with the interests of freedom and democracy, even with the interests
of God. I must tell you quite frankly and openly that this is such a
naive and dangerous belief that I can scarcely fathom how anyone can
seriously believe this. It is disturbing to me that so many Americans,
even though being moral and ethical people, fail to make the distinction
between what is truly the interests of God and what is merely the narrow,
short-sighted relative interests of people who are ready to use the
military power of the United States to further their own desire for
power, control and money.
I am saddened by the fact that while many people outside of the United
States can see these hidden forces at work, so few Americans have awakened
to the reality that there are many hidden forces preying on their nation.
I must tell you frankly that unless the American people wake up and
make a determined effort to prevent the United States from becoming
the bully of the world-wide neighborhood, there is a high risk that
this nation, within a decade, can become a worse tyrant than the Soviet
Union ever was.
Obviously, the American people have a greater opportunity to speak out
against their nation’s policy than did the citizens of the Soviet
Union. Yet it remains to be seen whether a critical mass of Americans
will wake up and make use of this opportunity. The American people are
today in a similar situation to that encountered by Prince Hamlet. Hamlet
knew there were forces inside his own kingdom that were plotting against
him, yet he refused to take active measures to stop these forces, and
this decision led to a greater calamity.
I am not suggesting that the American people should use violence to
prevent their government from using violence. On the contrary, this
battle must be fought with information and nonviolent measures. What
I am saying is that the American people must do something to restrain
their own government, because without action from the people, the government
will not be able to restrain itself.
Back to Current
Affairs main page.
Back
to top
Copyright
© 2003 by Kim Michaels |
