Killing in the name of religious beliefs is the result of egoic attachments and cognitive dissonance.

Many Christians use Luke 22:36, in which Jesus says, “Let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.” as a proof-text advocating the use of deadly force by Christians in self-defense.

The problem with this is that this interpretation is inconsistent with Jesus's teachings and the rest of that very story. Additionally, many people blur the lines between defense and aggression as is the case right now with current geopolitical strife. Is a pre-emptive strike of a burgeoning nuclear power an act of aggression or an act of defense? The answer is obvious but many mental gymnasts will argue for the alternative as the alternative satisfies their egoic lust for blood.

After Jesus tells the disciples to sell their cloaks and buy swords, he goes to the Garden of Gethsemane where Jesus prayed and a group of Roman soldiers came to arrest him. When the disciples saw that Jesus was about to be arrested, they asked "Lord, shall we strike with the sword? (vs 49). Without waiting for an answer, one apostle drew a sword and blood was spilled.

As the servant of the high priest whose ear has been cut off by the sword strike stood there bleeding, Jesus said "No more of this! And he touched his ear and healed him."

Read that again, "Christians". He said "No more of this!".

Thirst for blood is not Christian so stop pretending like Holy War is somehow consistent with "love your neighbor" and "turn the other cheek." Maybe go drink some holy wine instead.

🪶