Warrior monks?

[JacksLadder]

Never mind bad post....

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

Why don't we have warrior monks?



God is good so is Genocide in his name also good? According to Joshua it is. So why are monks all peaceful. God's will dictates that they should be out on a crusade.

John 13:34
A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

1 Corinthians 13:1
If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

In the Old Testament the Covenant was between God and the Jews. In the New Testament God extends the covenent to all mankind. Furthermore, Christ commands us to love one another. We are to be peaceful and get along with one another.

Galatians 3:23-29
Now before faith came, we were confined under the law, kept under restraint until faith should be revealed. So that the law was our custodian until Christ came, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a custodian; for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise. (emphasis added)

Ninja monks are foreign to Christianity. Monks are to be peaceful, loving, and passionless.

 

[Chesterton]

Also, Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord.

 

[Tzaousios]

God is good so is Genocide in his name also good? According to Joshua it is. So why are monks all peaceful. God's will dictates that they should be out on a crusade.

Although I am not Orthodox, I find this topic interesting and thought I would add my comments.

Let me preface my remarks by saying that I am not condoning the killing of babies by Christians or anyone else. However, if we are going gain any understanding from this passage, and get past emotionalized language and reactions, we must look at the passage in its historical and theological context.

When ancient armies engaged in warfare, the custom was for the victor to plunder the enemy and remove any threats that could arise from the enemy in the future. Therefore, both the enemy's material welfare and his means of extending his line (through male children) were eliminated. The Israelites fought wars of defense and conquest in the same manner as other armies in general. However, an argument could be made that people such as the Assyrians and Philistines were more brutal in the methods that they used.

Secondly, on a theological level, if we look at the Biblical attributes of God the Father, namely that he is perfectly omnipotent, omniscient, and sovereign over creation, as well as loving and merciful, we can see that he alone has the power and the authority on a moral level to give and take life from his creation when he sees fit. Accordingly, he can exact punishment or grant clemency when he sees fit as well. He is under no obligation to grant mercy to all and the withholding of mercy is not injustice. In Scripture, we see God exacting punishment in different manners, such as the natural and miraculous (the Flood, plagues in Egypt), and through human agency (military conquest and prophetic dispensation).

The passage of Joshua 6 is an example of the latter manner. God had withheld his wrath from the idolatrous and pagan peoples in Canaan for a very long time. He promised the land to the Israelites as their "Promised Land." The people of Jericho were no exception to the charge of idolatry and other sinful practices. In they eyes of God, just as any other unregenerate sinner after the Fall in Eden, they were not innocent. Ultimately, it was through the line of Moses, Joshua, and eventually David that the Savior would come and this is the land in which God said the Israelites would settle.

Could God have accomplished this by other means? Yes. Do they seem shocking to 21st-century, Westernized sensibilities? Yes. But God is God and we are the creation. We must know our place. For this reason the Apostle Paul said the following:

Romans 9:19-20

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?”


Romans 11:33-35

33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!

There is an easy answer to this, I believe. First of all, by his own words, Christ came to fulfill the Law, not abolish it. The Old Testament stories are both history and foreshadowing of greater things to come. Did Christ command his followers to wage wars of conquest and jihad? No, he commanded to love your neighbor. There is no need for Christian holy war. There is no need for "warrior monks."

 

[Macarius]

I must agree. Warrior monks are inconsistent with the gospel (with, perhaps, the exception of them defending their homes, as has occured occasionally in history - though even this I question, as I view the gospel as generally pacifist). We are to do to others as we would have them do to us, and to love them as if they were us - indeed, as if they were Christ (for God's image is in them).

Christ commanded us to love our enemies - not exterminate them (to quote a pop-theologian).

There is, in general, a gradual growth by Israel (by God's people) into knowledge of Him. In some portions of the OT, the idea that they ought to kill made sense to their understanding of God and so they recorded it as such. Further, they were given the sacrifices of animals so that they wouldn't be tempted to use humans as a sacrifice (as was the practice in some places at that time).

Yet we have been shown a more excellent way. Knowing that animal sacrifices do not please God, Christ showed us the ultimate sacrifice and ended all other sacrifices. Now we don't kill animals on altars, because Christ revealed the fullness of God's love to us. Furthermore, we (like the Jews you quoted) recognize the need to purify our lives from sin. For Judaism, this was (at times) an ETHNIC purity and an ETHNIC cleansing (and involved violence). We have had a superior way revealed to us by Christ: if your hand causes you to sin cut it off.

It is not other PEOPLE who cause us to sin - a monk is not a warrior against other races or religions. A monk is at war with himself! His violence is directed at his own sin, and seeks to purify him of it in order to prepare for a fuller unity with God. So are monks ARE warrior monks, but as in other things what was revealed in part in the Old Testament has its fulfillment in the teachings of Christ: violence has been transformed by love, and now we know that if we are to be pure we must ruthlessly war against our own selfishness and ego, even as before Israel warred against its enemies.

In Christ,
Macarius

 

[Ortho_Cat]

 

[Kreikkalainen]

We have warrior monks and here's a picture of their main weapon.

 

[SeraphimSarov]

Reps for you!

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

We have warrior monks and here's a picture of their main weapon.

I nominate this for post of the month!

 

[Sphinx777]

​

 

[Sphinx777]

Knights of Saint John



​

 

[Blackknight]

I've actually wondered why we don't have something like Shao Lin monks in the Orthodox world. Is it because we think martial arts is bad?

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

I've actually wondered why we don't have something like Shao Lin monks in the Orthodox world. Is it because we think martial arts is bad?

Because monks are not supposed to strike another person.

Let us learn from St. Seraphim of Sarov who endured being beaten within an inch of his life when two men tried to mug him.

O Holy St. Seraphim, pray to God for us!

 

[Sphinx777]

I've actually wondered why we don't have something like Shao Lin monks in the Orthodox world. Is it because we think martial arts is bad?

Martial arts or fighting arts are systems of codified practices and traditions of training for combat. While they may be studied for various reasons, martial arts share a single objective: to physically defeat other persons and to defend oneself or others from physical threat. In addition, some martial arts are linked to beliefs such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Daoism, Confucianism or Shinto while others follow a particular code of honor. Many arts are also practiced competitively, most commonly as combat sports, but may also take the form of dance.

The term martial arts refers to the art of warfare (from Mars, the god of war). It comes from a 15th-century European term for fighting arts now known as historical European martial arts. A practitioner of martial arts is referred to as a martial artist.

In popular culture, the term martial arts often specifically refers to the combat systems that originated in Asian cultures, especially East Asian martial arts. However, the term actually refers to any codified combat system, regardless of origin. Europe is home to many extensive systems of martial arts, both living traditions (e.g. Jogo do Pau and other stick and sword fencing and Savate, a French kicking style developed by sailors and street fighters) and older systems of historical European martial arts that have existed through the present, many of which are now being reconstructed. In the Americas, Native Americans have traditions of open-handed martial arts including wrestling, and Hawaiians have historically practiced arts featuring small- and large-joint manipulation. A mix of origins is found in the athletic movements of Capoeira, which African slaves developed in Brazil based on skills they had brought from Africa.

While each style has unique facets that make it different from other martial arts, a common characteristic is the systematization of fighting techniques. Methods of training vary and may include sparring (simulated combat) or formal sets or routines of techniques known as forms or kata. Forms are especially common in the Asian and Asian-derived martial arts.

 

[Tzaousios]

Is anyone going to try and deal with the Old Testament text which JacksLadder posted in the OP? I really think this is the root of the problem in his question rather than whether or not monks should be warriors in the military sense. I tried to answer this in post #4 if anyone is interested.

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

Is anyone going to try and deal with the Old Testament text which JacksLadder posted in the OP? I really think this is the root of the problem in his question rather than whether or not monks should be warriors in the military sense. I tried to answer this in post #4 if anyone is interested.

If you look at the OP, Jack doesn't seem to be concerned with it anymore.

 

[Tzaousios]

If you look at the OP, Jack doesn't seem to be concerned with it anymore.

Wow, I did not see that he had changed it! Hmm, I wonder what made him realize it was a "bad post"?