In analyzing the question of whether Christianity can be considered a source of violence and wars, two principal lines of argumentation can be distinguished.

Christianity’s Paradox: Balancing Peace and Warfare

In analyzing the question of whether Christianity can be considered a source of violence and wars, two principal lines of argumentation can be distinguished.

On the one hand, some defenders of Christianity argue that the true teachings of this religion are built on the principles of love, meekness, and reconciliation, and that violence is a perverted application (a distortion) of its doctrine. For instance, one source notes, “Religious wars, mass beatings of heretics, and the burnings of the Inquisition are not a natural outgrowth of the Savior's religion; they are a gross, criminal perversion of it, a grievous insult, a desecration of the all-forgiving love of the Crucified for the peace of the Son of God. Christianity, as a religion imbued with the spirit of evangelical meekness, love, and mercy, is fundamentally averse to any violence...” (source: link txt). This emphasis suggests that violence and wars are not expressions of Christianity’s true values but rather a departure from the ideals embodied by Jesus Christ, resulting in a societal distortion of his teaching.

On the other hand, critics point out the historical practice where the Christian tradition and its interpretations were used to legitimize wars and acts of violence. For example, one source highlights the profound internal contradiction of Christianity: “War is the material manifestation of the primordial contradictions of existence... And Christ brought not peace, but the sword to the earth. This is the deep antinomy of Christianity: Christianity cannot respond to evil with evil, oppose evil with violence, and Christianity amounts to war, a division of the world...” (source: link txt). This perspective indicates that within biblical texts and tradition lie elements that assign a dual nature to the religion, attributing both the power of reconciliation and the potential for the emergence or justification of violence.

Furthermore, the historical aspect of confrontations is frequently mentioned: “Throughout the history of humanity, religion has been the moral-organizing, unifying foundation that bound nations together... The overwhelming majority of wars in history were religious in nature, and such global military confrontations, such as the armed struggle between Islam and Christianity, persisted…” (source: link txt). This argument underscores that religious conflicts—including those both within Christianity and between Christianity and other faiths—have played a significant role in centuries of strife.

Finally, there is also the thesis that the Christian tradition is capable of justifying paradoxical approaches to the issue of military actions: “Is it truly the case that Christianity is pacifism?

... si vis pacem, para bellum: – ‘if you want peace, prepare for war’ – transforms into si vis bellum, para pacem: – ‘if you want war, prepare for peace’, prepare for war in peacetime.” (source: link txt). This suggests that within the tradition itself, one can find arguments both defending the principles of nonviolence and justifying preparations for military action in certain contexts.

Thus, in the discussion of whether Christianity is a source of violence and wars, both proponents and critics present various arguments. The defenders emphasize that the true essence of Christianity is rooted in love and rejection of violence, viewing military acts as a distortion of its doctrine. In contrast, critics point to historical examples where Christian ideas were used to justify wars and violence, as well as to the paradoxical nature of certain biblical precepts that encompass both peacemaking and militant elements.

Supporting citation(s):
“Religious wars, mass beatings of heretics, and the burnings of the Inquisition are not a natural outgrowth of the Savior's religion; they are a gross, criminal perversion of it, a grievous insult, a desecration of the all-forgiving love of the Crucified for the peace of the Son of God.” (source: link txt).

“War is the material manifestation of the primordial contradictions of existence... And Christ brought not peace, but the sword to the earth. This is the deep antinomy of Christianity: Christianity cannot respond to evil with evil, oppose evil with violence, and Christianity amounts to war, a division of the world...” (source: link txt).

“Throughout the history of humanity, religion has been the moral-organizing, unifying foundation that bound nations together... The overwhelming majority of wars in history were religious in nature, and such global military confrontations, such as the armed struggle between Islam and Christianity, persisted...” (source: link txt).

“Is it truly the case that Christianity is pacifism? ... si vis pacem, para bellum: – ‘if you want peace, prepare for war’ – transforms into si vis bellum, para pacem: – ‘if you want war, prepare for peace’, prepare for war in peacetime.” (source: link txt).