Onward Christian Soldiers?

I’ve often thought on that passage when it comes to asking whether or not a Christian should be a soldier. I also relfect often on Cornelius.

Talk to you soon.

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Michael Krahn, Michael Krahn. Michael Krahn said: Onward Christian Soldiers? – http://bit.ly/agWYU3 [...]

Hey Michael.

Bruxy Cavey recently addressed this question in a very good, very in-depth series at the Meeting House called “Inglorious Pastors: Waging peace in a world of war.” You might want to check it out.

http://www.themeetinghouse.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=121&Itemid=3

I have been listening to the series.

Cavey, as usual, is good but takes the short road on some of the more contentious aspects of pacifist (and Arminian) theology.

What do YOU make of the two points in the post?

A couple of thoughts. I think Jesus’ vigorous expulsion of the moneychangers in the temple show he was no simple pacifist. King David was on of the greatest heroes in the Old Testament and a pacifist he certainly was not.
“Military service, when executed with integrity and in the Spirit of God, is a suitable vocation for the people of God.”

Now there’s the rub. For the wars of King David little justification is needed, he served God and the only kingdom to have a covenant with God. How do we decide today whether we can in good conscience provide military service to our country? The following quote nails it down nicely for me.

“In order for a war to be just, three things are necessary. First, the authority of the sovereign. Secondly, a just cause. Thirdly, a rightful intention.” – Saint Thomas Aquinas.

If these are the prerequisites of a just war than very few wars in the last 1000 years or so can be considered just. At times we have defended the helpless against the likes of Hitler, but at worst we have furthered the agenda of those who are motivated by greed and and a lust for power.

OK. I really dislike joining discussions like this because they get so contentious, and people end up all offended, and it just makes me think of Titus 3:9 where Paul warns him to “avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.”

I also know that the real reason I avoid these sorts of discussions is because I’m actually a very analytical person and can feed off the rush I get with an intellectual discussion – which is dangerous…

That being said, I’d like to point out, as I’m sure you’ll recognize Bruxy as having said, that being a pacifist is not the same as being passive. A true pacifist will actively seek ways to bring about a peaceful resolution in a non-violent way. Even if it means allowing violence to be done to him or herself. (Like Mahatma Ghandi, or Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., or Nelson Mandela.)

I wrestled with this a long time ago, and came to the conclusion that God is the ultimate dialectic (you know, thesis, anti-thesis, and synthesis). In so many ways, he is both completely one thing as well as its “opposite,” as well as their synthesis. Like how Jesus is both fully God and fully man. Or how, since time is a creation and God exists both inside and outside of it, knowing the end from the beginning because He can experience it all at once from the perspective of eternity, we both have free will to choose our actions, and are pre-destined for them because He has already worked all our choices into His plan…

Anyway, I say all that because God is both Just and Merciful; and when He is Just, it is also merciful, and when He shows Mercy, it is also fully just. This is why, I believe, when God told the Israelites to go to war and eradicate other nations in the Old Testament, it was ‘good.’ Because “the wages of sin is death,” and these nations were sinful, and God was fully Just to exact that payment from them.

And this is what most people use to justify their “Just War” theories, but I think it is only half of the full story.

Because God is also fully Merciful. And I believe the Israelites failed in their mission, and failed to recognize God’s heart – because He told Abraham that “all peoples on earth” would be blessed through his offspring, and told the Israelites that they were “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”

So it was their mandate to be witnesses of God to the nations, and I sincerely believe that God yearned to show mercy to them (as He did with Nineveh), but because the Israelites did not intercede on their behalf (like Abraham did for Sodom, or, in a more successful example, Moses did for the Israelites after the Golden Calf incident), they were left to pay the full penalty for their sins.

“I looked for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on behalf of the land so I would not have to destroy it, but I found none. So I will pour out my wrath on them and consume them with my fiery anger, bringing down on their own heads all they have done, declares the Sovereign LORD” (Ezekiel 22:30-31).

And this is still good and right because God is Just. But imagine the implications if He had been allowed to show mercy!!!

I have been on enough mission trips in foreign countries, and read enough testimonies of martyrs, to realize that my citizenship is primarily in another kingdom – the new kingdom that Jesus came to declare with his new covenant (not one that has borders and passports and a national anthem). And because of this, it only seems strange to me that, one day we might go as missionaries to a country because we yearn to share the Gospel with the people there and bring them into our Family – but then the next day, if anyone from that country threatens our “rights,” we are willing to obliterate them. Does that not seem contradictory to anyone else?

I hope and I pray that I would be willing, like Jesus, to ACTIVELY CHOOSE to lay down my life and ACTIVELY CHOOSE to allow someone to trample my “rights” if it will allow them to even see a tiny glimpse of Him and His love. Even if they are breaking into my home and threatening my family.

And, personally, I think the passage in Ephesians 6 about the Armour of God is very clear that “our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”

We should be fighting FOR our “enemies,” recognizing that they are in bondage from powers beyond their control – because Jesus died for them, too. And yearns for them just as much as He yearns for us. (This was the one major flaw in the movie The Matrix, in my opinion; Neo and the others would kill people because they might be housing Agents inside of them – Jesus, on the other hand, would cast the demon out to rescue the person, whom He loved.)

Anyway, I digress. And this has gotten very, very long. And I don’t know if all my ideas are making sense, because there are so many and I’m trying to cram them all into a single comment. But I think you know my answer now.

PS How is a seven-week series, with a 45-minute sermon each week, as well as additional “Drive Home” podcasts (some of which are an hour-and-a-half long), taking “the short road”? I’m just curious.

Sorry Diane, come to think of it I was thinking way more of a sermon of his we watching the previous Sunday than I was of the pacifism series. In that vid he quoted two support texts for the Arminian position on salvation and didn’t even mention two other obvious text that seem to oppose.

I’m not saying I’m completely on one side or the other, but I thought he did the congregation a disservice by only articulating one side.

As for the content of your response… nicely written… which is, of course, expected. :-)

I was unsatisfied with Bruxy’s handling of the “what if someone breaks into your house and is about to harm your family” scenario. As cliche as it is, your answer to it really is (speaking of cliches) where the rubber meets the road.

So it’s those types of gaps that, for me, undo some of his good teaching. I’d rather hear someone admit paradox than not mention a position that has debunking power over his own.

However, you still haven’t dealt with the two texts in the original post. I’m not trying to goad you into an argument. I really could use some help with those.

And unfortunately, it’s usually impossible to tell at the time whether or not a war is just. Only in retrospect can we usually see whether it was legitimate or not.

I’ve been thinking about what you said.

I honestly thought I did deal with the second text in the original post – when I said, “And, personally, I think the passage in Ephesians 6 about the Armour of God is very clear that “our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”

We should be fighting FOR our “enemies,” recognizing that they are in bondage from powers beyond their control – because Jesus died for them, too. And yearns for them just as much as He yearns for us.”

(That was my answer to “Military service is one of the most common metaphors in the New Testament to describe the Christian life. We are to fight the good fight, put on the armor of God, and serve as a good soldier of Christ Jesus.”)

And as for the first text, I will simply ask you a question in response:

In the book of Philemon, Paul writes to him to ask him to take back his runaway slave Onesimus, appealing for leniency because, “Perhaps the reason he was separated from you for a little while was that you might have him back forever— no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 15-16).

Why, in this instance, didn’t Paul take the opportunity to tell Philemon – a slave owner – to release Onesimus, his slave? Is Paul implicitly condoning slavery? After all, there are many other texts where he writes to encourage both slaves and their owners in Christian behaviour toward each other (for example, Eph. 6:5-9)…

Does this mean slavery is honourable in God’s eyes?