About Jesus    Steve Sweetman

Home Page

The Politics of God And The Bible

Part 10

 

The Politics Of War – Part 2  

 

From a Biblical standpoint it's clear to me that Christians should not use violence to advance or defend the Kingdom of God.  It's not so clear to me that Christians should fight, or not fight, if called upon to defend their nation.  This issue has been debated for centuries in Christian circles.  I won't end the debate.  In my thinking, the reason for the debate is because the New Testament gives no specific  or clear-cut teaching on the subject.  There's no verse that says, "don't fight for your nation".  There's no verse that says, "fight for your nation".  There are passages where one can derive some kind of interpretation that promotes a particular viewpoint, but it's an interpretation.  It's not a statement of fact. 

 

One example of this is when Jesus told people to give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. (Luke 20:25)  The context of Jesus' words concerned paying taxes to Caesar.  Paying taxes is the primary statement of fact here.  Some suggest a secondary meaning to Jesus' words is possible.  They say that if Caesar calls you to serve in the military, you serve because serving in the military is something that belongs to Caesar.  That may well be true but the problem with this is that Jesus didn't specifically say that in this passage.  That's only what some think He might have said if asked.  One basic hermeneutical principle states that you cannot argue a point from silence, and this argument is based on silence.      

 

Jesus had conversations with Roman soldiers on many occasions but never told them to leave the army.  Some suggest that's proof Jesus allows military involvement by His followers.  That's speculation too.  The soldiers Jesus encountered weren't necessarily His followers, and they weren't Jews.  They were Romans.  Jesus' ministry was specific to the Jews, not to Gentiles.  He would have had no reason to tell a Roman soldier to leave his post.                                             

 

Another example of a passage used to support Christian involvement in the military is found in 1 Corinthians 7:20.  Paul tells his readers to stay in whatever situation they were in when God called them.  The context of Paul's words concerns marriage.  If you were married when you became a Christian, stay married.  If you were single, stay single.  If you struggled with the sexual pressure of singleness, then get married.  That's not a sin.     

 

Paul did give two other examples of situations to remain in once becoming a Christian.  If you were a slave when you met Christ, don't demand your freedom. It you are offered your freedom, take it.  If you were uncircumcised, don't get circumcised.  Obviously, if you were circumcised, stay circumcised.  Beyond these three situations, Paul gave no other examples of situations to stay in once becoming a Christian.  Any situation we might add to Paul's list is speculative on our part.  Would Paul have added military involvement to this list?  I can't say for sure because he never said so.  I know from other passages that there are some occupations that he wouldn't add to his list.  Prostitution is one. 

 

The apostle Paul lived much of his post-conversion life surrounded by Roman soldiers.  He preached the gospel to them while in prison or in chains.  We have no record of Paul telling any of these soldiers to leave their post once they began to follow Jesus.  Any reason we might give for this omission, assuming it was an intentional omission, is speculative. 

 

In John 18:36 Jesus told Pilate that if His kingdom was of this world, His disciples would fight to prevent His arrest.  Does this imply Jesus is in favor of military involvement by His followers?  He specifically said His disciples would not fight because the kingdom they would be fighting for isn't of this world.  Some suggest that this opens the door for military involvement by Christians because their nation is of this world.  They might have a point.  On the other hand, Jesus might have simply been speaking on an individual level, not a national level.  His statement might be one of self defense than military involvement. 

 

I'm sorry to end this section  uncertainty, and with no strong conviction.  I lean towards Christian involvement in the military as being Biblically permissible.  I wish there was a clear cut statement of fact one way or the other.  I've heard the arguments on both sides of the issue.   Both sides have compelling arguments, but still, I'm not fully convinced of either.

 

Next Page

Previous Page

Home Page