“Christ in disarming Peter, disarmed every soldier”- Tertullian
I met up with a friend of mine whom I’ve known for years. He wanted to meet up with me and have some coffee because he had enlisted in the army and was going to be shipping out soon. So I suppose he was catching up with his old friends before he left. I was a little shocked. This is a friend I’ve talked with many times about all the various things we discuss here at the subversive church. When I asked why he came to the decision to join the war on terror, he said two things “I have no direction in life” and “I believe in this war and our president”… I had no fucking idea what to say.
I’ve noticed that no matter how liberal a “Christian” group seems to be, there is still a silence on the subject of whether it’s alright for a Christian to join the military. Though most “liberals” (christian and non) beleive the war in Iraq is wrong, not too many people are willing to comment on whether or not individual participation in the war is wrong. I understand why, obviously no one wants to get lumped in with the Vietnam protestors who spit on veterans at thier homecomings.
However, someone has to be the villain of the piece. I feel turning a blind I to this is wrong. People we love are needlessly killing each other and feel it is the right thing to do. I have friends in the military and can tell you from experience that they are not bad people, quite the opposite, they are good people. But the church has created an attitude that war is (seemingly) always just and this has gone on since it’s inception. It all goes back to the “Us vs. Them” mentality of the church. There has always been a “them” and for the church to gain power, it had to eliminate the “them”. How does one accomplish this when Christians have all “put down thier swords? You find a way to twist the scriptures and justify picking those swords back up. Or in Constantine’s case, you claim God told you to kill. I know that sounds a bit harsh. But I’m of the mindset that it’s time to quit fucking around and sweeping this subject under the rug in order to not offend the “support our troops” mentality in America. People’s lives are at stake (on both sides) and the church is condoning this bloodshed.
At this point you may wonder why I’m not spending my time speaking out against the government(s) that started the war(s) in the first place? Pointing out that the government (or any government) has corruption is like pointing out a broken tail light on a totalled car. Governments are man made institutions of the world. They can only be what they were created to be, temporary and flawed. The church on the other hand, claims to be the true church of God, yet it is acting like a government and not aspiring for better. The church could be the solution, but it continually sets itself as part of the problem. More than 80% of Americans claim to be Christian. If that 80% spoke out against the war, there would be no war. In fact, it seems the 20% that don’t make such claims are the ones protesting the violence.
If Jesus didn’t really mean “Those who live by the sword will die by the sword” there should have been a footnote or something (although not in my bible, perhaps Pat Robertson has a different translation). I like that Shaine Claiborne said “If there ever was a just reason to kill, Peter had it. He was trying to save the ONE innocent person on the earth.” but Jesus disarmed Peter and healed the soldier. Does the church honestly beleive THIS Jesus would be pro-war? Deitrich Bonhoeffer, who conspired to assassinate Hitler, repented of his part in the plot and instead of asking God’s blessing (on what could easily be thought of as justified violence even the the mind of the most liberal of liberals) he only asked God’s forgiveness that he couldn’t see a better way. This is the way the church is supposed to operate.
Again, I can see why the church as a whole does what it does. Simply because it is not God’s true church, it is a man-made institution that has all the flaws and characteristics of a government. But if we are to be some miniscule example of God’s kingdom on earth, we can’t associate ourselves with pro-war, pro-violence attitudes. We should encourage subversive thinking on the subject and help soldiers who want to leave the military get out (whether by legal means or otherwise). Or perhaps just helping out kids and families who may get caught in the “economic draft”. The church is far from being the “light of the world” and instead has become the world around the light. If we are going to step up and try and be the light, we can start by doing what we can to stop these “crusades”.
*Shane Claiborne has a chapter on this in his book “Jesus for President”- READ IT! (it’s much better than anything I could write)
*Also read Deitrich Bonhoeffer’s “Prison Letters”
-Chris
July 23, 2008 at 4:17 pm
History will tell whether or not the Iraq war is justified.
However, I can think of a few times in Scripture when God commanded His people to go to war. I don’t believe God would tell us to do something that is inherently, intrinsically evil. That doesn’t mean ALL war is justified, but at least some of it must be/must have been.
Where do you draw the line? That’s the real question.
July 23, 2008 at 4:43 pm
You are assuming these stories in the Hebrew scriptures and passed down as oral tradition through the generations are actually God (the same God Jesus spoke of) instructing them. Many people have and continue to do violent things believing it to be God’s will… whether or not God told anyone to go to War is not for me to judge. It makes little difference. I think the real question is: Who’s example are you following? Humans who believe they have heard from God, or Jesus who was God?
-Chris
July 24, 2008 at 12:33 am
@hr
I can also think of the time God told his people not to want a king because the king will take your sons off to war.
Just war? When Cheney used the term ‘perpetual war’…or ‘resource war’. Is that just? History will find that this was a war for scarce resources. The American people don’t want to hear such rethoric, but it is true.
Have you seen the pictures of our new embassies? They are literal fortress-compounds costs God-knows how much. These are being built in the countries we are occupying now. Do you honestly think we are going to leave those to be overrun?
Just a couple of questions to ponder.
For me, the line is I will not participate in direct action. Do I benefit from it? Of course. Therein lies the debate.
-mike
July 24, 2008 at 1:29 am
[...] God of WarWhen I asked why he came to the decision to join the war on terror, he said two things “I have no direction in life” and “I believe in this war and our president”… I had no fucking idea what to say. … [...]
July 25, 2008 at 9:14 am
Which is a greater love, to weep for those who suffer violence or to free them from it?
July 25, 2008 at 10:23 am
Chris, Truly enough, Jesus did disarm Peter and restore the ear. However, Jesus also knew that he must be captured as it was necessary to be crucified in order to pay the debts of all sinners. Surely you wold not suggest that Jesus, a loving Lord, would desire others to unnecessarily suffer in other circumstances.
Jesus stood for mercy. He also recognized corrupt behavior and set it straight. In Fact, he sat down to braid a whip in order to chase the money changers from the temple.
War is ugly and almost always the wrong solution to any difficult problem. But unless you have systemic change in the lives of all people (especially Christians) that prevents atrocities to begin with, then sometimes, the best human means to stop such atrocities, unfortunately, is war.
I am not claiming support of this war. But I do recognize and support the fact that a military and war are sometimes necessary.
“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men are willing to do violence on their behalf.” – George Orwell.
I wonder how well any of us sleep at night?
July 25, 2008 at 10:51 am
Chris, your comment about the Hebrew scriptures is an interesting one. Although I do not maintain that the bible is inerrant, your comment is either allowing for a extremely wide interpretation of scripture or is down right challenging the inspiration of scripture.
Granted, I too, having just read Genesis through Judges wonder about whether all the OT fighting and waging of war was a product of God or within the will of God. No man has ever gone to war without thinking his God is on his side. Vanity.
God speaks to Abraham that he will be blessed that all humanity will be blessed through him. I interpret that as Jesus coming from that lineage. God is loving, as we see in Christ. We also know that God created the all the peoples of the earth from one blood. To have God play favorites, destroy one people group at the benefit of another, seems a little racist to me. I don’t think God is racist.
July 27, 2008 at 7:33 am
Two thoughts:
1. We cannot justify anything based solely on OT Scripture since we are under the NT covenant. However, the fullest understanding of the NT is in recognizing the whole story of how Christ came to us and that includes OT reality. God authorized the slaughter of the Canaanites. Why? It’s a significant question. I do not believe the war in Iraq is a just war. However, a lack of morality behind our involvement in this war and other foreign policies of the US are a sign of the times, but not necessarily an indictment against all armed force.
2. Which brings up point number two. Be careful how you sling judgment toward others who make decisions with which you disagree. Being an individual who joins the military and being a supporter of American policies that kill are two separate things. I know a person who honestly feels called to be in the military as a platform for ministering to the lost men and women who are there. He has chosen a “soft skill” of being an engineer who helps build military bases. Does his action support the war? Indirectly yes, but the US military has and will continue to do many jobs other than fight this questionable war. Is this man misguided? Perhaps we should leave that to God’s judgment. You use vulgarities that many people find patently offensive and this in apparent violation of Scripture in James. This speech is powerfully angry sounding and this may be the manner in which you use it. However your usage could be interpreted as hate in your heart and thus would be defined by Jesus words as murdering your brother, since to hate is the same as murder like to lust is the same as adultery.
In summary your personal interpretation of what a Christian should do and look like, justified by a reference to Jesus’ action of healing a soldier’s ear, is little more than the same canned rhetoric you find such fault with in the organized church. Your position appears based on immature feelings instead of mature faith.
July 27, 2008 at 7:54 am
My opinion of why God authorized killing in the OT:
The Israelites were instructed to kill Canaanites because the Lord had determined to have a covenant people who worshiped Him. Mixture between the Israelites and these people of false beliefs would have served to entice those of the covenant to join in false worship. Further, along with these false gods came some fairly abhorrent human behaviors, namely sacrificing live babies by fire before Molech and both male and female temple prostitutes available for sexual activity as part of the worship of Baal.
Consider Paul’s first letter to Corinthian Christians which instructs them to shun a person who purports being a Christian but insists he or she is free to practice sexual immorality. Notice the same separation of those who belong to God from those who are involved in idolatry expressed through sexual behavior.
God’s attitude of preventing mixture has not changed from the Old Testament to the New. The noticeable difference is the New Testament does not require immediate stoning or other violence leading to death as it did in Old Testament. Did God change? No.
It is the effect of the crucifixion and resurrection. It isn’t that God changed either His attitudes or His methods. His physical entry into the world in the form of Jesus and the satisfaction of His perfect justice through Christ’s atonement altered humanity’s condition.
That is, people are slaves to sin. Once sin becomes practice, humans will not turn from such. The Canaanites would not change, and the Israelites were drawn into those false beliefs.
God had no alternatives to the destruction of people groups mired in false worship or punishment of the Israelites for idolatry before Jesus walked on the earth and ended His life as sin under the curse of God. With the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus breaking the power of sin and death, the human condition was enabled to respond to the message of God’s grace and love. God remained unchanged.
July 27, 2008 at 2:29 pm
to ded,
thanks for sharing.
July 27, 2008 at 4:26 pm
@ Joe (I’m working my way down the page)
- Your options to weep or free people from suffering justice leaves a big one out for me. Suffering along side.
- You said, “you would not suggest that Jesus, a loving Lord, would desire others to unnecessarily suffer in other circumstances.” I would then ask why Jesus said to consider the cost before following him, and that we would be like sheep among wolves, and that we should also pick up our cross, and the whole ‘If they do this to me, then how much more will it be done to you?’ I can’t speak for Chris, but I would submit that Jesus told us to expect suffering.
- You say, “…the best human means to stop such atrocities, unfortunately, is war.” I would agree, but only within the kingdom of man, not within the kingdom of God.
@ded
- Wow. ‘canned rethoric’? That was a suprising ending. Your opinion of OT killing is the basis of my question #2 below. It is in agreement, btw.
@ all
- This ain’t a pretty topic, but it is worth digging into. It will aways be contentious and can lead to heated posts. I love sharing this space with Chris as we both post independently from one another and never know what we are going to find.
I do not presuppose to speak for him so I won’t. I will however ask just two questions that I would like to hear your responses.
1: How would this discussion be shaped if it wasn’t from an Amero/US-centric point of view? That is to say if we were on the receiving end of this ‘War on Terror’?
2: ded talks about the mixing of the Israelites with pagan beliefs not jiving with God. For me, this is exactly what has happened to christianity. The impure mixing of the kingdom of God and the kingdom of man, for me, at least, is what I take out of this post.
Galatians 3.
26 For you are all children of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
27 And all who have been united with Christ in baptism have put on Christ, like putting on new clothes.
28 There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And now that you belong to Christ, you are the true children of Abraham. You are his heirs, and God’s promise to Abraham belongs to you.
What promise? Look earlier in Galatians 3.
8 What’s more, the Scriptures looked forward to this time when God would declare the Gentiles to be righteous because of their faith. God proclaimed this good news to Abraham long ago when he said, “All nations will be blessed through you.”
9 So all who put their faith in Christ share the same blessing Abraham received because of his faith.
So if there is no designation of believers, if all believers are children of Christ, then the idea of war, of defending some sort of man-made nationality is the mixing of the kingdom of God and the kingdom of man. Exactly what ded was talking about above concerning the Israelites.
It was all too easy for the Israelites to fall into worng practices, so it is for us as well being Christians and Americans. Can we be both?
So are we supporting the kingdom of man when we support war, as engineers or otherwise?
I personally know some who are in “soft skill” positions. I don’t know how to get around this without offending them other than to not post at all. Maybe I’m wrong in this, and if so I am more than open to a counter to my view.
It also comes back, for me, to living in this country and benefitting from “rough men willing to do violence on my behalf”. While I may not be involved in the military, as an American I am associated to it. Do I want that security? Yes. But am I, as a christian, entitled to it?
So maybe it isn’t so much that we should be anti-war, or anti-military so much as it should a be an issue of being non-kingdom of man. Should we be set apart as God initially setup the Hebrew nation to be. Without king?
Ok, so maybe more than two questions, but I think the military issue is the more visual issue of the problem of living within an empire as a Christian. We see how christianity was perverted by Constantine. The usurping of christianity into supporting nationalism has never been addressed to this day.
-mike
July 27, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Wow, Mike. I appreciated your thoughtful response. (Why does that not surprise me?)
I don’t think the issue is can we be both Christians and Americans. That is, in fact, the case: we are both. Paul was a Christian and a Roman citizen. He dedicated himself to the former and used the latter when it served his purposes of advancing the message he lived to tell.
I’ve got much to do; will respond to your two questions later.
July 27, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Mike, I totally agree that we should expect to suffer as Christians. That is not what I said. I know that Christ said we are to pick up our cross and follow him, that necessarily implies suffering. I think what you have missed is the single word unnecessary. What purpose do you suppose is gained in unnecessary suffering.
Besides that, to what goal or purpose would the suffering of those who have not decided to follow serve? Senseless abuse, rape, murder, and genocide are atrocious activities that are felt even among our non-Christian counterparts. That does not reduce our love for them or our need to express Jesus’ love for them. I maintain that we are to help relieve their suffering rather than turn a blind eye or worse yet, worsen it.
As far as suffering along side, I agree that this is a good option, but I fear there is more suffering than you or I could manage to handle by ourselves, or even with the collective whole of Christianity.
More later.
July 27, 2008 at 9:21 pm
Continued…
AS I said there is more suffering than we can manage, but, keep in mind that you (mike)know me, who are you or I suffering with?
Until all these Christians who espouse to love others actually show it, until we are actually suffering with these others, I’m prepared to serve in the military. Because the soft skilled people build bridges and water treatment plants, sewerage plants, electrical plant, and schools for those people who have no quality of life. Because the military medical professionals save lives and prevent treatable diseases. Because I know that people in Iraq and Afghanistan throw rose petals at the feet of soldiers when a new school is opened. Because the Christians aren’t doing too much.
As far as a friend who joined because he supports the war, well, frankly, that’s stupid. Anybody anywhere that supports the war simply is ignorant of what’s going on. I don’t mean that unlovingly, but matter of factly.
If we had been involved for the reasons stated early in the war (Iraq), to stop genocide, and oppressive terror, then I would be for the war. But that is not the case as evidenced in our military/political absence from Darfur. It could effectively be argued that this war is absolutely a resource war and private economic party at the cost of multitudes.
The obvious counter argument would likely be that the hard-skilled soldiers (and others) are not building a better quality of life, they are killing people. I have no argument against that. In fact, that is a significant part of the job of the military. But, it is not of the Christian people, the same people who brought you the crusades and rampaged North & South America, Africa, and India in ‘missionary efforts’.
In Brian McLaren’s book, A New Kind of Christian, his main character has a conversation about Christianity with a stranger. The stranger says, “I’ve studied Jesus, and I think he was a great Jewish prophet, maybe the greatest who ever lived. But Christianity and Jesus don’t seem to have too much in common, as far as I can see” Of course this book is fiction, but the point is not all (few actually) Christians are Christ-like.
Believe it or not, not all soldiers are war-mongers, or even murderous. Some of them are very loving people and see military service as a genuine means by which to help people. Some are even Christians. Some of them are even more Christ-like than some of us reading this very page.
John the Baptist does not condemn soldiers. He simply tells them to do their job honestly and be content with their pay. That Luke included this in his gospel is pertinent and perhaps revealing. It tells us that military duties are not a sin, and that anyone, soldier or civilian can receive and benefit from God’s word.
July 27, 2008 at 9:24 pm
And just for the sake of presenting a variety of veiwpoints…
“We cannot be both the world’s leading champion of peace and the world’s leading supplier of arms.” – Jimmy Carter
July 27, 2008 at 11:11 pm
@ Joe
-Nicely put, I appreciate your time to comment further. I’m also glad to see you didn’t take offense to my earlier questions. I didn’t think you would, but it is always something that concerns me.
Agreed about the suffering, there is too much of it and there aren’t enough christians (myself included) doing something about it. I think that is one of the main reasons we dropped out of mainstream church, it seemed to condone ‘doing-nothingness’. Yet, the alternative has been a lonely path as well, with no clear-cut solutions. I consider one like spinning wheels in mud, the other just turning the engine off. At some point I would like to move forward, you know?
I love your quotes… from Orwell to Carter…classic!
I can see where you are coming from with the military angle as positive. I just want you to know I do not consider every soldier a war-monger, and I really hope that can’t be construed out of any of the writings here, mine or Chris’.
I will ponder on your words and come back tomorrow with a thoughtful answer.
You mention McLaren’s book, is it worth reading? Have you finished Claiborne’s book yet?
-mike
July 28, 2008 at 8:01 am
Joe, I’ve enjoyed reading your thoughts. I liked the quotes, as well.
Mike,
Responses to your questions:
1. In a very fundamental way we are on the receiving end of the “Terror War,” eh? Very possibly this war began with the establishment of a nation of Israel in 1948. We took sides and have been the enemy of the side we didn’t support since then. No doubt, many of our nation’s clandestine efforts and overt national policies are in part at the root of our enemy’s hatred for us. I am not writing to defend anything our nation has done, known or unknown which might be construed as lacking integrity.
However, the shooting at us began way before 9/11. The word you used earlier, “empire” says it all. So we function.
Humans always need an enemy. This is a basic premise of anthropological explanations of the development of man. I see this as the simple answer to your question. The amazing thing is that nationally we see ourselves as on the receiving end of the violence. Therefore, we are “justified” in perpetuating violence. I think it is clear–and this gets to the root of the question–we are a morally bankrupt nation despite our spiritual underpinnings and the possibly large number of people who are mostly law-abiding. Our nation is willing to flex its extensive military-tech muscle to achieve its political agenda, which always produces “collateral” civilian damage, in a totally immoral way.
It is the reality of seeing ourselves as victim, which then garners the support of a large, right-oriented politic often identifying itself as “Christian” offering canned Scripture references for justification of war-mongering that so rankles many believers. Chris and I are among these rankled ones! (Chris, I understand your feelings quite personally.)
I stopped repeating the Pledge of Allegiance years ago because I saw the pledge as a violation of my whole devotion to God. I don’t believe the pledge, why say it in response to a cultural mandate? However, God instructs me to obey the civil law. So I make the effort at positive citizenship while attempting to understand beyond propaganda or the need for an enemy.
2. …defending some sort of man-made nationality is the mixing of the kingdom of God and the kingdom of man leads to the question So are we supporting the kingdom of man when we support war, as engineers or otherwise?
This appears to me to be a question Christian disciples have faced throughout time:
Should Christians refuse
to participate in the nation-state system since it mixes our alien identity in Heaven with worldly allegiances? Some have answered the question with the practice of monasticism.
Add the phrase, “especially in war,” and you have the reason for this discussion.
Narrow the question a bit. Should a Christian man use lethal force to protect his wife and children against an intruder in the home who seems intent on committing acts of rape or other physical harm to innocents?
The nation state system has developed the military for two purposes. One to protect the homeland so that innocents may live securely and to gain wealth. If we could remove the latter (and I know we can’t but for the sake of exploring what we think) does logic not tell us evil, physically harmful aggression exists? So then we ask without the moral complicating factor of fighting for greed, “Should Christians join the sword fight to stop it?”
It strikes me as intensely personal and a one-size-fits-all answer will not be found.
Sorry for appearing to skirt the issue, but I appeal to my first position: Be careful in judging others who make decisions with which one disagrees.
July 28, 2008 at 8:15 am
If you have the time, here is a link of a brother (and I can vouch that he is a dedicated and sincere disciple of Jesus) who discusses evil and Christian action in response outside of the US institutional military context. He is reviewing and analyzing The Dark Knight(current and just previous post).
I only offer his words as a view of the issue of believers’ involvement in the real violence of the world.
http://suppliants.blogs.com/pura_vida/
July 29, 2008 at 9:59 am
There are two things I want to point out in Chris’ post that is the precursor to my response to Joe and ded. First is his allusion to Constantine, and the second to Bonhoeffer.
Constantine’s mother claimed to have found Jesus’ cross and did many other shady things to solidify Constantines’ new choice of a unifying religion and his political ambitions for a larger cohesive kingdom. I highly recommend James Carroll’s book Constantine’s Sword. It has actually been made into a movie and the DVD comes out in September. http://constantinessword.com/
Bonhoeffer’s actions and asking forgiveness for his actions is quite the answer to ded and the Christian dilemma of war and personal violence to protect oneself. I thoroughly agree with ded in that a one-size-fits-all answer will not be found.
The issue of this post isn’t the military. The military is part of the kingdsom of man. We live in the kingdom of man, therefore the military is always going to be a part of the equation. The issue is the church’s overzealous support of country and politics over peace and justice.
Joe speaks of the good being done in Iraq. I must concur as many other military folks say the same thing. That is fine, but there is a flip-side to that coin. There have been how many citizens killed and displaced since we occupied Iraq?
Joe I have a question. I pose it for two reasons. First, I am not in the military so I would never claim to know how a person deals with this aspect. Second, I think this is one aspect of this dialog that needs to be heard.
By working within the military to do the good deeds, how does one reconcile the violent side of the orginization with being a Christian?
From the outset the church, in general, has supported the ‘war on terror’. The country needed to kick some ass after 9/11, and everyone was on-board, from the media, to the Democrats, to the church. Why? Political capital. If we won the war quickly, then who wants to be one the side that was critical of going to war? But now that it is becoming obvious what the true intentions are of this war (oil profits), everyone is doing damage control.
I love these lyrics from Bill Mallonee and the Vigilanties of Love’s song, Resplendant.
Desperate times, you know everbody’s part
It’s your own lines you’d like to forget
Till what you were meets what you’ve now become
grins and says Hey, haven’t we met
I’m not about to claim that my ideas are better than someone else’s. But I will say that the church, as an institution, has been in bed with political power for a long, long time. Sometimes it has been involved as a Bonhoffer, seeing no better way to fix a situation. Other times the church has acted as a Constantine, looking for more power.
-mike
July 29, 2008 at 11:42 am
[...] Carroll’s Constantine’s Sword book in the comments of Chris’ post God of War. I felt the need to post this in hopes that people will actually pick it up and read it. Yes, [...]
August 6, 2008 at 1:46 pm
[...] Actually, recent discussions with Joe and ded already had me thinking. Joe’s comment in God of War really concerned me, Until all these Christians who espouse to love others actually show it, until [...]
August 10, 2008 at 10:11 pm
I was thinking… Mike you asked “By working within the military to do the good deeds, how does one reconcile the violent side of the orginization with being a Christian?”
I respond with this. We (Christians)are taught to do unto others as we would have done unto us. If somebody was kicking the crap out of me, I would want somebody to stop them. If someone was raping and murdering my people, if somebody was forcing my family into slavery and stealing our food, I would want somebody to step up and help me.
We are also told to work it out amongst ourselves. (Matthew 18:15 “And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. 16 “But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. 17 “And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer).
Christian legal advice is to bring it up among other believers and if you have a few witnesses, you are found guilty. If guilty, excommunicate them. Being found guilty and suffering the consequences only works if we all accept those rules. And if excommunication is something to fear or remorse. Not everybody does though.
I can excommunicate any oppressive foreign power that I like. But they likely will not care. My treating them as the gentile or tax-collector does not impact them. It also does not alleviate the suffering of those whom are in need of assistance. By agreeing they are in the wrong and excommunicating the oppressors, I’m not doing unto the sufferers of injustice I would have them do unto me. I would have them come in and rescue my family from the rapists, thieves, and murders.
So, again the only outlet where that capacity to stop such atrocity is available to me is the Army. In some cases, I can stop the oppression and torture.
The obvious question that I see in response is what about all the needless suffering and death, what about the political & economic ugliness of war and violence. there is much bad that comes with the good.
To that I admit. Anytime that humans are involved, there is corruption, that is because man is flawed. Nothing we do is perfectly pure. Also, nothing we compete or battle against is completely evil.
I can’t even pick which wars are good and right and which wars are not. I cannot even choose which wars to fight in and from which to abstain. That part sucks. But I still have a place.
My place in it is to do the most good that I can; to turn the situations in which I am involved to the better. I can only do my best. And I can only expect and encourage the best in my subordinates. I can be a living example of Christ in what I do and, Lord willing, my actions will influence and impact the actions of others, both superiors and subordinates. But that won’t happen if my actions are not seen.
Imagine what the world would look like if there were no Christians in the military. Imagine what the world militaries would do without the presence of a Christian conscience.
Not only is it acceptable or appropriate for Christians to be in the military, it is imperative.
“A Bad Peace is even worse than war” – Tacitus
“If I must choose between righteousness and peace, I choose righteousness.” – Theodore Roosevelt
August 11, 2008 at 11:20 am
“Do not say to God I am of no use where I am…for you are surely of no use where you are not!” -Oswald Chambers
Do all the good you can by all the means you can in all the places you can at all the times you can to all the people you can as long as ever you can. – John Wesley
August 11, 2008 at 3:33 pm
I guess the question is while soldiers are out rebuilding schools, planting rainbows, and paving those third world roads with cotton candy, what happens when it comes time to pick up a gun (or missile) and kill… and don’t tell me it won’t ever come to that,
(or did the military start giving you the option) is that still doing “good” where you are?
August 11, 2008 at 5:26 pm
To Chris,
Wow, thick with sarcasm. I can feel the brotherly love even from here.
To be honest, in the previous 16 years of military service I have never been asked nor has it even been insinuated that I should pick up a missile.
Granted, many Army jobs require that you be prepared to kill people. And nearly all require that you at least train in the skills just in case. However, the military job for which I am currently training actually requires me NOT to carry any firearms or weaponry of any kind. It requires that I sign an affidavit declaring that I will not.
Of course so far, I have avoided answering the root of your question. By intention to explain that you appear to know very little about the military.
Yes, people in the military kill. This is true and has always been true. Yes, militaries, including our own, are subject to corruption, greed, and are often used poorly.
If the time comes where a soldier has to use force, which it will, or the time when they have to use lethal force, which it will, it is regrettable. But some things are worth fighting for.
John 2:15 And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.
Jesus sat down and braided a whip and used it. But I still think he was working towards the greater good.
I’m a just war theorist. Even though it’s ugly, killing a few to save the multitudes in some cases is worth. I do regret that you must choose either to support the military or not rather than support or reject each particular use of force.
In this post, Bonhoeffer is mentioned regretting that he couldn’t find a better way than participating in a conspiracy to assassinate Hitler. I am familair with his writing but have not read Bonhoeffer thoroughly, but I don’t remember him stating he had ever found a better way.
Something that has not been mentioned in any of this conversation is the fact that these military persons who are such ugly murderous people are also getting shot at. They are risking their lives to aid and assist others. It is not as if they are merely going somewhere and and using human populations as target practice. In fact, some of these soldiers are getting killed for their efforts. To my understanding, Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.
August 11, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Again to Chris,
I returned sarcasm with sarcasm and I apologize.
To answer your specific question, ‘is that doing all the good that you can.’ My answer is maybe, and in some cases yes. Going back to the example of Hitler, and tying my argument together more succinctly, killing Hitler would be the greatest good any person could do in that situation.
I think Wesley’s point is that in whatever situation you find yourself, whether pleasant or adverse, whether in power or oppressed, whether military or civilian, there are opportunities to do good. I believe that to be the case.
Even if my military obligations forced me to kill someone, I believe that I can do much good during my military tenure. Despite that possibility, I hope and strive to do the most good there that I can. Some of that good will be towards military personnel, some will not, some will be to strangers.
August 12, 2008 at 12:27 am
@joe and chris,
I love the planting rainbows and paving with cotton candy line. I had to laugh a lot at that one. I also had to laugh at the idea of never ‘picking up’ a missle in 16 years.
Awww, you guys…play nice.
@joe
Bonhoeffer used an analogy about trying to kill Hitler. If a madman drove a car into a public square full of children, would it be better to try and grab the wheel or allow it to happen and console the parents?
Ok, let me work through some of the ideas and positions here.
I’m concerned that you project ideas of how Christians are to interact with one another onto how we are to act with powers of the world. Maybe I missed what you were trying to say there.
Also, you didn’t really dig into the idea that the military is for maintaining economic status and control of scarce resources.
And I want to throw out a hypothetical. If, until this point, all military action by the US was just and humanitarian, what would happen if there was, in the future, an action that was completely selfish and an overt power-grab that would be devistating to the local population. What would the proper Christian response be for those who had signed on for to serve in the military?
Your comparison of Jesus and his whip to modern military might is a stretch in my book. A whip verses a SAW is hard to imagine. Just saying. (Actually I wanted to get in on the sarcasm too.)
Also, I want to thow out some scripture for all of us to chew on.
Matthew 5
38 “You have heard the law that says the punishment must match the injury: ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ 39 But I say, do not resist an evil person! If someone slaps you on the right cheek, offer the other cheek also. 40 If you are sued in court and your shirt is taken from you, give your coat, too. 41 If a soldier demands that you carry his gear for a mile, carry it two miles. 42 Give to those who ask, and don’t turn away from those who want to borrow.
43 “You have heard the law that says, ‘Love your neighbor’ and hate your enemy. 44 But I say, love your enemies! Pray for those who persecute you! 45 In that way, you will be acting as true children of your Father in heaven. For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike. 46 If you love only those who love you, what reward is there for that? Even corrupt tax collectors do that much. 47 If you are kind only to your friends, how are you different from anyone else? Even pagans do that. 48 But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.
I’m not trying to put you on the hot seat. I just wanted to throw out some thoughts that were bouncing around in my head.
-mike
August 13, 2008 at 7:34 am
Mike, the passages you posted are of course excellent teachings, but they address if someone is smacking me around and taking my clothes. My concern is what about when they’re smacking your wife and children around, or raping them, or killing them?
I understand that we are to loves us and be self-sacrificing, I really don’t see God wanting us to allow others to suffer. How will you best love your family, or your friends/neighbor, or even your enemy by allowing them to suffer unimaginable atrocities?
You seem to have well established thinking about our duties towards Peace, but what about our Christian obligations towards Justice & Mercy. Who will stand for the suffering? Yes, I believe that sometimes standing against the greatest wrong may require grabbing the wheel from the Madman.
August 13, 2008 at 9:38 am
Joe,
So peace has been established. We can take that off the table to look at other aspects. I’m cool with doing so.
Ok so let’s go with your raping and pillaging scenario. No, I’m not going to stand idly by as someone tries to harm my wife and kids or someone else’s family. There are individuals who will join the military as Christians in hopes to do good. Fine. I don’t necessary agree with it as we are called to be set apart, offering a different way of living in the world. There are plenty of people who do good in the military and are not followers of Christ. What sets the Christians apart for those who try to do good? Being a follower of Christ is more than just doing good in a given situation. In talking about individual military service, we have shifted the target.
The topic was originally unabashed church support of all things military. You and ded focused on Chris’ befuddlement at his friend’s decision to join the military and the reasons for doing so. It was easy to go down that road and we all did, but we shifted the target in doing so. Joe you even said, “As far as a friend who joined because he supports the war, well, frankly, that’s stupid. Anybody anywhere that supports the war simply is ignorant of what’s going on. I don’t mean that unlovingly, but matter of factly.”
So I would like to bring the original topic back into focus: The American evangelical support of state and military.
I want to go back to the issue of Darfur that Joe brought up and it might even touch on the rape and pillaging scenario he brought up earlier. If the evangelical church is supposed to be concerned about justice and supports the military, then why doesn’t it cry for justice to be served in Africa via the military?
Instead, the church backs the military and by default, it’s ventures into Iraq and in doing so looks in the world’s eyes as fanatical as radical Islamists. And so, while there are individual stories of redemption like school building and other humanitarian good deeds, there is still the ugly side that must be contended with like torture and rendition and profiling and mass round ups for identification. Isn’t the church and therefore by default, individuals within the church, to be set apart from such contradictions that mark kingdom of man solutions?
What it means is that the church has to take an active role in righting the wrongs of this world. The church can’t sit by and hope that a flawed institution such as government and its military will do its work for it. Oh, it can, but the results are going to be devastatingly flawed.
So Joe I can understand totally your desire to do as much good as possible. But why is it we can’t see that we are to offer another option, another way of doing things? The church should be spearheading humanitarian efforts sans weapons. Maybe the military can cover us as we go in, but we need to go in regardless, as the church, not the military.
-mike
August 14, 2008 at 1:06 am
[...] so we normally don’t go political here. Well maybe God of War did, but not like this. I may have mentioned that I call myself a recovering neocon. For me, I [...]
August 14, 2008 at 9:01 am
Mike says, “But why is it we can’t see that we are to offer another option, another way of doing things? The church should be spearheading humanitarian efforts sans weapons. Maybe the military can cover us as we go in, but we need to go in regardless, as the church, not the military.”
I agree, wholeheartedly. Go get’em tiger. Now, show me your plan. … Meanwhile, I’ll do what I can through this other angle.
August 14, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Hey all,
I wanted to throw my two cents in as the discussion seems to be winding down.
My story in a nutshell is that I spent several years doing missions work, needed money to go to college, joined the Army Reserves for 8 years, saw a chaplain less than once a year-except for basic training when I went to chapel, wanted to go into cross cultural missions but felt God lead me to serve as a Chaplain: missionary to a largely unreached people group that I was a part of and speak the language/know the culture. So I’m in that process.
I’ve had to wrestle with some of the various questions that have been expressed here.
John the Baptist, Jesus, Peter and Paul all had encounters with soldiers in their day. In fact, all four probably died at their hands, since soldiers ran the prisons too. But I don’t recall them ever condemning a soldier or telling them to get out of the military. Instead, a soldier is held up as an example of great faith, another is the first Gentile Christian, soldiers’ lives and equipment are held up as illustrations for Christian living.
This blog started with a quote from Tertullian, but that is cherry-picking church history out of context, when serving required an oath of “Caesar is Lord.”
There is a book called, “When God Says War is Right.” (Cole-MA @ Yale/MDiv @ Duke/PhD @ UVA) that goes through church history and makes the point for Just War. I’m not saying I agree with all of it, but you can’t throw out Scripture, Clement, Origen, Basil, Eusebius, Ambrose, Augustine and Calvin that the author uses to support his claims.
I reconcile the violent side of the military as ‘being all things to all men in order that I may win some/rendering to Caesar, being salt and light/being an ambassador for Christ in chains (you know, the ones that hold my ID tags)…’ Where sin abounds, there is the need of more light, not standing back condemning the darkness. (My apologies to whoever I just paraphrased.)
I think part of the issue is what model of “Christ and Culture” (Niebuhr) one holds to. He gives 5(?) different models that I see two or three reflected in the discussion.
One issue I want to raise is the question of coercion. It is part of our sinful nature to think that my understanding is better and to use whatever means of my choosing to bring you to my way of thinking. War is a physical manifestation of this desire that is in every heart. I had a professor apply the “Just War” criteria to MKL and Ghandi in their coercion of the power structures of their context. It was a really good lecture.
Sojourners and Christian Coalition are both equally guilty, in my opinion, of trying to coerce the church into their position. Both think that they know the will of God and just need the government to enact it for them. (Painting with a broad brush.)
How about going after them, fellow Christians, and leaving the servicemembers- a mix of non-/Christians alone for doing what the representatives that WE elected have ordered them to do.
I think part of the problem being reacted against by those who think the churches are rallying around the flag, is that there is a realization that the Church was silent in loving the soldiers who returned from Vietnam, or in some cases demonizing them and that wearing the uniform was the unforgivable sin even though the soldier may have been drafted.
My concern is that in protesting the war, which is the right the soldiers ensure-the Constitution is just a piece of old paper with some ink on it, some have misplaced blame and transfered it to the soldier for doing their job. Sometimes that is killing and blowing stuff up. Sometimes it is building schools, holding clinics, guarding food shipments… No one has chapter and versed that wearing the uniform is contrary to the Word of God.
Could it be that God is big enough to be “yes, and” rather than “either/or” in the theologies that we try to construct?
“Why is it, do you suppose, that Jesus said to love your enemies, rather than have no enemies?” –Jason Huff, a friend of mine.
Sorry for going so long. jc
August 15, 2008 at 1:09 pm
@ Joe
“Now, show me your plan. … ”
I will, when Chris gets back from CA. I think it is a fair question.
@ Jeff
There are a lot of points to consider in your post. I would like to go back to my comment #29. We are off topic in the discussion. The post was directed at the church in genereal, not individuals. There seems to be some defensive anger in a few of your comments but I’m not sure.
I found your comment on the church feeling guilty about Vietnam-era veterans interesting. That is a good observation I’d like to hear more on. Could you expand on that topic?
-mike
August 15, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Mike,
Sorry, you’re right about some anger coming out. I’ve had my work study supervisor in undergrad, an ordained clergy with a PhD say that “No one who wears the uniform should be allowed to call themselves a Christian.” If sin is sin, then what makes one vocation more sinful than another?
I’m not sure which comments from #29 you are referring to. Darfur?… It is a decision of the politicians and the public opinion shapers in the media. Not an answer I like, but what I think is reality. ‘National strategic/self interest’ is a huge factor of why we would get involved in Bosnia when it was in Europe’s back yard, versus going to other hot-spots on the globe. (Personal aside, I spent some time as part of the missions work I alluded to in refugee camps in Croatia during the war in Bosnia. It was before President Clinton got the U.S. involved. But seeing the situation up close is what made me appreciate the U.S. military more than I had previously.)
Or are your referring to the sweeping generalizations about torture, mass arrests,… That hyperbole and the actions of a few writ large. That would kind of like me blaming you for all Christian atrocities; guilt by association. Another problem with such lines of thinking is that it would seem that you are transferring your ideals onto another culture that may not appreciate the same values. Individual liberty is second only to life in the West.
Order is superior to just about everything, except maybe religion in the Middle East, or that is my perception. So there are things that would be outrageous here, i.e. curfews and mass arrests, that are desirable there for order. I have a lot of statistics about how the infrastructure and lives of the majority are better in the post-war Iraq and Afghanistan, but will spare them. I think little girls going to school, and all kids having the option regardless of religious or clan distinctions getting an education is a blessing to those nations where the military has shed blood; ideally none of it civilian.
Okay, changing gears, the Vietnam/War on Terror contrast on the part of church response is a personal observation and concern.
By the rhetoric some pacifist Christian leaders use, there is God’s grace for addiction, adultery, any criminal offense, etc, but not for being a soldier. Some have begun to realize that it is a vocation that has a high sin potential, like being an actor/musician who may have to compromise morals to get to work.
There is a great need for those that have been to war to receive grace. If the church won’t offer it, who will? I’ve read accounts where children will be sent into the street to pick up the weapon of a fallen insurgent to take back to another in his house who is holding a gun to the mother. The soldier has to shoot the child to protect him/herself and the rest of their team. Other stories have to do with tethering women/children in the street when an American convoy is coming to make them stop to set up an ambush. The streets are too narrow to miss the innocents, and to stay is to get more people killed, so the lead vehicle has to floor the accelerator.
But that soldier did what they had to do yet will bear the emotional scars for life. (This is why Al-Quaeda in Iraq has lost so much support.)
{One death is a tragedy, a hundred is a statistic. –Joseph Stalin}
Will what our religious leaders say and do bring the hope and grace of Christ to the soldiers? Or will we lose another generation of service-members after they return. There have been more deaths from Vietnam Vets by suicide after they came home than there were combat fatalities in the war. PTSD is nothing new, it is just the new title to something that has been around for as long as there had been war. Sometimes it doesn’t show up for a long time due to variables nobody understands.
The Church’s care for the soldier is important to me. In times past, other cultures had a time of cleansing/transition. We don’t. In past wars, especially the world wars, there were weeks on a troopship coming back with others who had “been there” to de-brief. Now it is a few hours on a plane, hand a person a piece of paper with phone-numbers, maybe a brief speech, and then let them go see their families.
I have a friend that helped start the church I attend. His brother is a pastor in another state. After trying college and running low on funds, he joined the Army after 9/11. Two tours overseas as a medic in four years and he got out. He was going to use his GI Bill. All is good. He is in a college in a large city, going to church, etc. On a guys night out, someone with a gun tries to mug him and his friends. The friends run, but his training kicks in and he put the mugger in the hospital. It scared my friend so bad that he might snap, he has virtually disappeared. Not even his brother knows how to find him. I think he may be homeless in a large city in the South.
He knows all the Sunday school answers. But what is the church doing to care for this young man who has much to give who is hurting and broken? That is my concern.
Is the shed blood of Christ enough for my friend? I believe it is, but pointing fingers and calling names by others in Jesus’ family doesn’t help.
I’m asking this question at the seminary where I’m going to school, what is the American church doing to love the soldier returning from war? Most of the time, the answer I get is silence.
There is a great quote from GEN. H Norman Schwartzkopf (sp?) about the horrors of war and that any soldier ‘worth his salt’ should be anti-war, but that there are still things worth fighting for. I concur.
I wear the uniform because I have family and friends that can’t do it with a clean conscience. I respect that. The military is NOT for everyone. But please respect those who do choose to serve, or who may even be called to serve the Kingdom in this way. God had called me to this vocation; please don’t try to tell me that I am not a part of the body of Christ, or that my sins are beyond the reach of the cross.
I don’t agree with the Constantinian alliance of church and state. I think it weakened the witness of the Church. But I do see it as a hospital to sinful people to come and receive the grace of God for the asking.
I’d rather see a small government and a strong Church. Let the churches handle care for the poor, not the state. We have copped out with ‘we’ll pay our taxes and let the government do it.’ God forgive us. Let the Church take the lead with addressing social injustice and declining morals and then do something tangible to meet needs with excellence. Maybe then we’d not have enough time for the latest version of the worship wars or a church split over what color paint for the pastor’s study.
I guess I’ll take the lead and try to spend more time being and doing with my Lord, and less time surfing the ‘net.
If you really need to reach me, here’ my school e-mail: jeff.crispin@asburyseminary.edu
August 16, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Jeff,
Comment #29 was where I was talking about missing the focus of this post, which is questioning the church’s support of military action, not individual action or choice.
I’m hoping when you use the word ‘you’, you mean it generally, and not towards me indivdually in this line:
“But please respect those who do choose to serve, or who may even be called to serve the Kingdom in this way. God had called me to this vocation; please don’t try to tell me that I am not a part of the body of Christ, or that my sins are beyond the reach of the cross.”
If somehow I have put forth an air that I am judging you, then please accept my sincerest apologies. My/our questioning the church supporting military action is merely that, questioning. It is not judging. This is why I referred back to my earlier comment and how the conversation got side-tracked.
I also thought this was a powerful line worth contemplation:
“By the rhetoric some pacifist Christian leaders use, there is God’s grace for addiction, adultery, any criminal offense, etc, but not for being a soldier.”
I appreciate your comments here. And as a side note, you can always feel free to post stats to back up your point.
-mike
August 16, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Mike,
sorry, I should have clarified that “you” is to the reader to try to personalize it, but not aimed at you, Joe, Chris, ded, or anyone in particular.
I try to focus on things within my circle of influence-stuff I can do something about rather than the stuff “way above my pay grade”. I’m not a head of state or the leader of a large church, or any church, that can speak and influence thousands. But trying to realize ways I can minister to overlooked areas that are likely to walk through the front doors of where I worship is something I can impact.
I guess through this process I’ve realized some anger that got the better of me. “Why are people still debating about a war. We are in it and there are broken soldiers and their families that have needs.”
I think that perhaps there is the problem of having a society at peace and a military at war.
Getting back to the point of the post you referred to, I don’t think the question is one that can be answered as a whole. Some Christian people will fall on various places on a spectrum of positions. And all of them will profess Jesus is their Lord. It is a mystery that is beyond my understanding.
“40% of people are going to be against anything at any given time.” Robert Kennedy
August 19, 2008 at 3:26 am
Jeff,
Your comments about grace for the soldier and support for the broken and thier families is absolutely true. Grace is for everyone and it’s unlimited. We should be showing that love and grace to everyone (including soldiers, no matter how we feel aboutthe war.)We are merely questioning the role of the church in this war and the motives behind it. It seems if the overwhelming support for the war (in the beginning) came largely from the Christian community (and still does) that doesn’t appear to be very supportive of those who signed up for the armed services. and in response to your previous post (with the quote from your friend)- I think (and I could be wrong) Jesus said to love your enemies because he knew as humans we make enemies as easily as we breathe, on a large scale we will always have enemies. But shouldn’t loving your enemies naturally make them (at least in your own personal perspective) no longer your enemies? Sure maybe Jesus could have said “have no enemies”, but we are afterall, human. So one step at a time.
August 21, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Nearing the end of the original post there is a word: “Pro-war”. War at the bargain-basement definition is a conflict. Jesus was pro (if you will) conflict. He unsettled many by producing conflict in their beliefs and belief systems. However, the conflict produced was to cause those out-of-line to get in-line with the heart-of-the-matter.
I don’t think this is what YOU mean as pro-war. You are meaning pro-kill. Right?
Scripture is clear on this issue. Clear as mud. Do not kill but kill everything. I believe here is your issue.
Would Jesus kill? We don’t know but know that He didn’t according to scripture. However, let me point out this one thing. He did die. How can we apply what Christ did to what we should do? Die but don’t kill? Really?
August 22, 2008 at 9:33 am
Phil,
Was Jesus pro-conflict or were the people who heard his message and were offended pro-conflict out of guilt?
He may have said he brought a sword, but does that mean he used it. Not backing down from justice and truth doesn’t mean he used the sword. Could it be that he brought it, but those offended picked it up?
And I have to disagree with you your in-line, out-of-line comment. Do we really see a massive move to get in-line within the Hebrew community? Or do we see it in the Gentile community later?
-mike
August 24, 2008 at 1:26 pm
[...] Crowd in History, Women and the Economy | This post is a response to Joe’s comment in God of War. I am copying it here for reference. Joe Says: August 14, 2008 at 9:01 am [...]
September 10, 2008 at 3:27 am
[...] relations, Laurence M. Vance, Lew Rockwell, RAND Corporation, war | A disclaimer. In God of War, the topic of the church supporting the military turned into a discussion about individual service [...]
November 3, 2008 at 7:34 pm
[...] Nation, political affiliation, refugee, Shane Claiborne, voting | With titles like God of War, The Intellectual Inbreeding of the Church, and The Queer Kingdom of God, it is understandable that [...]