Curious Christian

Reflections on culture, nature, and spirituality from a Christian perspective

Holy War and Christianity

Published by

Matt Stone

2008-01-25

How do we reconcile the Old Testament and New Testament on issues such as war and violence? I recently left some comments on John Smulo’s blog in response to such questions and I thought I would reproduce it here as this is a very important issue for me personally.

Best book I ever read on this [Jesus and pacifism topic] was The Politics of Jesus.

And proper answer to this question does take a book.

To summarize it a little though, this is not a question Old Testament folk would have asked and it actually creates a kind of false dichotomy between the two testaments. What would have struck them about their history is that “God fights for us”! Dancing round the walls of Jericho would hardly be accepted as a responsible military strategy by neocons in the Pentagon. It is startling just how much the ancient Hebrews relied on God’s strength and not their own in their wars. In fact, fighting in strength was sometimes taken as a sign of unfaithfulness.

So where does the New Testament fit in? The cross is the climax of this history of “God fighting for us”, the taking this truth to it ultimate conclusion. Through the cross God dethroned the ultimate weapon of militaristic governments – the power to take life – and reveals the true power that governs this universe. The Kingdom of God will not come through the sword; if we see the Kingdom as our first priority the sword becomes useless.

So what are your thoughts? Both on war generally and the Bible specifically?

Tags War

6 responses to “Holy War and Christianity”

Peggy

2008-01-25

Matt, I must say that this is an area where I really struggle to find the balance of the whole situation and not just pieces of it.
One of the most difficult tensions with which we must live is the already/not yet … a very common theme in the Bible.
Already God has destroyed the ultimate power of death, but we are not yet free from consequences of human evil around us.
Is there a place for taking up arms to protect one’s family or innocent others being taken advantage of? It is not an easy question, and simplistic answers abound….
Is there a place for civil government to punish those who break the laws of society?
Is there a place for true rehabilitation of those who commit horrific crimes against others…and is that the place of civil government? Or is there a place for timely and ultimate consequences for those who commit said crimes?
Are we to totally blame society for “creating” sociopathic and psychopathic “monsters” rather than requiring persons to take responsibility for their choices and actions?
Rarely are cut and dried either/or answers sufficient for the complexity of 21st century society’s problems.
God calls people to be accountable for their actions–for knowing basic right and wrong and realizing that the world has natural laws that are to be heeded.
People are precious image bearers of God. Too few actually live and act out that truth. Jesus taught us to love, absolutely. But he also taught us to forgive others as we are forgiven. And that with the measure we measure others we will be measured.
Nope…all very complex, indeed…and that for those who believe in Jesus as God Incarnate. How much more challenging for those who do not believe….

LikeLike

Reply
Isaiah

2008-01-25

Politics of God? Is that by Jacques Ellul? I only recently started reading his stuff and it’s good.
Maybe it’s not by him, whose it by?
As for the question: every actions you take, whether in action or actions will lead to something bad. War is War. If you go into a country you kill, if you don’t others kill. You can’t judge it based on results, for they have mixed results.
I’m reminded of the words of Jesus “You have heard it been said “An Eye for an Eye, and a tooth for a tooth, but I say to you do not resist an evil person”… and “Love your enemies”. Honestly, these commands are the only ones you can go by.
As for Just War theory, how can you have a just war without a just state? And there is no just state when there are no perfect people.

LikeLike

Reply
Isaiah

2008-01-25

Never mind, apparently it wasn’t him. Sorry about that. But he would write something like that though.

LikeLike

Reply
Chris S

2008-01-26

There is a great summary of Yoder’s book by Nathan Hobby at http://perthanabaptists.wordpress.com/politics-of-jesus-simplified/

LikeLike

Reply
Matt Stone

2008-01-26

Peggy
You know I get the impression this is a discussion that can take very different shapes in different cultures – particularly where our two cultures are concerned.
Some facts: Australia has no capital punishment and death by police is still rare enough that every incident is considered newsworthy by our media, with deaths often being reported for days on end. Our relaxed policing practices are no doubt due to our low homicide statistics in general, with only 295 murders being recorded Australia wide in 2005. I am sure a few rough LA neighbourhoods would easily eclipse the efforts of our most hardened criminals. We have no National Rifle Association I know of. If there is one I never hear of it. Gun control legislation, so draconian that even Democrats would baulk at it in your country, was introduced by the last conservative government in ours – to popular acclaim – after a mass murder in Tasmania. We see no reason to say anything about guns in our constitution and find the gun culture of the US not only incomprehensible, but up there with furry culture as a form of collective insanity. Gun control and no to capital punishment is supported by the vast bulk of Christians and the vast bulk of the Australian population beyond that.
This is the context of our debate.
So, when an Australian like me questions the use of violence by the state, our questions are very much focused on war, not policing. We strongly distinguish between policing and military action because policing is, by and large, low on violence here. For us it seems self evident that violence breeds violence and violent technologies should be strictly controlled. Arming ourselves would only escalate the risk to our families. That still leaves us with the question of whether it’s ok to punch out a criminal who is threatening you and others, but speaking of punching or restraining rather than killing shifts the debate considerably.
If I was asked these questions by an Aussie I would answer them thus. Taking up arms is a foolish action that places you and those around you at greater risk from criminals than you would be otherwise. The wise Christian focuses on the skills of de-escalation not escalation. Yes, it is the role of law enforcement agencies to enforce law, but there is no law that says we need capital punishment laws to do that. There a place for timely and ultimate consequence – before the thrown of God. Reductionist understandings of sociopaths are not helpful – sociopaths are shaped by society, but are also shapers of society with all the personal responsibility that entails. But I understand the context is different in the US so I know I must go much more into listening mode on that score.
What concerns me much much more is the issue of war, particularly since Australia joins America in so many of them. But then again our differences come out as we Aussies have no theology of manifest destiny. I think it is important to recognize that the church is the inheritor of the mantle of ancient Israel, not the state, not any state. What the Old Testament has to say about leaders leading their people into holy wars properly applies to church leaders not state leaders. When one government makes war on another and demands Christian make war on Christian it is usurping the authority of the church, and ultimately, Christ himself. No government has that authority. In Christendom times governments at least made the pretense of seeking the church’s acquiescence before ordering Christian citizens into war against one another. I don’t see that happening much post-Christendom! For me “just war” theology too easily devolves into “justification for war” theology. Start asking whether, as people of the new covenant, we should be exploring the higher concept of “gracious war” over “just war” – watch what happens then!

LikeLike

Reply
John

2008-01-26

Matt, We now live in a totally diferent world to the relatively small scale tribalised world of 2000 years ago. A world in which any and every war was localised, and hence limited in its world-wide repercussions, or unintended consequences.
We now live in a Quantum world where everything is instantaneously connected, and which is filled to overflowing with weapons of devastating power, and in which one false move could trigger off world war three, which WILL be the last war, because there wont be anybody “left behind”.
It is also a world which has an unimaginably vast psychic reservoir of fear, anger, rage, and resentment—just waiting for the trigger point to let off the pressure. Any such breaking point can lead to rapid escalations of violence and horror all over the world—“unintended” consequences.
Please read this essay which was written in response to that recent atrocity in New York.
1. http://www.dabase.org/openlett.htm
Meanwhile the author of that letter is saying that the entire world has become much more insane since then, prompting Him to write this book as a wake up call.
1. http://www.ispeace723.org
A few weeks ago He pointed out that Humankind has 2 to 5 years to turn itself around, or the potential horrors described in the above reference will occur.
It is also interesting that five years of 2012 is the year predicted in the ancient Mayan calendar when a major shift will occur in human civilization. A once in a 26,000 year occurrence.
It can either be an unimaginable horror or the seed time for the flowering of a new culture.
If we continue on our present course the turning point will be entirely negative—hence the urgency of the calling(s) in the above book.

LikeLike

Reply