As a Christian is there ever a time that we can justify going to war? War obviously involves taking lives, and aren’t we supposed to be against that? What about the death penalty: isn’t killing a killer still murder?
Some Christians are opposed to these concepts, and I want to
be very clear here. I am not writing this to argue with you; I respect that
stance, and I am not trying to start a war of words. This is just my personal belief after studying this topic.
At the same time, I am not a hawk when it comes to war. I do
not believe in going to war for selfish reasons, like gaining territory,
resources, or money.
But I do believe the Bible teaches the concept of just wars,
to wit, some wars are justifiable.
But aren’t we called
to be peacemakers? Yes, in His famous sermon on the mount Jesus said,
“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God
(Matthew 5:9).” But this sermon was given to teach how to conduct ourselves in
our individual lives; national matters are a different story.
Jesus was teaching His followers to live at peace with each
other, and not to take up vigilante justice.
Remember that this Man who taught about peace making was not
afraid to make a whip and cleanse the temple.
For a person to become an anti-war activist from this one
verse is to also ignore a very large part of the Bible, namely Old Testament
passages that are just as important as the New Testament.
Consider the fact that Solomon said that there is a “time
for war (Ecclesiastes 3:8).”
The first war recorded in the Bible takes place in Genesis 14
after Lot was kidnapped. Abraham, one of the heroes in the hall of faith,
gathered an army and went to war to retrieve his nephew. Does being a peacemaker
mean that he lets Lot remain in captivity for the rest of his life, or even
allow him to lose his life at the hands of evil men?
After Abraham was returning from this just war he meets
Melchizedek, whom many people believe to be a pre-incarnate appearance of
Jesus, or at the very least a picture of Jesus (He is the “king of Peace”).
Melchizedek says, “Blessed be the Most High God, who has delivered thine
enemies into thy hand.” The passage refers to the battle as a “slaughter.”
Why would Jesus or a man sent to typify Jesus praise God for
military victory over an evil nation if God were opposed to war?
The Old Testament is full of commanded wars, especially in
the book of Joshua. In that book God used Joshua and his army to bring about
punishment in the form of war. These nations were extremely pagan, and in God’s
sovereign patience, it was time for their removal, just like with the Great
Flood.
When you read the Old Testament how many times do you see
the command from God to not leave any survivors? God did not want to leave even
a trace of these pagan nations, and He used war to accomplish it.
One of those times comes in I Samuel 15, where Saul is
commanded to kill all the inhabitants of Amalek. Saul brings back one survivor,
their king Agag. Because Saul didn’t
kill this man when the Lord told him to, God rejected Saul as king, and the
prophet Samuel killed Agag himself.
But isn’t one of the
10 Commandments “Thou shalt not kill?” Kind of. A better translation would
be “Thou shalt not murder.” It is interesting to note that the Bible makes a
distinction between killing and murder. This also applies to capital
punishment.
If taking the life of a human were absolutely wrong 100% of
the time, then why would God command His followers to institute a death penalty
just one chapter after He gave the commandment not to kill? In Exodus 20 we
have the 10 Commandments, then in Exodus 21 God lays out six instances where
people should be put to death for certain crimes.
In the New Testament when Jesus is being arrested in the
Garden of Gethsemane, Peter pulls out his sword and takes a swing at Malchus; Jesus
then rebuked Peter and affirmed capital punishment in the same breath. Jesus
told Peter that those who take up the sword will die by the sword (Matthew
26:52); in other words, if Peter killed Malchus, then Peter would also be put
to death.
Aren’t we supposed to
turn the other cheek? Yes, this also comes from the sermon on the mount. Jesus
said that after He referenced the old “an eye for an eye” expression. The eye
for an eye remark was God’s law as given to Moses, and it referred to how
punishment would be meted out under their new system. These commands were
carried out as part of the legal
system.
Once again, the sermon on the mount was given for
instruction on living an individual’s life, not for the legal system. In
essence Jesus was telling the disciples not to take matters into their own
hands, but to leave those things to the legal process.
I shouldn’t get to
choose who lives and who dies! So are you more comfortable with the
murderer making those decisions? It isn’t our choice to make when it comes to
the death penalty; God commanded it.
But the death penalty
doesn’t rehabilitate people! Prison will hopefully rehabilitate many
people, but not everyone is in there just for rehabilitation. The death penalty
is not about making someone a better citizen, it is about justice being served.
The lake of fire will not rehabilitate either; people are there for justice.
Imagine for a moment what the world would look like if we
abolish the death penalty and refuse necessary wars. Do the words mayhem or
chaos come to mind?
Is it possible, then, that by having war or a death penalty
we are being peacemakers?
If you want to vote for a peacemaker, fine. But please make
sure that it is one who realizes that peace is made and maintained by bringing
evil men to justice.
(Read Should Christians Vote here Part 2 here)
(Read Should Christians Vote for: Abortion and Stem Cell Research, Gay Rights)
(Read Should Christians Vote here Part 2 here)
(Read Should Christians Vote for: Abortion and Stem Cell Research, Gay Rights)
Comments