The Christian Dilemma of War, pt. 2
Last week we looked at the three main perspectives on war: activism, pacifism, and the just war theory. This week we’ll look at the strengths and weaknesses of activism. Activism is the idea that Christians (or citizens) have a duty to obey their government, including participation in a government declared war.
In the Old Testament, after the judgment with a flood because of the murderous violence of mankind, God commanded Noah to punish murderers with capital punishment. Genesis 9:6 says, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.” Later, Abraham used this power of the sword when he went to war with the kings who committed aggression against his nephew, Lot (Gen. 14). A strong case can be made that in the Old Testament the power of the sword (the power of life and death) was ultimately given to human governments to protect its citizens from acts of murderous aggression.
What is implied in the Old Testament is made explicit in the New Testament. In Romans 13:1-2 Paul writes, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.” In verse four, Paul explains why God has given authority to human governments: “for he [the government] is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” This does not mean that all governments honor or even recognize God, but it does mean that the government’s main task is to punish evildoers. Even a bad government is better than the certain anarchy of no government.
The activist position, then, is that if the government is established by God, and the government declares war on another nation, no matter how popular or unpopular the war is, citizens (including Christians) are obligated to obey (a similar position was argued by Socrates [Plato] in “Crito”). The underlying principle to the activist is the famous saying, “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” If governments did not act, or citizens refused to fight, the world would be ruled by evil tyrants such as Hitler.
There are, however, a few inherent problems with activism. In any given war, both sides claim the other side is the evil aggressor; both sides claim to be right. This means that Christians in both warring countries would be duty bound to obey their governments and kill each other.
Another problem for activism is a government giving specific orders to commit evil, such as purposely harming innocent civilians. Would the activist be duty bound to carry out such orders? Surly there is a time when a Christian must say “We must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29) The conclusion of the Nuremberg trials was that “I was just following orders” is no excuse.
Next week we’ll examine pacifism.
a pdf version of this entry is available here
In the Old Testament, after the judgment with a flood because of the murderous violence of mankind, God commanded Noah to punish murderers with capital punishment. Genesis 9:6 says, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.” Later, Abraham used this power of the sword when he went to war with the kings who committed aggression against his nephew, Lot (Gen. 14). A strong case can be made that in the Old Testament the power of the sword (the power of life and death) was ultimately given to human governments to protect its citizens from acts of murderous aggression.
What is implied in the Old Testament is made explicit in the New Testament. In Romans 13:1-2 Paul writes, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.” In verse four, Paul explains why God has given authority to human governments: “for he [the government] is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” This does not mean that all governments honor or even recognize God, but it does mean that the government’s main task is to punish evildoers. Even a bad government is better than the certain anarchy of no government.
The activist position, then, is that if the government is established by God, and the government declares war on another nation, no matter how popular or unpopular the war is, citizens (including Christians) are obligated to obey (a similar position was argued by Socrates [Plato] in “Crito”). The underlying principle to the activist is the famous saying, “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” If governments did not act, or citizens refused to fight, the world would be ruled by evil tyrants such as Hitler.
There are, however, a few inherent problems with activism. In any given war, both sides claim the other side is the evil aggressor; both sides claim to be right. This means that Christians in both warring countries would be duty bound to obey their governments and kill each other.
Another problem for activism is a government giving specific orders to commit evil, such as purposely harming innocent civilians. Would the activist be duty bound to carry out such orders? Surly there is a time when a Christian must say “We must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29) The conclusion of the Nuremberg trials was that “I was just following orders” is no excuse.
Next week we’ll examine pacifism.
a pdf version of this entry is available here
Labels: activism, just war theory, pacifism
posted on Friday, May 23, 2008 |
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home