by William Einwechter

http://DominionPacifism.com

http://VFTonline.com

• Pacifists declare that all war is evil and contrary to the principles of Jesus and the New Testament. Hence, Christian participation in war is forbidden.
• Just war adherents believe that a war may be just if it meets certain criteria. If the war is just, then a Christian may participate in it.

The purpose of this article is to summarize and defend the just war position.

Introduction to the Just War Position

The teaching of the Bible leads the Christian to presuppose the possibility of a just war. There are five arguments that show that war is not necessarily sinful (though, of course, a particular war may be), and that war can indeed be the righteous response to evil.

The last phrase, "war can indeed be the righteous response to evil," must be clarified. Does the word "the" have an exclusivist meaning: war is THE righteous response, there is no other, all other responses are sinful. Or does it simply mean, "war may be a legitimate response to evil, but pacifists are not wrong to refuse to fight."

We could spin wheels for quite some time arguing about whether a particular war was just. Some might say yes, others no. I am prepared to argue that all wars have been unjust and unjustified, but that really doesn't end the debate, because someone could say that a future war might be justified, and we should therefore neglect the prophecy of Micah, "never will they train for war anymore" (Micah 4:3).

The real issue in this debate is whether any war is ever commanded, and whether pacifism is ever sinful.

Be sure to check the footnote.

Deuteronomy 20 also allows pacifists to avoid fighting.

Russia Invades Israel!
Every Christian reading these words would agree that the Roman Occupation of Israel was sinful. Rome had no Biblical right to impose military rule on Israel. It was a violation of the most basic and widely-accepted canons of International Law. If the Soviet Union in 2006 did exactly what the Roman Empire did in 63BC (or what Alexander the Great did 200 years after the Jews returned to Jerusalem from Babylon), sending military forces to subjugate Israel, abolishing their government and denying them the rights with which our Declaration of Independence says they were endowed by God, all Christians who support the "Just War" theory would be outraged. Those soldiers would be doing evil. Everyone would agree on this point. So it's worth our time to ask why Christians who are under the military domination of a pagan empire would not focus on getting soldiers to go AWOL. Consider Paul's words:

²⁰You should continue on as you were when God called you. ²¹Are you a slave? Don't let that worry you--but if you get a chance to be free, take it. ²²And remember, if you were a slave when the Lord called you, the Lord has now set you free from the awful power of sin. And if you were free when the Lord called you, you are now a slave of Christ. ²³God purchased you at a high price. Don't be enslaved by the world. ²⁴So, dear brothers, whatever situation you were in when you became a believer, stay there in your new relationship with God.
1 Corinthians 7:20-24

Is slavery OK? Was William Wilberforce justified in seeking the abolition of slavery in Britain even though Paul told slaves to obey their masters? Are pacifists justified in seeking the abolition of war even though soldiers were commanded to obey their superiors?

There is no example in the New Testament of any priest being told to leave his profession on the grounds that Christ is the only legitimate priest. (Roman Catholics, of course, believe we still need priests, so this argument won't be persuasive to them.) Evangelical Bible-believing Christians do not become priests. Similarly, Christians in the early church avoided the Roman military whenever possible. None of this is a decisive argument against pacifism.

¹I urge you, first of all, to pray for all people. As you make your requests, plead for God's mercy upon them, and give thanks. ²Pray this way for kings and all others who are in authority, so that we can live in peace and quietness, in godliness and dignity. ³This is good and pleases God our Savior, ⁴for he wants everyone to be saved and to understand the truth.

The pagan Cicero provides the first organized statement of a just war theory. In the ideal state where law is based on right reason rather than utility (1) the only just cause for war is the defense of national honor and safety, (2) war is a last resort when all negotiations fail, (3) it must be formally declared, in order to give due warning, (4) the purpose may not be conquest or power, but the securing of a just peace, (5) prisoners and all who surrender should be spared and (6) only those who are legally soldiers should be involved (De Republica iii. 22-29; De Officiis i. 11-12).3

Statement of Just War Principles

A war can be considered just if the following standards are met.6

The use of Romans 13 throughout Einwechter's essay is false. Romans 12-13 commands Christians to be in subjection and not resist "the powers." The powers do not have any right to take up the sword, but God sends this evil as a judgment. This will be a recurring objection to many parts of Einwechter's essay, but we cannot repeat the entire response at every turn. See www.Romans13.com 

There are seven just causes for declaring and waging war.

1. The first cause is the recovery of things taken away through violence by another people.
2. The second cause is the defense against violence inflicted by another, and the repulsion of it.
3. The third cause is the necessity for preserving liberty, privileges, rights, peace, and tranquility, and for defending the true religion.
4. The fourth cause occurs when a foreign people deny peaceful transit through its province without good reason.
5. The fifth cause occurs when subjects rise up against their prince and lord, do not fulfill their pledged word, and are not willing to obey him, although they have been admonished many times.
6. The sixth cause is contumacy, which occurs when any prince, lord, or city has so contemptuously and repeatedly scorned the decisions of courts that justice cannot be otherwise administered and defended.
7. The seventh just cause of war occurs when agreements are not implemented by the other party, when he does not keep his promises, and when tyranny is practiced upon subjects.8

1. A pickpocket lifts your wallet. You turn around to see him put it in your pocket. You're carrying a tranquilizer gun, which you use to put the pickpocket to sleep. You retrieve your wallet, and leave a message urging the pickpocket to repent and believe the Gospel, which he reads upon awakening. How does "recovery of things taken away" justify bombing entire neighborhoods?
2. Pacifists grant the legitimacy of building a fence or force-field to defend against violence, but where is the justification for bombing entire neighborhoods? How is this "defense?" Obviously we need to define the scope and limits of "waging war."
3. Al-Qaeda invades your neighborhood and denies your rights and imposes a false religion on you. Where does Christ say you have the right to bomb Iraq? Why didn't Christ urge the rightful Jewish government to wage war against Rome?
4. I have the right to bomb East Germany because it will not allow me to enter the Berlin Wall and travel through its province?
5. So Britain had the right to wage war against the American colonies.
6.  
7.  

The causes of war that rely upon the right are (1) defense of liberty and of one's rights, and repulsion of a launched attack, (2) defense of the pure religion, (3) recovery of properties unjustly seized, (4) denial of justice, and (5) conspiracy with an enemy, and rebellion....9

But these causes can easily be reduced to two, the first is defense and the other vindication. The former repulses and the latter vindicates injury launched against God, the commonwealth, its subjects, or the church. I understand defense to be either of your own nation or of another.... Vindication is a legitimate cause for war when a judgment and recovery of what has been seized has not yet taken place.10

In the remainder of the sermon Edwards outlined the circumstances in which a professing people may feel justified in going to war: (1) when the rights of a public society are invaded and the preservation of the community requires it; and (2) when a people are obliged by a "Just alliance or Covenant" contracted with another people for their "mutual defense and Preservation."12

Where do we have the right to make a contract to do something wrong?

Military force is justified, thought Edwards, when the "rights and privileges of a people are threatened," or "when the preservation of the Community or Publick society so requires it." If "injurious and bloody enemies" molest and endanger a society, it is the "duty" of government to undertake that society's defense by the use of force. This follows "from the Law of self-Preservation."13

Israel was commanded to sacrifice the Canaanites to cleanse the land of their abominations. Israel initially failed to do this, and perpetually suffered continued conflict as a result of their failure to obey God's command. The United States has no command to make atonement by shedding the blood of any other nation. All accounts of war against these nations must ultimately return to the original command of God to wipe them all out because of their abominations. No such command exists in the New Testament.

came and laid hands on Jesus and took him, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

But wasn't this act "to defend life and liberty against evil aggression?" There are many different ways to defend life liberty and property without resorting to violence, or returning evil for evil. War is not one of them.

1. We have the right to wage war against a tyrannical government, and
2. government has a right to wage war against those in (a) above.

America thought Britain was a "tyranny" in 1776, even though their tax rates were only one-tenth what ours are today, and Britain never used money to fund abortions or remove the Ten Commandments from public buildings; Britain thought Americans were a bunch of insurrectionists. Which side did Jesus agree with? I say neither.

This authority to undertake war ought not to be employed by the magistrate unless all other remedies have failed, and there is no other way to repel an attack upon his subjects, to avoid and vindicate injustice to them, or to obtain peace and tranquillity in the realm.... But before undertaking war a magistrate should check his own judgment and reasoning, and offer prayers to God to arouse and direct the spirit and mind of his subjects and himself to the well-being, utility, and necessity of the church and community, and to avoid all rashness and injustice....23

1. No war has ever seen all other possibilities exhausted.
2. The Christian ideal is simply that it is better to suffer evil than to return evil.
3. All U.S. wars in the 20th century were the result of prior sins on the part of the U.S. federal government, either in giving foreign aid to tyrannical anti-Christian governments or terrorists, or in meddlesome foreign interventions that stirred up hornets' nests.
4. National security is the result of obedience (Leviticus 26:6), not war

...[biblical] military law requires that, prior to an attack, or rather, a declaration of war, an offer of peace be extended to the enemy. The offer of peace cannot be an offer to compromise. The cause, if it be just, must be maintained; the enemy must yield to gain peace.24

Pacifists believe that the only war that is justified is one that is commanded by God, and failure to wage that war would be sinful.

³⁸Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
³⁹But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
⁴⁰And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
⁴¹And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
⁴²Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
⁴³Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
⁴⁴But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
⁴⁵That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
⁴⁶For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
⁴⁷And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
⁴⁸Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Concluding Observations on Just War

The principles of just war are distinguished between those that justify when one may go to war (jus ad bellum ) and those that govern how a war is to be waged (jus in bello). The jus ad bellum principles are that war must be waged by a legitimate civil authority, have a just cause, be fought with right intention, as a last resort, when there is probability of success, and when the good to be achieved is greater than the suffering brought about by the war. The jus in bello principles are the need to make proper discrimination between military and non-military targets, to fight with right intention (i.e., a just peace, thus avoiding acts of war that will ultimately hinder peace), and to seek proportional good from the tactics and methods employed in the war (i.e., no tactic should be used unless the good expected from its use is greater than the evil caused).

Similarly, physical resistance, whether in the form of warfare or personal resistance to murderous attack, or the attempts of evil men to overwhelm us, is a godly stand and by no means wrong. In an evil world, such resistance is often necessary; it is an unpleasant and ugly necessity, but not an evil. David could thank God for teaching him to war successfully (II Sam. 22:35; Ps. 18:34; 144:1). In an evil world, God requires men to stand in terms of His word and law.29

Defensive war is, then, righteous, and only defensive war. Aggressive war is wholesale robbery and murder. If the magistrate is armed with righteous power to destroy the domestic murderer, a fortiori he has the right to destroy these alien murderers, committing the crime wholesale. The "Peace Society" used to argue that all war is sinful, from the horrors of war. They are enormous. But common sense would rather argue from this the guilt of the perpetrators and the right of punishing it in some appropriate way. Who may do it if not the magistrate? But war should only be defensive. As soon as the invader is disarmed, his life should be spared; especially as individual invaders are usually private subjects of the invading sovereign, who have little option about their own acts as private soldiers. It is scarcely needful to add that the Scriptures of both Testaments expressly teach the righteousness of the patriot soldier's profession. The Apostle, in Heb. ii [11], teaches that the valour of the defensive soldier is one of the noble fruits of religious faith, a principle he ascribes to the inworking of God himself. A moment's reflection shows that the rightfulness of capital punishment stands or falls with the lawfulness of defensive war.31

Capital punishment and war stand or fall together.

The "survival" of a "nation" is not a Biblical concern. "Better dead than Red" is not a Biblical principle. It is better to live under communism than kill communists. It is better to be invaded and have a new flag on the public flag pole than it is to kill invaders. Jesus commanded us to go two miles when the invaders compel us to go one. We are not allowed to kill invaders even if they are going to abolish our government and establish a new government that will make the preaching of the Gospel illegal. We are simply commanded to preach the Gospel anyway (Acts 5:29), no matter what the government is. Better Red than Dead, that is, better to serve and suffer under communism than to kill communists.