Brock/Francis Debate on Christians and War

 
 
Proposition:
The N.T. teaches a Christian must obey the call to war by his government..
which results in killing other people.

Affirm: Dennis (Skip)Francis
Deny: Nelta Brock

Welcome to Nelta Brock and to all listers on this site. I believe this subject to be 
of special importance to a large number of brethren, especially those who are in 
the military. As we go about the task of debating one another, we will both press 
our various points aggressively. This in no way means we do not love one another 
or that we think negatively of each other. I will cast no aspersions on Nelta, and 
would hope that this would be reciprocated, though I will passionately address 
what I believe to be true.

As the affirmant in this debate, it is my task to define the subject of my 
affirmation. 

By New Testament, I refer to the 27 books of the Bible known as the New 
Testament, New Covenant, the faith, the Way, from the book of Matthew, through 
Revelation.

By teaches, I mean the New Testament shows, avers, and demonstrates by direct 
command, approved example, or necessary inference, either explicitly or 
implicitly through the act of convincing, rebuking, and exhorting.

By Christian, I refer to those who have heard the gospel, believed it, confessed 
Christ as the Son of God, repented of a sinful life, and been baptized in water for 
the remission of their sins, and then continue to walk the new life, who walk in 
the light, who walk in the Spirit.

By must obey, I mean that someone is under authority and must follow the 
commands of, as a superior, within the scope of the aforementioned authority. 
One is usually under various authorities in this life, to God, to a boss or 
supervisor, to the police force and laws of the land, etc. Sometimes these 
authorities overlap and sometimes they are autonomous, while some authority 
reigns supreme over others (i.e. God’s).

By the call to war, I refer to armed conflict wherein two parties are active 
participants. I categorically leave out such areas as terrorism or invasion. Though 
these actions may be the cause of war, they are not war of themselves. Armed 
conflict may result in the damage or destruction of property or the wounding and 
loss of life of people.

This said, I do affirm that the New Testament does show, by various commands, 
examples, and necessary inference, that a Christian, if called upon by his 
government, must obey the call to war, which results in killing people. This, of 
course, would include those in non-combat positions in the military, even though 
they may be in support of the killing of others. When Christians are called by their 
government, they must obey the call, but may, if conscience dictates, assume non-
combat positions.

Though I do aver that this is New Testament instruction, an appeal to the Old 
Testament will be included as showing how God works. Such is appropriate 
because of what Paul asserts in Romans 15:4, For whatsoever things were written 
aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of 
the Scriptures might have hope. 

On reading the precepts given to the people of Israel, one is confronted with the 
fact that they include the statement Thou shalt not kill (Ex 20:13), yet we see 
numerous examples wherein God sanctioned killing in various military actions. In 
Canaan, the Jews were commanded to utterly destroy the people living there. 
What can be made of this? Simply that the Hebrew word ratsach, which has been 
translated kill in Ex. 20:13, literally means murder. To murder, in the eyes of 
God, is far different than to kill in the act of battle or war. It is also far different 
than capital punishment or self defense.

As to the New Testament, it is clear that we, as Christians, must obey the duly 
appointed governments under which we exist. Romans 13:1-7 teaches, Let every 
soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the 
powers that be are ordained of God. (2) Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, 
resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves 
damnation. (3) For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou 
then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise 
of the same: (4) For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that 
which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister 
of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. (5) Wherefore ye 
must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. (6) For 
this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually 
upon this very thing. (7) Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute 
is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

The New King James Version has translated higher powers as governing 
authority, and if this authority is ordained of God and resisting is to resist the 
ordinance of God, and this includes bearing the sword, is it not morally 
inconsistent for one to believe he cannot be a part of being God’s revenger to 
execute wrath? We are even to support this activity with tribute. 

Though it may indeed be distasteful to us, it is yet a fact that this passage shows a 
kind of killing that is acceptable in the eyes of God, and it was so in the Old 
Testament as well. Not only is this kind of killing acceptable, it is considered a 
ministry for good. This shows that there are times when it is necessary to keep 
evil at bay with the sword, even when it comes to the taking of life.

It being established that some killing is approved of God, what needs to be 
established is that the Christian can or should participate in activity of this nature.

What we need to bear in mind is that God works today (and always) through the 
earthen vessel. He uses men and the elements to work His will in the realm of 
divine providence. It is men who are to preach the gospel. It is men who are given 
the task of church discipline, and it is men whom God will use to keep order. 
Though it says in Romans 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but 
rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, 
saith the Lord., it must be remembered HOW God will gain His vengeance. In the 
judgment, it is Jesus AND His mighty angels that will seek vengeance. In the 
current time, it is the governing authority which will be used for this purpose. 
This is clear in Romans 13:3, For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if 
thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is 
the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. As 
stated in my previous rebuttal, revenger and vengeance come from the same root 
word in Greek, thus man works as the very arm of God. Such is also true in the 
case of church discipline. The Corinthians were commanded to remove the man 
who has his father’s wife and this was called revenge by the Lord (2 Cor 7:11).
What, therefore, is man to do about any ministry for good? Is it wrong for any 
man to participate in a good work? That is the essential question: whether or not a 
Christian can be involved in a ministry for good, which non-the-less involves 
killing. Obviously, killing for this purpose is sanctioned by God; we are hard-
pressed to say anything against it. 

What of the Christian? A key verse in this discussion is Romans 13:5, Wherefore 
ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. The 
word subject, in the Greek hupotasso, means to be under control or be in 
submission. This word is used in reference to parents (Luke 2:5), the law of God 
(Romans 8:7), God (1 Cor. 15:28), Christians to the church and wives to husbands 
(Eph. 5:24), servants to masters (1 Peter 2:18), and many other relationships. The 
question raised here is, what does Paul mean when he says we must needs be 
subject? Paul is talking to Christians here, not non-Christians (a moot point as 
God does not have two different standards or laws). Wherefore ye (Christians) 
must needs be subject (under control), not only for wrath (translated from orge 
meaning violent passion, anger, violence, vengeance), but also (a connective word 
used to combine to thoughts of equal value) for conscience sake. We, as 
Christians, must be under control of our governments (not to mention bosses, 
elders, husbands, Christ, God, parents, etc.) out of concern for vengeance and out 
of a clear conscience.

If we are to be under our government’s control, we must be so even when called 
upon to do that which we find to be abhorrent; taking of human life. Remember, 
God has taught us that, under these circumstances, bearing the sword is a ministry 
of His, and is therefore no sin.

The lack of any teaching preventing the Christian’s participation thus allows it. I 
recognize that we do not need a thou shalt not to have divine instruction, but the 
only way one can mitigate a divine instruction is with clear evidence that it is 
intended to be mitigated (i.e. a clear concise statement that Christians are not to 
participate in this ministry). Such was true when Jesus was smitten on the face 
while under examination (John 18:23). He mitigated His own statement 
concerning turning the other cheek (Matt. 5:39).

I look forward to Nelta’s rebuttal.