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

Greeting to all:

Continuing the "Christian Going to War" debate.

Again, here is the proposition that must be proven by command, example, 
necessary inference OR principle.

"Proposition #2 

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

As yet the proposition has not been proven.

It was said, 
"As we speak I have several friends and brethren who are actively involved in 
their duty to our nation...."

Herein is the BIG problem with a debate on this Biblical subject. We all know 
people who are going to war...or have been to war. However, can we let that fact 
guide us, or must be willing to let our God guide us?

I will number the points I must consider in this rebuttal.

1) Mal. 3:6, "For I am the Lord, I change not." 

God's character does not change. His dealing with people does. Israel was His 
chosen nation and the way He dealt with the enemies of Israel does not affect us 
today except to show us His power. Today, God has no chosen nation except the 
spiritual nation that is made up of all who have been added to Christ by Christ. 
Therefore He does not give instructions on one nation getting rid of another.

2) "What Nelta fails to understand, however, is that God has expressly given this 
particular authority to the governing authority." 

On the contrary! I understand that thoroughly and have stated such.  Rom. 13, 
makes it plain that God gave to the civil government all the authority it takes to 
take care of the unruly, whether they be *Christians* or the ungodly. 

3) "Where is this fictional law you keep trying to make out of some highly 
generalized statement?" 

In my first affirmative I gave the scriptures that show the Christian character 
developed by Jesus in the hearts of His followers. That should be enough. 
However, in Matt. 5:13-14 Jesus calls His followers the "light of the world AND 
the salt of the earth." Shall the light of the Christian be put under a bushel until he 
finishes his *duty* to go to war and kill other Christians or unbelievers? Someone 
once said Jesus could remain in the heart of one who went to war. If that is so 
does He remain in the heart of the Christian on the other side of the war? Does He 
perhaps help them kill one another?

4) Of all of arguments in this debate, the one that surprises me the most is this: 
Since in Rom. 13, we are told that the civil government
"is the minister of God to thee for good," 

that we must partake of war because of the word *good.* Compare that with a 
husband who leads for the good of the family, then the family should be a part in 
the leading because of the word *good.* 

5) "Who is to take care of those evils if someone cannot do it?" 

This of course, has been answered many times in this debate. The one who takes 
care of the evils of the world are those to whom God gave the authority to do so. 
This does not include God's children because they are to be the "light of the world 
and the salt of the earth," not the destroyer of the evil people. What does not seem 
to be understand is that God gave different roles. That is even seen in the physical 
family. It is also seen in the lives of the Christian and in the civil government. Let 
me again ask, How can someone be the light of the world...showing sinners the 
Master and at the same time...kill them? How can the Christian pray for them and 
at the same time KILL them?

6) "The entity responsible for such deaths related to war is not the Christian, even 
though he participates in such activity. The civil government prosecuting the war 
is responsible for any deaths relating to that war." 

This was the cry of the killers of the Jews during WW2 who said all they were 
doing was carrying out the orders of THEIR civil government.  However, they 
didn't get by with that and even many years later, when they were caught, stood 
trial for what THEY did in killing the Jews. When the Christian stands before 
Almighty God to give an account "for the deeds done in the body" does anyone 
really think he will get by with "the government made me do it?"

7) "Any Christian who does not become involved in the affairs of secular 
government is foolish." 

This has been answered so many times it would serve no purpose to go over it 
again.

8) "Is it acceptable for the Christian to defend himself.......?" 

Lets stick to the subject of Christians going to war and perhaps killing other 
Christians and unbelievers who would have no chance to search for God.

9) "And they said, Lord behold, here are two swords....." 

The explanation for this is, "This was because their sojourn would be done only in 
the region of Judea, among their own kinsman, and little danger was expected." 

Excuse me?? Where is ANY such thing mentioned in that scripture? We have no 
idea why they were told to take swords, yet we know Jesus never taught 
ANYONE to defend themselves with physical force against another person, but 
rather to turn the other cheek. In fact, didn't He say, that those who use the sword 
would perish by the sword? Jesus was going to perform a miracle (the ear thing) 
and the sword was used for His being able to do that.

10) "Cornelius........" 

Cornelius has been dealt with several times during this debate. We don't know 
ALL that Cornelius was told. Was he told to place membership in some Church of 
Christ, putting himself under the authority of the Eldership? Slave-owners were 
not told to give up their slaves...does that mean slavery is acceptable? Those on 
the day of Pentecost who repented and were baptized were not told a list of things 
they should give up...such as having more than one wife....did that mean they 
could continue in that sin? We learn the will of God by principles in scripture. If 
an action held by someone goes against the character of one's living the Christian 
life...then of course, he will/must give it up when through his study he is 
convicted of his sins.

11) "And what does it mean for someone to give up their life for their friends?"

It means just that. However, it does not say nor mean that in giving up his life for 
his friend, he kills another person.

Again, I would like to say that when someone goes to war/kills for the civil 
authorities, he is giving up his self-control to another. To say the Christian is not 
responsible for the killing he does in the war says he gives up his self-control to 
the civil government.....which God never directed anyone to do.

Ending my second rebuttal.

Nelta