My default thought about war will always be a pacifist stand. I get this from the sermon on the mount and the very concept of people striving to kill people. I will always have the impulse in me that violence is wrong and vengeance is outside the scope of Christian decision making. However, in taking this impulse to Scripture I am corrected at a couple of points. Certainly God utilized war in the Old Testament. While we are under the New Testament, I also know that God in his character does not change. Somehow, in God’s thinking, there is use for war. In explaining his command for his people to wage war on nations in the Old Testament, God seemed to consider war a legitimate way to punish evil doers. And even later in the Old Testament, he uses other nations to war against his own people as a means of punishment. Another corrective has to be Romans 13. The discussion there follows on the heels of Paul making it clear that Christians are not to seek revenge on enemies. We are not to seek out those who wrong us for the purpose of punishing them. God has left this role to human governments. They carry “a sword? for the purpose of punishing evil doers. The “sword? discussion provides a basis for capital punishment and even war if the purpose is for punishment and maintaining God ordained order. Some have objected to this, saying that God would not provide for such “violence,? even in principle. The problem is that even in the Exodus context of God’s command not to murder, within two chapters he also commands capital punishment. The controlled, purposeful taking of a human life for the purpose of justice is not incompatible with God’s command for a respect for the sanctity of human life. In fact, it seems that if we are going to respect human life, some form of capital punishment is necessary. The problem with the Romans 13 passage when it comes to war, I suppose, is that if each government is ordained by God, what gives one nation a right to invade or war against another nation, which also is God ordained? The answer to this lies in the purpose of God’s ordination. It is ordained for the keeping of law and order, specifically the punishment of those who do wrong and the leaving alone of those who are doing right. If a government is terribly imbalanced in this role of justice and keeping order, another government that is better at it may feel justified in punishing the evil the other government does. However, in the realm of human thinking, such an evaluation of self and other governments is all but impossible. Yet, governments have the responsibility to think this through. That is where the “just war?theory comes in.

But before we go there, let me describe the other side of the continuum. These are people who collapse faithfulness to Scripture with patriotism to America. It is as if we are the nation of God and therefore patriotism is the same as faithfulness. This is a dangerous position for all sorts of reasons. While I am patriotic, my allegiance to faith supercedes my allegiance to America. I must be able to tell the difference between devotion to God and devotion to democracy in the United States. For the role of the church is to be the voice of God (as God’s servant) to help guide, critique, and commend the government (God’s other servant). But the servanthood of the church is prior to and stands above the servanthood of government. That is why, if government demands Christians to do things contrary to their faith, it is necessary for Christians to object and even disobey. I have found that if America goes to war, many churches seem to automatically believe this is what God wants. I am not so sure all the time. When going to Jonesboro one time, I saw a church sign which said the following

Then the Lord asked, “Whom Shall I Send??
And the 875th said, “Lord, Send Us!?

You are likely aware that this is taken from the call text of Isaiah 6. But to take this call story from Isaiah and apply it to a worldly conflict such as this one makes my backbone curl a little bit. I am not willing to view the war in this way. So the extremes to avoid in thinking about this war seem to be an all-out pacifism and an all-out endorsement of it. If this is the case, how are we to think about what is going on in Iraq? I have a few observations that guide my thinking and maybe you will find them helpful. But keep in mind this is simply one view

1. I still believe our government is God ordained because there is a general sense of law and order in our land. Evil doers are punished and good people are pretty well respected in our culture. It is not a perfect country and we are not perfect in the maintenance of order, but if you visit other places you will know that there is still a strong sense of justice and safety in our land. So our government is operating within ordained boundaries set by God.

2. The next consideration lies in why we attacked Iraq. Here is where human thinking and evaluation comes in. A government has to use its best information and way of thinking to surmise what is appropriate. If Iraq truly had the means of harming other nations and if Iraq truly had the intention of doing that and if Iraq had already practiced or was practicing the unlawful harming of innocent people, it might be allowable for another nation to war against them. In other words, if they were doing any of these things, they are out of line with their ordained purpose as a government. The problem here is in how we determine this. The evidence presented to us seemed pretty compelling, enough that most people felt the invasion was justified. It turns out, however, that theinformation was inaccurate. So I will say this: If our President knew that the information was inaccurate and went to war on the basis of misinformation, he should be impeached and then imprisoned and tried. He has exceeded his authority and must be held accountable. But if he acted based on what he thought
was a case of punishing an evil-doer, he may be in line with this role as God ordained law protector. I as a citizen must give him the benefit of the doubt–not because I like him or because he prays or because he is a republican, but because my role is to submit until
such a time as it is proven he has gone out of bounds with his role. Personally, as I look at it now, it is a shame to be stuck in the mess that is there. I wonder, also, how to determine what unjust governments need to be attacked. Far worse than Iraq is Sudan. Why attack Iraq and not Sudan? Then I wonder if we are to police the entire world. It seems to me that a government should only physically attack another
nation if that nation poses a threat to itself and if other diplomatic means of resolution do not work.

3. Regardless of what results from considering the first two elements above, those who are sent to fight must be respected, lifted up, prayed for, and supported. Can an individual Christian fight in a war? I believe that if that Christian servant believes that the government (another servant of God) is operating within the boundaries of right, he may. And if he is uncertain but forced by that servant to fight, he may also be justified, with any responsibility for the decision resting on the sending authority. That is a hard call and I pray I (or my kids) never have to stand in that position.

This is just one way to think about the war from a Christian point of view. The struggle to apply the whole counsel of God to this topic is difficult because of the varying considerations presented in the text. Christians must do their best to think it through responsibly, pray
for the Spirit’s wisdom, and rely on the grace of God. We as a community of faith must bear with differing approaches, but the above is one approach that tries to take seriously God’s Word. Take a stab at thinking about this for yourself and let’s have a discussion!