The Bible and Non-Violence

Charles Moore writes the following in The Plough Reader (Autumn 2002):

“When I first became a pacifist, I hit the warpath. In my zeal, I tried hard to convert others to my newfound position. I didn’t recognize that my zeal was blinding – and hardening me. I had ‘seen the light.’ Now those who differed from me were hawks, war-mongers, compromisers, enemies of humanity, or mutineers of Jesus. ‘Size them up and shut ‘em out’ became my modus operandi.”

On the other hand, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, spiritual guide and one of my favorite

writers, set forth his view on passive resistance in his book, The Church’s Brand of

Discipleship. He proposed that the way to conquer evil is through passivity and that the Christian must be meek, not seeking his own rights, even when wronged. He knows of no exception, writing:

“There is no deed on earth so outrageous as to suffer a different attitude. The worse the evil, the readier must be the Christian to suffer.”

Interestingly, Bonhoeffer later changed his views when confronted with the Nazi

regime. His involvement in the fight against the regime resulted in the plot to

assassinate Hitler, which later cost him his life.

So, where does that leave the Christian today? Can we use physical force to protect

cultural and spiritual values? If we answer no, we often find it unrealistic. Even

The New Testament does not promote this kind of radical pacifism, as seen with Jesus and

the money-changers in the temple, and in other situations.

On the other hand, we recall Christ's words when he said, “all…who take the sword shall perish by the sword” (Matthew 26:52) and "blessed are the peacemakers" (Matthew 5:9). And of course, Jesus died on the cross rather than take the sword

The spirit of love requires some coercion and sacrifice, but who wants to be known as one who kills, especially those listed as “innocent collateral damage victims” of war? (For a full discussion on these particular issues, see God's Word for Warriors book and online courses, found here).

If love is our motive and peace our goal, does not violence seem a contradiction?

Yet, responsible behavior must be tied to reality. No believer wishes to initiate a war, nor

do we want to embrace evil (if war can always be classified as evil). So, there is

disagreement on the part of sincere believers. Do we keep the risk of war at a very

minimum, or do we try to keep it in line with moral demands? A minimum demand is

certainly that we do not want to increase the risk of war, but there is also the demand to

do justice.

So, we ask, what conditions must be satisfied if war is morally justified in a particular

situation? Following the work of Augustine (354-430 CE) and Thomas Aquinas (1224-

1274), scholars have come up with the “Just War” theory. This is used as a basis for

legally and morally justifying war.

The basic conditions are as follows:

1. The cause must be just

2. The war must be made by lawful authority

3. The intention of the government declaring war must be just

4. This particular war must be the only possible means to secure justice

5. Only “right” means may be employed in the conduct of war

6. There must be a reasonable hope of victory

7. The good achieved by victory must outweigh the evil effects of the war

In conclusion, I feel I must set forth, basically, my views on war. The reason I do this

is not that you necessarily want to hear them, but that I want you to know where I come from and what prejudices I might display:

Responsible behavior must be tied to reality. Again, no Christian wants to initiate a war, nor

do we desire to embrace evil. We may disagree on how to keep war at a minimum or keep

it in line with moral demands. A minimum demand is certainly that we do not want to

increase the risk of war. To engage in limited war and violence may be conducted, not for

revenge or conquest, but to further justice. The limits of engaging in war must be to protect the greater good, not necessarily “total victory.” The means must be proportionate.

Our first priority is always to avoid war, if possible, but this is possible only with the

development and maintenance of military power. We must have such a retaliatory

power and the means to deter the offender from attacking again. We must also preserve the means to deliver a second strike if the need arises.

I leave with these words from the Apostle Paul:

“If possible, so far as it depends upon you, live peacefully with all” (Romans 12:18).