restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations
A Brief Theological Examination of the Anti-War Position
In a recent article (1), a conservative pastor from Michigan named Bill Barnwell pointed out how disenfranchised the voice of the anti-war Christian right is despite the fact that the anti-war position is reasonably maintained by many right-wing Christians.
As Barnwell notes out in his article, on the rare occasions the pro-war Christian right deigns to notice us, we anti-war Christians are condemned as either liberal or cowardly or both. Some war-hawks I know have even flatly denied that anyone, Christian or otherwise, who is anti-war could ever possibly really care about the innocents on either side who die in war. And yet what is so ridiculous about the categorization of anti-war Christians as liberal is that they often hold to the position they do because of literal interpretations of Scripture.
One of the primary theological reasons for opposing this war is that preemptive strikes are patently unbiblical. As R.C. Sproul, Jr., pointed out in an article (2) on the subject of preemptive strikes, Genesis 9:6 reads, Whoso sheddeth mans blood, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God made He man. That verse is the earliest command in support of capital punishment and/or military action found in Scripture. The requirements listed in the passage are that:
1) There must be a victim before a perpetrator can be either identified or punished and 2) Once the perpetrator is identified, it is his blood (not the blood of his friends, relatives, neighbors, or taxi-cab drivers) that is to be shed. Those not directly guilty of the crime in question should not be forced to share the punishment.
Because of the principles in Genesis 9:6, I oppose the war in Iraq. There was no victim (at least, none under US jurisdiction), without a victim it was impossible to identify a perpetrator, and while many unsubstantiated accusations were thrown at the Iraqi government, none of the charged crimes were serious enough to warrant the shedding of blood (and if they were, then either the victims were always outside US jurisdiction or else the accused could not be proved to be the perpetrators). And so there was no justification for shedding blood.
Even if ones delves further into Scripture to uncover passages allowing for self-defense (3) one finds that self-defense is only ever warranted in the event of a physical threat (and not a suspected threat, although preparation in the face of such would certainly be prudent). The only exceptions are the rare occasions when God spoke directly to the Israelites to give them specific commands, and even if God still spoke directly to men which Scripture makes clear He does not (4) it is highly doubtful, considering the righteousness of those He spoke to either when He spoke to them or very soon after, that He would choose to vocally command the heretical (5) president of an apostate nation.
Another theological reason for opposing the Second Gulf War is that one of its aims is to militarily establish a humanistic democracy in Iraq. Civil government was established by God for the sole purpose of enforcing His Laws and must of necessity bow a symbolic knee to the Creator. Whenever it does not, that government both binds itself to failure and makes itself superfluous. That being the case, the forcible establishment of a humanistic (aka, secular) civil government, either in this or another country, is a waste of lives and resources. Furthermore, there is no Biblical support for purely democratic civil government (6), and even if there were there is no qualifier found in Genesis 9:6 which permits the shedding of blood in order to spread democracy.
I could go on to expound upon the Biblical basis for the Just War Theory, but my intention here is only dissipate the notion that the anti-war Christian right is either liberal or lacking Biblical justification. Indeed, I could turn those accusations around and suggest the pro-war Christian right is guilty of elevating patriotism over Scriptural adherence and of attempting to justify (or at best dismiss without discussion) the sometimes intentional (7) slaughter of thousands of (innocent) Iraqi civilians at the hands of the US military and the undeniably intentional torture and murder of dozens of untried Iraqi prisoners.
For the moment, however, I will forego accusing the pro-war Christian right of endorsing the above evils. In Barnwells article he mentions that many Christian war-hawks believe the anti-war Christian right consists of theologically irresponsible believers, and, as was my purpose, I believe I have managed to demonstrate that, in reality, the anti-war Christian right opposes the war for very defensible theological reasons.
—–
References
1. Bill Barnwell. 2004. The Anti-War Christian Right Must Speak Up. LewRockwell.com, July 28.
2. R.C. Sproul, Jr. 2003. A Time For Peace. Every Thought Captive, vol. 7, issue 2.
3. Exodus 22:2, Nehemiah 4:7-18, Luke 22:35-58.
4. Hebrews 1:1-2
5. Pieter Friedrich. 2004. George W. Bush – Heretic. PieterFriedrich.com, February 9.
6. There is, however, support for a representative form of government to be found in Deuteronomy 1:9-18.
7. Staff Sgt. Jimmy Massey in an interview with Paul Rockwell. 2004. Atrocities in Iraq: I Killed Innocent People For Our Government. The Sacramento Bee, May 16.
August 12, 2004
Pieter Friedrich lives in a small town in the California Sierra Foothills. He is an amateur political analyst, a writer, a classical liberal, a juris naturalist, a paleo-conservative, a strict constitutionalist, and, foremost, a Christian. He may be reached for comment here.