Can a Christian be a Soldier?

 

 

 

 

This is similar to the question, “Can a Christian be a police officer!” The answer here is quite simple: Since God has ordained the civil government to bring justice on the evil-doer (Romans 13:1-5), there is no reason that a Christian should not serve in this capacity to deliver the justice of God. Similarly, the military serves to defend its nation. Similarly, there is no reason that, if the enemy is on its border, the military should not launch a preemptive attack.

To sharply distinguish between the police and the army is ludicrous. The Old Testament is filled with accounts of the legitimate use of the Israelite army. Is there any reason to believe that the armed forces are made defunct by the New Testament. This would be to say that our government can protect its people against murderers and arsonists within its borders but not against bloodthirsty invaders. If the sword of the civil magistrate within the New Testament is legitimate, there is no reason to deprive the army of its sword. Nor did John the Baptist condemn the occupying Roman army:

 Luke 3:14 Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.”

Nor did Jesus ever condemn the occupying Roman army or the role they were playing in Israel. Instead He commended  their centurion beyond that of any Israelite:

 Matthew 8:10 When Jesus heard this, he marveled and said to those who followed him, “Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith.” 

Was Jesus a pacifist? Did He teach against any use of righteous violence? Instead, He forcibly drove the money-changers out of the Temple. He also sanctioned the use of violence to defend one’s home and family:

 Matthew 24:43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into.

 Jesus even sanctioned capital punishment according to the Mosaic Law: Matthew 15:3–4 He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’”

Nevertheless, the Christian should consult God and His Word before entering the military. Will he be serving a righteous cause, one consistent with the will of God? Would he continue to put God above all other considerations. Jesus had warned us against serving two masters:

Matthew 6:24 “No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.”

Nor can we serve power, approval, self-promotion, or fear. Consequently, even within the military or the police force, Christ must remain our Master. We must always be ready to yield to Christ even if this means great loss to ourselves. However, this also applies to our employment. If we are employed in violation of Christ and His teachings, we must be prepared to leave the job even at the expense of our accruing benefits Christ does not want compromised Christians. Instead, we must trust in Christ alone. Faithfulness must be #1 concern:

 Matthew 10:37–39 “Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.” 

But we ask, “How is it possible for me to live in such a committed fashion?” The answer is simple. Even the best of us will fail. However when we confess our sins, He will forgive and cleanse us from all the filth of sin, giving us a fresh start (1 John 1:8-9). Even those who are fully faithful continue to fail. However, once we confess our sins and recommit ourselves to our Savior, He delivers us, assuring us that He really loves us.

 

VODDIE BAUCHAM, POLICE, SYSTEMIC RACISM, AND CRITICAL THEORY

 

 

If systemic racism exists, then it is our responsibility to raise our voices against it, as BLM banners imply: “White Silence is White Violence.”

 

One of the charges that fuel the move to defund police is that the police discriminate and even hunt down blacks, but do the statistics support this claim?

 

It doesn’t seem so, at least according to the sentiments of most blacks. In support of this, Voddie Baucham, a black scholar, has written:

 

·       According to recent Gallup polls, most black Americans (81 percent) want police to spend the same amount of or more time in their area as before protests broke out in 2020. This resonates with my own experience growing up in a high-crime area. I remember days when I had to walk through territory that was unfamiliar or unwelcoming. I always had my head on a swivel, looking for gangbangers who might want to jam me up. Like all young black men in my neighborhood, I had nightmares about being caught in the wrong place at the wrong time…(Baucham, “Fault Lines,” 167)

 

In contrast, Critical Race Theorists (CRTs) allege that whites are invariably racist “oppressors,” even if they don’t recognize it, and that racism is engrained in the fabric of the American society - guilty without any hope of being proven innocent.

 

·        This is the analytical lens that CRT uses in examining existing power structures. CRT identifies that these power structures are based on white privilege and white supremacy, which perpetuates the marginalization of people of color. (“What is Critical Race Theory?” UCLA School of Public Affairs, Critical Race Studies, https://spacrs.wordpress.com/what-is-critical-race-theory)

 

CRT starts out by presupposing that all systems are the attempts of the ruling class to maintain power and control (“hegemony”). From this presupposition, CRT concludes that the whites are systemically trying to exclude the blacks, even if they don’t realize it. However, according to Baucham, the evidence against systemic racism is impressive:

 

·       According to federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, in interracial violence involving blacks and whites, white perpetrators account for 15 percent of the cases while black perpetrators account for 85 percent. In other words, far from there being an epidemic of whites “hunting down innocent, unarmed black men,” when it comes to interracial violence, black people are overwhelmingly more likely to victimize white people than the other way around. (Baucham, 166)

 

·       A police officer is 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black assailant than an unarmed black man is to be killed by a cop. (Baucham, 166)

 

Who then is exercising the power? Do police murder blacks disproportionately? Baucham has written:

 

·       I reject the idea that America is “characterized by racism,” or that racism is an unavoidable byproduct of our national DNA. In fact, I believe America is one of the least racist countries in the world. (201)

 

Baucham is joined by other marginalized black conservatives. However, to deny systemic racism, especially as a black man, is risky. It means he will be maligned. Baucham presents CRT’s attack strategy:

 

·       Systemic racism is the cause of disparities. If you doubt that, it is because you are a racist who wants to protect your power and keep those disparities in place. This has to be true because, if you were not racist, you would know that the cause of disparities is… racism.

 

In the case of black conservatives, they are discredited as “uncle Toms” and” traitors.” Likewise, CRT warns all against opposing their racist narrative:

 

·       Don’t “whitesplain.” Do not explain racism to a POC. Do not explain how the microaggression they just experienced was actually just someone being nice. Do not explain how a particular injustice is more about class than race. It’s an easy trap to fall into, but you can avoid it by maintaining a posture of active listening. (“Be the Bridge” Facebook group)

 

Consequently, if you perform a “nice” act, you are a racist; if you don’t, you are a racist. For the “oppressor,” there is only one appropriate response - shut up and listen. If you protest, this automatically proves you are a racist.

 

Baucham lists some examples of those who have lost their jobs for simply resisting this narrative:

 

·       Kurt Beathard was the offensive coordinator for the Illinois State University football team. That is, until he found a BLM flyer on his office door and replaced it with a flyer of his own stating, “All Lives Matter to Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” Beathard was fired within weeks. Professor Stephen Hsu was forced to resign from his position as vice president of research and innovation at Michigan State University over alleged “scientific racism.” His actual crime? Interviewing an expert on police shootings who debunked the CRT myths surrounding them. (Apparently, merely associating with someone who questions the narrative is tantamount to “scientific racism.”) Portland State University professor Bruce Gilley was subjected to international scrutiny and scorn after starting a “Critiques of BLM” reading group. (155)

 

Police, blacks and whites, are also victims:

 

·       A 2015 Washington Post analysis found that “511 officers [were] killed in felonious incidents and 540 offenders from 2004 to 2013. Among the total offenders, 52 percent were white, and 43 percent were black.” Ambush killings of officers are nearly evenly split racially: “There were 304 officers killed in ambush attacks from 1980 to 2013, with 371 offenders involved in those deaths. The percentage of black and white offenders in ambushes were about the same: 44 percent were white, and 43 percent were black.” (51)

 

Since only 13% of the population is black, they are represented disproportionately higher than whites. Why then does CRT maintain that the whites are still the racists? Many point to Marxism as the culprit. Their strategy has always been to delegitimize the present system as “oppressive” and to replace it with a Marxist system.

 

Let’s return to the central question of systemic racism - “Are blacks killed disproportionately by police?”

 

·       The best research on the topic of fatal officer-involved shootings (FOIS) has been clear, as were the findings of Harvard economist Roland G. Fryer Jr. in a forthcoming study. “On the most extreme use of force, FOIS,” he writes, “we find no racial difference in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account.” Fryer was actually surprised by his findings. (Baucham, 48)

 

·       Meanwhile, a National Academy of Sciences study ignited controversy when its authors proclaimed, “We find no evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities across shootings, and White officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers.” (Baucham, 48)

 

Our communities and churches are divided over the question of the existence of any systemic attempt to kill or keep blacks down. However, according to Baucham and many others, the evidence for its existence appears to be lacking. However, such claims are promoted by CRT and even the press to the detriment of the nation.

 

Instead of helping the black community, these groups continue to promote the idea that blacks are still the victims for their own political purposes. Instead, my deepest hope is reflected by the prayer of our Lord:

 

·       “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me.” (John 17:20-23)

 

However, CRT seeks the very opposite thing!

Resisting Evil?

Christians are now experiencing escalating persecution worldwide. This raises several questions:

“Should Christians ever bring legal charges against their persecutors?

Some feel that we shouldn’t and cite:

• Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them… Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” (Romans 12:14-19)

They reason that, since we must “bless and… not curse” and “never avenge” ourselves, bringing legal charges isn’t an option. Instead, we are to trust that God will bring “vengeance” (justice) - “the wrath of God” - on the Day of Judgment.

However, is “the wrath of God” only reserved for that Day? According to Paul, “the wrath of God” is also meant to be exercised through the court system:

• Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. (Romans 13:1-4)

God also takes vengeance through the “governing authorities.” They are His invention to bring about justice. Therefore, to “leave it to the wrath of God” is to bring the matter before those whom God has ordained.

Paul repeats that we are required to submit to these authorities in the next verse. He then instructs Christians to pay them “taxes” (13:6) and “honor” (13:7).

How do we honor them? By respecting their office, by being witnesses against evil (Eph. 5:11) and even by pressing charges, when appropriate! If we know a gang is committing rapes and we fail to testify against them, then we become moral accomplices and bring disrepute upon our faith by allowing them to continue unchecked.

We also honor the authorities by allowing them to do their job.  It is not our job to bring justice. We cannot form vigilante groups or take revenge. However, we can help the governing authorities by bringing to them charges of criminal wrongdoing. If we fail to do this, we are guilty before God:

• He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the Lord. (Proverbs 17:15)

If we give the wicked a free pass, our God is not pleased.

“Is it ever right to use physical force against the evildoer?”

Some would argue that personal physical force is never justified:

• To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:20-21)

They argue that, if we are to overcome “evil with good,” there is no place for physical force. However, this teaching, along with many others, pertains to the behavior of individual Christians not governments. Very few of the teaching in the New Testament were directed towards the authorities in their public roles. There was certainly no expectation that their Roman over-lords should “overcome evil with good” or to forgive their enemies. Instead, the authorities, whoever they were, ruled by fear – by the sword (Rom. 134). Anything other than this was unthinkable.

Ideally, the civil authorities are the ones to exercise justice and administer punishment, but what would happen if kidnappers broke into a home with young children? Should not the husband protect his family in the absence of the police? And what if the husband didn’t protect his family but misapplied the Jesus’ teaching about turning the other check, saying “You want my three-year-old-daughter? Take my four-year-old also.”

Such a response would be ignorant and bring disrepute upon the church. The next victim could then rightfully say, “Since you didn’t resist the kidnappers, you enabled them to come to my home on the following night!”

Of course, this scenario is absurd, but it demonstrates where this foolish thinking about non-resistance can take us. Instead, even Jesus taught that physically resisting evil was sometimes acceptable:

• Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. (Matthew 24:42-43; Luke 12:39)

The homeowner had a perfect right to protect his family, even with the use of physical force. Even Jesus Himself resorted to physical force when He drove the money changers out of the temple.

“How then are we to overcome evil with good?”

I was asked, “What would you do if you ran into someone who had just enlisted to go fight with ISIS?”

I answered that I would invite him for a cup of coffee and an apple pie. In gentleness, I would then try to reason with him to repent. However, afterwards, I would call the authorities to have him detained.

Our calling to love our enemies is not in conflict with our calling to support the authorities. Instead, they should both go together.