I have purchased Jim Wallis' book, God's Politics, for study and analysis. For my part, I would never be so presumptuous as to claim that my politics are God's as well, but I am willing to give Mr. Wallis' motives the benefit of the doubt. (I am no man's judge.) I have not yet read any of the book, but I have looked at the table of contents. The title of Part III is "When Did Jesus Become Pro-war?" This is a staggering title given what we know of the history of the Twentieth Century.
Winston Churchill was a masterful historian of World War II in addition to being the Prime Minister of Great Britain during that period. In his role as historian, he wrote a six volume series called The Second World War that is one of the greatest histories of war ever written. At the beginning of each volume of this series, Mr. Churchill stated a theme, and the theme he gave for volume one, The Gathering Storm, was as follows:
"How the English-speaking peoples through their unwisdom, carelessness, and good nature allowed the wicked to rearm."
Churchill, who was a conservative, records in this volume the tragic story of how leftist pacifists played a role in bringing about the Second World War—how they missed several opportunities to prevent global war by fighting a limited war. By being against war at all costs, leftist pacifists helped bring into being the most horrific war that this world has ever seen. Had Mr. Churchill been in power in that same period, Germany would have been prevented from rearming, and the war could not have occurred. (Read the book if you think this is not a reasonable conclusion.)
On considering this simple reality, one wonders how anyone can justify being anti-war at all costs. There are clearly times when great evil must be confronted with courage, resolve, and willingness to do violence—even for Christians. The Word of God, and Jesus is called the Word made flesh (John 1:14), is clearly not anti-war. Consider the following:
To every thing there is a season, and a time to ever purpose under the heaven: a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; a time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; a time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; a time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace. (Ecclesiastes 3:1-8)
The great error of pacifists is that they repeatedly demand that war be avoided at all costs—even, as we learn from history, at the cost of worse wars due to delay of action. (I know, it never occurs to them that their own actions might result in a greater war than might otherwise have been, but this is clearly the lesson of World War II.) If Jesus truly is anti-war, then Normandy was as great a sin against God as Auschwitz—even though one of the consequences of the killings of Normandy was to put a stop to the killings of Auschwitz. Moreover, if war is a sin, then God Himself is a sinner because He commanded the Israelites to fight wars of conquest of the promised land. (He even commanded them to commit genocide. Read Deuteronomy chapter 20.)
This leads us to the question: Is it a sin to kill the killer? Is it a sin to kill by war or by other means those who are themselves killers of men?
During the proceedings of the execution of Timothy McVeigh on June 11, 2001, I was watching the Fox News telecast, and at one point, they included a pair of reporters from a newspaper in Ireland. The female reporter from that newspaper said something like this:
"I do not understand how a supposedly Christian nation can accept and use the death penalty. Doesn't the Bible say, Thou shalt not kill?"
When I heard this, I jumped out of my chair and shouted at the TV, "Why don't you quote the verse just twenty-five verses later?" It says, "He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death." This means that it is a sin NOT to put the killer to death. Consequently, once the war was a going concern, Normandy was necessary to stop Auschwitz and could not have been a sin. It would have been a sin NOT to fight the war once it was forced upon us. If there was any sin in all of it, it was on those who refused to fight a small war to prevent a larger—and to also close Auschwitz before it was ever opened.
Comments