It’s a day I’ll never forget.
My bus had just pulled in through the gates of the Australian Army’s 1st Recruit Training Battalion, near the NSW town of Kapooka. I’m on board with 40 other eager 18 year old males. We had enlisted together. And now we had finally arrived—to undertake Army Basic Training.
There’s nervous excitement. The action is going to begin, we think to ourselves with youthful enthusiasm. We’re following in the footsteps of the Anzacs. Sure, we know it won’t be easy. But if it’s anything like the army recruiting ads, it’ll at least be exciting.
But that enthusiasm disappears the moment the bus stops. A gruff Military Police Sergeant jumps on board. He takes the roll. And then starts barking orders (with a healthy dose of expletives).
Our smiles are wiped off our faces. The nervous tension shoots through the roof. We get off, we line up, and we’re immediately regretting signing up (what were we thinking?, we say to ourselves). I felt like I was going to be torn apart. No, this wasn’t some idealistic army recruiting ad. This was Stanley Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket.[1]
And so begins my time in the military.
When Military Service Is Controversial
I was a relatively new Christian at the time. I was confident of doing a good thing by joining the army. But not all would agree.
No less than acclaimed theologian Miroslav Volf objects to those who think the profession of arms can be a virtuous endeavour:
But if one decides to put on soldier’s gear instead of carrying one’s cross, one should not seek legitimation in the religion that worships the crucified Messiah. For there, the blessing is given not to the violent but to the meek.[2]
And you can understand where he’s coming from. War is violent. It involves killing: taking the life of other image bearers of God. There’s collateral damage—innocent bystanders invariably die. And didn’t Jesus teach his disciples to turn the cheek, rather than pull a trigger?
So is Volf right? Is putting on the soldier’s gear the moral opposite of carrying one’s cross?
It’s a big discussion, and beyond the scope of this post to treat it in detail.[3] But here are some thoughts that provide some direction:
1. The New Testament Doesn’t Condemn the Military Profession
‘Balogh, you owe me a thousand pushups!’ This was my near daily dose of ear bashing. Kapooka was the most intense three months of my life. The day began with yelling, and finished with it. It was relentless. Marching. Physical Training. Rifle practice. Chow time (or lack thereof). God help you if you left your rifle unattended – which I did. (I’ve never heard expletives used so creatively.) So I needed to know that God was for me—that what I was doing was pleasing to Him.
Thankfully, the New Testament is not silent on this issue.
When soldiers came to John the Baptist asking about righteous living, he didn’t rebuke them. He didn’t demand they leave their profession for the sake of godliness. Instead, he commanded them to be fair and just as they exercised their power (Luke 3:14).
Cornelius is another soldier we get to meet (Acts 10:1-2). Even though he’s a Roman soldier, he’s commended as ‘devout and God fearing’ and—get this—‘righteous’ (Acts 10:2,22). [4]
Let’s think about it: if Volf is right, and being a soldier really is a sinful occupation, inherently at odds with the way of the crucified Messiah, would Cornelius have been described as ‘righteous’? Wouldn’t the fiery John the Baptist have told the soldiers to go AWOL asap – to ditch their swords and take up farming?
The New Testament seems to suggest it is possible to carry a soldier’s gear, and the cross, at the same time.
From these first hand encounters with soldiers—even soldiers serving the pagan Roman empire, the New Testament seems to suggest it is possible to carry a soldier’s gear, and the cross, at the same time.
2. According to the Bible, Killing Is Warranted In Some Circumstances
I’ve never had to shoot to kill. But like any soldier, I was trained to kill.
But can killing ever be right?
In the larger sweep of salvation history, killing does have a place in God’s plan for humanity. But it’s killing in very limited and proscribed circumstances. For example, in God’s new covenant with all of humanity that he makes with Noah, He says:
‘Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.’ (Gen 9:6).
The very preciousness of human life (being made ‘in the image of God’) means that there are circumstances (e.g. to punish murder) when it is right and just to kill.
But in this case, who does God authorise to undertake such retributive killing?
3. God has Authorised Governments to ‘Bear the Sword’ and Punish Evil
God has authorised governments to be his ‘servant[s]’, to ‘bear the sword’ and to ‘bring punishment on the wrongdoer’ (Rom 13:4). In this age, it is our government that is tasked by God to uphold justice – even justice by the sword.[5]
And yes, as a soldier I was on the pointy end of our government’s sword. Thankfully I didn’t have to wield it.
4. Love Sometimes Requires Government to Wield the ‘Sword’ for the Sake of Justice, and Protecting Innocent Life
Soon after I left the army, East Timor fell apart. And so our government sent our soldiers in. What I found surprising was how broad the support was among Australians for this action. Innocent Timorese were being slaughtered on our doorstep. And the right thing, the loving thing for Australia to do was send in soldiers, to stop the slaughter.
As Don Carson points out:
Where an enemy is perpetrating its horrible holocaust, is it not an act of love that intervenes, even militarily, to prevent that holocaust if a nation has the power to do so? And is not restraint in such cases a display, not of loving pacifism, but of lack of love—of the unwillingness to sacrifice anything for the sake of others? Indeed, such a war may be, according to Calvin, a Godlike act, since God himself restrains evil out of love for his creatures.[6]
Where an enemy is perpetrating a horrible holocaust, is it not an act of love that intervenes, even militarily?
5. There is a Time For Peace. And a Time for War. The Trick is to Know What The Time Is.
What I’m about to say may sound easy given hindsight, but it means we need to pray for our leaders, for their wisdom and discernment.
World War I—the end of which we commemorate this year—was by any measure an unnecessary war. There was no ‘Just’ cause for it. Diplomacy could have (and should have) prevented it. European leaders tragically mis-read the time.
But the mid 1930’s was a time for war—at least for the western allies. Western European nations should have seen the enormous danger that Hitler posed to Europe in the mid 1930’s, and acted to prevent his rearmament – militarily if necessary.
Instead, the pacifist mindset of the Chamberlain-led British government went so far as to appease Hitler, giving him Austria, the Czech republic, and a chance to build his mighty Wehrmacht – without preparing their own armies. Arguably, World War II could have been prevented had people known what time it was. But again, (western) European leaders tragically didn’t know the time.
And in both instances, millions of innocent souls reaped a horrifying harvest.
Beating Swords into Plowshares
As I reflect on my own brief military service this Anzac day, I thank God for this time of peace in our part of the world. But it’s not guaranteed to last. The scourge of war will be with us until Jesus returns.
[Only then] will they beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore. (Is 2:4)
Oh Lord, bring on for that day, when war will be no more!
[1] The first half of Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket features US Marine Corps Basic Training. I watched the movie after I had completed my army basic training, and was gob-smacked by how similar my experience was.
[2] Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996).
[3] If you wanted to read more, check out “Good Wars,” First Things 116 (Oct 2001), 27-31 (Dowload for free: http://www.firstthings.com/article/2001/10/good-wars). For a longer, more in depth read, check out Love in Hard Places, Don Carson (Crossway: Wheaton,Illinois, 2002), especially Chapter 4 (free PDF download of book: http://thegospelcoalition.org/article/don-carson-on-osama-bin-laden/).
[4] When a senior Roman soldier came face to face with Jesus, asking for help for his sick servant, what’s Jesus response? There’s no rebuke, there’s no demand that the soldier leave his profession. Instead, Jesus commends him for his faith – a faith greater than anyone else in Israel (Matt 8:5-10).
[5] As commentator Doug Moo points out, in the context of 1st century Rome, and against the OT background (Gen. 9:4-6), ‘Paul would clearly include the death penalty in the state’s panoply of punishments for wrongdoing.’ Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle To The Romans, NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 802.
[6] Carson, Love in Hard Places, 112. Over the last 2000 years Christians have reflected on the role of government, especially when it comes to war. Out of this sustained reflection has emerged what is called ‘Just War’ theory – describing when and how war can be fought. One compelling reason is to rescue and protect the innocent.
