Would Jesus Celebrate Memorial Day?
A Christian/Pacifist/Anarchist Inquiry

Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
Matthew 5:9

It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones. Luke 17:2 .

There are 100 million born-again evangelicals in the United States. There are 250 million people in America who would call themselves "Christian," which presumably means "follower of Jesus Christ." Given their disposable income, these millions have the electoral and financial power to completely alter U.S. foreign policy and re-shape the world for peace.

But the vast majority don't take the teachings of Jesus seriously. They believe His teachings apply to "saints" and the super-spiritual, or are only for a future "dispensation." Or else they believe that His teachings are for your "heart," because they're "religious," but don't have any real application in the "real world" of law, economics, political policy or military strategy.

George Bush does not take Jesus seriously. At least not as "Commander-in-Chief." In the third TV debate in the 2000 primaries, Tom Brokaw is serving as moderator and asks for viewers' questions, getting this: "What political philosopher or thinker...do you most identify with?" Candidate Steve Forbes came out with John Locke. Candidate Alan Keyes came out with the Founders.
The question was repeated: "Governor Bush — a philosopher-thinker and why."
Bush: "Christ, because he changed my heart."

Not because He changed Bush's political policies, or military strategies. Clearly, Jesus has had no impact on Bush's decision to harm children by destroying Iraqi neighborhoods. But Bush may be sincere when he thinks of himself as a follower of Christ, because Bush believes that Christ is Lord in religious areas, even if not military areas. After all, it's just not "practical" or "realistic" to apply Jesus' teachings to international relations. We can believe Jesus in our hearts, and go to heaven when we die, but applying Jesus' teachings literally in the political or military arena is suicidal. Many people -- even atheists -- agree with Bush in this respect.

This webpage is intended to show that we can and must take Jesus seriously, in every area of life -- even our nation's political life and foreign policy.

The basic issue is: Can Jesus be trusted? If we follow Him, taking His Word seriously, will everything work out OK? Or is the Bible just a fairy tale? Is it just a contradictory collection of feel-good stories and Hallmark-card aphorisms? Something you can believe in your heart, but should keep separate from State and economy?

This webpage argues that if we had taken Jesus seriously in the 20th century, things would have worked out better. We would not have fought any war in the 20th century, and would not be fighting in Iraq today. If we had followed Jesus and not fought any wars in the last 200 years, the world would be a better place. If you think that's a nutty idea -- less than "5" on a scale of 1-10 -- we guarantee that if you read this entire page, your rating of that idea will go up 50% or more. In short, this webpage is guaranteed to change your thinking on the issue of war and peace, if only a little.

Here are two controversial ideas. First, let's take Memorial Day seriously for just a few minutes. That's controversial because most people don't. Like Christmas, Memorial Day has lost its original significance, and now means going to the beach, firing up the bar-b-que, or maybe watching a parade. Here's the entry for "Memorial Day" from an online encyclopedia:

Memorial Day
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many Veterans groups are trying to get the observance of Memorial Day shifted back to its original day, instead of being made a part of a "3-day weekend," which tends to focus people's attention on vacationing rather than observing Memorial Day.

There are two ways to take Memorial Day seriously.

• One way is to mourn the dead and weep with those who weep (Romans 12:15).
• The other way is to honor the dead.

The Bible says to mourn the death of soldiers, but never says to celebrate their choice to fight.

Imagine an immature teenager who sees one of those "extreme" television shows featuring "incredible" stupid stunts. He then tries the stunt at home and dies. We mourn the loss, and console his family. Do we honor his choice? No.

This is an analogy, not a comparison. One can enlist in the armed services without engaging in a stupid stunt, but can be motivated by patriotism, loyalty, self-sacrifice, and other ideals which can be respected. But Nazis and Communists can also serve in their armed forces and be motivated by patriotism, self-sacrifice, love of the "Fatherland" or the "workers revolutionary paradise," and no matter how sincere and well-intentioned they were, we would say they were wrong. While we can mourn their deaths as human beings created in the Image of God, we cannot honor their choice. If we catch an enemy soldier, we do not honor the passion of his patriotism, we imprison him.

If a person chooses to intentionally kill other human beings created in the image of God, does it matter in God's eyes which flag he waves?

If a person pushes a button or pulls a trigger that kills innocent non-combatant civilians, does it matter in God's eyes that he was wearing a government uniform?

On Memorial Day Americans honor those Americans who were killed in uniform.
In other words, Americans honor those Americans who chose to fight in a war.

I say "chose" even though many were drafted (conscripted), as in the Vietnam conflict. But they had the power to refuse, even though they may have lost their status or even gone to jail. Jesus underwent worse forms of torture. Even those who are drafted have a choice, and can choose to "do violence to no man" (Luke 3:14), no matter what the penalties.

Would Jesus honor those who chose to fight (or did not choose not to fight)?

Didn't Jesus say "Blessed are the peacemakers"?

Jesus never said "Bless and honor the warmakers."

On this Memorial Day, let us effectively mourn those who died.

Second controversial idea: Let's take war seriously.

In his Presidential Radio Address of May 26, 2007, President Bush said the following:

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. This Memorial Day weekend, Americans honor those who have given their lives in service to our Nation. As we pay tribute to the brave men and women who died for our freedom, we also honor those who are defending our liberties around the world today.

On Memorial Day, we pay tribute to Americans from every generation who have given their lives for our freedom. From Valley Forge to Vietnam, from Kuwait to Kandahar, from Berlin to Baghdad, brave men and women have given up their own futures so that others might have a future of freedom. Because of their sacrifice, millions here and around the world enjoy the blessings of liberty. And wherever these patriots rest, we offer them the respect and gratitude of our Nation.

We must challenge the President on every one of these wars. The world was not made a better place by fighting them, and Americans should have chosen not to fight them:

During the 20th century, an average of 10,000 people were murdered each and every single day. These people were not murdered by people who are usually called "murderers." That's because the people who did the killing all wore uniforms of the various governments on earth. In the United States, 16,110 people were murdered during all of the year 2002 by "murderers," that is, private enterprise murderers not wearing an official government uniform. During the last 15 years, during the Bush I/Clinton/Bush II years, the United States has killed approximately 2,000,000 men, women, and children in Iraq during various Gulf "wars," "operations," and embargoes. That's more than 100,000 per year, almost ten times the number of "private" murders committed per year. On the CBS News program "60 Minutes," on May 12, 1996, Lesley Stahl asked Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State under Bill Clinton:

Stahl: We have heard that a half million children have died [in Iraq]. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?
Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

This is a "cost-benefit" question. To evaluate whether the cost was "worth it," you have to ask, "What benefit did we get for the price?"

• The price in the 20th century: 10,000 killed per day, on average, every day for 100 years.
• The price in Iraq in the last 15 years: 8,600 children over five die every month while the number did not exceed 1,600 before "the gulf crisis."

What did these deaths bring us?

• Answer: an Islamic Theocracy.

And throughout the world during the 20th century, hundreds of millions of people have been subjugated under atheistic and socialistic tyranny with the aid of the nation that was supposed to be "a city upon a hill": the U.S.of A.

What causes us to honor those who wore a uniform for the world's largest killing machine? Why do we not honor those who refused to fight, and chose peace? How should the Christian react to "Memorial Day?"

I believe Christians should be outraged, and should vigorously protest the killing. Those who voluntarily don a uniform to kill for money, for college tuition, for "job training," or for kicks, should be excommunicated. As it is, in churches across America, the killers are honored.

With the exception of an occasional psychopath, all the killers in the 20th century believed they were doing good. Germans who killed Jews were protecting "the fatherland," preserving the "national security of Germany, or were just honorably "following orders." For Muslims, killing infidels is a matter of sincere religious duty. Russians who shot Ukrainian farmers carried out "the will of the People." Americans napalmed South Vietnamese villages because "It became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it." Save them from Communism, of course, which Americans believe is a fate worse than death by napalm. 10,000 murders a day requires a lot of people wearing uniforms, and all of them believed they were doing their patriotic duty. None of them thought of themselves as doing "evil" just because they were killing human beings.

I want to think about Memorial Day with a view to creating a plan that will get hundreds of millions of people to think that killing is evil. Given the billions of people who believe killing is justified if ordered by the government or a false religion, this is a huge undertaking.

I can't recall ever hearing a Memorial Day sermon in which the preacher did not dutifully remind the congregation that "Jesus was not a pacifist." But Jesus clearly was a pacifist. He died because He did not defend Himself against evil aggressors, even though He was perfectly innocent. If Jesus was not a pacifist, His followers would have fought to keep Him from being delivered up to death (John 18:36). But He told them, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword" (Matthew 26:52). At the right side of this web page are dozens of verses which strongly suggest that the Bible advocates pacifism (which comes from the Latin word for "peace.").

In fact, the Bible is so strongly pro-peace that we offer you this controversial suggestion: On Memorial Day, let us not honor the dead. Let us mourn and help their widows, but let's not honor their choice to fight. In fact, let's make the suggestion even more controversial:

Wow, that's pretty crazy, huh?

I'm not interested in debating the details of church discipline, excommunicating people, or anything like that, I'm interested in provoking some serious thought about war and peace. If you think it's ridiculous to claim that "Christians should be against war," please keep reading, and I'll wager you won't think the claim is quite so ridiculous when you're finished reading. I'm confident that if you work through this website, focus, pray, take a break halfway through and get a second wind, then continue asking tough questions, you'll be a different person than you are right now.

Another thing I hear in Memorial Day sermons every year is the de rigueur citation of James 4, which says,

1 Where do wars and fights come from among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasure that war in your members? 2 You lust and do not have. You murder and covet and cannot obtain. You fight and war. Yet you do not have because you do not ask. 3 You ask and do not receive, because you ask amiss, that you may spend it on your pleasures. 4 Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.

This text, like many others in the New Testament, seems to move us to oppose war. But on Memorial Day, the preacher virtually pooh-poohs the verse and goes on to claim that there are some noble reasons to go to war, though there are never any verses quoted which say the ultimate cause of war is holiness and righteousness and following the Prince of Peace.

Consider this controversial claim:

If I can prove this claim, your attitude towards the teachings of Jesus will be radically transformed. If you're like most people, you've been taught that Jesus was at least sort of a pacifist, He said a lot of things about peace that are good for our private lives, but are completely out of place in "the real world." But "the real world" would be a much better place if we followed Jesus literally and became pacifists.

"But aren't some wars justified? Isn't it a positive good to fight in some wars?"

If you believe this, you should take a year to study America's wars. Take an hour a day. Treat it like a college class. In lieu of that large undertaking, let's quickly review America's wars. Were any justified? Did any have the long-term effect of making the world a better place? Really? Let's look at these wars:

• America's War for Independence - 108,000 deaths
• The "Civil War" - nearly 700,000 deaths
• World War II - (1937-45): as many as 84,609,000 deaths
• Iraq - 1980-2007 - a minimum of 2,000,000 deaths attributable to U.S. sanctions, military aid, and military intervention in Iraq/Iran

Admittedly, I have cited the highest estimated casualties in these wars. If you find this objectionable, I would ask you to cite the lowest number of causalities which you believe are both (1) accurate and (2) morally acceptable to Jesus.

America's War for Independence

Let's start with the first war in America's history (though I don't intend to examine each and every one of the over 100 "wars," "conflicts," "police actions," etc. that America has been involved in since 1776). That would be the war that gave birth to the United States of America, the "War for Independence."

What would Jesus say about those who chose to take up arms against "the Redcoats?"

I have created a website that goes into this question in greater detail:

www.July4th1776.org

I heard a Memorial Day sermon in which the preacher asked, "Is it ever right to fight?" He said, "We are free because our Founding Fathers fought." Are we free? Should they have fought?

Consider this parable and a few Bible passages:

Date: April 19, 1775   Imagine a young man about 23 years old. As an agent of the British Empire, he wears a red coat. He believes that the colonies face a situation of "anarchy" and chaos. For generations, the British government has maintained law and order, and he has been told that social stability is threatened by lawless hoardes of colonists who vandalize tax-paying merchants while dressed as Indians. Based on reports of a large cache of arms in Lexington and threats of armed revolution, he has been sent away from his family in Liverpool to help maintain order in the colonies.
       As a good Christian, this young man believes that God has ordained government to preserve peace and good order. He believes armed revolution against the government is a violation of Romans 13. He's proud to serve in His Majesty's armed services.
       Oh dear. This nice young man has just had a large part of his face and shoulders blown away by the musket fire of an outraged tax-resister. The colonist (and others like him) apparently believed that this young British soldier evinced "a design to reduce them under absolute despotism." As the officer lies dying in a pool of his own blood, the revolutionary "minute-man" rejoices in his victory over this red-coat's objective of the "establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states." (Quotes from the Declaration of Independence)
       Is this a loving (1 Corinthians 13:5-7) or righteous (John 7:24; Exodus 23:2; Prov. 24:21) judgment of this young human being? Was this soldier a budding Adolph Hitler, or a "good Christian family man"?

Was this revolutionary killing the beginning, or the end, of a Christian nation?

Consider these Bible passages, which have been slightly altered to fit the context. (Don't just read them, but prayerfully ask yourself, if these are the commands of Christ, how can a follower of Christ justify killing government officials?):

Romans 12-13 {1} I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
         {2} And be not conformed to the world of the Scottish Enlightenment: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
         {3} For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.
         {10} Be kindly affectioned one to the British with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;
         {11} Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord;
         {12} Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
         {13} Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitable quartering of troops. (cf. 3rd Amendment of the Bill of Rights.)
         {14} Bless the "Red Coats" which persecute you: bless, and curse not.
         {16} Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.
         {17} Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
         {18} If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with the British.
         {19} Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
         {20} Therefore if an enemy soldier hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
         {21} Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.
         {13:1} Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are set in place by God.
         {2} Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, throwing tea into the harbor, or firing muskets upon them from behind trees, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
         {3} For archist red coats are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
         {4} For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
         {5} Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
         {6} For for this cause pay ye taxes without representation: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
         {7} Render therefore to all their dues: taxes to whom taxes are due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
         {8} Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
         {9} For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
         {10} Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

1 Peter 2:11-24 Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;
         {12} Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.
         {13} Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to king George III, as supreme;
         {14} Or unto parliament, as unto them that are sent by Him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
         {15} For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
         {16} As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.
         {17} Honour all the British. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.
         {18} Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
         {19} For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.
         {20} For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
         {21} For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow His steps:
         {22} Who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth:
         {23} Who, when He was reviled, reviled not again; when He suffered, He threatened not; but committed Himself to Him that judgeth righteously:
         {24} Who His own self bare our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by Whose stripes ye were healed.

Matthew 5:38-48 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
         {39} But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
         {40} And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
         {41} And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
         {42} Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
         {43} Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
         {44} But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
         {45} That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
         {46} For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
         {47} And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
         {48} Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Proverbs 24:21 My son, fear the LORD and the king; Do not associate with those given to change; for their calamity will rise suddenly, and who knows the ruin those two can bring?

Exodus 23:2 Thou shalt not follow a crowd to do evil.

These verses make obvious what every conservative Christian fears: Jesus was a pacifist. Jesus died a pacifist, telling his followers not to take up arms to defend Him, even though He was sinlessly innocent, and His imminent arrest was totally unlawful and immoral. If His murder isn't a case for justifiable defense, nothing is. But Jesus prohibited it, and then we are told to "follow in His steps" on precisely this issue. The Bible teaches pacifism. The follower of Christ seeks peace. Click here for a few more verses to prove this (they might still be visible in the column at right, depending on your browser and font size).

And history teaches that war is unjustified. Again, something conservatives fear, but don't want to think about it.

The American Revolution would be considered the most "American" of all wars, and no patriotic love-it-or-leave-it American would suggest that the War for Independence was immoral and unChristian. But I would. It was immoral, unChristian, and an obvious violation of Romans 13, which was originally written to Christians living under violent military occupation by the barbaric and pagan Roman Empire, and surely applies to Christians living under a more benevolent government like eighteenth-century England.

If we should not spend Memorial Day celebrating the willingness of Americans to take up arms in the War for Independence, what does it say about Americans who celebrate the "Fourth of July?" Do we expect to impress America's Founding Fathers by honoring their military efforts? They risked "our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor" to rebel against an essentially Christian nation. What are we willing to risk against a regime many times worse?

The war that gave birth to America was not justified, but those that rebelled had more integrity than we do, since we do very little against an empire far more tyrannical. 

We'll discuss the 20th century and how we can reverse the damage done by America, but let's first consider our most recent disaster, Iraq.

On the left is some information about early America. On the right is some information about the government created in Iraq by the new and improved secularized United States at a projected cost of nearly $500 Billion (that's half a trillion dollars) and too many human casualties to count:

Every single person who signed the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution would be outraged at the fact that the United States

• has a huge standing army,
• which is being used to kill thousands, if not millions,
• of innocent non-combatant civilians,
• with no constitutionally-declared war,
• in order to establish an Islamic Theocracy.

The more you know about America's Founding Fathers, the more you know all this to be true. They would be outraged.

The USMemorialDay.org website gets us thinking about another of America's disastrous wars. It says:

Memorial Day was officially proclaimed on 5 May 1868 by General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, in his General Order No. 11, and was first observed on 30 May 1868....

General Order 11 begins:

Why should the South have not been allowed to secede from the union? Was it really necessary for 700,000 Americans to die to impose by force a compulsory union on a supposedly "free" people? Were blacks less free on a Christian plantation in the South than they are in a drug- and gang-infested Christ-free federal housing project in Chicago, without skills or good character, chronically unemployable, without known father or grandfather, unable even to imagine success for any out-of-wedlock children they may conceive but will never parent, making up for the fact that the federal government is father to their children by joining gangs and puncturing society with acts of violence? The Civil War was completely unjustified.

"But we couldn't allow the South to get away with slavery," some would say. Slavery was legal in all 13 of the original American colonies, and if the North was justified in preventing the South from seceding because they permitted slavery, then Britain was justified in keeping the colonies from their rebellion. Britain abolished slavery decades before the United States, without firing a shot. New York had slaves into the 1850's, and New Jersey did not end slavery until 1865. The first "emancipation proclamation" was Lord Dunmore’s, the Royal Governor of Virginia, in 1775, promising freedom to slaves who would defect against the colonial rebels.

More from General Order No. 11:

Why are the soldiers of the North called "defenders" when they were the aggressors? The South just wanted to secede, not take over the North.

Once again we have to ask, "Was the cost worth it?" Why was it so much better to kill 700,000 human beings, most of them professing Christians, than to have a "United States of America" and a "Confederate States of America?" At the end of World War II the Allies divided the German Republic into East and West. Why did so many Americans have to die to prevent the U.S. from being divided into North and South?

One could argue that both the South and the North dishonored the flag. But was the North justified in creating widows and orphans in the South? Would Jesus honor them for their killings? It is not surprising to learn that

The South refused to acknowledge the day, honoring their dead on separate days until after World War I (when the holiday changed from honoring just those who died fighting in the Civil War to honoring Americans who died fighting in any war). (USMemorialDay.org)

You must be exhausted reading this, because I'm exhausted writing it. Stand up, do some deep knee bends, grab a lemonade, then come back and re-focus. I haven't even mentioned World War II, which most folks believe was certainly justified. I don't. The goal of the U.S. federal government was not to save the Jews, it was to advance international socialism (or Communism) rather than allow national socialism (Nazi) to advance. Sounds like a crazy idea, doesn't it.

But that was the result of WWII. Eastern Europe was given to Soviet Communism, and much of Asia was given to Chinese Communism. And when the federal government had a chance before 1945 to rescue Jews, it refused to do so. One example: a boat full of Jews escaping Hitler came to the U.S., but Roosevelt prohibited the ship to dock on U.S. soil. The story | The details | More about WWII.

Ask the same question about every war: "Was it worth the cost?" The "cost" is easy to determine, in lives lost and wealth destroyed. But when we ask "Was it worth the cost," the "it" is usually harder to define. Was it "a war to end all wars?" Was it "to make the world safe for democracy?" Usually none of the stated goals of the war actually were achieved. So what were the actual results of the war, and were these results worth the cost? Not once, I would argue. Not a single time. Click here for a list of all U.S. wars since 1776, compiled by the U.S. Naval Historical Center. Not one of them was worth the cost. Jesus would not have commanded His followers to kill human beings in order to achieve the results of these wars. And we shouldn't honor those who refuse to follow Christ.

So here's where we are. First, Jesus was a pacifist and the Bible commands us to seek peace. Second, every war in American history was unjustified and unChristian. Our national policy should be never to fight. We should honor those who refuse to fight more than we honor those who fought. If we would spend trillions of dollars evangelizing potential enemies rather than killing them, or bombing them "back to the stone age," God will bless our nation with "national security."

It seems obvious to me, but at this point, you may be saying to yourself, "I'm not changing my mind. Sure, some of this is interesting, but nobody's perfect." This is not about achieving some saintly, ethereal level of super-spirituality. This is rock-bottom bedrock minimum level Christianity: "Thou shalt not kill." When someone does something you don't like, you don't kill him -- at least if you're a follower of the executed Christ.

"But Jesus was not a pacifist," we're told in pulpits every Memorial Day. This claim is always based on Jesus overturning the tables in the temple. But what are Christians commanded to do in the face of "tables" of warmaking? Shouldn't we overturn them? In fact, Christians have done so. Over the centuries, Christians have applied the teachings of Christ to international conflict, and through the use of such ideas as "just war theory," the world became incomparably more humane than it was in the ancient world, where "an eye for an eye" operated on a national scale. The number of wars recorded in the Old Testament is staggering. When ancient Assyria conquered a city, for example, it left a mound of human skulls at the gates as a lesson to other nations that would not heed Assyria's demands. Up until 1776, Christianity was eliminating this terror, vengeance, and mass-slaughter from civilized society. In fact, civilized society is another word for Christian society.

But during the 20th century, Christians have become more "pacifist" in the worst sense of that misunderstood word, by retreating from the world, yearning for "the Rapture," and passively allowing atheists to secularize this once-Christian nation. Some say this retreat began in 1925 with the Scope's Trial, in which evolution seemed to gain the upper hand over creationism. But the retreat began even before that.

As a result of Christian retreat, formerly Christian nations around the world became secularized, and their military and political leaders plunged the world into mass death on an unprecedented scale.

Since I became a pacifist years ago, I've talked (debated) with many people. Not very successfully, I confess. I've concluded that there are only two ways to convince most conservative "Bible-believing" Christians to become pacifists.

First, they must be convinced that peace is possible. Right now, the vast majority of Christians believe that peace is impossible because war is predestined. We are moving inexorably toward Armageddon, according to millions of copies of best-selling Christian fiction. We are in the "last days" of earth history, the last days before a billion people are destroyed in the Battle of Armageddon, and the entire planet is annihilated after the Christians are "Raptured."

If war and destruction is predestined, why resist the inevitable? And by "resist" I don't mean "be a pacifist war resister," I mean resist destruction by fighting the destroyers, by taking up arms against the "enemy." Why fight a a war to end war if war is inevitable? Why not follow Jesus, and die like He did, without killing anyone on the way out? If we can't create peace on earth, why not go out following Jesus instead of going out killing others?

I believe something completely different. I believe the prophecy of Micah 4, and I created an organization in 1979 to promote this belief. The organization is called "Vine & Fig Tree," ( http://VFTonline.org ) and here is Micah's vision:

I believe the fulfillment of this prophecy was made possible at Christ's First Coming, and we are not to wait for a Second Coming before peace is possible. We should begin hammering our swords into plowshares today.

The Apostle Peter says a thousand years is as a day to the Lord (2 Peter 3:8) so we've just started the third "day" of Christian history, and already tremendous progress has been made. Christian theologians before 1776 tempered the residual harshness of ancient practices like war, even as Christians have continued (though never perfectly) to follow Christ and proclaim His pacifist teachings. If the Apostles were to travel through time into our age, they would see the tremendous effects of Christianity: our freedoms, our health and welfare, and the fact that billions of people in our day are relatively free from war. What we need to do is grow up, mature, be courageous, and eliminate the remaining wars. A hundred million committed Christians in the United States is all that is required to accomplish this.

Coming to believe this requires a major transformation in thinking which can only be accomplished in one way, I've concluded. In order for your average conservative Bible-believing Christian to oppose war and work for peace, he or she must read through the entire Bible in one year, asking a set of specific questions along the way. I am currently setting up this Bible study on the Internet, after having worked on it for the last few years at a Christian school.

The Declaration of Independence speaks of "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." Romans 1 says mankind shows the work of the law written on his heart. All human beings know that God exists, and that we are not to kill and not to steal.

If killing is wrong, and if taking other people's money by force is wrong, then how do we justify governments and government vengeance?

We can't. Nowhere in Scripture does God override the commands not to steal ("tax") and kill ("bold new foreign policy").

If you would like to survey the Bible in about two hours, you can see what this year-long Bible study will reveal. I have summarized this view in a format made famous by Martin Luther: 95 Theses.

http://vftonline.org/VF95Theses/paradigm.htm

OK, maybe it will take more than two hours to look up all the verses cited. So let me state two propositions:

1. Nowhere in Scripture, from Genesis to Revelation, does God ever say to man, "I think now is the time to form an institution which substitutes vengeance for love of enemy, and funds all its activities by theft and fraud, buttressed with threats of unspeakable violence." Concerning the language of Romans 13 ("the powers that be are ordained of God"), James Benjamin Green, in his Harmony of the Westminster Standards, noted that: "It is not meant that God directly ordained the state by saying to man, Thou shalt set up a government or organize a commonwealth."
2. The urgency and imminency with which the New Testament speaks of the Second Coming was vindicated in A.D. 70 when Christ returned to take vengeance on Israel and utterly terminate the Old Covenant and its temple. These verses were not looking forward to fulfillment thousands of years later. We are not in "the last days" of the Old Covenant, we are in the first days of the New Heavens and New Earth inaugurated by Christ.

Proposition #1 above teaches that laissez-faire capitalism is Biblical, and socialism is not. Some have called this "anarcho-capitalism," and Christians go ga-ga over the word "anarchism." This is because they have fallen prey to the biggest socialist lie in human history. In the Bible, "archists" are bad. Christ commanded His followers not to be "archists" (Mark 10:42-45). Use whatever word you want to describe people who follow Christ, do not attempt to dominate others using violence or compulson.

Proposition #2 above teaches us that Christ's Kingdom grows like a mustard seed into a huge tree. It also teaches us that the Kingdom is not handed to us on a silver platter. Micah says we must move our legs and get on the road to the House of the Lord. We have to beat our own swords into plowshares. None of this is done for us while we watch TV.

Combined with pacifism, these three themes completely re-orient a person's understanding of the Bible. But only these three themes allow a person to be a dedicated follower of Christ. Otherwise, too much of what Christ says seems misguided, irrelevant, appropriate only for a future dispensation, or directed only to "saints" and "super-spiritual" people, not ordinary Americans.

My goal is to get one hundred million Americans to read or re-read the Bible and specifically ask themselves if "anarchism," preterism, and pacifism are true or not. Then, after this one-year study convinces them that they are true, commit to one hour a month working for peace. This will include contacting politicians, generals, and CEOs of the military-industrial complex and urging them to repent of war-making. One hundred million Christian Americans will constitute the most formidable political power on earth. They will be a voting block that will change the way the world's greatest super-power does business.

The sad fact is, that the United States does more to promote war than any other nation. The encouraging fact is that the United States has the power to become a "City upon a hill," and Christianize the world -- without the sword.

About the Author

I've worn a uniform. I didn't exactly volunteer, but I wasn't drafted. My parents insisted. At their strong urging ("You will or we're disinheriting you.") I donned the uniform of the U.S. Air Force. I confess my obedience was not cheerful, but grudging. When I had an opportunity to get out before doing any "active service" of any kind, I left. But I actually have an "Honorable Discharge" from the U.S.A.F.

I was not raised a pacifist. There was a time when I would have not even read, much less agreed with, the article I am now writing. People who spoke out against war and the U.S. government were "commies." My father was part of what President Eisenhower called "the military-industrial complex." Dad was not pleased when I turned my back on a full college scholarship from the military.

But in my junior year of high school I became a six-day creationist. A decade after getting out of the military, in a deposition before a federal district court in Los Angeles, I explained how my becoming a creationist led me to become a pacifist. You can read it here. I was in court because I was being denied a license to practice law in California, even though I successfully passed the California Bar Exam (which I've been told is the toughest bar exam in the world). I discovered a fact of which most Christians are not aware. America was once a Christian nation, but now is an atheistic nation, and if your allegiance to God is greater than your allegiance to the now-secular government, you cannot take the oath to "support the constitution" which is required of all attorneys, all public servants, all members of the armed services, most public school teachers, and many other occupations. I tried to get an exception to this rule in my case, but was turned down by the federal courts and the Supreme Court of California.

So the first thing we have to deal with is the fact that anyone who volunteers for the armed services must take an oath which identifies them as an "infidel," or unbeliever.

I know that sounds crazy. Every single person who signed the U.S. Constitution would say that's crazy. But it's true. My final brief was written by three well-known professors of Constitutional Law and a former California State Supreme Court Justice. It was denied by the same court that ruled that California school children could not say the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. Another decision which I would describe as crazy, but true. Details on my case are here:

http://i.am/not-a-lawyer

I say again that on Memorial Day Americans do more than mourn the dead and assist their families. They honor the choice to fight. They honor their choice to be warmakers instead of peacemakers. Speaking as a six-day creationist pacifist, I would rather go to prison and be sodomized than kill a human being. And there are a lot of Veterans who are still traumatized by what they were ordered to do by their government. We need a holiday to honor peacemakers, based on the Biblical idea that war is evil.    [top]