How do devout Christians justify military service?

[Earl_of_Sandwhich]

@mangeorge

First off, I’ll admit to the possibility of some bias on this subject. I liked him as Cassius Clay, and I’ve come to really admire the man over the years.
He was guaranteed a “free ride” through the military, doing mostly pr stuff, and would have profited greatly had he served. Instead, he refused and paid a heavy price, with no promise of ever resuming his boxing career.
I wondered why so I read everything I could find about his refusal and subsequent trials. I never did find anything concrete to show that there were any reasons other than his religious beliefs and his moral convictions.
Do you know something to the contrary?
BTW; I’m not being argumentative, I just wanna know. I won’t think any less of the man if he did “dodge”.

When I said that “more than just Mr. Ali’s conscience was at work when he came out in opposition to the Vietnam War,” I did not mean to imply that he had any kind of ulterior motive. I was replying to NoClueBoy’s assertion that his individual conscience, rather than his religion, was the primary reason for his refusal to submit to military induction.

I would argue, and both the Justice Department and the Supreme Court would seem to agree, that Mr. Ali’s refusal to participate in the Vietnam War was “based upon religious training and belief,” one of the requirements for conscientous objector status.

As far as I know, Mr. Ali’s actions turned out to be perfectly legal. After all, the Supreme Court unamimously overturned his conviction. He was one of many people who had to make a difficult decision, and I think he showed real courage in resisting the government’s effort to put him in a uniform. He did the right thing, and payed for it by not being allowed to box during a crucial time in his career. But he did make a comeback.

[David_Simmons]

@JThunder

Your error is in thinking that because murder is wrong, non-murderous killing is automatically copacetic. It isn’t. The Old Testament law also condemns negligent manslaughter – hence the provisions for the safe havens that you described.

I’m not sure how you read into my post the idea that I think some killing is “copacetic.” (Now there’s a word you don’t often run into any more.")

I don’t think that it makes any difference whether or not the commandment originally used the word now translated as “murder” or the word now translated as “kill.”

The commandment merely lays down a ban without specifying any punishment. How various killings are to be treated is spelled out in various other places. Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy for example. It is analagous to Congress passing a law establishing a new agency and leaving the details of its actual administration to be filled in by the Executive Department in a series of regulations.

As far as the question in the OP, it seems to me one prime message of the Old Testament is that that God’s directions are to be obeyed. If He says kill everyone and everything - men, women, children, livestock, crops - then that is what is required on penalty of offending God. Or if He says to kill all the men and keep the "women and the little ones and the cattle [and ] … all the spoil thereof to yourself as in Deut. 20:13-14 then you do that.

So it would appear that the devout Christian could easily engage in war as a combatant if the war is presented as upholding God’s will. Even Hitler claimed that he was fulfilling God’s will. In Mein Kampf, Book 1, Chap. II . he wrote, “And so I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator. In standing guard against the Jew I am defending the handiwork of the Lord.”

Now, I don’t say that a Christian in the military in WWII, or Korea, or Vietnam is in any way comparable to Hitler. I merely say that rationalizing is easy and if the enemies can be made into Amalekites by propaganda then killing them can easily become the Lord’s will. They can all be killed to the last person and their cities destroyed and their land strewn with salt so that they will not be a problem in the future.

In WWII US Secretary of the Treasury Henry Mogenthauargued for just such a solution for the “German Problem.” In my WWII bomb group we regularly bombed cities that held women, children, old people and war wounded. The mission planners knew it and so did we, including the many Christians among us. As I said, rationalizing is easy. For one thing, if you were ordered to go and refused you could easily go to a military prison, or worse, and someone else would be sent to do the job. In other words, the rationale is that the job will be done and your opposition won’t change that, it will merely get you in deep trouble. Business executives find this rationale very useful.

I do not claim that these are the particular rationalizations that are used by Christians or were used by those of us in the bomb group. In our case that matter never came up as far as I know. At least it wasn’t a subject for great discussions among us. I am just pointing out in answer to the OP question some of the ways in which a Christian can rationalize participating in a war as a combatant.

[Rodrigo]

Let’s see Diogenes

Was your that’s for sure about the hypocrisy or the sinfulness?

Can it be used to justify anything? Sure, so what?, tell me something that can’t.

No it is not so subjective and variable that the bible can be used to justify virtually anything, in the sense you imply. People used the US constitution to force blacks into segregated bathrooms notwithstanding “all men are created equal”. There is a difference, and you look like you don’t perceive it, between wildly subejctive interpretation (which isnt the Bible) and trying to justify my sin by ex post facto re-interpeting the Bible. Bill Clinton tried to force the bible into saying that getting a blowjob wasn’t wrong, but that wasn’t because the Bible was clear or not (and it is not the point if it is clear on this issue), he was trying to cover his ass, willfully mis-intepreting Scripture, but still, it is mostly a NO on hipocrisy and a YES on sin.

My point on Iraq, and I didn’t claim you said anything, was that you have made it clear you oppose it. You oppose it because YOUR OWN PERSONAL interpretation of the facts lead you to belive it, but many other people, reading the same facts have come to completely different opinions both on the “dove” and “hawk” side of the issue. So we can say that the facts of the war on Iraq are “so subjective and variable that the bible can be used to justify virtually anything”. Bush has used the facts to go to war, some journalists used the facts and didn’t report n the atrocities so that they could report", some used the facts to vent out anit-US feeling, some used the facts to oppose this specific war and some used the facts to oppose ANY war. So I think that your opposition is coloured by your preconceptions, unless you call yourself bias-free.

Can’t two fair-minded people disagree without using dark agendas or hypocrisy?

It is a NO on the contradictions, but we have already discussed contradicitons on the Bible on another thread called are there contradicitons in the Bible.

---

What is the option: no soldiers (and no cops)? Did Jesus intend for me not to defend my family? Should I sit down while they are stabbing my wife or should I confront the agressor even at risk of my own life and using force?

---

Chrsitians cannot participate in wars of aggression but can and should defend the helpless.

[mangeorge]

@Diogenes the Cynic

Mangeorge, I misread your post and I missed the crucial word “as,” In your first senetence. I thought you said “I like Cassius Clay.” I’m sorry for the unjustified correction. please ignore that post and forget I said anything.

"Sallright.

[deb2world]

Here is how Seventh Day Adventists (and I think you can all agree that we are some of the most conservative Christians around) do military service (or at least the official church policy). First, let me say that many the Adventist died in WWII and Korea and Vietnam.

They do not carry a gun. Instead they are medical support personnel. If the draft is reinstated there is a plan to send all of our draft age young men to 6 weeks medical training who need it. As medics they treat (and have treated) both sides equally.

Also, the head Navy chaplain is an Adventist. You might have seen him, he conducted the memorial ceremony for the USS Cole.

deb