The strongest argument for non-participation has to do with a Christian’s citizenship. It’s a case I’ve made before, but I feel strongly enough about it to address it again. To be honest, I think that a true understanding of citizenship limits a lot of the nationalistic expressions and patriotic stances that I see in Christians in the United States.
For many, there almost seems to be a conflation of the Kingdom of God and the nation of the United States. (“God bless the U.S.A.” is less about God and more about the U.S. A.) What’s good for the U.S. is good for God. That attitude runs contrary to what I see in the Bible, where Christians are to live as strangers and aliens, seeking a heavenly city rather than an earthly one.
No man can serve two masters. No one serving as a soldier in the Lord’s service should be distracted by the “civilian affairs” of this world. You can’t be an ambassador of one nation and full-fledged citizen of another.
We are citizens of a nation that spans all earthly borders, includes all nations and races, speaks every earthly tongue. The good of every person on this earth is our business. The welfare of every nation on earth is our concern. Our main prayer is that we be able to lead quiet lives, able to spread the good news of God’s reign.
I don’t see how serving in the military of any one country can fit with that stance. Again, I’m in no place to condemn those who make a different choice. But I know that growing up, I never heard this teaching. I thought patriotism was a natural part of Christianity and military service a necessary part of patriotism. My aim is to help others at least recognize that they are making a choice, one that can have powerful consequences.
I continue to be amazed at how much we think alike. Is that good or bad, bro?
Amen on what you had to say about our citizenship. It is my belief that a failure to understand our citizenship in the kingdom of God is at the root of most problems in the church.
On the other hand, my experience in what was taught by Christians where I grew up was the opposite of yours. We were taught that our citizenship in the kingdom of Heaven was primary. It was not complete non-participation, which may have led to the change about the time I turned 20, but it was very close. Complete non-participation in earthly government seems to be the only way to keep our perspective from being skewed by propaganda.
The change came about because of the fear of communism during the Cuban Missile Crisis of the 1960s. The local church abandoned their stand against military service because government propaganda branded them as communists otherwise.
A few of us who did believe in complete non-participation, were often called communists, and worse, even by our brethren. In the late 1960’s, I have been told, those of us who happened to preach in the Chicago area were tracked by the CIA. It may not have been true, but it certainly made us think about our loyalties and caused many to change or temper their teaching.
During that time I was blessed by a congregation that for the most part still believed in non-participation, so my decision to maintain what I believe to be the truth was not as hard as it would have been. However, since then I have faced many challenges, even losing my job preaching for one congregation because they learned when I mentioned that I am a conscientious objector in a passing comment. I can not help, but wonder if any churches still exist that really understand the kingdom of our Lord.
Wes
My citizenship in heaven is primary…and it is this that defines me. Yet, from a position of stewardship, I can consider myself a citizen of earth, in general, and the United States, in particular…although I also struggle with how much weight should be given to such… Blessings, Don
Wes,
Thanks for sharing your insights and experiences. Some express fear that the government may one day harass Christians for what they teach; they don’t seem to recognize that that very thing has gone on numerous times in the past.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Doug,
If I were you, I’d be worried.
:-)
Thanks Don for the comment. I think we all need to wrestle with those priorities.
Good post, I’ve been having the same thoughts lately. For a couple years up till last November I had fallen away from the church, gave it all up for worldly pursuits. Well at one point I cleaned up and tried to join the Marines, I wanted to be an infantryman in the worst way. I was disqualified for just slightly to bad of eyesight.
After that I fell even further away, but thanks be to God, i came back around. I realise now what the problem was. I wanted to serve man for the sake of death, instead of serving God for the sake of life. Now I’m getting ready to do mission work, and even with all odds stacked against me, its working out perfectly. God is good.
I agree with your post and your acknowledgment that you are not the one to judge those who have a different view.
I believe it is impossible to serve two kingdoms. We may try but as long as we do, we will make one subservient to the other. Because the Patriotic/Nationalistic ethos is so prevalent and indoctrinated into, it almost always becomes the kingdom of choice by those who try and serve two kingdoms.
It is interesting that Jesus never confronted any military personel or politition regarding citizenship. He did seek to identify where their hearts were and what was motivating them. The heart will always reveal the true intentions of a person. If we have given ourselves to Christ, completely, how can we give ourselves to someone else?
David,
Of course Jesus doesn’t seem to have spoken with any Jews who were in the military. And the concept of being citizens of the Kingdom doesn’t seem to have been preached until after Jesus’ death.
What you say about the heart, however, is very true.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
We don’t know if Jesus did confront any civil servant or not. All that we know is we have no record in scripture of him doing so. However, it takes a huge leap to ascertain solely from the absence of any such conversation that Jesus would then approve of his followers engaging in civil service. Likewise, it would take a similar huge leap to draw claim Jesus is condemning of his followers engaging in civil service based solely on the fact that we have no remarks from Jesus which directly answer the question in the affirmative. What we must go on is the evidence of what Jesus did teach and how his followers came to understand and practice that teaching. I believe the evidence favors the view that Christians are, at bare minimum, not to participate in or support the state in warfare for the fact that such participation and support serves a kingdom other than God’s. However, I also realize that such a conclusion is not without credible dissenting arguments and that is why I refrain from making judgments about the faith of Jesus followers who believe otherwise.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
I grew up in a pacifist environment (1940’s & early 1950’s) at the Mt. Dora, FL Bible School. When I registered for the draft, I requested recognition as a CO. I received a non-combatant (A-1-0) draft card, but was never called up. I was ordered to report for a physical in December 1961 just after the Berlin Wall went up. I passed the physical, but the order to report never came.
Over the years, I have come to recognize the possibility of a just war, though I still struggle with the question of how a Christian can participate in such a war as a combatant. I am also persuaded that just wars are few and far between.
The ideal of the kingdom of God is that military equipment be turned into farm implements.
I do not go as far as David Lipscomb in advocating non-participation in government at any level. I remember Daniel and his friends who served in high office in Babylon – and also for the Medes and Persians. I remember Erastus who was the city (Corinth?) director of public works (Rom 16:23). These were God’s people serving in both Testaments as civil servants in Pagan Empires. This is in line with Jeremiah’s instruction to the exiles to work and pray for the prosperity of Babylon – for God would bless them through the prosperity of their cities of exile (Jer 29:7, context vv 4-23). I also remember Paul taking advantage of Roman Law in his conflict with the Jews of Jerusalem.
While I can see a role for Christians in civil service, I do not expect to establish the kingdom of God at the ballot box – though I am also persuaded that God can use elections. I also realize that there are so many factors that can affect how a person votes. In the recent gubernatorial election in FL, I voted for the losing candidate because I thought the other guy (who won the election) was either a crook or incompetent because his company had to pay more than $1 Billion as a fine for Medicare Fraud. My dearly loved cousin voted for him because she thought he was more likely to be pro-life than the losing candidate. Neither of us lost any sleep over the vote of the other.
Citizenship in the kingdom of heaven means I put God first. Just as I can come to Jesus only by “hating” father and mother, I can come to him only by “hating” my fatherland as well. Nevertheless, as a citizen of God’s Kingdom I am to love and honor my parents. I am also taught to honor the king and to give to Caesar that which is Caesar – while also giving to God that which is God’s – which is all my heart, soul, mind, and strength. There should be no doubt as to where my ultimate allegiance lies!
Note: I published a few remarks and an index of links to this series of blogs here today.
I am glad Tim is making these posts. A brother who spent WWII in a Conscientious Objector Work Camp (much like a concentration camp) here in the USofA once told me of how sad it was to see how bloodthirsty brethren became after Pearl Harbor, including many who until then had been pacifist in their outlook. I experienced the same sadness after 9/11. While I never descended to “hating Bush” or “bashing” him, I was sad that he – along with nearly all of our government – thought that war, first in Afganistan and then in Iraq was “necessary.” (At the same time, I confess I do not know what an appropriate response would have been.)
I do know that all of us have a lot of thinking – and praying – to do about this matter.
Bless you, Tim, for bringing it to our attention in a kind, gentle way.
Jerry Starling
Jerry
Tim, do you believe a Christian should serve on a jury?
Laymond,
I currently don’t have a problem with Christians serving on juries. I’m debating (for me personally) how I feel about voting for certain things, such as local elections. Thanks for bringing that up… there are lots of particulars that I’m still working through.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
I’m curious for some interaction with Paul’s comfort – both pre- and post- conversion – with his dual citizenship.
Why is a single citizenship mindset, rather than Paul’s dual citizenship mindset, the better position?
Is the writer of Hebrews subtly reprimanding Paul for his willingness to use his Roman citizenship to further his kingdom ministry?
I don’t know that Paul had a dual citizenship mindset. I know how the two incidents from Acts are often presented, but Paul also laid claim to his Pharisaism in the book of Acts. Do we honestly think he went around presenting himself as a Christian Pharisee? In Philippians 3, Paul specifically mentions being Pharisee as part of the past that no longer mattered and implies the same about his citizenship.
I would also argue that the incident in Philippi makes it clear that Paul wasn’t quick to mention his Roman citizenship. It gets mentioned AFTER he was arrested, beaten and imprisoned.
When I came back from Nicaragua last week, I got in the U.S. Citizens line at immigration because it makes things go faster. When I go into Argentina, I show my Argentine resident card, for the same reason. Neither status defines me.
When he went to synagogue, I think that’s exactly how he presented himself. Otherwise, I doubt that he would have been allowed to preach.
And presenting his Roman credentials before his beating would not have gotten the job done, either there or in Jerusalem, where the timely presentation of his credentials opened the door for preaching the gospel to the highest officials in the land – partially fulfilling the original promise that closes Luke and opens Acts – the gospel going to the ends of the earth.
What he did not do anymore was precisely what you don’t do – allow his status and his rank within that hierarchy to define him.
But you opened this post by saying, “The strongest argument for non-participation has to do with a Christian’s citizenship.”
That’s where I disagree – I think it is the weakest of the ones you’ve presented, because there are too many credible counterexamples. The arguments you followed with (the powers, Jesus’ teachings) leave fewer opportunities for credible counterexamples. For a Christian’s citizenship in the kingdom of heaven to be the strongest argument, it would have to require rejection of other citizenships. Unless Paul didn’t handle his Roman citizenship in harmony with kingdom citizenship (and I’m not eliminating that possibility out of hand – if Peter can screw up, so can Paul), Acts teaches us that such a rejection is not required.
Where is your motivation? Where is your loyalty? What identifies/defines you? These are the key questions of kingdom citizenship, and I’m not yet sold that military participation requires a worldly answer to any of those questions.
Nick,
Even if citizenship in heaven doesn’t require a rejection of other citizenships, it does require being taken seriously. What I mean is this: while people give lip service to their heavenly citizenship being more important, their actions betray them. Is it possible to be “dual citizens” with one citizenship taking precedence? Maybe.
When you take on a new earthly citizenship, they expect you to renounce all other citizenships. Why should the heavenly one be different?
I still don’t see what Paul did in Acts as being any different than claiming any other affiliation that would be helpful. It is no more important than what he did as a Pharisee. It’s similar to a missionary I know who gets medical supplies through the Rotary Club because he’s a Rotarian. For the Christian, earthly citizenship exists, but it has no claims on us. A good counterexample would be Paul doing something in service to the Empire.
Maybe I need to find a better way to express the concept. Maybe it’s not just “citizenship,” it’s patriotism or nationalism. We should be patriotic… for the Kingdom of Heaven. And nationalistic about it as well.
YES – exactly! That’s exactly what I see, too, and it frustrates me to no end.
I think part of the language struggle, around the word citizenship, might be that ‘dual citizenship’ just didn’t exist when Paul was writing, so his challenge to the Philippians is actually a really creative concept. No so much for most Christians in the 1st century, who weren’t citizens of anything – but for the colonists in Philippi who were Roman citizens… challenging them to see themselves primarily as kingdom citizens w/o renouncing the actuality of their Roman citizenship is a very creative move.
I think there’s a lot of meat for the US Christian to chew on in Paul’s teaching to the Philippians.
Pingback: THE CHRISTIAN AND PACIFISM « Committed To Truth