Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 6
Bert Brocklesby’s exchange includes: “War is great in the command ‘Thou shalt not kill’… Do you think those commands apply to individuals but not to the state? They apply to both… There are thousands of Christians in the war… It’s not my idea of being a Christian”; what assumptions about discipleship, authority, and obedience to Jesus are exposed in those lines, and where do you see the same “state vs. individual” split operating in current Christian ethics?
Another way to ask: In Brocklesby’s words, what beliefs show up about following Jesus, obeying authorities, and what “Thou shalt not kill” means for both people and governments? Where do you see that same split—one rule for individuals, another for the state—in Christian choices today?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
Brocklesby assumes discipleship means Jesus’ commands (including “Thou shalt not kill”) bind Christians without exceptions for state demands; he refuses the idea that the state can suspend Christ’s moral law. The transcript doesn’t apply this to modern debates directly, but it clearly exposes a “state vs. individual” split where many excuse what they would call sin privately when done under government authority.
- The military official frames war as compatible with commandment ethics: “War is great in the command ‘Thou shalt not kill.’”
- The official presses the common distinction: do commands apply “to individuals but not to the state?”
- Brocklesby’s reply: “They apply to both,” rejecting the split.
- When told “There are thousands of Christians in the war,” he answers, “It’s not my idea of being a Christian.”
- The speaker comments that nations presented war as “holy” and “righteous,” but he insists, “war is not holy.”
- Brocklesby is described as having a “very powerful testimony… of non-resistance and loving your enemies.”