Chapter 5: The Early Church. As the Persian Gulf War drew closer, headlines commonly began to display reports from Kuwait and Iraq suggesting the imminent need for military force. I was rather vocal about my growing convictions, so some of my leaders were beginning to challenge me and ask questions. I welcomed their questions because, each time, I secretly wished they would talk me out of all of this. One afternoon in particular, I remember an intense inward struggle I had while on duty in the armory.
Our unit had received a few 203 grenade launchers that we were supposed to attach to some of the M16 machine guns. Being just back from armory school, it was my job to install them. I vividly remember holding the grenade launcher in my hand, twisting the wire around the M16 barrel, and asking myself, "What would Jesus do?" The answer seemed clear: of course, Jesus would have nothing to do with grenade launchers. But still, I wrestled to justify the whole thing as I put the final touches on the job.
It wasn't long until the whole unit was called into the meeting hall with a tone of urgency one evening. We were given what the commander called our "deadly force briefing." In this meeting, the acting first sergeant was obviously excited. He spoke forcibly as he paced back and forth. This guy was one of those people who dreamed of times like this. His nickname was "Big Daddy." He was mostly bald and sported a surprisingly tolerated potbelly. It made you wonder how he ever passed the quarterly weigh-ins.
Accustomed to using profane words and harsh expressions, he was now explaining the seriousness of the hour and how we were expected to respond to this threat. Then, toward the climax of the talk, he looked right at me and said, "If someone tries to get in here, you will be required to use deadly force to stop him." Suddenly, my funny ideas had become something more than just theological wrangling. I thought to myself, "Well, they can't actually make me kill someone.
I can just keep this all to myself and walk around looking official." But the more I thought about it, the more convicted I became. My banner of no compromise was being tested. And besides the spiritual side of it all, I started to be concerned that if I wasn't being honest with how I was planning to respond to the enemy, then I could end up hurting someone else in the unit. My mind was spinning, and my heart was racing. Cloud of Witnesses.
At this time, I think I would have felt completely alone if it had not been for the writings of the early church. I had recently run across a few books that had introduced me to the faith and practice of the early Christians during the first 300 years of the church. The military community in which we were living had many English and American stores off base. One of these was a Christian bookstore with a very unusual assortment of books. I simply couldn't believe what I was finding in this store.
It was owned by a regular evangelical minister, but the things that he had in his store were revolutionary. I later found out that he had recently purchased a large portion of his inventory from a local radical bookstore that had gone out of business. This was unfortunate for the man who went out of business, but for me and my wife, it was life-changing. One book that I found there was "How Christians Made Peace with War: Early Christian Understandings of War" by John Driver. This book lured me in.
I thought this book would help me make peace with the war issue, but instead, it introduced me to the writings of the early church. Other books I found there were volumes by David Bercot, such as "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up?" and some other primary sources of early Christian writings that David Bercot had published. These books threw open the door showing me that a live, spiritual, powerful church had existed after the death of the apostles. I had no idea what I was about to find.
As I dug into the writings of the early Christians, I soon discovered that the closer I got to the apostles, the simpler, purer, and more biblically literal their teachings became. But more than just doctrine, I found in their writings a faith that caused men to preach from crosses, challenged kings in front of devouring beasts, and caused whole families to lay down their lives for Christ. It seemed that this doctrine of peace and non-resistance flowed naturally from their general understanding of the faith.
The New Kingdom. One of the primary points the early church stressed was that Christ the Messiah had come, and that at His coming He set up His kingdom in which He alone reigns as King. When the early Christians prayed, "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done," they meant it. As citizens in that kingdom, their structure, practices, laws, and even their weapons had been prescribed by their King. I have to admit, as I read the writings of the early Christians, I got excited.
These early Christians had such a sense of expectancy, it seemed that they were inspired by watching the fulfillment of the Scriptures right before their eyes. One of the most significant prophecies, repeated time and time again by the early church, was the kingdom prophecy found in Isaiah. "Many people shall come and say, 'Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us His ways, and we shall walk in His paths.
For out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. He shall judge between the nations and rebuke many people. They shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.'" In fulfillment of this Scripture, they felt that their King had come and done this very thing. Justin Martyr.
Justin Martyr was a philosopher who, after being born again, gave himself to the preaching of Christ until it eventually cost him his life. Writing around AD 150, he wrote a debate with a Jewish man in which he appealed to him from the prophecy of Isaiah, saying, "We used to be filled with war, mutual slaughter, and every kind of wickedness. However, now all of us have, throughout the whole earth, changed our warlike weapons.
We have changed our swords into plowshares and our spears into farming implements." Later, he wrote a letter to the emperor, trying to explain Christianity to him. He said, "We who formerly murdered one another now refrain from making war even upon our enemies." Bishop Irenaeus of Lyons. In another part of the world, an early Christian bishop named Irenaeus, writing a book against polytheists and heretics, explained the way of the Christians.
"The new covenant that brings back peace and the law that gives life have gone forth over the whole earth," as the prophet said, "for out of Zion will go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, and he will rebuke many people, and they shall break down their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks, and they will no longer learn to fight. These people, that is, Christians, form their swords and war lances into plowshares, that is, into instruments used for peaceful purposes.
So now they are unaccustomed to fighting. When they are struck, they offer also the other cheek." I found that, without question, the teaching of non-resistance was an integral part of the faith of the early church, not just from one teacher or from only one area. Rather, I found that the teaching was preached unanimously from all parts of the ancient world.
When I considered that this unity was accomplished without the aid of mass transportation, telephones, or even modern parcel service, it really made me stop and think. Perhaps a literal understanding of Jesus' words was not as crazy as I had once thought. Clement of Alexandria. Across the Mediterranean, separated by oceans and mountains, was another teacher named Clement of Alexandria who wrote in about the year AD 190. Once again, even there in North Africa, the gospel he had received was the same.
Writing a series of teachings on the Christian faith, Clement explained the faith he had received. In some of those teachings, he explained, "He bids us to love our enemies, bless them who curse us, and pray for those who despitefully use us." And he says, "If anyone strikes you on the one cheek, turn to him the other also, and if anyone takes away your coat, do not hinder him from taking your cloak also.
An enemy must be aided so that he may not continue as an enemy, for by help, good feeling is compacted and enmity dissolved. We do not train our women like Amazons to manliness in war, for we wish even the men to be peaceable. Christians are not allowed to use violence to correct the delinquencies of sins." The early church treatment of the Old Testament.
What I saw coming out of the early church was the understanding that, without hesitation, they simply believed that Jesus changed the way His kingdom was to operate and do battle. They emphatically believed that wars and fighting would still continue; it was just that the methods and weapons had changed. Tertullian.
In testifying to how the early Christians viewed this change from the Old Testament practice, Tertullian, a very outspoken early Christian from North Africa, wrote in about AD 195, "The practice of the old law was to avenge itself by the vengeance of the sword. It was to pluck out eye for eye and to inflict retaliatory revenge for injury. However, the practice of the new law points to mercy. Men of old were used to requiring an eye for eye and tooth for tooth and to repay evil for evil with usury.
But after Christ has supervened and has united the grace of faith with patience, now it is no longer lawful to attack others even with words, nor to merely say, 'Fool,' without danger of the judgment.
Christ says, 'Love your enemies, and bless your cursers, and pray for your persecutors.' Christ plainly teaches a new kind of long-suffering when He actually prohibits the reprisals that the Creator permitted in requiring an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." Hippias, a pagan, is put to death for laying plots against the state. No Christian ever attempted such a thing on behalf of his brethren, even when persecution was scattering them abroad with every atrocity.
For what difference is there between provoker and provoked? The only difference is that the former was the first to do evil, but the latter did evil afterwards. Each one stands condemned in the eyes of the Lord for hurting a man, for God both prohibits and condemns every wickedness. In evil-doing, there is no account taken of the order; the commandment is absolute. Evil is not to be repaid with evil.
Going beyond personal non-resistance, the early church very clearly taught against killing of any kind, even if it had the guise of a just cause. Again, Tertullian challenges. I think we must first inquire whether warfare is proper at all for Christians. What point is there in discussing the merely incidental when that on which it rests is to be condemned? Do we believe it is lawful for a human oath to be added to one that is divine?
Is it lawful to make an occupation of the sword when the Lord proclaims that he who uses the sword will perish by the sword? Will the Son of Peace take part in the battle when it does not become him even to sue at law? Will he who is not the avenger even of his own wrongs apply the chain, the prison, the torture, and the punishment? Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus.
During the same time as Tertullian, but in a completely different location, Hippolytus wrote an ancient church document stating guidelines for the church concerning grounds for receiving or rejecting converts into baptism and communion. The church guidelines state: "If an applicant or a believer seeks to become a soldier, he must be rejected, for he has despised God." You're not helping us. One of the challenges I received from my fellow soldiers was that I was unworthily partaking of the peace that the U.S.
Army was giving to me. They asked, "What if everyone in the Army felt this way? What would happen?" They argued that it was not fair for me to enjoy this peace without doing my part to maintain it. This hurt. I had always embraced the idea of doing my part, of being a team player. I appreciated the sacrifice made by American veterans and what they did for me, but I loved Jesus even more. It wasn't that I despised or disrespected the soldiers; it was that I had undergone a change of allegiance.
My allegiance was to Jesus, but I wasn't insensitive to their sacrifices. Interestingly, I found that the early church was accused of the same thing. Writing about AD 248, Origen, another philosopher turned Christian, was giving a defense against this very criticism. Origen. With faith-filled confidence, Origen challenged his opponents that the Christians were doing a lot more than they thought.
The critics of the Christians said that the Christians should feel obligated to labor with them in maintaining justice, and if the need should arise, to fight with them. Origen had a great reply. To this, our answer is that we do give help to kings when needed, but this is, so to speak, a divine help, putting on the whole armor of God. And we do this in obedience to the commandment of the apostle.
I exhort, therefore, that first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgiving be made for all men, for kings, and for all who are in authority. So the more anyone excels in godliness, the more effective the help is that he renders to kings. This is a greater help than what is given by soldiers who go forth to fight and kill as many of the enemy as they can. Our prayers defeat all demons who stir up war. Those demons also lead persons to violate their oaths and to disturb the peace.
Accordingly, in this way, we are much more helpful to the kings than those who go into the field to fight for them. And we do take our part in public affairs when we join self-denying exercises to our righteous prayers and meditations, which teach us to despise pleasures and not to be led away by them. So none fight better for the king than we do. Indeed, we do not fight under him even if he demands it; yet we fight on his behalf, forming a special army, an army of godliness, by offering our prayers to God.
The early church did not need a sword to defend or prosper their cause. The more they were hunted, crucified, fed to lions, or tortured, the more this faith just grew and grew. Speaking about persecution of Christians, Tertullian told the Romans that instead of diminishing the church, it actually was attracting people to it. Speaking of the result of the empire's merciless persecution of the Christians, he said, "It is bait that wins men for our school.
The oftener we are mown down by you, the more in number we grow. The blood of Christians is seed of the church." With sheer bravery, Origen once challenged the emperor, speaking of the church's growth amid great persecution, saying, "And this is in spite of the numerous obstacles that oppose the spread of Christ's teaching in the world. However, since it was the purpose of God that the nations should receive the benefits of Christ's teaching, all the devices of men against Christians have been brought to nothing.
For the more the kings, rulers, and peoples have persecuted them everywhere, the more Christians have increased in number and grown in strength." I was greatly encouraged to discover that the Christians who were the closest to the apostles all agreed unanimously with the literal understanding of Jesus' words, "Love your enemies." No just wars, just plain and simple, "Love your enemies." It was so refreshing.
I thought, "At last, I found some friends and fellowship." However, it was just too bad for me that they had all died more than 1,700 years ago. There seemed to be such a chasm separating their world from mine. I wondered what had happened. How had the church changed from holding to a universal position of non-resistance to becoming a military and persecuting force by the time of Augustine? How did such a huge change happen? How was this chasm ever crossed on such a large scale?