Skip to content
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Christian Citizenship  /  War  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 5
Across Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement, Tertullian, Cyprian, Arnobius, and Lactantius, the repeated “we” language is emphasized (“we refrain from making war,” “we offer the other cheek”); what do you think this reveals about early Christian communal identity, and how different is that from modern “personal conviction” approaches?
Another way to ask: Early Christian writers often said “we don’t make war” and “we turn the other cheek.” What does that show about how they saw Christians as a group, and how is that different from treating faith as only a personal choice?

Direct Answer The repeated “we” suggests early Christians saw enemy-love and nonviolence as a shared, public mark of the whole church, not a private preference. Bercot presents it as a unified, worldwide Christian identity rather than individual “views” that vary person to person.

Support from Transcript:

  • Justin Martyr: “We who formerly murdered one another now refrain from making war even upon our enemies,” and “we…have…changed our…swords into plowshares.” Bercot notes he’s addressing Romans and speaking for Christians generally.
  • Tatian similarly speaks representatively: “I decline military command.” Bercot says he is not giving “personal views” but “representative of all Christians.”
  • Athenagoras: “We have learned not to return blow for blow…we offer the other side also.”
  • Irenaeus describes Christians as a people who “no longer learn to fight” and “offer also the other cheek.”
  • Bercot summarizes: writers across “Africa, Egypt…Rome…Gaul…Syria” all express “the same viewpoint,” and he claims you “will not find…a single writer who takes a contrary view.”
Discussion Follow-ups If the early church spoke this way, what would it take for modern churches to say “we” about violence rather than “some of us”?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10
Back Questions Next