Jumpstarter 8 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 8

In the Second Civil War, both Puritan sides “pruned their armies” for sanctified soldiers, prayed earnestly, and then interpreted slaughter and victory as proof God was with them; what does this do to our discernment of God’s will, and how does it challenge common evangelical assumptions that victory, growth, or success equals God’s endorsement?

Another way to ask: If both sides prayed hard and then used victory and slaughter as proof God was with them, how does that confuse our ability to know God’s will? How does it challenge the idea that success means God approves?

Direct Answer The transcript suggests that when both sides claim spiritual purity, pray, and then use victory as “proof,” discernment collapses into reading outcomes as God’s endorsement—yet the same mindset can justify civil war and massacre as “the Word of the Lord.”

Support from Transcript:

Before battle, “both sides prayed earnestly to God” and “pruned their armies of any soldiers who were not fully sanctified.”
The Independents “wept and groaned” over compromising with the “ungodly” (meaning fellow Puritans), repenting of “carnal consultations.”
They lamented trying “to reach a compromise” and believed they should have “immediately” taken up arms—Bercot comments: “The Word of the Lord doesn’t tell you to try to make peace…It says to go to war…? How strange.”
Cromwell’s decisive victory “only convinced them the more that God was on their side.”
He then blocked retreat so enemies were “mowed down and slaughtered over 20,000 men,” yet victory still functioned as validation.

Discussion Follow-ups What tests besides “it worked” should Christians use to judge whether a cause is God’s will? How do we keep prayer from becoming a stamp of approval on what we already want?

Jumpstarter 8 of 10