Biblical Self-Defense and the Obligations of Christian Soldiers

The Bible is often cited as a source of moral and ethical guidance, both for individual behavior and for nations. One major topic that often arises is the role of defensive actions, especially in light of the famous phrase 'turn the other cheek.' This article explores how modern Christians, particularly those who take their faith seriously, should approach self-defense and the use of force in a world where danger and violence are all too common.

Weapons and Defense in the Bible

A surprising number of heroes in the Bible were armed and engaged in combat. Figures like Abraham, the various Judges of Israel, David, and the Twelve Disciples are all mentioned as being equipped for battle. In Exodus 22:2, God's people are explicitly instructed on how to handle attacks:

“If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the attacker is not guilty of bloodshed.”

This passage clearly indicates that self-defense is not only allowed but also expected in certain circumstances. Throughout the Bible, there are numerous examples of armed conflict, such as the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites, and the use of weapons by the judges and kings of Israel.

The Dilemma of Modern Christianity

Despite the clear support for self-defense in the Bible, some modern Christians apply a selective interpretation of its teachings. Figures like David McKay, John Piper, and organizations such as Desiring God and the United Methodist Church have influenced many to believe that Christians should not own weapons or engage in defensive actions. This belief is further amplified by the mainstream media, which often portrays these views as the dominant Christian perspective. However, this is a misinterpretation and a deprivation of the full richness of Biblical teachings.

Christians and Self-Defense

Many Christians believe that the command to 'turn the other cheek' should be taken as a call to peace and non-violence. While turning the other cheek can be a powerful symbol of grace and forgiveness, it is not a one-size-fits-all prescription for dealing with every situation. Indeed, this principle has been misapplied to the detriment of many individuals and communities. For instance, turning the other cheek was not the best strategy for Peter when he was trying to protect Jesus, nor was it a feasible approach during the mass murders under Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

Historical Context and Practicality

History is replete with examples of people who lived by the sword and either died by the sword or peacefully died in old age. The reality is that a purely pacifist approach can be ineffective and even dangerous. Consider the impact of individuals like Susan B. Anthony and Martin Luther King Jr., who used non-violent protest but also relied on the support of those willing to defend their movements. Conversely, the effectiveness of defensive actions cannot be overstated, as seen in the numerous instances where individuals and communities have survived and thrived by taking appropriate protective measures.

Conclusion

Christians face a complex challenge in balancing their faith with the realities of a dangerous world. While the Bible does promote peace and non-violence, it also supports self-defense in the face of clear and present danger. The key is to approach these teachings with a balanced and practical mindset, understanding both the historical and ethical context. It is essential to remember that the 'turn the other cheek' principle is not an absolute mandate but rather a call to follow a path of grace and forgiveness when appropriate. However, Christians should also be prepared to defend their own and others’ rights when necessary, guided by wisdom and prudence rather than a rigid interpretation of scripture.