What Does the Bible Say War is Good For?

Holy War in the Bible: A Review

Thomas, Heath A., Jeremy Evans, and Paul Copan. Holy War in the Bible: Christian Morality and an Old Testament Problem. Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2013.

Holy War in the Bible: Christian Morality and an Old Testament Problem was birthed from a colloquium held in 2009 at Wake Forest Baptist Church (9). It is an attempt to bring together a wide array of perspectives regarding the tension between Christianity and war. It is broken into six major sections, with an afterword that asks the ever important “so what?” question. In fact, “Old Testament ‘Holy War’ and Christian Morality” is the glue that binds the entire book together. While the introduction, “Orientation Amidst the Diversity” does a fine job of initially orienting the reader, it is the final essay co-written by Thomas and Evans which sheds the real light on the immediate consequences of the ideas contained in the book. These final considerations of what future research should investigate regarding Christian ethics and war serve as the true north for the rest of the essays. 

Part One of Holy War in the Bible begins the introductory essay and concludes with a challenging exploration of “Joshua and the Crusades.” Douglas S. Earl digs deep in Crusade history to demonstrate that there were those in power during the Middle Ages who used Joshua as a pretext for conquest (20-21). Overall, however, Earl makes a powerful argument that most theologians interpreted Joshua along the same lines as the early Church Fathers, and did not in fact use this portion of Scripture to justify war (38).

Part Two wrestles with the Old Testament’s in text perspective on divine war, with Stephen B. Chapman and Heath Thomas contributing essays. Chapman’s essay, which deals with the tension between Israel’s violent history and their proposed peaceful future, is brilliant. As Chapman notes, his conclusion will not satisfy everyone, but he asks the right questions for Christians to consider in light of the resurrection of Christ (65-67).

Part Three examines the use of “holy war” language in the New Testament, beginning with Timothy Goombis’s essay on Ephesians 5. According to Goombis, Paul’s use of warrior language is not a reflection of the culture, but rather “reflects the counter-cultural character of the people of God throughout Scripture” (106). Alan Bandy then follows suit by examining the imagery of John’s apocalypse. Bandy calls Revelation “easily the most violent book of the New Testament,” but asserts that these images “encourage believers to remain faithful, patiently endure and trust in God’s justice” (108, 128). 

The two essays the comprise Part Four deal with the issue of Divine War from a Biblical theology perspective. David Lamb specifically analyzes the Old Testament beliefs regarding compassion and wrath, while Douglas Earl continues the discussion began by Chapman, hermeneutically exploring the Hebrew word חרם and the difficulty in linguistically distinguishing the Hebrew idea of a “holy war” (153-156). 

Part Five, the longest of the units, is a philosophical and ethical exploration of the topics previously covered. Crusades, Christian morality, future visions of peace, and the concept of divine action that seems contradictory to the nature of God are all explored from a philosophical bent. Of special note is Glen Harold Stassen’s essay, which unfolds the role of the prophet in peacemaking, nothing the important of justice to the future visions of peace that are often found in the Old Testament (244-246). 

The sixth and final part is a sort of praxis section, molded out of the theological and philosophical consideration proposed by the other essays. Murray Rae explores the role of Christians in war and resistance, using other theologians such as Tertullian, Karl Barth, and Oliver O’Donovan to argue that pacifism has persisted in the Christian worldview apart from extreme circumstances such as the horrors of World War II. Stephen Williams rounds out the volume by examining the claims that Christianity is incoherent in light of the violence of the Old Testament compared to the Christ of the New. 

This book offers lots to consider in relation to Christian ethics, specifically, though it is too much to deal with adequately in a short review. The topics covered are vast, and the conclusions arrived at are varied. There are a couple of essays that stand out in my mind and are worth further reflection. First, there is much to ponder in Stephen Chapman’s essay:

all war in Israel’s memory – whether divinely authorized or not – carries the quality of a temporary reality, a concession to current circumstances that makes it necessary for the time being but not permanent. The heavy usage of cosmological language in the Old Testament battle accounts . . . indicates a similar perspective: warfare is an unnatural disruption within the created order and not a feature of “the way things are supposed to be.” (62)

This is the first time I have ever encountered Chapman’s particular language. As someone who was raised in the church and came to understand war in the Old Testament as merely an expression of God’s judgment on sin, to think of war as an aberration is a lot to consider. The implications are manifold, but Chapman presents a convincing argument supported by Scripture. Beyond the issues that arise from considering divine justice and the problem of evil, taking the original intent of creation into account when considering the sanctioned violence of the Old Testament may cause on to question the standard conservative, Christian perspective (particularly in America). If Chapman is right and the war of the Old Testament points towards the incarnation of Jesus Christ in the New Testament, can there remain any reason for Christians to engage in warfare today (66)? This has serious implications Stassen’s claims later on in the book. Suffice it to say, Chapman articulates a position that urges Christians to be wary, if not downright skeptical, of any attempts to declare war in the name of Jesus Christ. Christians must wrestle with this in light of New Testament teaching. 

Glen Harold Stassen’s essay, “The Prophets’ Call for Peacemaking,” acts as an interesting, almost balancing essay with Chapman’s.

If the truth of the prophet still applies, then true friends of Israel will encourage Israel to do justice to the aliens and to those over whom they have power, not to practice greed, domination, exclusion and violence. (255)

If one follows Chapman’s claim that war is unnatural in creation, then Stassen seems to be taking this conclusion to its natural conclusion. For Stassen, there does not seem to be any real way to do justice while engaging in violence. For starters, Stassen’s thoughts regarding international law seem anachronistic at best (261-262). Modern international law is not built upon the idea that God’s people will stand a s beacon of hope and redemption in the midst of a fallen world, so the equating of something like the United Nations with Amos’ condemnation of Israel for their actions against Tyre seems circumspect. The very idea that just peacemaking is defined as the spread of democracy shows the modern propensity to force current thought paradigms upon previous societies (263). I’d argue that Stassen goes too far in this application, which is built on Old Testament promises rather than New Testament instruction. Yet Christians should think seriously about the concepts of peace, globally and locally, and Stassen’s essay is certainly thought-provoking.

Holy War in the Bible is an invaluable work. The insights contained with each essay add to the larger discussion of Christian faith and practice, which has been engaged the topic of violence and justice since the earliest days of the Church. As Christians consider the future of Christianity in this world, we should seek to peacemakers. However, this is not to excuse Christians from the resistance of tyranny. Clear thinking is necessary to deal with these issues, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit is paramount in all situations.