Mennonites and War

[GaryK]

It seems to me that following Jesus is less about hypotheticals and more about how we live faithfully in the roles we’ve actually been given—as disciples, not generals. As people shaped by the cross, not strategists in Caesar’s court.

But if you believe these are the right questions—then how would you answer them? Show me how they lead to clarity for you.

Would you recommend that the Ukrainian government lay down its arms and... do what, exactly?

Romans 13 tells us this:

For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

So when Caesar bears the sword in the way described in Romans 13, do you believe he is acting as God’s servant—or not?

Do you believe God uses governments to punish wrongdoers and restrain evil?

And if so, what would you recommend to Caesar?
Would you criticize him for acting in that God-given role?

I would recommend to Caesar the same as Paul recommended to King Agrippa - He tried to persuade King Agrippa to be a Christian. I would recommend to Putin that he lay aside his position as ruler or president or whatever, and instead use his ill-gotten wealth to try to begin to make amends for all the pain and hurt he has caused. I would recommend to the Russian soldiers that they refuse to fight and kill their fellow humans. I would recommend to the Ukrainian soldiers that they follow the Prince of Peace, who allowed sinful men to mock Him, torture Him, and kill Him. I would recommend to President Zelensky that he repent and believe the Gospel, and turn away from clinging to power as a ruler of this world. I would recommend to President Trump that he repent of his sins, beg God for forgiveness, and practice purity, honesty, holiness and amendment of life.

As far as I am concerned, the refusal to call all men to repentance and holy living is what clouds the issues. Any theory that says it's OK for presidents and governments and policemen to defy Jesus' teachings because God has given them their rules is not a theory that leads to moral clarity. Moral clarity is recognizing that God calls every man to repentance and following Christ, and agreeing with Jesus' teaching that nobody can have eternal life unless they are willing to follow Him.

This is consistent two-kingdom theology, IMO.

[ken_sylvania]

I think I was saying these are the wrong questions.

Thank you for clarifying. I think it would have been helpful to say that directly instead of claiming that you had answered the questions.

I’m not in a position to make recommendations to the Ukrainian government. That's not my God-given role.
These are not questions that the Bible answers for me. I don't think they lead to biblical clarity.

To be honest, I’m also reminded of Fletcher's situation ethics—e.g. a woman is told that the only way to save her husband’s life is to commit adultery with a prison guard. I don't think that's the right way to understand the morality of adultery. I can say that adultery is wrong without having a good answer to that question. The scenario doesn't actually lead to greater moral clarity. So if you ask me that question, I might not give you a direct answer, I may reframe it. Jesus did that too, when the Pharisees asked him questions.

Sometimes such reframing helps with the moral clarity, sometimes it simply helps elevate a specific point of view and to avoid admitting the truth of an opposing viewpoint. (btw, thanks for the gratuitous comparison, you as Jesus, me as a Pharisee).

It seems to me that following Jesus is less about hypotheticals and more about how we live faithfully in the roles we’ve actually been given—as disciples, not generals. As people shaped by the cross, not strategists in Caesar’s court.

But if you believe these are the right questions—then how would you answer them? Show me how they lead to clarity for you.

Would you recommend that the Ukrainian government lay down its arms and... do what, exactly?

Romans 13 tells us this:



So when Caesar bears the sword in the way described in Romans 13, do you believe he is acting as God’s servant—or not?

Do you believe God uses governments to punish wrongdoers and restrain evil?

And if so, what would you recommend to Caesar?
Would you criticize him for acting in that God-given role?

I would recommend to Caesar the same as Paul recommended to King Agrippa - He tried to persuade King Agrippa to be a Christian. I would recommend to Putin that he lay aside his position as ruler or president or whatever, and instead use his ill-gotten wealth to try to begin to make amends for all the pain and hurt he has caused. I would recommend to the Russian soldiers that they refuse to fight and kill their fellow humans. I would recommend to the Ukrainian soldiers that they follow the Prince of Peace, who allowed sinful men to mock Him, torture Him, and kill Him. I would recommend to President Zelensky that he repent and believe the Gospel, and turn away from clinging to power as a ruler of this world. I would recommend to President Trump that he repent of his sins, beg God for forgiveness, and practice purity, honesty, holiness and amendment of life.

As far as I am concerned, the refusal to call all men to repentance and holy living is what clouds the issues. Any theory that says it's OK for presidents and governments and policemen to defy Jesus' teachings because God has given them their rules is not a theory that leads to moral clarity. Moral clarity is recognizing that God calls every man to repentance and following Christ, and agreeing with Jesus' teaching that nobody can have eternal life unless they are willing to follow Him.

I'm curious why you would urge President Zelenskyy to "repent and believe the Gospel, and turn away from clinging to power as a ruler of this world", but not President Trump. (I think that that is good advice for any political leader. The main point of the passage about how to pray for 'kings and rulers" appears to me to be that God desires all humankind to come to repentance, and be saved; that God does not desire that anyone would perish in sin.)

The things I mentioned were not intended to be exclusive to each individual. I would urge the same to President Trump - I don't see how any of those men could repent, practice purity, honesty, holiness and amendment of life while remaining in positions of worldly power.

[Bootstrap]

Soloist quotes the Dordrecht Confession here:

XIII. Of the Office of the Secular Authority
We believe and confess that God has ordained power and authority, and set them to punish the evil, and protect the good, to govern the world, and maintain countries and cities, with their subjects, in good order and regulation; and that we, therefore, may not despise, revile, or resist the same, but must acknowledge and honor them as the ministers of God, and be subject and obedient unto them, yea, ready for all good works, especially in that which is not contrary to the law, will, and commandment of God; also faithfully pay custom, tribute, and taxes, and to render unto them their dues, even also as the Son of God taught and practiced, and commanded His disciples to do; that we, moreover, must constantly and earnestly pray to the Lord for them and their welfare, and for the prosperity of the country, that we may dwell under its protection, earn our livelihood, and lead a quiet, peaceable life, with all godliness and honesty; and, furthermore, that the Lord would recompense unto them, here, and afterwards in eternity, all benefits, liberty, and favor which we enjoy here under their praiseworthy administration.

I think that being advocates of individuals/leaders repenting is appropriate. Expecting their office to act Christlike is unrealistic.

I agree. I think that the New Testament verses that directly address this ask us to acknowledge the role of the authorities in restraining evil - with the sword - and to pray for the authorities.

Romans 13:1–4 (ESV)

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

That also implies that even we Christians need these authorities to act as God's servant in our own affairs sometimes. Child sexual abuse cases come to mind.

1 Timothy 2:1–2 (ESV)

1 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people,
2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.

So I think we should be praying for authorities to make decisions that lead to a peaceful and quiet life. I don't think the New Testament ever says we should urge authorities to repent of being authorities.

In fact, Paul appeals to Agrippa to use Caesar's authority to protect him from the Jews:

10 Paul answered: “I am now standing before Caesar’s court, where I ought to be tried. I have not done any wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well. 11 If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die. But if the charges brought against me by these Jews are not true, no one has the right to hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar!”

Later in the same passage, Paul does try to persuade Agrippa to adopt the gospel, but not to step down from his position as King:

25 “I am not insane, most excellent Festus,” Paul replied. “What I am saying is true and reasonable. 26 The king is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner. 27 King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know you do.”

28 Then Agrippa said to Paul, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?”

29 Paul replied, “Short time or long—I pray to God that not only you but all who are listening to me today may become what I am, except for these chains.”

30 The king rose, and with him the governor and Bernice and those sitting with them. 31 After they left the room, they began saying to one another, “This man is not doing anything that deserves death or imprisonment.”

32 Agrippa said to Festus, “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.”

So I don't think Paul and Agrippa tells us that we should ask authorities to repent of being authorities. And even if they did, someone else would take their place. Someone will rule a nation.

This is directed at anyone, do you agree or disagree with the bolded?

I'm not sure. And part of that is quite simply that God doesn't really tell New Testament believers how to judge secular authorities.

The Bible doesn't clearly say that secular rulers will receive eternal reward because they governed well. Eternal life is not presented as the reward for good governance—but for faith in Christ and following him.

But there are passages that talk about the works of kings:

Proverbs 16:12 (ESV)

It is an abomination to kings to do evil, for the throne is established by righteousness.

1 Kings 3:10–14 (ESV)

It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this. And God said to him, “Because you have asked this, and have not asked for yourself long life or riches or the life of your enemies, but have asked for yourself understanding to discern what is right, behold, I now do according to your word... And if you will walk in my ways, keeping my statutes and my commandments... then I will lengthen your days.”

Jeremiah 29:7 (ESV)

But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.

Romans 13:4 (ESV)

For he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

And centurions:

Acts 10:1–4 (ESV)

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion... a devout man who feared God... gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God... And he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God.”

God commends certain actions in rulers—like justice, generosity, and fear of the Lord. He condemns others—oppressing the poor and vulnerable, taking bribes and perverting justice, shedding innocent blood, idolatry and leading others into idolatry, arrogance and pride, abusing power for personal gain ...

it seems likely that these things matter in how they are judged. But I don't know how that plays out in eternity. The Bible simply doesn’t tell us exactly how God will reckon with the actions of a just ruler who doesn’t follow Christ. Or a just ruler who is a Christian but remains in office, contrary to what I would be able to do with a clear conscience.

[Bootstrap]

So you agree, then, that Hitler and the German Jews were not just two sides of the same coin?

I agree that apples and hammers are not the same kind of thing. A despotic national leader and a subethnic group are not the same thing.

And perhaps you also agree that on October 7th, Hamas and the civilians in the kibbutzim were not just two sides of the same coin?

A political party & military unit of a nation is not the same thing as a group of people who live in a commune.

However, Russia and Ukraine are both nation-states.

Are you saying that God does not judge nation states for their actions? Or that all nation states are judged the same way?

In the rapist scenario, the victim, the policeman, and the perpetrator are all human beings, but their roles in the situation are not the same. I do not think God sees them as morally equivalent. I think the same holds for nations.

[Soloist]

Boot, thank you for your response.


I think the foundation of conservative Anabaptists is in part the view on how being part of the government is incompatible with the Kingdom of God.

[JohnH]

So you agree, then, that Hitler and the German Jews were not just two sides of the same coin?

I agree that apples and hammers are not the same kind of thing. A despotic national leader and a subethnic group are not the same thing.

And perhaps you also agree that on October 7th, Hamas and the civilians in the kibbutzim were not just two sides of the same coin?

A political party & military unit of a nation is not the same thing as a group of people who live in a commune.

However, Russia and Ukraine are both nation-states.

Are you saying that God does not judge nation states for their actions? Or that all nation states are judged the same way?

In the rapist scenario, the victim, the policeman, and the perpetrator are all human beings, but their roles in the situation are not the same. I do not think God sees them as morally equivalent. I think the same holds for nations.

The Bible says each man will be judged according to his deeds.

I don’t see the Bible really talking much about the modern nation-state at all.

[ken_sylvania]

Soloist quotes the Dordrecht Confession here:

XIII. Of the Office of the Secular Authority
We believe and confess that God has ordained power and authority, and set them to punish the evil, and protect the good, to govern the world, and maintain countries and cities, with their subjects, in good order and regulation; and that we, therefore, may not despise, revile, or resist the same, but must acknowledge and honor them as the ministers of God, and be subject and obedient unto them, yea, ready for all good works, especially in that which is not contrary to the law, will, and commandment of God; also faithfully pay custom, tribute, and taxes, and to render unto them their dues, even also as the Son of God taught and practiced, and commanded His disciples to do; that we, moreover, must constantly and earnestly pray to the Lord for them and their welfare, and for the prosperity of the country, that we may dwell under its protection, earn our livelihood, and lead a quiet, peaceable life, with all godliness and honesty; and, furthermore, that the Lord would recompense unto them, here, and afterwards in eternity, all benefits, liberty, and favor which we enjoy here under their praiseworthy administration.

I think that being advocates of individuals/leaders repenting is appropriate. Expecting their office to act Christlike is unrealistic.

I agree. I think that the New Testament verses that directly address this ask us to acknowledge the role of the authorities in restraining evil - with the sword - and to pray for the authorities.

Romans 13:1–4 (ESV)

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

That also implies that even we Christians need these authorities to act as God's servant in our own affairs sometimes. Child sexual abuse cases come to mind.

I don't follow your train of thought here. Are you thinking the implication is that Christians need the threat of punishment in order to keep them doing right? Or are you thinking more in the sense that Christians benefit from an orderly society that is held in check by punishment for wrongdoing? Or something else?

1 Timothy 2:1–2 (ESV)

1 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people,
2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.

So I think we should be praying for authorities to make decisions that lead to a peaceful and quiet life. I don't think the New Testament ever says we should urge authorities to repent of being authorities.

In fact, Paul appeals to Agrippa to use Caesar's authority to protect him from the Jews:

10 Paul answered: “I am now standing before Caesar’s court, where I ought to be tried. I have not done any wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well. 11 If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die. But if the charges brought against me by these Jews are not true, no one has the right to hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar!”

Later in the same passage, Paul does try to persuade Agrippa to adopt the gospel, but not to step down from his position as King:

25 “I am not insane, most excellent Festus,” Paul replied. “What I am saying is true and reasonable. 26 The king is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner. 27 King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know you do.”

28 Then Agrippa said to Paul, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?”

29 Paul replied, “Short time or long—I pray to God that not only you but all who are listening to me today may become what I am, except for these chains.”

30 The king rose, and with him the governor and Bernice and those sitting with them. 31 After they left the room, they began saying to one another, “This man is not doing anything that deserves death or imprisonment.”

32 Agrippa said to Festus, “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.”

So I don't think Paul and Agrippa tells us that we should ask authorities to repent of being authorities. And even if they did, someone else would take their place. Someone will rule a nation.

I have at least two objections to this line of argument. First, to assume that because there is no record that Paul asked Agrippa to step down from being king that therefore being king is compatible with being a Christian, is really quite wild. Using the same logic, we would have to conclude that if Agrippa had become a Christian it would have been entirely OK for him to continue his incestuous relationship with Bernice, because Paul didn't explicitly condemn that either.
Equally untenable is the idea that it's OK for Christians to be in positions of worldly power because somebody else would do it if they stepped down. It's like saying that we shouldn't criticize the people who killed Jesus, because if they hadn't done it somebody else would have. That's not moral clarity, it's using human reasoning to sidestep moral clarity.

This is directed at anyone, do you agree or disagree with the bolded?

I'm not sure. And part of that is quite simply that God doesn't really tell New Testament believers how to judge secular authorities.

The Bible doesn't clearly say that secular rulers will receive eternal reward because they governed well. Eternal life is not presented as the reward for good governance—but for faith in Christ and following him.

But there are passages that talk about the works of kings:

Proverbs 16:12 (ESV)

It is an abomination to kings to do evil, for the throne is established by righteousness.

1 Kings 3:10–14 (ESV)

It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this. And God said to him, “Because you have asked this, and have not asked for yourself long life or riches or the life of your enemies, but have asked for yourself understanding to discern what is right, behold, I now do according to your word... And if you will walk in my ways, keeping my statutes and my commandments... then I will lengthen your days.”

Jeremiah 29:7 (ESV)

But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.

Romans 13:4 (ESV)

For he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

And centurions:

Acts 10:1–4 (ESV)

At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion... a devout man who feared God... gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God... And he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God.”

God commends certain actions in rulers—like justice, generosity, and fear of the Lord. He condemns others—oppressing the poor and vulnerable, taking bribes and perverting justice, shedding innocent blood, idolatry and leading others into idolatry, arrogance and pride, abusing power for personal gain ...

it seems likely that these things matter in how they are judged. But I don't know how that plays out in eternity. The Bible simply doesn’t tell us exactly how God will reckon with the actions of a just ruler who doesn’t follow Christ. Or a just ruler who is a Christian but remains in office, contrary to what I would be able to do with a clear conscience.

If, as you so confidently assert, there is nothing in the Bible to clearly indicate that Christians cannot hold worldly office and direct the armies of this world in killing their fellow men, why do you say you couldn't do so with a clear conscience? Did Christ possibly teach against that kind of thing?

[Bootstrap]

I agree. I think that the New Testament verses that directly address this ask us to acknowledge the role of the authorities in restraining evil - with the sword - and to pray for the authorities.

Romans 13:1–4 (ESV)

1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

That also implies that even we Christians need these authorities to act as God's servant in our own affairs sometimes. Child sexual abuse cases come to mind.

I don't follow your train of thought here. Are you thinking the implication is that Christians need the threat of punishment in order to keep them doing right? Or are you thinking more in the sense that Christians benefit from an orderly society that is held in check by punishment for wrongdoing? Or something else?

Both, actually. Paul seems to address both points in Romans 13—and he’s writing to Christians.

Ideally, just becoming a Christian and joining a community of believers would eliminate the possibility of things like child abuse, sexual misconduct, financial fraud, or dishonesty in business. And honestly, I do think the church often does better than the world at large in these areas.

But we’ve also seen too many examples where that’s not the case. Where churches looked the other way, minimized abuse, protected their reputation, or simply failed to act. And in some of those cases, it was Caesar—the governing authorities—who exposed the sin we should have dealt with ourselves.

So yes, Christians do benefit from an orderly society where wrongdoing is punished. But sometimes, we also need Caesar to restrain evil even within the church, because we haven't always been faithful to do it ourselves.

Sometimes, sadly, we have even encouraged victims to submit to people who were committing these sins, refusing to listen to them.

[Bootstrap]

So I don't think Paul and Agrippa tells us that we should ask authorities to repent of being authorities. And even if they did, someone else would take their place. Someone will rule a nation.

I have at least two objections to this line of argument. First, to assume that because there is no record that Paul asked Agrippa to step down from being king that therefore being king is compatible with being a Christian, is really quite wild. Using the same logic, we would have to conclude that if Agrippa had become a Christian it would have been entirely OK for him to continue his incestuous relationship with Bernice, because Paul didn't explicitly condemn that either.
Equally untenable is the idea that it's OK for Christians to be in positions of worldly power because somebody else would do it if they stepped down. It's like saying that we shouldn't criticize the people who killed Jesus, because if they hadn't done it somebody else would have. That's not moral clarity, it's using human reasoning to sidestep moral clarity.

I’m simply observing that Paul’s encounters with Agrippa don’t include any call for him to step down. I think you implied they did. The same goes for Jesus’ interaction with the centurion, or Peter’s with Cornelius. I can’t think of a single case in the New Testament where a governing authority is told to abandon their position in order to follow Jesus.

Can you?

That doesn’t prove those roles are always morally acceptable. But if stepping down were essential to following Jesus, wouldn’t we expect to see that clearly taught—or at least modeled?

Practically speaking, most of us aren’t talking to kings or emperors. We’re talking to each other. We’re ministering to the traumatized, the displaced, the wounded. That’s where moral clarity is most needed.

So when we speculate about what we would say to Zelensky or Putin, we’re not actually talking to them—we’re talking to each other. And when we claim there’s no moral difference between invading a country and defending it, that’s not clarity. And it’s not biblical two-kingdom theology, as I understand it.

God has instituted two kingdoms. Romans 13 and 1 Timothy 2 tell us why that other kingdom is needed. It’s not the kingdom we live in or minister in—but it does have a role. And I think Paul tells us what that role is.

[Bootstrap]

Are you saying that God does not judge nation states for their actions? Or that all nation states are judged the same way?

In the rapist scenario, the victim, the policeman, and the perpetrator are all human beings, but their roles in the situation are not the same. I do not think God sees them as morally equivalent. I think the same holds for nations.

The Bible says each man will be judged according to his deeds.

I don’t see the Bible really talking much about the modern nation-state at all.

You're right that the Bible doesn’t speak directly to modern nation-states as we understand them today. But it speaks a lot about empires, kings, and what happens when those in power use violence, exploit the weak, or place their trust in chariots instead of God.

In my Mennonite tradition, we often considerwhat the prophets say to nations—not to justify war or align ourselves with state power, but to warn us all of what happens when violence becomes normalized and rulers forget justice and mercy.

"Woe to those who make unjust laws, who issue oppressive decrees" (Isaiah 10:1)

"Because you trample on the poor... I will not pass by you anymore" (Amos 5:11)

“You say to yourself, ‘I am, and there is none besides me.’ But disaster will come upon you… A calamity you cannot foresee will suddenly come upon you.” (Isaiah 47:8,11)

That doesn’t mean we place our hope in “better” governments or make moral excuses for war. We are citizens of a different Kingdom—one that does not rely on swords or bombs, but on the cross. At the same time, we can still name evil for what it is, even when committed by governments.

God does not see the rapist, the victim, and the police officer as morally equivalent. But the church is called to minister to all three.

We don't bear the sword. We bear witness to a Kingdom where violence ends.