In this work we hear from four Christian authors, each of whom has very different beliefs about what Christians should think of warfare. Ausburger argues that the Christian cannot morally participate in war in any way, even as a noncombatant. Hoyt allows Christians to serve as chaplans and in other roles, but not as soldiers. Holmes adheres to the 'just war' philosophy. Brown believes that Christians can even support preventive wars or crusades. The pacifist arguments of Ausburger and Hoyt are rejected by most Christians. If adhered to historically, Christian Europe would have been become Muslim, and the gospel of Christ could not have been shared with the world. It seems unlikely that God intended his people to be eradicated for the faith. I prefer Brown's position. Although the just war philosophy does have its appeal, it is too limiting. Under its guidelines, the allied nations could not even have have fought on to total victory in World War II. In the nuclear age, the just war has no place whatever. Each Christian must come to his own conclusions about the justice of any particular war, and not be limited by hard and fast rules from times past. This book is only an introduction to the subject, but it is a good one indeed.

Each of the four authors writes an essay defending his position, and then the other three respond, making for an interesting dialogue.

All four make compelling cases, partly because the New Testament does not directly address the issue of what a Christian or Christian community's response to war should be. The history of the Christian church will show how very differently popes, rulers, and Protestant communities viewed involvement in war.

Augsburger makes a compelling case for pacifism. What is attractive about pacifism is that it so brilliantly proclaims to the world a different way, the Way of Christ Himself who eschewed violence against those who mistreated him. The community then places its faith only in God for its protection. This position thus is naturally connected with the refusal to be politically involved, which it has historically accompanied in the Mennonite and other pacifist communites.

Hoyt says Christians can serve their country, but only in non-combat roles, as the Christian is bound not to perpetrate violence to another human. I must admit I was strongly attracted to this - and I'm sure this probably has reflected the views of many conscientious Christians once drafted. But this breaks down, because it sets up a double standard.

Holmes presents the classical doctrine of "just war". The problem with this is that a "just war" is hard to come by. Acting completely in accordance with it requires that no military forces attack territory or citizens belonging to the aggressor -- only retaking territory the enemy has taken -- thus being purely defensive. Reality tends to make conducting a "just war" impractical and unwise -- the Allies would have stopped at Germany's borders in World War II.

Brown defends the ideas of the "crusade" and the "preventive strike". This may sound offensive and did to me, but Brown is capable. But the problem lies in the Christian's justification of the particular crusade or strike. And, of course, how is this different from how the world conducts its warfare?

There are two fundametal realities that we confront as Christians facing war: One reality is that there are unscrupulous, evil, and aggressive rulers who need to be checked. The other is that war is an incredible evil and can do nothing but wreck the conscience -- which is especially troubling for the obedient Christian who knows that human life is made in the image of God. So how do we trust and obey God in the midst of war? The state "bears the sword"; can a Christian thus be part of such a state? If so, how should the state bear it?

I continue to struggle with the answers, but heartily recommend this to someone needing a beginning point on this.

I think most Christians' views on war are determined largely by their culture and only secondarily by their understanding of the Bible. Many Christian people seem to be unaware of other views, or have dismissed them too quickly. I am disturbed by the enthusiasm for war amongst many Christian people, and would hope that Clouse's book might be a small corrective to this.

This topic is worthy of thinking through, because it relates to our understanding of the relationship between the Old and New Testaments and also to the character of the God who is revealed in the Bible.

The four writers each present persuasive cases. If this makes you uncertain about your previously held views, it will have been worth reading the book.

Highly recommended.