Untitled article by R. F. Cottrell

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · May 23, 1865

Should Christians Fight? No. 2.

By R. F. Cottrell

CHRIST is heir of all the kingdoms of the world. He has gone to receive the kingdom, and having received it, he will return and dash in pieces the existing kingdoms, his enemies, and take possession; and having, at the second resurrection and the second death, purified the territory from sin, sinners and the curse, will reign upon it forever. No particular kingdom, at the present time, is the Lord's, as it was in the Jewish age. Hence the Christian has no kingdom for which to fight, except that for which he is to fight the "good fight" of faith. Said our King, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence." Jno. xviii, 36.

This text does not assert, as some imagine, that Christ's kingdom is not literal, but spiritual. It teaches that his kingdom is not present but future—that the time of his kingdom had not come. It is not of this present world, but of the future, glorious new earth, for which, Peter says, we look "according to his promise." It is "not from hence," i. e., it is not from this time onward. This is the reason given why Christ's servants do not fight; and it still holds good; for the kingdom has not yet come; and when it shall have come, and all the enemies shall have been destroyed, there will be no fighting in all the kingdom of peace. The battle bow having been broken, "wars" shall "cease to the end of the earth." Ps. xlvi, 9.

Christ's servants must not fight that their Lord should not be delivered to his persecutors and murderers. What object more worthy exists for which to take up arms?

Perhaps you say, It was God's purpose that Christ should die, and therefore to fight to deliver him, would be fighting against the purpose of God.

In reply to this it is sufficient to say, God has his purposes in regard to the nations of the earth; and it is clearly revealed that his ultimate purpose is to "break them with a rod of iron," and "dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel." No nation is excepted. Shall Christians fight to thwart God's purpose and save the nations, doomed for their sins, while Jesus would not suffer his disciples to fight in defense of immaculate innocence?

Well, says one, if you will not fight in defense of your government, you are not worthy to enjoy its protection.

We will let God, whose providence controls the nations, and our government, which we conscientiously obey, judge concerning this. As long as we enjoy protection, we thank God and the government for it. God uses and controls civil governments for the benefit of his people, the advancement of his cause and the salvation of souls. It is for want of trust in God that Christians think they must take care of the State in order that the State may take care of them. Obey God in all things. This includes all a Christian's duty to the government. If God has commanded those to fight for civil government, whom he has forbidden to fight for themselves, their religion and their Master, let every lover of God obey. But if not, let all be followers and imitators of the Prince of peace, "who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously."

Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and unto God the things that are God's. But "he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword." This was illustrated in the Reformation of the sixteenth century. Zwingle took the sword and was killed in battle. Luther's strong faith trusted in God alone, and he was preserved. Perhaps you say, Zwingle fought for the cause of religion—for the advancement of the Reformation—a thing which he ought not to have done. I ask, What better cause to fight for? If a Christian fight for civil rights and the enfranchisement of mankind, is not religious liberty and the everlasting salvation of man his ultimate and highest object? If not, he perils his life for an object too low for, and unworthy of, a Christian. But if his object is the exalted and worthy one—the salvation of souls—he fights for the advancement and triumph of religion; a thing you say he ought not to do. You may have your choice between the two horns of this dilemma. One or the other you must take, or, either take the non-combatant ground or conclude that a crusade in favor of pure religion is, indeed, a "holy war," and, as some have said concerning the present war, "as much a religious duty as it is to pray."