Ronald J Sider, "The Early Church on War and Killing: Distinguishing speculation from historical fact"

In an article published last week on Christianity Today’s Books & Culture page, Ronald J Sider, Distinguished Professor of Theology, Holistic Ministry, and Public Policy at Palmer Theological Seminary of Eastern University, discussed his 2012 book The Early Church on Killing: A Comprehensive Sourcebook on War, Abortion and Capital Punishment.

Dr Sider comes from a BIC background, a denomination which combines Anabaptism, Pietism, and Wesleyanism. Dr Sider is probably best known for his book Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger.

Here is an excerpt from the article:

Is there sufficient evidence to resolve this debate one way or the other? In spite of the massive amount of articles and books written about the early Christians' views on war and killing, no scholar had ever collected in one volume all the extant data (literary and archaeological) on the topic. I did that in The Early Church on Killing, published by Baker Academic. This sourcebook contains every extant statement I could find by Christian authors up to the time of Constantine relating directly to killing. It also includes all relevant inscriptions on tombstones and other archaeological data.  

In an afterword, I summarize the historical record. Starting in the late 2nd century and then increasingly in the later 3rd century and the first decade of the 4th century, there is evidence that some Christians were serving in the Roman army—at least a few by AD 173, and a substantial number by the late 3rd and early 4th centuries. Unfortunately, our sources do not enable us to say how many.  

On the other hand, there is not a single extant Christian author before Constantine who says killing or joining the military by Christians is ever legitimate. Whenever our extant texts mention killing—whether in abortion, capital punishment, or war—they always say Christians must not do that.

You can read the full article here.

Further Reading:

Online:

• Rachel Stanton, “The Early Church on Violence”.

Books:

• Ronald J Sider, The Early Church on Killing: A Comprehensive Sourcebook on War, Abortion and Capital Punishment (Google Preview or, Find in a Library);
• Brian Zahnd, A Farewell to Mars: An Evangelical Pastor's Journey Toward the Biblical Gospel of Peace (Google Preview or, Find in a Library);
• Preston Sprinkle, Fight: A Christian Case for Non-Violence (Google Preview or, Find in a Library).

Related Posts: 

• John Wesley and Charles Spurgeon: Quotes On War;
• On Jesus-Centred Non-Violence & A Sermon Series: “Inglorious Pastors: Waging Peace in a World of War” (The Meeting House);
• Preston Sprinkle, “A Case for Christocentric Nonviolence”.

Preston Sprinkle, “A Case for Christocentric Nonviolence”

Preston Sprinkle’s manuscript, “A Case for Christocentric Nonviolence”, presented at the Evangelical Theological Society’s annual meeting, is available online.  

His book Fight: A Christian Case for Non-Violence is one of the few books by Calvinist authors that I recommend getting a hold of (you can also read TC Moore’s review here--as Moore notes, “perhaps most delightfully surprising is how directly he challenges the nationalistic idolatry and violent misinterpretations of those in his own Neo-Reformed camp like Mark Driscoll and Wayne Grudem. Before reading Fight, I don't recall ever reading another Neo-Calvinist author break ranks and so clearly call out their fellow Calvinists on any subject whatsoever.”).

Here is an excerpt from his manuscript:

I also find non-Christocentric versions of pacifism, or nonviolence, to be ethically and theologically anemic. If Jesus does not walk out of a grave and sit at the right hand of the Father, then we have no business loving our enemies. Unless Christ defeats evil by submitting to violence—by dying rather then killing—and rises from the dead to tell the tale, I will most certainly destroy my enemy before he destroys me. Without the death and resurrection of Jesus, all forms of nonviolence, I believe, are uncompelling. 

To be clear, I believe in Christian—or more explicitly, Christocentric—nonviolence. Christocentric nonviolence says that we should fight against evil, we should wage war against injustice, and we should defend the orphan, the widow, the marginalized, and oppressed. And we should do so aggressively. But we should do so nonviolently. 

In other words, Christocentric nonviolence does not dispute whether Christians should fight against evil. It only disputes the means by which we do fight. 

Now, rather than asking the questions: Are some wars just or should a nation wage war as a last resort, I want to ask and answer the question: should Christ-followers use violence as a means of confronting evil or defending the innocent.

The full manuscript is available here.

Further reading:

Books:

• Brian Zahnd, A Farewell to Mars: An Evangelical Pastor's Journey Toward the Biblical Gospel of Peace (Google Preview or, Find in a Library);
• Preston Sprinkle, Fight: A Christian Case for Non-Violence (Google Preview or, Find in a Library).

Online:

• Rachel Stanton, “The Early Church on Violence”;
• Austin Fischer, “Romans 13, N.T. Wright, and a Christian Response to Paris”