War, Peace, National Defense, and the Use of

Military Force

Thinking Biblically About Protecting the Nation, Pursuing Peace, Confronting Evil, Military Service, Just War, Civilian Life, and the Responsibilities of Government

War is one of the most serious decisions a nation can make.

Human lives are at stake.

Soldiers may die.

Civilians may suffer.

Families may be separated.

Cities and infrastructure may be destroyed.

Economies may be damaged.

Hatred may deepen.

And consequences may continue for generations.

Christians should therefore never treat war casually.

But neither can we assume that peace is preserved simply by refusing to fight.

Nations can be attacked.

People can be invaded.

Terrorists can deliberately murder civilians.

Dictators can threaten neighboring countries.

Governments can commit genocide.

Aggressors can interpret weakness as an invitation to attack.

Sometimes refusing to resist evil may allow even greater evil to occur.

Christians therefore face difficult questions.

When is military force justified?

When should a nation defend itself?

Should Christians serve in the military?

How much should a country spend on national defense?

Should America defend another country that is attacked?

When should military intervention end?

What responsibilities do governments have toward civilians during war?

Can there be peace without strength?

Can military power itself become dangerous?

How should Christians think about nuclear weapons?

What about terrorism, cyberattacks, drones, intelligence operations, and new technologies of warfare?

What responsibility does a nation have toward its own citizens before becoming involved in conflicts elsewhere?

These questions rarely have simple answers.

Christians need principles strong enough to condemn both unnecessary war and irresponsible weakness.

A diverse group of military personnel and civilians gathered respectfully at a peaceful outdoor memorial setting.

Christians seek peace while recognizing government’s responsibility to protect people, restrain aggression, and use military force only with wisdom, restraint, and moral accountability.

God Desires Peace

Peace is a recurring biblical theme.

Jesus said:

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” — Matthew 5:9 (NASB 1995)

Christians should desire peace.

We should pray for peace.

Support diplomacy when possible.

Encourage reconciliation.

Avoid unnecessary conflict.

And resist the temptation to glorify violence.

War should never become entertainment or an opportunity to demonstrate national power merely for pride.

Human beings created in God’s image die in war.

That should always matter to us.

Peace Is More Than the Absence of Fighting

Peace does not simply mean that no one is shooting.

A population living under brutal oppression may experience little open warfare while having little genuine peace.

People may be imprisoned.

Tortured.

Starved.

Persecuted.

Enslaved.

Or terrorized into silence.

Biblical peace involves justice, security, order, and human flourishing.

Therefore, simply ending military resistance does not necessarily create genuine peace.

Sometimes it merely determines which side controls the population.

Evil Is Real

Christian thinking about war must begin with a realistic understanding of human nature.

People are capable of tremendous good.

They are also capable of terrible evil.

History includes invasion.

Genocide.

Slavery.

Terrorism.

Religious persecution.

Ethnic cleansing.

Mass murder.

Political oppression.

And deliberate attacks upon civilians.

Christians should not assume that every aggressor can be stopped by negotiation.

Diplomacy is valuable.

But diplomacy requires another party willing to negotiate honestly.

Some leaders use negotiations merely to gain time, weaken opposition, or prepare for further aggression.

Peace requires wisdom as well as good intentions.

Government Has a Responsibility to Protect Its People

One of government’s fundamental responsibilities is protecting citizens from violence.

Paul described governing authority as one that does not “bear the sword for nothing.” — Romans 13:4 (NASB 1995)

This passage does not answer every question about warfare.

But it recognizes that government possesses legitimate authority to restrain wrongdoing.

A government that refuses to protect its citizens from invasion, terrorism, or organized violence is failing an essential responsibility.

National defense therefore has a legitimate purpose.

National Defense Is Not the Same as Militarism

Supporting national defense does not require glorifying war.

A nation can maintain strong armed forces precisely because it hopes those forces will discourage attack.

A locked door does not mean a homeowner wants someone to break in.

A police department does not mean a city wants crime.

Likewise, military preparedness does not necessarily mean a country wants war.

Strength can sometimes deter aggression.

The goal should be sufficient strength to protect the nation without developing an appetite for unnecessary military intervention.

Deterrence Can Help Preserve Peace

Potential aggressors make calculations.

What will an invasion cost?

Will the country resist?

Will allies respond?

Can the attack succeed?

A nation unable or unwilling to defend itself may appear vulnerable.

Military strength can therefore sometimes prevent war rather than cause it.

But deterrence works only when potential adversaries believe both that a nation has the ability to respond and that it will use that ability when necessary.

Empty threats can be more dangerous than clear and credible policies.

Military Strength Must Have a Purpose

A military exists to protect legitimate national interests, not simply because a nation possesses the ability to use force.

Before military action, leaders should be able to explain:

What threat exists?

Why does it matter?

What is the objective?

Can the objective realistically be achieved?

What will military action cost?

What happens afterward?

How will success be measured?

What would cause the mission to end?

A country should not send people into combat without being able to answer basic questions about why they are being asked to risk their lives.

War Should Be a Last Resort

Military force should not ordinarily be the first response to international disagreement.

Diplomacy.

Negotiation.

Economic pressure.

International cooperation.

Defensive preparation.

Intelligence.

And other peaceful means

may sometimes resolve a conflict.

But “last resort” does not mean waiting until an enemy has already caused catastrophic harm when an attack is clearly imminent.

Wisdom sometimes requires acting before the worst happens.

The difficult task is distinguishing genuine necessity from fear, speculation, political pressure, or impatience.

The Christian Just-War Tradition

For centuries, Christians have wrestled with when military force may be morally justified.

This developed into what is commonly called just-war reasoning.

It is not a biblical checklist stated in one passage of Scripture.

Rather, it is an attempt to apply biblical principles of justice, government, protection of innocent life, proportionality, and moral responsibility to warfare.

Questions traditionally considered include whether there is a just cause, whether proper authority has authorized the action, whether peaceful alternatives have been seriously considered, whether the goal is restoration of a just peace, whether there is a reasonable chance of accomplishing the objective, and whether the expected good is proportionate to the harm likely to result.

These principles do not make warfare good.

They attempt to restrain it.

A Just Cause Matters

Not every political disagreement justifies war.

A nation should not go to war merely to demonstrate strength, acquire territory, seize resources, punish an insult, distract from domestic problems, or increase a leader’s popularity.

Defending the nation from attack is one of the clearest justifications for military force.

Protecting an ally may also be justified under some circumstances.

Preventing mass slaughter or genocide can present a powerful moral case for intervention.

But humanitarian concern alone does not automatically tell us whether military intervention will actually make conditions better.

Good intentions must be joined with practical wisdom.

Legitimate Authority Matters

Individuals do not ordinarily possess the authority to start wars.

Military action should occur under lawful governmental authority and constitutional processes.

This provides accountability.

Citizens should know who made the decision.

Legislators should exercise their constitutional responsibilities.

Military commanders should operate within lawful authority.

The enormous power of war should not rest casually in the hands of one person without appropriate checks.

Clear Objectives Matter

One of the dangers of military intervention is entering a conflict without knowing what victory means.

Is the objective to repel an invasion?

Destroy a terrorist organization?

Protect civilians?

Remove a government?

Defend an ally?

Prevent a particular attack?

Secure territory?

Once the objective becomes vague, military involvement can continue for years while the original reason for entering the conflict becomes increasingly difficult to identify.

Mission creep is dangerous.

Soldiers deserve clear objectives.

Citizens deserve clear explanations.

Ask What Happens After the Fighting

Winning battles and creating lasting peace are not the same thing.

A government may be defeated.

Then what?

Who governs afterward?

Will another dictator take power?

Will terrorist groups fill the vacuum?

Will ethnic or religious groups begin fighting each other?

Will American forces remain indefinitely?

Who rebuilds the country?

What happens to refugees?

What happens to weapons?

What political institutions are capable of functioning?

Military planning must consider what follows military victory.

Otherwise, defeating one threat may create another.

Good Intentions Can Produce Unintended Consequences

This principle applies to war just as it applies to domestic policy.

A military intervention intended to protect people may destabilize a country.

Removing a brutal ruler may create a power vacuum.

Arming one group may eventually place weapons in the hands of another.

Economic sanctions may hurt ordinary citizens more than political leaders.

Supporting an ally may draw a country into a larger conflict.

A short military operation may become a decades-long commitment.

Leaders must ask not only:

What do we intend to accomplish?

But also:

What could happen that we do not intend?

America Cannot Solve Every Conflict in the World

People suffer throughout the world.

Civil wars occur.

Governments oppress their citizens.

Religious minorities are persecuted.

Ethnic groups fight.

People live under dictatorships.

These situations should concern Christians.

But concern does not mean the United States has the ability or responsibility to solve every conflict militarily.

American military personnel cannot be sent everywhere injustice exists.

Resources are limited.

Military power is limited.

Political influence is limited.

And American leaders have a primary responsibility to protect the people they govern.

Compassion must be joined with prudence.

Other Nations Have Responsibilities Too

Allies should contribute to their own defense.

A wealthy nation should not automatically expect another country’s taxpayers and military personnel to carry most of the burden of protecting it.

International alliances work best when responsibilities are shared.

Countries facing threats should invest appropriately in their own defense.

Citizens of one nation may reasonably ask why their sons and daughters should repeatedly bear risks that another capable nation is unwilling to share.

Cooperation should involve mutual responsibility.

Defending Allies Can Still Be Important

Shared responsibility does not mean alliances are unnecessary.

Strong alliances can discourage aggression.

An aggressor may hesitate to attack a smaller nation if doing so would bring a response from several powerful countries.

Alliances can therefore contribute to peace.

But commitments should be clear.

Ambiguous promises can encourage allies to take risks they otherwise would not take while leaving adversaries uncertain about what will trigger a response.

Military Personnel Are People, Not Political Tools

When leaders discuss military intervention, they are discussing real human beings.

Service members have spouses.

Children.

Parents.

Friends.

Plans.

Dreams.

They may return wounded.

They may experience trauma.

They may live with disabilities.

Some will not return.

Political leaders should never treat military personnel as pieces on a geopolitical chessboard.

If a cause is not important enough to justify those sacrifices, it is not important enough for war.

Military Service Can Be an Honorable Calling

Christians have historically disagreed about military service.

Some Christian traditions embrace pacifism and believe followers of Jesus should not participate in warfare.

Other Christians believe serving in the military can be a legitimate and honorable form of protecting neighbors and restraining evil.

Scripture contains soldiers without universally commanding them to abandon military service.

When soldiers asked John the Baptist what they should do, he told them not to extort money or falsely accuse people and to be content with their wages. He did not tell them simply to cease being soldiers.

Christians should respect sincere believers who wrestle differently with these questions while taking Scripture and conscience seriously.

Soldiers Remain Morally Responsible

Military service does not eliminate personal moral responsibility.

A lawful military depends upon obedience.

But “I was following orders” cannot justify every action.

Soldiers should not deliberately murder civilians.

Torture prisoners.

Commit rape.

Loot for personal gain.

Execute people unlawfully.

Or knowingly participate in war crimes.

Military discipline and moral responsibility must coexist.

Civilians Must Be Protected

One of the most important moral principles in warfare is distinguishing combatants from civilians.

War inevitably creates danger for civilians.

But civilians should never be deliberately targeted simply because attacking them creates terror or political pressure.

Military forces should take reasonable measures to reduce unnecessary civilian casualties.

The presence of civilians can make military operations extraordinarily difficult, particularly when enemy forces deliberately operate among civilian populations.

Even then, civilian life matters.

Terrorism Is Morally Different From Legitimate Military Action

Terrorism deliberately attacks or terrorizes civilians to achieve political, ideological, or religious objectives.

Bombing a marketplace because civilians are present is not morally equivalent to attacking a legitimate military target while taking reasonable precautions to protect civilians.

Both actions may result in death.

But intention, target, necessity, and precautions matter morally.

Christians should resist simplistic claims that all uses of force are morally identical.

Human Shields Create Terrible Moral Problems

Some armed groups intentionally operate from civilian neighborhoods, schools, hospitals, or religious buildings because they know their opponents are reluctant to strike those locations.

This practice places civilians in danger.

The responsibility for protecting civilians does not disappear.

But neither should the deliberate use of human shields make military targets permanently immune from response.

These situations require extraordinary caution and moral judgment.

Prisoners Must Be Treated Humanely

Enemy soldiers who surrender are no longer active battlefield threats in the same way they were while fighting.

Prisoners should be treated humanely.

Torture, humiliation, revenge, and unnecessary cruelty undermine justice.

How a nation treats captured enemies reveals something about its own moral character.

Nuclear Weapons Raise Extraordinary Moral Questions

Nuclear weapons possess destructive power unlike conventional weapons.

Their use could kill enormous numbers of civilians, devastate infrastructure, spread radiation, and potentially escalate into catastrophic conflict.

Christians should therefore approach nuclear warfare with exceptional seriousness.

At the same time, nuclear deterrence has been defended on the argument that the fear of overwhelming retaliation discourages nuclear attack.

This creates a profound moral tension.

Weapons may be maintained partly in the hope that they will never be used.

Christians can reasonably debate whether and under what circumstances nuclear deterrence or use can satisfy moral requirements of necessity, discrimination, and proportionality.

New Technologies Do Not Remove Old Moral Questions

Modern warfare includes drones.

Cyberattacks.

Artificial intelligence.

Satellites.

Long-range missiles.

Electronic warfare.

Autonomous systems.

And sophisticated surveillance.

Technology can sometimes make attacks more precise and reduce risk to soldiers.

But distance can also make the reality of killing seem less immediate.

The moral questions remain.

Who is being targeted?

Why?

Under whose authority?

How reliable is the intelligence?

What happens if the system makes a mistake?

Who is accountable?

Technology changes warfare.

It does not eliminate moral responsibility.

Cyberwarfare Can Cause Real-World Harm

A cyberattack may not involve bombs, but it can still cause enormous damage.

Attacks against electrical grids, hospitals, financial systems, communications networks, transportation systems, water supplies, or military defenses can endanger human life.

Governments therefore have responsibilities to defend critical infrastructure.

But cyberwarfare also raises difficult questions about attribution.

Who actually conducted the attack?

Was it a government?

A criminal organization?

An independent group?

A false-flag operation?

Responding militarily before establishing responsibility could produce disastrous consequences.

Intelligence Is Necessary but Must Have Limits

National defense requires intelligence.

Governments need information about potential attacks, hostile governments, terrorism, weapons programs, and other threats.

But national security should not become an unlimited justification for spying upon citizens.

A free society needs both effective intelligence capabilities and legal safeguards against abuse.

Security and liberty must be held together.

Citizens Have a Right to Ask Questions Before War

Questioning a proposed military action is not automatically unpatriotic.

Citizens may reasonably ask:

Why are we going?

What evidence supports the claim?

What is the objective?

What will it cost?

How many troops may be required?

What risks are involved?

What happens if the original plan fails?

What happens after victory?

What would cause us to leave?

How will Congress exercise oversight?

Supporting the military does not require agreeing with every decision political leaders make about using it.

Patriotism Does Not Require Blind Loyalty

Christians can love their country.

Appreciate its freedoms.

Honor those who serve.

Defend its legitimate interests.

And remain grateful for sacrifices made on its behalf.

But Christians ultimately belong to God.

No nation is always right.

Governments can make mistakes.

Military leaders can make mistakes.

Intelligence can be wrong.

Political leaders can exaggerate threats.

Public opinion can become fearful or angry.

Christian patriotism should therefore include moral discernment.

Opposition to War Does Not Automatically Mean Cowardice

People may oppose a particular military action for serious moral or practical reasons.

They may believe peaceful alternatives remain.

They may doubt the evidence.

They may believe the objective cannot be achieved.

They may fear disproportionate civilian casualties.

They may believe intervention will make the situation worse.

Those concerns deserve consideration.

Likewise, supporting military action does not automatically mean someone loves violence.

A person may reluctantly support force because he or she believes failing to act would permit greater suffering.

We should evaluate arguments rather than caricaturing motives.

Foreign Aid Has a Role but Also Has Limits

Nations can help other countries without sending troops.

Humanitarian assistance can provide food, medicine, shelter, disaster relief, refugee assistance, and development support.

Diplomatic and economic assistance can sometimes strengthen vulnerable countries.

But foreign aid cannot solve every problem.

Money can be wasted.

Corrupt governments can steal resources.

Aid can create dependency.

Assistance can unintentionally strengthen bad governments or organizations.

Foreign aid should therefore have clear purposes, accountability, and periodic evaluation.

Compassion does not eliminate stewardship.

Refugees and Displaced People Deserve Compassion

War frequently forces ordinary people from their homes.

They may lose family members.

Homes.

Jobs.

Schools.

Churches.

Communities.

And possessions.

Christians should care about refugees and displaced people.

At the same time, governments retain responsibilities for national security, immigration law, screening, available resources, and their own citizens.

Compassion and responsible government are not enemies.

Both matter.

Defense Spending Requires Stewardship

National defense costs money.

Aircraft.

Ships.

Weapons.

Cybersecurity.

Military bases.

Training.

Personnel.

Veterans’ care.

Intelligence.

Research.

And maintenance

all require resources.

A country that neglects defense can become vulnerable.

But defense spending should not escape scrutiny simply because it is labeled national security.

Waste is still waste.

Poor procurement is still poor stewardship.

Programs that no longer serve an important purpose should be reconsidered.

Government should provide what is reasonably necessary for defense while remembering that taxpayers provide the resources.

Caring for Veterans Is Part of the Cost of War

The cost of military action does not end when the shooting stops.

Veterans may live for decades with injuries.

Disabilities.

Trauma.

Family disruption.

Employment challenges.

Or other consequences of service.

A nation willing to send people into danger assumes responsibilities toward them afterward.

Veterans’ care should therefore be considered part of the cost when leaders debate military action, not an unrelated expense years later.

War Creates Economic Costs at Home

War requires enormous resources.

Money spent on military operations cannot simultaneously be spent elsewhere or remain with taxpayers.

Government may borrow to finance war.

Debt can continue long after the conflict ends.

Energy prices may rise.

Trade may be disrupted.

Families may face inflation or shortages.

None of these considerations automatically makes a necessary war wrong.

But citizens deserve an honest accounting of the costs.

Economic Sanctions Also Have Consequences

Sanctions can provide an alternative to military force.

They may pressure hostile governments without immediately beginning a war.

But sanctions can also hurt ordinary citizens.

Food.

Medicine.

Employment.

Banking.

And basic commerce

may be affected.

Leaders should examine whether sanctions are actually influencing the people making decisions or primarily increasing suffering among people who have little political power.

America Should Not Fight Wars Merely to Remake Other Countries

Military power can defeat armies.

It cannot easily create healthy political cultures.

Democratic institutions require more than elections.

They depend upon law.

Trust.

Civil institutions.

Political habits.

Education.

Shared expectations.

And willingness to accept peaceful political defeat.

A society cannot always be transformed quickly from the outside.

The desire to help people become free should be tempered by humility about what military occupation can accomplish.

Nations Have a Right to Defend Their Borders

National sovereignty includes protecting territorial boundaries from military invasion.

A country does not have to allow foreign armies, armed groups, or hostile forces to enter its territory.

Defending borders from military aggression is different from hatred toward people of another nationality.

A country can respect the dignity of foreigners while maintaining the right to defend its territory and citizens.

Avoid Both Isolationism and Endless Intervention

Two extremes should be avoided.

One says:

What happens anywhere else in the world is none of our concern.

But events elsewhere can threaten national security, disrupt trade, create humanitarian catastrophes, strengthen hostile powers, and affect allies.

The other extreme says:

Whenever serious injustice occurs somewhere in the world, America should intervene.

That is also unsustainable.

Wisdom asks where American interests, treaty obligations, humanitarian concerns, available resources, likely consequences, and moral responsibilities genuinely justify involvement.

Peace Negotiations May Require Difficult Compromises

Wars rarely end with every party receiving everything it wanted.

Negotiated peace may require compromise.

But compromise has moral limits.

A peace agreement that simply rewards aggression may encourage future aggression.

An agreement that abandons vulnerable populations may produce further injustice.

On the other hand, continuing a war indefinitely in pursuit of an impossible objective may cause enormous additional suffering.

There is no simple formula.

Leaders need wisdom to recognize when continued fighting protects justice and when it merely adds casualties without a realistic path toward a better outcome.

Forgiveness Does Not Eliminate National Security

Jesus commands His followers to forgive.

But personal forgiveness and governmental responsibility are not identical.

A Christian can forgive someone who committed violence while still believing that person should be restrained from harming others.

Likewise, a nation can seek eventual reconciliation with an enemy while continuing to defend itself against an active threat.

Forgiveness does not require leaving innocent people defenseless.

Christians Should Pray for Enemies

Jesus said:

“love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” — Matthew 5:44 (NASB 1995)

That command becomes especially challenging during war.

Christians should pray for their own service members.

But we can also pray for enemy soldiers.

Enemy civilians.

Political leaders.

Prisoners.

Refugees.

And grieving families on every side.

Praying for enemies does not mean approving aggression.

It means remembering that even enemies are human beings in need of God’s mercy.

Christians Should Resist Dehumanizing the Enemy

War encourages societies to think of enemies as categories rather than people.

But an enemy soldier is still a human being.

Some willingly support evil.

Others may be conscripts.

Some may have been deceived by propaganda.

Some may fear their own government.

Some may have families praying for their safe return.

Military necessity may require fighting an enemy.

It does not require hatred.

Truth Matters During War

Governments use information strategically during conflict.

So do enemies.

Propaganda can exaggerate victories.

Hide losses.

Dehumanize opponents.

Spread false atrocities.

Or conceal genuine atrocities.

Christians should be especially cautious about immediately believing every dramatic claim circulating during wartime.

Truth remains truth even when a nation is at war.

Peace Requires Preparation After War

Ending combat is only the beginning of lasting peace.

Former enemies may need to live beside one another.

Communities may need rebuilding.

Refugees may return.

War criminals may need prosecution.

Governments may need reconstruction.

Weapons may need removal.

Trauma may affect generations.

Churches and humanitarian organizations can play important roles in reconciliation, relief, rebuilding, and spiritual care.

When Christians Disagree

Faithful Christians can agree that human life is sacred, peace is desirable, evil should be restrained, and innocent people should be protected while still disagreeing about a particular war.

They may disagree about whether a threat is serious enough to justify military force.

Whether intervention will work.

Whether an ally should be defended.

Whether a war remains just after circumstances change.

Whether nuclear deterrence is morally acceptable.

Whether military spending is too high or too low.

Whether sanctions are justified.

Or whether a negotiated settlement should be accepted.

These disagreements should be discussed seriously rather than reduced immediately to accusations of cowardice, warmongering, disloyalty, or lack of compassion.

Questions Christians Should Ask

What is the actual threat?

Has the evidence been verified?

Is military force necessary?

Have reasonable peaceful alternatives been considered?

Who has lawful authority to make the decision?

What is the military objective?

Is that objective realistically achievable?

What would victory mean?

What happens afterward?

How will civilians be protected?

Is the expected military response proportionate to the threat?

Could intervention make the situation worse?

What unintended consequences are foreseeable?

Are allies sharing responsibility?

What will the war cost?

What responsibilities will exist toward veterans afterward?

Could the conflict expand into a larger war?

Is the nation defending itself, protecting others, or attempting to remake another society?

Are leaders being truthful with citizens?

What would cause the military operation to end?

Are we acting from wisdom or from fear, anger, pride, revenge, or political pressure?

Are we praying for peace even while preparing for the possibility of war?

A Biblical Balance

Peace is good.

Peacemaking is good.

Human life is precious.

War is terrible.

Aggression is wrong.

Terrorism is wrong.

Deliberately targeting civilians is wrong.

Government has a responsibility to protect its people.

Nations may legitimately defend themselves.

Military strength can sometimes deter aggression.

Strength should not become militarism.

Diplomacy should be pursued when realistically possible.

Diplomacy should not become an excuse for ignoring obvious aggression.

Military force should have a justifiable purpose.

Military objectives should be clear.

Civilian life should be protected.

Prisoners should be treated humanely.

Soldiers remain morally responsible for their actions.

Allies should share responsibility for their defense.

America cannot militarily solve every injustice in the world.

Foreign aid can help but has limits.

Defense spending requires stewardship.

Veterans should be cared for.

Unintended consequences must be considered.

National security should not eliminate constitutional liberty.

Christians should resist both glorifying war and pretending evil will disappear if good people refuse to resist it.

The goal of national defense should ultimately be a just and durable peace in which people can live safely and freely.

Questions for Personal Reflection

Do I think about war too casually because I will probably never personally fight in one?

Do I remember that soldiers and civilians on every side are human beings created in God’s image?

Do I automatically support military action because my preferred political leaders support it?

Do I automatically oppose military action because I distrust government?

Am I willing to examine evidence?

Do I distinguish national defense from unnecessary intervention?

Do I believe America must solve every international crisis?

Do I believe America should ignore everything happening beyond its borders?

Do I consider the unintended consequences of military action?

Do I think about what happens after a war?

Do I consider the long-term needs of veterans and military families?

Can I honor military service without believing every military decision is correct?

Can I oppose a particular war without dishonoring those who serve?

Do I pray for political leaders who must make decisions involving war and peace?

Do I pray for military personnel?

Do I pray for civilians caught in warfare?

Do I pray for enemies?

Am I ultimately seeking justice, protection, and peace rather than victory for its own sake?

A Prayer for Peace, Protection, and Wisdom

Father, You are Lord over every nation.

You created every human life.

You see soldiers and civilians.

Leaders and citizens.

Refugees and prisoners.

Those who attack and those who are attacked.

You see every family separated by war.

Every parent waiting for a child to return home.

Every child frightened by violence.

Every community destroyed by conflict.

Give our leaders wisdom.

Protect them from pride.

Fear.

Anger.

Political pressure.

Revenge.

And careless decisions.

Help them recognize genuine threats.

Give them courage when action is necessary.

Give them restraint when force is unnecessary.

Give diplomats wisdom to pursue peace.

Give military leaders sound judgment.

Protect those who serve.

Comfort their families.

Give soldiers courage without cruelty.

Discipline without hatred.

Strength without arrogance.

Help them remember the humanity even of their enemies.

Protect innocent civilians.

Comfort people who have lost loved ones.

Care for refugees and displaced families.

Strengthen veterans who carry wounds from their service.

Help our nation keep its promises to those who have sacrificed for its defense.

Give us wisdom about military strength.

Keep us prepared to defend what must be defended without becoming eager for war.

Help nations share responsibility.

Help leaders count the cost before sending people into danger.

Expose false information and propaganda.

Give citizens wisdom to examine what they are told.

Protect our liberties while protecting our security.

Where evil threatens innocent people, give leaders wisdom to know how to respond.

Where peace is possible, open the way toward it.

Where reconciliation can occur, soften hearts.

Where justice is required, establish it.

Teach Christians to be peacemakers without being naive about evil.

Teach us to love enemies without abandoning people who need protection.

Teach us to honor those who serve without placing our nation above You.

And remind us that the lasting peace humanity needs will never finally come through military strength alone.

Our ultimate hope is in Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace.

In Jesus’ name, Amen.

Thinking Biblically About Difficult Public Issues

Needs, Wants, Rights, Privileges, Mercy, Compassion, and Justice

Immigration: Borders, the Rule of Law, and Welcoming the Stranger

Continue Learning

Freedom of Speech, Protest, and Peaceful Dissent

Guns, Violence, Self-Defense, and Public Safety