Expert: Tom Smith - 11/24/2006

Question
Hello Tom,

I overheard an expert on a radio program saying that Iran has already stated it wants to destroy Israel & the U.S. & it's a matter of time until Iran or some other evil nation will use a nuclear weapon against us. He discussed that the electromagnetic wave from a certain size nuclear device detonated 100 miles above the U.S. could completely knock out much or all of our communications capability.
Are there any Biblical scriptures supporting America or Israel launching a nuclear first strike against our enemies if we know they're going to attack first in a matter of time? Does the Bible indicate anywhere that we would be going against God's law by killing innocent civilians in such an attack?
I would think God would support our first strike option if we go by Old testament law. New Testament law seems a bit different. Christ comes and seems to move us to love our enemies and even "turn the other cheek".
What might be your opinion on all of this?

Thank you very much.

Sincerely,

Mike Eidson

Answer
That is a difficult question. There are a few considerations from a Biblical perspective. First and foremost is the concern that I would have for those people who die who have never had a chance to hear and receive the gospel. I am not a pacifist, but I am always concerned that we do not kill people unnecessarily because, no matter who they are, God can work on their heart and can bring them to salvation. Our primary motivation as Christians must be to consider the eternal implications of weapons of mass destruction.

My second concern is whether those launching a strike have acted in good faith and in accordance with Biblical principles. I do not have to go back over the past events, but certainly there are some aspects of actions by the US which has helped to escalate the situation to where it is today. This is not in any way to take away from the evil nature of the current Iranian government, but the moderates appeared to have the upper hand before 2003. It appears that the aggressive posturing aided the more extremist elements in promoting their agenda.

The result is a more complex and dangerous situation than existed previously. So is there a high moral ground in moving forward with a first strike? It is definitely a complex moral issue. If it was a clear case of the good guys vs the bad guys where the good guys had done everything possible to avoid aggravating the situation, it would be much clearer.

Now consider other aspects of the international situation. In Russia we have a leader who has been flexing his muscles and who would not take kindly to seeing nuclear weapons being used on his border. It is also quite close to three other nuclear powers, India, Pakistan, and China, countries that together have almost half of the worlds population. Starting a nuclear conflict could have consequence beyond anything that we can imagine. And again, keep in mind the first objective - getting the gospel to those who are lost. We could deny any hope of the gospel to hundreds of millions or billions in a few moments.

So who really has the high moral ground?

I do see strong justification for using weapons in self defense, but unless a first strike could be clearly shown to be a necessity for self-defense in facing an imminent first strike from the other side, I would find it very difficult to justify.

Finally, when I read scripture, it is not nuclear weapons or the United States who is the protector of Israel, but it is God Himself. As for protecting the United States, I have seen nothing to suggest that Iran has anything close to the capability of launching a strike on the United States. Thus, a strike on the US would more likely occur as a result of an escalation due to events spiraling out of control. It would be best to avoid starting those events in the first place if possible.

I believe that the government of Iran is evil. I believe that it is in the best interests of the west to do what we can to support opposition elements in Iran in the hopes that perhaps that they can gain the upper hand once again and we can avoid millions of millions of deaths.

Your comments about the OT vs NT is interesting. I personally don't see a difference, but I do believe that if we showed our love and concern for the people of Iran rather than threatening them, the likelihood of avoiding the question of a first strike would be much better. When I say that I don't see a difference, what i mean is that I see the love of God in both. For example, in the OT, we have God establishing the cities of refuge where those accused of a crime could go to be safe. If they were innocent, they would remain protected. If not, they would be removed. In the OT, we find that we are told to protect those who are defenseless. That is God's love coming through for those who are innocent.

I know that I have not given any firm answer, but rather my thoughts on the principles that I see. What we need more than anything else is God's guidance. We need leaders who will be guided by God's Holy Spirit and we need to pray for those leaders.