The Sabbath and Military
Service Study No. 269
The Sabbath-keeping Church of God has a long tradition of non-participation in war. Both the Church of God (7th Day), and most descendants from the Worldwide Church of God are opposed to military service. Some of these groups have anti-participation-in-war statements in their fundamentals of belief. While Seventh-day Adventists do not have a statement on carnal warfare in their current official doctrinal statement, SDAs, when inducted into the military, often become non-combatants, but many now serve in combat roles. However, the history of conscientious objection to military service goes back much further.
Anabaptists in Europe, who became prominent in the 1500s, generally opposed taking part in warfare. While not all Anabaptists were Sabbath-keepers, some were. My ancestors became followers of a prominent Sunday Anabaptist named Menno Simons, founder of the Mennonites. Because they would not participate in Prussian wars, my German Mennonite ancestors, known as the “von Nickel” clan, gave up their ownership of the largest nickel mine in Eastern Europe, and settled in the south Russian area of the Ukraine, at the invitation of Russian Empress Catherine the Great. John Kiesz, the late noted evangelist of the Church of God, Seventh Day, also was descended from these Germans in Russia. They eventually migrated further east, reaching Tashkent, in Asiatic Russia. In about the 1870s, seeking to avoid mandatory military service in the Russian army, my father’s ancestors migrated to the Dakotas in North America. Others went to Paraguay, in South America.
Those who refuse to kill and maim other human beings in warfare often face contempt, ridicule, and persecution. In spite of ardent persuasion from public officials, my grandfather in North Dakota refused to buy War Bonds during World War I. Buying bonds was supposed to be voluntary. He did not want to support President Woodrow Wilson’s war in Europe. As a result of grandpa’s refusal, the local sheriff came to Cornelius Nickel’s farm and confiscated a cow on behalf of the United States war effort.
In 1969, as a young college graduate and twenty-one year old convert to the Sabbath-keeping Church of God, I faced a hostile draft board shortly after I was baptized. The government had declared me “1A,” which means that I was subject to being drafted and sent to the Vietnam War. I performed a diligent study of the Bible teachings on war, writing a lengthy paper to my draft board, in order to convince them that I was a sincere conscientious objector to war. One of the members of the Draft Board reviewing my case was Professor of Religion at the college I had been attending. I remember his pointed questions, and sneering ridicule of my beliefs. I got a little practice in case I ever have to appear before a Grand Inquisition. Rather than allow me to engage in public or international service in the Peace Corps as work in lieu of military service, my Draft Board decided that I must take the lowliest job available: janitor at Goodwill Industries in Portland, Oregon. So, for two years of alternate service, known as the “1-W” program, the valedictorian of both his high school and college graduating classes, mopped floors and cleaned toilets. It was a good, character building experience. I could have fled to Canada to live with relatives there, but I am happy that I was able to serve my country in a non-destructive way. While some of my contemporaries who went to Vietnam came back in pine boxes, crippled with injuries, or drugged out of their minds, I worked with handicapped people and learned many helpful lessons.
My personal experiences are not unique. Sabbath-keeping and non-participation in warfare seem to go hand in hand. The Waldenses huddled in the valleys of the Alps underwent military attack and persecutions time and again. They were never aggressive, and only in extreme circumstances would defend themselves.
Civil War Conscientious Objectors
During the American Civil War, many Adventists and Church of God Sabbatarians refused to participate in the war.
One clear indication of the beliefs of the Hope of Israel (name of the Church of God paper, the predecessor of today’s Bible Advocate) supporters generally was their conscientious objection to participation in the Civil War.
It appears that some Advent groups attempted to buy exemption from the draft for their male members. Eli Wilsey of the Hartford “Church of Christ” spent at least four months in prison “for refusing to fight with carnal weapons.” Frequent news articles on the progress, and staggering costs, of the war were published, with the exhortation to the brethren to have nothing to do with “war, revenge and murder.”
One news report was that brother William Cronk of Casco was drafted, passed examination, “but was declared exempt from field service on account of his religious principles. He is in the government service in the hospital.”
N. Wallen and R.C. Horton reported in a letter dated January 16, 1865, from South Haven, Michigan that the brethren of Hartford and Casco were going to try and raise $300.00 to clear all the brethren who may be drafted.
The April 23, 1865, issue contained a quote from the Harbinger expressing sorrow at the death of President Lincoln, thanking God that Lincoln made laws to deliver Christians from participating in war.
John L. Staunton, a one-time president of the Michigan Conference, enlisted in the Union army, and the Waverly church disfellowshipped him, maintaining that only non-resisters could be in their church.
Henry E. Carver of Iowa was conscientiously opposed to Christians fighting with carnal weapons, that is, in warfare. He believed that the church should adopt the same position and urged that the question be discussed in the columns of the Advent Review (see October 21, 1862 issue, p. 166). This occurred at the outbreak of the Civil War, shortly before the foundation of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination.
The Whites stated at a council in Lisbon, Iowa that the subject should not be discussed because of the danger of being destroyed by the war elements in the country for seeming to be unpatriotic. James White wrote in the Review that to engage in war would be a violation of two of God’s commandments, but in case of being drafted, the government would be responsible for an individual’s violation of God’s commandments. In effect, he said that it was all right to break God’s law! This error was so obvious that Ellen G. White had to apologize in the Review for her husband, but maintained that something had to be said on this delicate subject. Mrs. White never did pronounce a vision concerning conscientious objection.
The Iowa Church of God brethren were firmly convinced that it was wrong for Christians to engage in warfare. During the initial phase of the Civil War, Elders B.F. Snook and J.H. Waggoner prepared a petition to the Iowa State government, asking their church be exempted as non-combatants. The petition was circulated among the brethren for signatures, and sent to the state capital. Battle Creek did not sanction this effort, terming it “fanaticism.” Due to the Church of God petition, a law was enacted exempting non-combatants from bearing arms. Carver termed the non-action of the Battle Creek Seventh-Day Adventists as “cowardly.”
However, Uriah Smith reported that the Seventh-Day Adventist General Conference did indirectly exempt Seventh-Day Adventists by petitioning the government to exempt them through an already existing law.
According to the “Coworker Letter,” January 19, 1986, The Church of God (7th day) “was the primary instrument in this country to establish the conscientious objector status of those who sought to live in peace on either side in the Civil War. . . . The Church of God, in the person of Andrew Dugger, presented in the time of the First World War the petition of the Church to remain free of obligation of killing one’s neighbor” (Herman L. Hoeh’s graveside message at Herbert W. Armstrong’s funeral).
Conscientious Objection Today
Jesus said in John 18:36, “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.” The Savior’s servants are not to engage in carnal warfare. There are many scriptures supporting the view that participating in war is contrary to New Testament beliefs. You may wish to view several articles on this subject at:
Besides presenting a problem with the sixth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill,” military service presents insurmountable problems with keeping the Bible Sabbath. As Ron Dart writes in his article, “Capital Punishment, A Christian Dilemma,” there is little difference between a slave and a man drafted into the military. Soldiers eat and sleep when and where they are told. They work and fight when and where they are told. They are not free to quit and go home. If a civilian Sabbath-keeper refuses to work on God’s weekly Holy Day, he may lose his job; a soldier under the same circumstances may be court martialed and jailed. Sabbath-keeping, and military service and war, are totally opposed to each other.
Evangelist Ron Dart does not believe it is wrong to be in the military or engage in war. Dart said he does NOT believe that we should conscientiously refuse to bear arms, or refuse to come under the military authority. He says, “I think it [opposition to military service] is a doctrine that needs to be carefully re-thought. As it was taught by the Worldwide Church of God, I came to see that there were flaws in the argumentation. During my years in WCG, I accepted the teaching on military service.” He says that Garner Ted Armstrong believed the same way, and that his church left it as a matter of individual conscience.
In a 2005 essay, “A Brutal War,” on Dart’s CEM website, he says that the USA should fight a no-holds barred war in Iraq. “you fight a war with whatever brute force is necessary to ensure that you don’t have to do worse later. You brutally pacify a city like Fallujah in Iraq, and you do it the first time you threaten it. You don’t back down or negotiate with criminals and terrorists. You kill them. It doesn’t sound very Christian does it? Well, so what? Isn’t the United States supposed to be a secular nation? Why should our military be guided by Christian principles?”
Supporting the war in Iraq, or any other carnal war, puts one outside the Church of God and is actually against the safety and security of our nation. “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh,” II Corinthians 10:3.
Doctrinal Statements on Military Service
Article 15 of the Statement of Beliefs of the Church of God, Seventh Day, headquartered in Denver, Colorado, states: “Participation in Warfare. Jesus Christ our Lord taught us to love and forgive our enemies, and to work for the peace and salvation of all peoples. Wars among nations and violence between persons are not God’s perfect will, but result from greed, lust for power, selfishness, and other sinful motives. Christians should renounce such carnality and the weapons of human strife, and should not participate in military combat through the armed forces. Matthew 5:38-48; Luke 6:27-38; Romans 12:17-21; John 18:36; Matthew 26:51, 52; II Corinthians 10:3, 4; James 4:1.”
The United Church of God, an International Association, with home office near Cincinnati, Ohio, says this in their statement of belief:
“We believe that Christians are forbidden by the commandments of God from taking human life, directly or indirectly, and that bearing arms is contrary to this fundamental belief. Therefore, we believe that Christians should not voluntarily become engaged in military service. If they are involuntarily engaged in military service, we believe they should refuse conscientiously to bear arms and, to the extent possible, to refuse to come under military authority.”
Down through history, Sabbath-keepers have often been persecuted and attacked by Catholic armies. They have had to flee to avoid massacre, and have had to defend themselves only under extreme, provocative, circumstances. In the Twentieth Century, purposeless wars slaughtered millions. If there is any lesson to be learned from this bloody history, it is that war is “hell,” and that a Bible believer should shun such evil practices. We look forward to the coming of the Savior. His return will initiate the ONLY “war to end all wars.” Sabbath-keeping and military service appear to be totally incompatible. This is not a borderline, “gray” issue. The Sixth Commandment is as important as the Fourth Commandment.
True Christians are Anti-War
A fundamental, foundational tenet of our belief is opposition to carnal warfare. Of the ancient Waldenses, it is reported, “Their opposition to bearing arms, and to war in all its operations, was unanimous and unequivocal. Whoever commanded them to the field they refused to obey, alleging that they could not conscientiously comply. No contingencies would induce them to assume the weapons of death; and this peculiarity was well understood by all the world, and made the onsets of the inquisitors and crusaders upon these weaponless Christians the more cruel and contemptible,” A General History of the Sabbatarian Churches, by Tamar Davis, 1851, p. 78.
U.S. Law for Conscientious Objectors
The United States Military Selective Service Act provides that no person shall be subject to combatant training and service in the armed forces who “by reason of religious training and belief is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form” (50 U.S.C. App. § 456(j)). There is no draft at present; however, if a war were declared today, the draft could begin immediately. By law, all males must register with the Selective Service within 30 days of their 18th birthday. Pursuant to the Biblical instruction given in Romans 13:1-2, we recommend that all young men register, and at the same time, express their conscientious objection to military service. If you have failed to register within the required 30 days, we recommend that you now register as soon as possible if you are between the age of 18 and 26. The longer you delay, the greater the potential penalty if the draft were re-instituted.
Seventh-day Adventists and War
(Material for this section comes from “Between Pacifism and Patriotism,” by SDA scholar Douglas Morgan.)
The Seventh-day Adventists have a checkered history relating to their stance on war. In the recent Gulf Wars, thousands of Adventists served in the Armed Forces, both active duty and reserves, the majority bearing arms. It wasn’t always this way.
In 1867, Adventists passed a resolution stating: “That it is the judgment of this Conference, that the bearing of arms, or engaging in war, is a direct violation of the teachings of our Saviour and of the spirit and letter of the law of God. (Similar statements were made in 1865 and 1868.)
While encouraging young people to choose options other than combatant service in the military, the church’s official stance since 1972 has recognized that conscientious Adventists will reach different conclusions on this momentous moral issue.
In August 1862, SDA founder James White, wrote in an Advent Review and Sabbath Herald editorial entitled, “The Nation.” White reasoned that if Adventists were drafted, they should submit, letting the government assume responsibility for any violations of God’s law (August 12, 1862, p. 84).
White’s editorial sparked vigorous, extended debate in the pages of the Review. Some believers called for Adventist participation in the Union’s “crusade against traitors” — one even fantasizing about an armed regiment of Sabbath-keepers that would “strike this rebellion a staggering blow” (September 23, 1862, p. 134). Other believers supported total pacifism, including Henry Carver, who maintained “that under no circumstances was it justifiable in a follower of the Lamb to use carnal weapons to take the lives of his fellowmen” (October 21, 1862, p. 166). The 1863 federal draft law allowed conscripts to purchase an exemption for $300 or to provide a substitute.
Congress, in July 1864, restricted these options to conscientious objectors with membership in a recognized pacifist church. The Adventist leadership quickly sought governmental recognition of their noncombatant position. Declaring themselves “a people unanimously loyal and anti-slavery” but unwilling to shed blood because of their convictions, based on the Ten Commandments and the teachings of the New Testament, they obtained an exemption allowing them two options: (1) accepting assignment to hospital duty or care of freedmen, or (2) paying the $300 commutation fee (Review, September 23, 1864, pp. 124-125). Despite this government recognition, at the local level, many Adventist draftees were refused alternative duty, threatened with imprisonment or court-martial, and harassed when they tried to claim their right to alternative duty.
A resolution voted by the General Conference session of 1865 declared: “While we thus cheerfully render to Caesar the things which the Scriptures show to be his, we are compelled to decline all participation in acts of war and bloodshed as being inconsistent with the duties enjoined upon us by our divine Master toward our enemies and toward all mankind.” (Review, May 17, 1865, p. 196-197.
During the first half of the 20th century, noncombatancy in general remained normative in Adventism, despite significant exceptions outside the U.S. However, a subtle but significant change in emphasis occurred. Most 19th-century Adventists viewed pacifism as a matter of faithfulness to Christ and obedience to the law of God, although they sought to accommodate the state as far as possible without violating principle. Twentieth Century Adventists tended to shift the priority to the Christian’s patriotic duty to the nation-state, and sought ways to fulfill that duty within their religious scruples, which became known as “conscientious cooperators,” and church leaders quickly adopted the phrase. During World War II, American Adventists enthusiastically embraced the national consensus about the rightness of defending freedom against the aggression of ultra-nationalist dictatorships.
As World War I neared, Germany had the largest Adventist membership of any European nation. Ludwig R. Conradi, who played a major role in establishing Adventism in Europe, led the German church. Drawing on Ellen White’s favorable comments from Basel in 1886 about Adventist participation in military drill exercises, Conradi basically repudiated noncombatancy. Under his leadership, the German church took the position that during wartime, Adventist draftees would not only bear arms, but also not make an issue of Sabbath observance. Conradi insisted only on Sabbath-keeping by Adventist military personnel during peacetime.
And so, Adventism had moved from eschewing military service to supporting it, and, as we shall see, even persecuting Adventists who opposed carnal warfare. Thankfully, not all Adventists supported their Church in its departure from Truth.
The story of German Adventist conscientious objectors is one of the most stirring episodes of Sabbatarian history.
Anybody who stood up to the Nazis is a hero in my book. Will we be steadfast in the coming time of war and trial? I became aware recently of a body of Sabbatarians who have a rich history of holding to their faith, in spite of hardship, persecution, and excommunication from their own Church. The Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement began during World War I in Europe. Their story is one of courage, and is a sterling example for us to follow. Will our faith be as immovable as theirs?
The Fourth Command, the Sabbath, is only one of Ten Commandments. The Sixth Commandment, “Thou shalt not kill [do no murder],” is as commonly broken as the other commandments. The Church of God continues to this day to be opposed to carnal war and military service.
During the formative years of the Sabbatarian Adventist Movement, some equivocated, but most Sabbath-keepers of the mid-Nineteenth Century were opposed to carnal warfare. The Seventh-day Adventist Church in the United States during the American Civil War declared in 1864:
“The denomination of Christians calling themselves Seventh-day Adventists, taking the Bible as their rule of faith and practice, are unanimous in their views that its teachings are contrary to the spirit and practice of war; hence, they have ever been conscientiously opposed to bearing arms. If there is any portion of the Bible which we, as a people, can point to more than any other as our creed, it is the law of the ten commandments, which we regard as the supreme law, and each precept of which we take in its most obvious and literal import. The fourth of these commandments requires cessation from labor on the seventh day of the week, the sixth prohibits the taking of life, neither of which, in our view, could be observed while doing military duty. Our practice has uniformly been consistent with these principles. Hence, our people have not felt free to enlist into the service. In none of our denominational publications have we advocated or encouraged the practice of bearing arms, and, when drafted, rather than violate our principles, we have been content to pay, and assist each other in paying, the $300 commutation money.” F. M. Wilcox: Seventh-day Adventists in Time of War, p. 58.
In 1865, the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists reaffirmed their original stand: “Resolved that . . . . we are compelled to decline all participation in acts of war and bloodshed as being inconsistent with the duties enjoined upon us by our divine Master toward our enemies and toward all mankind,” The Review and Herald, May 23, 1865.
During World War I (1914-1918), German and other European Seventh-day Adventists did an about-face and its leadership, supported by the American General Conference, not only broke with the traditional teaching of their Church, but actually encouraged its members to join the military and engage in warfare. While 98% of the members decided to obey the instruction of the officers of the denomination, taking by part in the war, 2% decided to remain faithful to the law of God, upholding the original position, as taught and practiced up to that time. These faithful believers were disfellowshipped from the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Europe because they chose to uphold the Church’s original position in regard to keeping the Law of God (all Ten Commandments).
In a booklet published by the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Germany, they announced the following doctrinal change: “In all that we have said we have shown that the Bible teaches, firstly, that taking part in the war is no transgression of the sixth commandment, likewise, that war service on the Sabbath is not a transgression of the fourth commandment,” Protokoll, p.12.
“On the German mobilization, in August, 1914, the SDAs of that country were faced with the necessity of making an immediate decision concerning their duty to God and country when called into the armed service (see Germany, V; Noncombatancy). After counseling with the few SDA leaders locally available at that time, the president of the East German Union Conference informed the German War Ministry in writing, dated Aug. 4, 1914, that conscripted SDAs would bear arms as combatants and would render service on the Sabbath in defense of their country . . .
“Admittedly, the three SDA leaders in Germany took a stand concerning the duty of SDA’s in military service that was contrary to the historic stand officially maintained by the denomination ever since the American Civil War (1861-1865),” The Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Commentary Reference Series, Vol. 10, p. 1183, Edition of 1966.
The Adventist leaders declared: “At the beginning of the war our organization was split into two parties. As ninety-eight percent of our membership, by searching the Bible, came to the conviction that they are duty-bound, by conscience, to defend the country with weapons, also on Saturdays, this position, unanimously endorsed by the leadership, was immediately announced to the War Ministry. Two percent, however, did not submit to this resolution, and therefore had to be disfellowshipped because of their unchristian conduct. These unprofitable elements set themselves up as preachers and, with little results, sought to make converts to their propaganda of foolish ideas. They call themselves, falsely, preachers and Adventists. They are not; they are deceivers. When such elements receive their merited punishment, we regard it, in fact, as a favor done to us,” Dresdener Neueste Nachrichten (a German newspaper), p. 3, April 12, 1918.
In the same year, SDA leaders made another declaration, as follows: “In the beginning of the war there were some members, as there are also in other places, who did not want to take part in war service, either because of their lack of unity, or because of fanaticism. They started to spread around their foolish ideas in the congregation by word and in writing, trying to convince others to do the same. They were admonished by the church, but because of their obstinacy they had to be put out, for they became a threat to internal and external peace,” Stuttgarter Neues Tagblatt, September 26, 1918.
Those disfellowshipped from the Seventh-day Adventist Church, not only in Germany, but also in many other countries in Europe, had no intention of starting a new Church. They were about 4,000 in number. Attempts at reconciliation with the main body were made just after the war, in 1920 and in 1922, but with no positive result.
Therefore, as their numbers increased, the Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement was organized as a church, separate from the main body of Seventh-day Adventists, when representatives from different countries met at Gotha, Germany, July 14-20, 1925. It is the purpose of the Reform Movement to continue with the original teachings and practices of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
The Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement General Conference first operated from Isernhagen, Germany, and then Basel, Switzerland. During the Nazi Era and World War II, mainstream SDAs served the Nazi state, as they had accommodated the German government in the first World War. The April 20, 1940, Morning Watch (an Adventist publication) praised Adolph Hitler for his humility, self-sacrifice, and “warm heart.” Adventists even disfellowshipped members of Jewish origin. Imagine, goose-stepping Adventists! This is a very black page in Adventist history. Although almost all SDAs placed themselves without exception behind the National Socialist Government, gave the German salute, and performed military service, the adherents of the Reform Movement maintained their old principles of faith and stood up to Hitler. Some were killed in concentration camps, rather than deny the Sabbath.
Reform Adventists publish an inspiring testimony of steadfast Sabbath-keepers during Germany’s dark days, “And Follow Their Faith!” ($5.00 postpaid from: Giving & Sharing, PO Box 100, Neck City, MO 64849) This 60-page book includes pictures, history, and letters of martyrs for the faith. In some cases, Nazi-collaborating regular Seventh-day Adventist ministers testified against them. One hero was Anton Brugger, born in 1911 in Salzburg, Austria. He was condemned to two years of prison in a labor concentration camp as a conscientious objector. While working in the concentration camp as a woodworker, Brugger wrote, “The officers of the Justice Department wanted to force me to work on the Sabbath, but the foreman was so satisfied with me and my work that I did not have to work on Saturdays. In exchange, I helped to unload boxcars every Sunday.” Suddenly, without notice, they came to get him for the military. “I could not pledge allegiance to the [Nazi] flag, because in doing so I would have promised not only to fight with arms, but also to fight on the Sabbath day. Because I could not give this promise, I was condemned to death.” In his touching letters to his mother and wife, Anton Brugger fully demonstrates the Spirit of Christ. He explains, “I could not swear to a worldly power unconditional fidelity, for this I did already to my Saviour at my baptism. Then I made a covenant with the Lord, promising Him to keep faithfully His commandments and follow Him under all conditions and difficulties in life. So there remained only two alternatives: either to remain faithful in all trials — even unto death — or else to become unfaithful by choosing the easier side. I chose death since I desire to attain to eternal life, for which Jesus Christ has called me by His sacrificial death. . . . For me there is no halfway position; I am either fully true to my conviction, or not at all. . . . I ask you [mother] to put forth special efforts to put out of your heart all hard feelings against everyone who has done you harm during your life. . . Forgive them with all your heart and forget all the evil done.” In his final letter to his beloved wife Esther, written hours before his execution on February 3, 1943 (at the age of 31), Anton wrote, “may the Lord bless you . . . and protect and help you graciously so that we may see each other again forever beside HIM in His wonderful kingdom of peace. . . . Farewell, my Darling, auf wiedersehen!” (“And Follow Their Faith!” pages 40-51).
After World War II, Reform headquarters was moved to America, now in Roanoke, Virginia. The SDA Reform Movement works in 83 countries. In 1999, it claimed almost 30,000 members. I do not agree with them regarding Ellen G. White and vegetarianism as a test of fellowship. However, I admire their courage to stand up to 98% of their brethren, and remain faithful to the Sabbath even under war and Nazi tyranny. May we all resist the liberal crowd and be faithful to the Lord of the Sabbath.
A Thousand Shall Fall
We highly recommend the 172-page book, A Thousand Shall Fall, by Susi Hasel Mundy ($13 plus postage from Giving & Sharing). This is the true story of a Seventh-day Adventist conscientious objector in Nazi Germany. God certainly delivered this family who trusted in Him. It is amazing how Hasel was able to keep the Sabbath and avoid unclean meats while working in a bridge construction crew in the Nazi army!
Consider the fact that today thousands of Seventh-day Adventists are serving in U.S. combat forces and killing “the enemy,” when in World War II, Franz Hasel risked his life in order to avoid killing anyone and rescued hundreds of Jews from Nazi murder. Do you think that the Almighty has a bone to pick with such faithless Sabbath-keepers of today, and with their Church leaders who refuse to preach the Truth about military service? Or, how about the so-called Church of God leaders who support America’s wars?
It is time the Church of God returns to its religious roots. We cannot serve in the military, because we must either serve God or Satan. Will God protect us as He says in Psalm 91? Will we exercise faith, or will we become part of the world by becoming part of the military?
“It is a known fact that for two centuries and more after Christ, Christians almost invariably refused to serve in the armed forces,” from The Christian and Military Service, by Herman Will, Jr.
— compiled by Richard C. Nickels Ω
For additional information, write for the 47-page reprint, “Should a Christian Fight?” by L. Leroy Neff, available for $4 from Giving & Sharing, or on the Internet at: