How the Israel-Hezbollah Conflict Challenges Christians to Lead with Compassion

Israel struck Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon today as the Iran-backed group attacked military facilities in northern Israel. The day before, Israeli strikes killed more than 490 people in the deadliest barrage since the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah conflict. After the Israeli military warned residents in southern and eastern Lebanon to evacuate, thousands fled in the largest exodus since the 2006 fighting. Hezbollah responded by firing dozens of rockets toward Israel. The Iranian proxy vows to continue its strikes until there is a cease-fire in Gaza. Israel says it is committed to stabilizing its northern border so the thousands of Israelis who evacuated since the conflict began on October 7 can return home.

As I noted yesterday, Lebanon is not part of the Promised Land intended by God for Abraham’s descendants (cf. Genesis 12:1–9). If the escalating conflict is not “biblical” in this sense, how does God view it?

How should we?

Let’s consider three theological options.

Total Pacifism

One approach is total pacifism, the position that war is never justified under any circumstances.

Pacifists might adopt non-violent means of opposition, such as hunger strikes or public rallies, but they refuse to take up arms against others. Many cite Jesus’ admonition: “Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:39).

However, our Lord’s words related to personal slander rather than self-defense or war. The left hand was not used in public in Jesus’ culture. As a result, if I strike you on the right cheek with my right hand, I must slap you with the back of my hand. This is not a life-threatening attack but an insult.

The context of Jesus’ words clarifies their relational intent: “If anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles” (vv. 40–41). His injunction was not intended to address the issue of war. Nonetheless, total pacifists believe that it is always wrong to harm others, whatever their aggression toward us.

In “Why I Am Not a Pacifist,” C. S. Lewis observed:

Only liberal societies tolerate Pacifists. In a liberal society, the number of Pacifists will either be large enough to cripple the state as a belligerent or not. If not, you have done nothing. If it is large enough, then you have handed over the state that does tolerate Pacifists to its totalitarian neighbor who does not. Pacifism of this kind is taking the straight road to a world in which there will be no pacifists.

Israeli pacifism would clearly lead to Jewish genocide at the hands of Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Iranian proxies pledged to the annihilation of the Jewish state. As Dennis Prager observed, if the Palestinians laid down their arms, the fighting would stop. If the Israelis laid down their arms, they would be destroyed.

If you doubt this fact, just remember October 7.

Preemptive War

This is the belief that war may be justified to protect ourselves from real or perceived threats. For example, Israel says it launched last Friday’s attack on Hezbollah leaders because they were plotting another October 7–type genocide, this time in northern Israel.

Many preemptive war theologians find justification for their position in God’s command that his people initiate war against the Canaanites (see Joshua 6:5; 8:1–2; Judges 1:1–4). These people had not attacked the Hebrews, but God knew that if they were left alive in the Promised Land, their paganism, idolatry, and immorality would infect his people and lead to rebellion against his word and will (cf. Deuteronomy 18:9–14).

However, the conquest of Canaan was a one-time event necessary to create the nation through whom God would bring the Savior of the world, not a strategy prescribed for all people at all times. If it is morally appropriate to initiate aggression against a nation merely because they have the capacity to harm us, what real or potential enemy are we not justified in attacking?

Applied to Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah, it seems clear that preemptive war is justified only to prevent real and present dangers, not all possible threats. Otherwise, Israel would be morally required to initiate total war against every antisemitic force anywhere in the world.

“Just War” Theory

“Just war” proponents believe that aggression against others can be justified under certain conditions. Cicero was the first to argue for such an approach, but St. Augustine (AD 354–430) set forth its classic formulation:

Just cause —a defensive war fought only to resist aggression.
Just intent—fought to secure justice, not for revenge, conquest, or money.
Last resort—all other attempts to resolve the conflict have clearly failed.
Legitimate authority—military force is authorized by the proper governmental powers.
Limited goals—achievable, seeking a just peace.
Proportionality—the good gained must justify the harm done.
Noncombatant immunity—civilians protected as far as is humanly possible.

In its response to Hamas’ genocidal invasion on October 7, Israel seeks to fulfill each of these conditions. Even the “noncombatant immunity” element, which dominates anti-Israel rhetoric, is typically misinterpreted: Hamas’s leaders want Palestinian civilians to die to mobilize the global community against Israel, pressuring them to stop the war without eradicating Hamas. This is one reason they locate their soldiers and forces behind civilian “shields.”

Even so, the IDF is doing all it can to minimize civilian casualties in Gaza and warning civilians in Lebanon ahead of airstrikes in their areas.

A Missionary’s Transforming Prayer

I plan to say more on this difficult subject in tomorrow’s Daily Article. For today, let’s close with this reminder: God loves every person involved in this escalating conflict, whether Jewish, Lebanese, or Palestinian. He “made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth” (Acts 17:26) and “desires all people to be saved” (1 Timothy 2:4; cf. 2 Peter 3:9).

Now, he is calling us to love as he loves and to grieve as he grieves. He wants us to see everyone involved in this conflict as if they were a member of our family because they are.

I once heard a missionary pray,