Who Needs to Turn the Other Cheek? Developing a Rational and Practical Christian Ethic of Violence

One of the less explored questions in the Christian tradition of Just War is the question of who can use legitimate force. This article focuses on this question. The intention is to assess different legitimate, plausible, historical interpretations for the relevance of Just War in the post-Cold War world order by using evidence from game-theoretical modelling and post-Cold War textual and conflict data. The assumption is that those interpretations that are rational and lead to peace are more relevant for today's world than those that do not. This way the article makes two original contributions. First, the article links consequentialist ethical discussion with research findings on consequences of the use or non-use of force. Secondly, the paper offers an altered interpretation of who should use force and who should not. The article suggests that force is functional in preventing violence only when the target accepts the norms enforced by the user of force and recognises the user as a legitimate enforcer of the mutually accepted set of norms. Force is rational and practical for the prevention of violence only when it disincentivises selfish temptations in legitimate order.