Our opponents present arguments, such as, in the New Testament, it is written (here we would like to humorously and sarcastically say: look, and it is depicted on the icon!? – see Part II):
In Capernaum, Christ accepts the request of the Roman centurion, whose servant was ill, and did not consider it necessary to comment on his military profession. Moreover, the centurion’s statement that he has soldiers under his command who must obey his orders – “I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes; and to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it” – does not elicit any reaction from Christ. More important is the centurion’s trust (faith-knowledge – this is the realm of the Kingdom of God, the knowledge by the Holy Spirit of the Mysteries of Eternal Life, so the centurion (who is in the realm of the old covenant, in the realm of righteousness) could not have faith until he becomes a member of the Body of Christ, a partaker of the Eucharist by the Holy Spirit – see Part II), for which he receives praise from the Lord. (The Lord did not come to patch up the old garment, not to make this world better, more moral, kinder, not to reform the military or write new military doctrines by which people should live in this age, not to engage in politics, economics, or culture, but to give people New Life, the Kingdom of God, life in the Holy Spirit beyond space and time, beyond decay and death; to enter into a New covenant with people, in which God and man are united forever inseparably). However, in another place in the Gospel, we see that Peter’s militaristic, zealot, warlike sentiments are most strictly stopped by Christ: “Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.” Why did the Lord disarm Peter and not say a word to the centurion? Because Peter was already a catechumen (baptized with water) and preparing for baptism with the Holy Spirit, while the centurion was a pagan, and you cannot take the sword away from a pagan (this is to demand from a person beyond their strength) – he lives in the old covenant, the realm of justice (at least equivalent retribution: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth). John the Baptist also did not tell the soldiers who came to him to throw away their weapons (to beat their swords into plowshares) but called them to righteousness, that is, to the maximum possible in the old covenant. By the way, John the Baptist is entirely the old covenant, he is a man of the old covenant (“The least in the Kingdom of God is greater than John the Baptist,” the greatest prophet of the old covenant!), so he speaks and knows as a prophet of the old covenant (he did not know on earth that God is Love (the Holy Trinity); he knew this in Part III when he was baptized with the Holy Spirit into the Church of Christ). Therefore, in the Old Testament, a just war (defensive, liberation) is a righteous deed, obligatory (in the old covenant, there is a choice between lesser evil and greater evil; with the advent of the New Covenant, which exists parallel to the Old Covenant, a person already has a choice between Good and evil, which they have the power to make by the Holy Spirit) – to defend their homeland, family, kin (in a word, primarily to “care for their own” in various ways), if you, being a pagan, do not do this, then you sin grievously against your conscience, against the truth, and make yourself extremely incapable of entering the school of catechumens, to prepare for baptism in the Church by the Holy Spirit. But Peter (and all the catechumens prepared by the Church for baptism by the Holy Spirit) is told that you will die by the sword, that is, you will inflict a grievous mortal wound on your soul, which will make you incapable of being baptized by the Holy Spirit for a long time! Therefore, a pagan with a gun in a just war (although such wars do not exist, but let it be) is commendable and righteous, and by following the advice of John the Baptist, he becomes capable of entering the school of catechumens, accepting the Gospel, and trusting the Church, and after preparation, being baptized by the Holy Spirit! But a catechumen with a gun in his hands in war is a catastrophe!!! And when a person baptized by the Holy Spirit takes up arms and fights (which cannot happen!) – it is madness!!!
In the Acts of the Apostles, we see the example of the centurion Cornelius, who was baptized into the Church by the Holy Spirit, showing that a soldier’s career is not an obstacle to salvation, that is, to being born into the Church by the Holy Spirit, to acquiring a humble and contrite heart, which is capable of receiving the Holy Spirit. But whether Cornelius remained in military service (or continued to earn his bread with such a craft) after baptism – the Acts say nothing!!! This is understood in the Church, but if it were written, then there would be a great temptation and obstacle in the mission – allegedly, Christians are disintegrating the army, provoking (and are the cause of) desertion. Nowhere (with few exceptions – examples see above) in church texts, where it speaks of the conversion of soldiers, who were later glorified among the saints, does it speak about their subsequent attitude to military affairs and war. This is, of course, an economic, missionary design, so as not to tempt the imperial beast, which already causes much harm to the church mission.