124         Jewish Wars as Precedents for Modern Wars.         [April,

necessity for a special grant in each individual case; but, what-
ever may be thought of New Testament revelation in this respect,
it is absolutely certain that no such general grant is to be found
in the Old Testament, and it is the force of its precedents that we
are now considering. The true and proper effect, therefore, of
applying to modern nations the law which governed Jewish war-
fare would be to render it impossible for them to wage any war;
for it would render insufficient the best causes which they can
have, unprovoked invasion and insurrection, while it would throw
them back for excuse upon one which they can never have, the
will of God specially revealed for the occasion. The Jewish
wars were certainly justifiable, and all wars precisely like them
would be equally so; but no modern wars can be like them in the
one only particular which made them innocent; therefore no
modern wars, judged by Jewish precedents, are innocent, or can
possibly be so.
   We have now exhibited the insufficiency of the argument for
war under consideration in two different ways. By first sup-
posing its conclusion to be granted, we have shown that it in-
volves the absurdity of justifying wars of unprovoked invasion
and extermination, and yet would prevent resistance to wars of
the same kind. This absurdity involved in the argument proves
that it must be fallacious. In the sccond place, we have shown
that the wars, upon the use of which, as precedents, the validity of
this argument depends, were such that, as precedents, they con-
demn all modern warfare. This fact again proves that there
must be a fallacy lurking in the argument. We have now only
to point out that fallacy, and dismiss the argument from further
   Plausible as the argument appears, it contains no less than two
fallacies; first, a false assumption in the major premise; second,
an ambiguous use of the minor term. To speak of the latter first,
it is clear that the term war is used in a broader sense in the con-
clusion than in the minor premise. God can not sanction that
which is morally wrong :  he has sanctioned war; therefore war
is not morally wrong.
   Now it is not admitted, nor does the minor proposition assume

      previous page                               next page