Nations Are Not You and Me OR You Can be Saved but the Nation Cannot

Last updated on: February 3, 2016 at 11:25 pm by John Mark N. Reynolds

Nations Are Not You and Me OR You Can be Saved but the Nation Cannot 2016-02-03T23:25:02-04:00 John Mark N. Reynolds

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The individual gives consent to the state. The state gives justice to the individual.

If I take your money without your consent, it is called “stealing.” If the government takes your money without your consent, it is called taxation.

Government can do things that individuals cannot, thank God.

Of course, Americans would argue that even if I personally oppose taxes, I must pay them. Why? Even if my candidate for office lost, the one opposed to the tax, I had a chance to be represented. The winner of the race, the guy in favor of taxes, combined with many other winners make me pay. Even if none of my candidates ever win (imagine a Green party member), I must pay because I am a participant in a system from birth.

This simple distinction is missing in the rhetoric of many Christians, especially some “progressive Christians” who are rarely progressive, lagging two steps behind the spirit of the age, and not very Christian, jettisoning Christian virtue for the DNC platform. Sometimes they act as if the state should act as I am to act!

Jesus wishes me to love my enemy and so I must. I cannot delight in the death of any human being no matter how vile. The state, however, is not an “individual” human being. The state can use force in ways that would be inappropriate for me . . . even if we do not count the death penalty.

The state can seize my property under certain conditions for the good of the community. No individual should be able to do so . . .no matter how rich.

This distinction must be taught because the state can respond with violence in ways that an individual Christian never should. Pacifists or those claiming Christians should be non-violent must recognize that the state, even a state made up of Christians, must have powers that would be wrong in a single person. This is not merely because the state is made up of “many people.” If you do not have a right to do something, then adding many more “no rights” to your “no right” still does not create a right! Instead, the state is a being separable from me. Just as the family is more than the sum of its members, so the states are not just we the people, though we the people may need not consent to the life of the particular state for it to gain justification in the use of power.

You know this is true if you pause and think for a minute: a day came when the Byzantine Empire died, the state ceased to exist, but thousands of the individuals that had been Byzantines still existed. They retained their God given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but the Byzantine Empire was no more. It ceased to be and they did not. In the same way, a country could be “reborn” (in theory) after all the original members were dead. When the Kingdom of Spain was recreated in my lifetime, there were few living people from the Kingdom of Spain, but the Kingdom of Spain was “reborn” with millions of new subjects. There were traditions, rules, regulations, and a “way of being” that gave continuity between the rule of the last Spanish monarch and the new king, Juan Carlos. The interregnum ended and those who may have been born subjects of a King of Spain, only to become citizens of a Republic, and then subjects to the dictator/regent Franco, found themselves once again subjects of a King in Spain.

When the government bombs Syria to end the threats of terrorism, that might be sound preventative policing. If I get confused and punch the guy on the bar stool next to me for grumbling threats, I am probably failing as a Christian. Why? God has given the state powers God has not given me.

Again, this division suggests that no state can be “Christian.” A state cannot go to heaven or receive Christ as Lord and Savior. A state may be made of Christians whose faith informs their daily life, but we must never confuse the state with a person. God can save the man who is President of the United States, but the office will not live forever. Mr Reagan was Mr President and then he was just Mr Reagan. If he knew Jesus (as I think he did), then now Mr Reagan is rejoicing with God in paradise, but the President is not in heaven . . . the President is Barack H. Obama for now . . . and will be someone else this time next year.

We must not make the mistake of some on the “religious right” (often less religious than concerned about the right) and equate the state and the individual. I am called to make Jesus Lord of my life, not the Republic.

The President has two bodies: one can be saved (the individual who is President) and one who cannot (the office). We are not a Christian nation, but a nation that is and has always been made up of mostly Christians. As a result, when we use the rhetoric of our Faith that applies to individuals about the state, we make a serious category error. The state may be compatible with Christian living or make it easier or harder to live a good life, but the Kingdom of Heaven is not the same as any earthly state.

No state should reward vice and punish virtue, because that is not a legitimate power of the state, but no state can incarnate the Christ, because the state is not a human being. We are His Body, not Washington.

Every Christian is called to feed the poor. The state is not. Maybe Christians will gain a majority in a government and might decide that it is a good idea for the state to feed the poor, but they need not. The poor must be fed, but how to do so is the duty of an individual Christian and not the duty of the government. In fact, a Christian might decide that state food distribution is ineffective.

Nations are not you or me. We have powers the state does not have (having children) and the state has powers we do not have (seeking justice against crime). Failure to recognize the distinction either ends in causing the individual to vanish in homogenous state or the state to cease to exist in a culture of autonomous narcissi.

Rand is wrong. Socialism is wrong. Limited government with maximum individual liberty is right.

Apologetics

Politics

Previous Post

February 2, 2016

Ten Lessons From Iowa

Next Post

February 4, 2016 Patience to Be Free: Numbers is a Good Book

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Apologetics Art Culture Education On Books On Education Philosophy Politics Pop Culture Spiritual Reflections Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 July 2025 June 2025 September 2024 July 2024 June 2024 December 2023 June 2023 September 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the Hebrew name for the first five books of the Bible?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Mishnah Torah Tanakh Apocrypha

Books by This Author John Mark Reynolds

See All Titles »