This article is part of a series.

In the previous articles in this series, I’ve covered how the New Testament cannot be taken at face value, and still justify the idea of a Christian nation; it does not conform to the idea of Christians improving politics. In this article I want to explore further along these same lines.

Let’s look first at Christ’s words in the Sermon on the Mount. “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.” (Matthew 5:38-45) These commands basically assume that Christians will not be involved in politics, because these commands can hardly produce an effective government, which is “a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” (Romans 13:4)

This article is part of a series.

In the last article I briefly addressed the impossibility of a “Christian nation.” In this article I would like to do a more in-depth study on this possibility. As I mentioned in the last article, the most important problem with “Christian” nations is that Christianity has no commands for nations, no guidance for government. The Old Testament certainly has commands for the nation of Israel; however, these rules are specific to this nation and do not transfer to other nations. One example of this is found in the issue of divorce. We find another in the commands regarding the cities of refuge. Numbers 35:14 says, “Ye shall give three cities on this side Jordan, and three cities shall ye give in the land of Canaan, which shall be cities of refuge.” Certainly not every nation can have three cities on either side of the Jordan River, and it probably wouldn’t fulfill the purpose of the cities of refuge even for some of the nations that could—the cities would be too close together or too far apart.

Jesus said, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” (Matthew 6:24) It’s easy for us to think of serving mammon as trying to get rich; then the verse does not apply to us because “trying to get rich” seems like something for Bill Gates, or John Rockefeller, or Andrew Carnegie, not us—we feel that we’re just “making a living” or “working toward a goal.” And maybe we are.

Reading the gospels, we may get the idea that when Jesus healed people, He simply spoke, and, just because of His great power, the person was healed. No cost, no pain, no trouble. That’s how we would like to start revival in our churches, too.

To the Pharisees, ritual and ceremony were the most important parts of religion. To them, paying tithes, offering sacrifices, praying publicly, and other such things, which were done as a ceremony, as a demonstration, were the central focus of religious experience.