Hi, I'm David Bercot, and today we're going to be talking about what the early Christians believed concerning voting and politics. When Pilate asked Jesus, "Are you the King of the Jews?" Jesus answered him by saying, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would fight so that I should not be delivered to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from here." Jesus didn't say that he was not a king. In fact, he was a king.
But he explained to Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world. It is a real kingdom with real laws and real citizens. But his laws are not the laws the world lives by or that the world even recognizes. And as Jesus stated to his father in prayer, his disciples are not of the world, just as Jesus was not of the world. So neither is his kingdom of this world nor are the citizens of that kingdom. In the days of Jesus and the apostles, and in the days of the early Christians, Rome was no longer a republic.
The Roman Republic came to an end with the ascendancy of Caesar Augustus in the decades right before the birth of Jesus. So during the New Testament period and during the days of the early Christians, people in the Roman Empire didn't have voting and elections the way we have them today. Nevertheless, there were plenty of politics. Often there were all sorts of intrigues going on behind the scenes in deciding who would be the next Caesar.
And when I say intrigues, these often involve murdering people in order to place a certain person on the throne. Of course, there were other political offices besides that of emperor, and there were all types of politics and influence peddling concerning these other offices. Some of these other offices were the consuls, the censors, the senators, magistrates, and the governors of various provinces. Now, none of these positions were elective offices. Rather, men obtained these offices through political appointments.
But as I said, there were often a lot of politics involved in getting those appointments. In the days of Jesus and his apostles, there was also political unrest in many parts of the empire. The most notable example was that of the Jews. In Palestine, they resented the rule of Herod and his sons, and they also opposed the Romans, who were the ultimate rulers of Palestine.
During the period of Acts, the Roman Emperor Caligula decided to place a statue of himself as a god with the name Jupiter at the base of his statue inside the very temple there in Jerusalem. Well, in response, there were massive protests by the Jews in various parts of Judea and in other parts of the world as well. Yet, you know, you would never know anything about it from reading the book of Acts. Even though the 12 were all Jews, and even though Paul was a Jew, they stayed completely clear of the situation.
They didn't even bother to mention it in any of their writings. We don't find the apostles or any of the New Testament Christians protesting against the treatment of Jews by Rome. Christians didn't participate in any of the Jewish riots or the Jewish wars against the Romans. After the death of Caligula, Claudius became emperor. And as a result of some disturbances in Rome, Claudius ordered all of the Jews to leave Rome.
We read about this in the book of Acts, chapter 18, verses 1 through 4, where it says, "After these things, Paul departed from Athens and went to Corinth, and he found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to depart from Rome. And he came to them. So because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them and worked, for by occupation they were tent makers.
And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath and persuaded both Jews and Greeks." Now, millions of Christians read that passage every year, and yet they don't grasp the significance of what it reveals about the stance of Christians regarding the political world of their day. Here was a minority group, the Jews, who were frankly being discriminated against. In fact, it went beyond just discrimination. They had been expelled from Rome, the place where they had their homes.
Many of these Jews had probably been born in Rome, and many of them were no doubt Roman citizens. That made no difference. They had to quickly sell their homes and move to other parts of the empire. So what was the response of Paul, who was a Jew? What was the response of Aquila and Priscilla, who also were Jews? Did they engage in protests? Did they riot? Did Paul and the other Jewish Christians become involved in intrigues to murder Claudius? You see, in those days, people didn't vote the emperor out of office.
They murdered him out of office. Caligula had been removed from the throne that way. And in fact, Claudius himself was also removed by having him murdered. But it wasn't Christians who murdered him. No, Paul and the other Christians did none of those things. Instead, Paul saw this as a kingdom opportunity to spread the gospel in Corinth. He looked at it totally from a kingdom standpoint. "Wonderful," he thought, "here are two more solid workers for the kingdom." You see, Paul's kingdom was the kingdom of God.
His real people were not the Jews, the ethnic group he belonged to and whom he loved, nor was it the Romans with whom he held his earthly citizenship. What happened in Roman politics, whether it was just or unjust, was of no concern to Paul. It didn't particularly matter to him that his fellow Jews had been discriminated against or punished by Claudius. His only concern for the Jews was that they would hear the gospel and come to faith in Jesus Christ, which would bring them eternal life.
That is how the apostles and the New Testament Christians looked at the politics and social conflicts of this world. When Paul wrote his second letter to Timothy, unrest was brewing in Galilee and Judea against the various policies of Nero. In fact, this unrest ultimately led to the first Jewish war, which began shortly after Paul wrote his second letter to Timothy.
Yet, even though Paul was a Jew, he doesn't even mention what was happening in Palestine in his letter, even though it was of utmost importance to the unbelieving Jews. Those events were of no concern to him. Judea was not his kingdom. His citizenship was in the kingdom of God. As Paul had told the Philippians, "Our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ." Paul's mind was on heavenly things, not on the affairs of this world.
In short, Jesus and his apostles stayed out of the affairs of government. The Pharisees tried to draw Jesus into one of the political disputes of their day, which was the rule of Rome over the Jews and the payment of Roman taxes. However, Jesus refused to be drawn into a political dispute. He told the Jews to render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's. Jesus was no Jewish patriot. He stayed out of the politics of the Jews.
He and his father had allowed Rome to conquer Palestine because it ultimately worked for the best for the kingdom of God. Jesus didn't think as a Jewish citizen. He thought as a citizen of God's kingdom. And that's how we must think. It's noteworthy that when the Jews wanted to make Jesus king, he declined it.
We read, this is in John chapter 6, verses 14 and 15, "Then those men, when they had seen the sign that Jesus did, said, 'This is truly the prophet who is to come into the world.' Therefore, when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, he departed again to the mountain by himself alone." Now, you may say, "Well, sure, Jesus didn't want them to make him king, but that was only because he knew he would be dying on the cross before long and then returning to heaven.
His mission wasn't to serve as king." However, there's more to it than that. If that were his only objection, he could have said, "Look, I'm not able to serve as king, but Peter here can be your king, and I'll back him." But that's not what he did. If Jesus wanted his followers to hold political office or to be involved in the politics of their various earthly countries, right there in front of him was the golden opportunity, and he deliberately passed on that opportunity.
In summary, we've seen how Jesus and his disciples stayed out of politics. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the early pre-Nicene Christians stayed totally out of politics as well. Tertullian told the Romans, "Among us, all zeal in the pursuit of glory and honor is dead. So we have no pressing inducement to take part in your public meetings. Nor is there anything more entirely foreign to us than the affairs of state.
We acknowledge one all-embracing commonwealth, the world." As citizens of God's kingdom, the early Christians viewed all other Christians, regardless of what countries they lived in, regardless of their race or ethnicity. They viewed them all as their fellow citizens. As Tertullian said, "We acknowledge one all-embracing commonwealth, the world." I mean, not that the early Christians were activists for border-free countries. Political and social issues like that were of no concern to them.
As Tertullian said, "There is nothing more entirely foreign to us than the affairs of state. Their whole energy went into governing, strengthening, and spreading the kingdom of God here on earth." This next quotation is particularly significant because it reveals what the pagans were observing about Christians and the Christian view about holding public office. The quote is from Origen, but he was writing in response to the attacks that Celsus, a Roman critic of Christians, the attacks that he was making.
And this is what Origen writes. He says, "Celsus also urges us to, quote, 'Take office in the government of the country if that is necessary for the maintenance of the laws and the support of religion.'" End quote. Or at least that's the end of the quote from Celsus. Now, Origen responds to him by saying, "However, we recognize in each state the existence of another national organization that was founded by the word of God," meaning Jesus.
"And we exhort those who are mighty in word and of blameless life to rule over churches." It is not for the purpose of escaping public duties that Christians decline public office. Rather, it's so they may reserve themselves for a more divine and necessary service in the church of God for the salvation of men. So that was the essence of the historic faith. As Christians, we are part of a kingdom that exists within each of the nations here on earth.
We're not going to hold political office in the governments of this world because we're not of this world. We have our own government, our own country. If certain individuals among us have the gift of leadership, then they devote that gift to the kingdom of God, to serving the churches, not to one of the kingdoms of this world. Not only did Christians not hold public office, but they didn't try to work behind the scenes to help bring about who would become the next emperor or senator or even regional governor.
Tertullian wrote, "No conspiracy has ever broken out from our body. No Caesar's blood has ever fixed a stain upon us in the Senate or even in the palace. No assumption of the purple has ever in any of the provinces been affected by us." You will recall that I had mentioned earlier that in the days of the New Testament and the early church, people didn't vote an emperor out of office. They murdered him out of office.
But Christians didn't take part in any of that, even when the emperor was someone who was persecuting them, such as Nero. Tertullian later made a very astute observation when he wrote, "The Caesars would have believed on Christ if either the Caesars had not been necessary for the world or if Christians could have been Caesars." In other words, there is a need for human government. They stand by the authority of God. They are necessary for the world. But a Christian can't serve as Caesar.
He or she would have to compromise too many of Christ's teachings to do so. Origen wrote, "It is not possible for anyone to enter the kingdom of heaven who has not been turned away from the affairs of this world and been made like the little children." Up to this point, we've seen that Jesus and his apostles stayed out of public affairs and political disputes. Their kingdom was not of this world, and they were not of this world.
We have also seen that after the New Testament period, the early pre-Nicene Christians refused to hold public office or become involved in any way in the political affairs of their day. But now let's talk about why the first Christians took this position. Why is it wrong to vote or hold public office or become active in the political and social affairs of this world? Well, there are several reasons. Let's just go down the list. Number one, the governments of this world are largely Satan's domain.
We read in the fourth chapter of Luke, this is concerning the temptations of Christ. It says, "Then the devil, taking him up on a high mountain, showed him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said to him, 'All this authority I will give you and their glory, for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish.
Therefore, if you will worship before me, all will be yours.' And Jesus answered and said to him, 'Get behind me, Satan, for it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and him only you shall serve.'" So Satan offered Jesus all the kingdoms of this world. Now, I realize that some would maintain that Satan was lying here, that the kingdoms of the earth have not been delivered to him. Well, to be sure, God is the one who is ultimately in control of all the governments on earth.
But that doesn't preclude the fact that God has permitted Satan to have a major hand in controlling them. I mean, the way most governments have acted throughout history would certainly indicate that Satan is the one that they are serving, not God. Furthermore, if Satan were lying here, why wouldn't Jesus have simply told him to his face that he was lying? Why wouldn't Jesus have quoted to him the ninth commandment about bearing false witness?
Furthermore, if Satan were lying, in what sense would this have been a temptation for Christ? Because he surely would have known Satan was lying. Furthermore, it's not just this passage alone that would indicate that Satan controls the earthly governments. John wrote, "We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one." That's 1 John 5:19. So in one way or another, the nations of this world lie under the sway or power of Satan.
So why would we want to get mixed up in the politics of Satan's realm? Paul told the Corinthians, "Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Belial?
Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever?" The world itself has the saying, "Politics makes strange bedfellows," which means that to be effective in the political world, you often have to make alliances with people who have very different views than you have. So what business does a Christian have in getting mixed up with this? You can't involve yourself in politics without allying yourself with unbelievers.
This is true whether we're talking about holding political office or being a political activist or simply going out and voting. Ask Paul, "What part has a believer with an unbeliever?" Okay, reason number two.
The second reason why Christians stay out of politics is Jesus' statement in the Sermon on the Mount, where he 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." Now, Jesus' specific application was to God and mammon, that is, money. But the principle works with everything else that is of this world. We cannot have two ultimate loyalties.
When it comes to kingdoms, it is either going to be God's kingdom or it's going to be one of the kingdoms of this world, but it can't be both. Origen wrote this about a citizen of God's kingdom. He said, "He cannot be induced to combine the service of any other along with the service of God. He cannot be induced to serve two masters. There is therefore nothing seditious or divisive in the language of we Christians who hold these views and who refuse to serve more masters than one.
To us, Jesus Christ is an all-sufficient Lord. Jesus himself disciples men so that when they are fully discipled, he may form them into a kingdom worthy of God, and so he may present them to God the Father." In a sense, even now, they separate themselves and stand apart from those who are aliens from the kingdom of God and who are strangers to his covenants. They do this in order that they may live as citizens of heaven.
So no earthly kingdom can be combined with God's kingdom because God's kingdom is run by different laws and principles than any earthly kingdom. For example, all earthly governments depend upon armies or national police forces to protect their power and to enforce their sovereignty. They don't operate on the basis of people loving their enemies and turning the other cheek. All earthly governments permit all kinds of things that God forbids.
Some examples are abortion, premarital sex, homosexual activity, giving of oaths, and homosexual marriage. Human governments permit pornography, immoral and violent entertainment, lawsuits, gambling, immodest dress, and on and on. At the same time, they often forbid things that God commands, such as non-resistance. They often oppose the teachings of the Bible. In fact, their agendas are often in direct conflict with God's purposes.
Yes, you may say, "But because of all these things, we need to help elect Christians to public office." Okay, let's suppose for a moment that a Christian wanted to run for public office in the United States. Do you really think that a person could ever hope to be elected if he or she, one, spoke truthfully and transparently about their own weaknesses, failings, and things that might be a hindrance to their being a good candidate for the position?
Or number two, he or she spoke truthfully about the qualifications of their opponent without misrepresenting the positions and strengths of their opponent. Do you think anyone could be elected if he or she outlined a platform based on God's commandments, such as forbidding war, oaths, divorce and remarriage, homosexual behavior, pornography, immoral and violent entertainment, gambling, and immodest dress?
Do you think anyone could be elected if he or she stood by all the biblical teachings that are politically incorrect? What if he or she stood against discrimination or hatred of people because of their race or ethnic background, regardless of whether that person was black, white, or brown? And at the same time, what if he or she also publicly advocated that people forgive one another for wrongs that were done to them and to love their enemies and to keep no account of past injuries? Well, I could go on and on.
Such a person would have no chance of even winning their party's primary, let alone winning the general election. In fact, the truth is that most professing Christians, even conservative ones, would not support such a candidate. So out of necessity, political candidates have to follow a platform that does not uphold all of Christ's values. They can endorse some of Christ's teachings, but they will, of necessity, have to trample on his other teachings. In short, we can't serve two masters.
If you run for public office, you ultimately are going to have to surrender to Caesar's laws and values, not to Christ. Reason number three. We are not just citizens of God's kingdom, but we are also ambassadors of it. Paul writes, "Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf, be reconciled to God." So God's people represent a foreign government, and that government is the kingdom of God.
As we all know, the US ambassador to France doesn't participate in the politics of that country. He or she doesn't vote in the French elections. They don't campaign for any of the political candidates of that country. That's because they are a citizen of a different nation. They participate in the affairs of their own country, not the country they reside in as ambassadors. Well, it's the same for a Christian. We can't be ambassadors of God's kingdom and then embroil ourselves in the political affairs of this world.
In fact, not only are we ambassadors, but according to Hebrews, we are also strangers and pilgrims in this world. Tertullian wrote this, "As for you, you are a foreigner in this world, a citizen of Jerusalem, the city above. Our citizenship, the apostle says, is in heaven. You have your own registers, your own calendar. You have nothing to do with the joys of this world.
In fact, you are called to the very opposite, for the world will rejoice, but you will mourn." Quoting there from scripture, Cyprian wrote, "We should ever and a day reflect that we have renounced the world and are in the meantime living here as guests and strangers." Clement of Alexandria said, "We have no country on earth." So when we get involved in the political affairs of our country, whether that is the United States or China or Mexico, wherever, well, we suddenly are no longer strangers, are we?
We are no longer aliens or pilgrims. We are acting as though this country is our home. Now, our fourth reason why kingdom Christians don't vote is that we live by Jesus' teachings to love our enemies, and therefore we don't go to war. Now, if we don't go to war, how inconsistent it would be for us to elect the person who will serve as commander in chief of the armed forces of our country.
Likewise, in the United States, it's inconsistent for a kingdom Christian to vote for a member of the Senate because in this country, it is the Senate who makes the decision to declare war or not to declare it. Likewise, it's inconsistent to elect members of the House of Representatives because it is they who prepare the budget, which allocates money for military spending each year.
You know, even in local elections, which might seem innocent, by voting, you can easily end up supporting people who go against the values and teachings of God's kingdom. I'm going to give you a real-life example right here in one of our local counties. Just recently, the three commissioners of this county voted to allow a casino to open in the county. Now, this is the interesting thing. Two of those county commissioners were Democrats, and one of them was a Republican.
So it didn't matter which party you voted for in that election, you ended up helping to put into office someone who voted to allow a casino to come into this county, which was the first time ever that such a thing had ever been approved. In other words, when you vote, you are not going to have clean hands. You have empowered people who will ultimately oppose God in certain areas of the political world, if not in others.
Okay, number five, another reason we don't vote is because political involvement pulls us into the world's way of thinking. I mean, it's rather absurd to vote in elections unless you educate yourself on what the issues are and where the respective candidates stand on those issues. The problem is that the more you read the written media or follow the audio or video media, the more you get sucked into the lies and distorted thinking of this world.
It doesn't matter whether you read or listen to the media of the political right or the media of the political left. You can be sure of one thing: you are not getting the objective truth about the facts and the issues. You are getting purposefully distorted views. And each year, the polarization and distortion gets worse and worse.
I mean, even if you don't go out and vote, if you have mentally been getting involved in the world's politics, you've been imbibing the world's way of thinking, the world's outlook on life, and the world's values. And in the end, instead of having a purely biblical kingdom view of social and family matters, you largely have the world's views on these things, even if you don't realize it. Again, it doesn't matter whether you are politically conservative or politically liberal. It is still the world.
In fact, generally speaking, political conservatives eventually adopt most of the same views as those of the political liberals. The only difference is they adopt them with a lag of, say, 20 years or 40 years or something like that. Just to illustrate, a conservative evangelical woman of today would hold to views about the family and about headship that are more feminist and less biblical than would have the average liberal unbelieving woman of the 1940s.
So when you get mixed up in the world's thinking, pretty soon you adopt their thinking. Tertullian gave some very sound advice when he wrote, "So long as you deem yourself a Christian, you are a different man from a pagan. Give him back his own view of things. After all, he himself does not learn from your views. Why lean upon a blind guide when you have eyes of your own? Why be clothed by one who is naked if you have put on Christ?" Yes, give the world their own views back to them.
They don't embrace the views of Christ. So how can Christians possibly embrace their views? Yes, you may say, "But as Christians, we can bring about a lot of good and stop a lot of evil by voting." You know, actually, that argument is not entirely invalid. By getting politically involved, Christians can accomplish a measure of good, and they can help to stop or at least delay certain evils.
This was demonstrated in the fourth century when Christians discarded the doctrine of the two kingdoms, and they got heavily involved in Roman political affairs. In fact, before long, they totally ruled the government, and they made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire. And through this, they were able to accomplish a certain amount of good things, and they destroyed certain evils because of their political involvement. I'll give you a few examples. They ended once and for all the gladiator contests.
They never returned. They banned abortion and infanticide. So both of those were wonderful things. They outlawed prostitution. I'm sure it didn't end prostitution, but at least it took it out of the open and made it less accessible. In fact, Christians brought about the collapse of classical paganism. They didn't even do that through persecution. They just stopped government funding of pagan temples and pagan priests and all of that. And without money from the government, those pagan religions disappeared.
So you might be thinking, "Okay, case in point. That's why we should vote and get involved in politics." Yes, but there's more to the story. All of the good things that Christians were able to accomplish by getting involved in politics came at a price that was much too steep. In exchange for the good they accomplished, Christians imbibed a huge amount of evil. Let me just list for you a few of them. Number one, Christians embraced war and fully participated in it.
At first, Christians only went to war against pagans. But before long, it was Christians warring against and slaughtering fellow Christians, and that has continued all the way to the present day. A second evil, Christians embraced all of the evils of this world's judicial system, which back then meant torture, sending people to horrible dungeons and capital punishment. Once again, Christians first only gave mental assent to these things.
They didn't participate, but they said, "Well, okay, it's all right for the pagans to do this, and we will support them." But before long, Christians were the ones who were torturing people and putting them to death and putting them into dungeons. A third evil, Christians turned to religious persecution, which included torture, burning people at the stake, and even genocide against entire groups of people. Those are just three examples. In short, Christians became the world.
Before long, there was no difference between Christians and non-Christians. Christians vied against each other for public office and for the throne. And in the process, they behaved no differently than had the pagan Romans. Yes, it was good that because of the Christians, the gladiator games were gone. However, all of the other types of Roman entertainment remained, including the chariot races.
In the days of the pre-Nicene church, Christians were known by the fact that they didn't attend entertainment like the chariot races and the theater. But after Christians got heavily involved in the world, before long, everyone in the audience was a professing Christian. And the same fanaticism towards sports that had once been a mark of the pagans now became a mark of the Christians.
What's more, instead of preserving the Roman Empire by getting involved in politics, Christians actually ended up bringing about its downfall. The Roman Empire fell after it had become Christian, after Christianity was the state religion. Christians also brought about the downfall of the separated holy church that had once existed. Now, don't get me wrong, true Christians remained, but they were now a small minority among all of those others who called themselves by the name of Christian.
In short, what Christians lost by getting entangled in the world's affairs far outweighed whatever good they accomplished. And there's another weakness in the argument that Christians need to vote and get involved in politics in order to stop evil and to advance good. And that weakness is that it assumes that God has no control over things. I've always hated trite Christian slogans and clichés.
And one of the ones you hear all the time these days is, "Well, God is in control." Of course, that is an absolutely true statement. My objection to it is that it is invariably mouthed by professing Christians who believe just the opposite. They typically only say, "God is in control," when something is out of their own control. For example, a loved one is injured or is killed in a car accident.
And they'll say, "Well, God is in control." It doesn't take any faith to say that because there's nothing they can do about it. Yet those same people who are always going around saying, "God is in control," in the months preceding an election, they aren't the ones saying, "Well, there's no need for Christians to vote because God is in control." No, they're the ones out there campaigning and trying to get the vote out because in the end, they don't truly believe God is in control. They believe that man is.
Otherwise, they would have no problem with Christians not voting. They would also have no problem embracing non-resistance and living by all of Jesus' teachings, even the ones that seem impractical from the standpoint of this world. Yet regardless of the emptiness of what many Christians say and do, the scriptures do tell us that God truly is in control. It is He who ultimately rules the governments of this earth.
In Daniel 2:20-21, we read, "Blessed be the name of God forever and ever, for wisdom and might are His. And He changes the times and the seasons." And listen to this: "He removes kings and raises up kings. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those who have understanding." Now, this in no way contradicts what we said earlier about Satan controlling the governments of the world.
When offering Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, Satan told Him, "This has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish." So Satan didn't claim that he had this power in himself. He claimed that God had delivered the power to him. In other words, it is a permissive power, and God can overrule Satan's choice anytime He chooses to do so. It is very similar to what Jesus told Pilate.
When Jesus was silent, Pilate upbraided Him, saying, "Do you not know that I have power to crucify you and power to release you?" But Jesus answered him, "You could have no power at all against me unless it had been given to you from above." In other words, Pilate only had authority because God had given him that authority. God is in ultimate control of things, and He can put anyone He chooses in office.
And if we truly believe that God is in control, and if we are concerned about the various evils in our country, whatever country that may be, then we should go all the way to the very top. We should be fervently praying every day about the situation in our country. God wouldn't have told us to pray for the ruling authorities if our prayers do no good. Okay, let's move to reason number four. The fourth reason Christians don't get involved in politics is that this is not what Jesus commissioned His followers to do.
Jesus didn't say, "Go therefore into all nations and work to correct the evils in them and to make each nation a better place to live in." No, He said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you. And lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the ages." So we've already been given our marching orders. Our commission is clear. We are to advance the kingdom of God.
And how do we do this? Well, Jesus told us it's by making disciples of people in every nation on earth. A Christian recognizes that the worst evil there is is bondage to sin. For one thing, it often brings ruin, poverty, and hurt in this life. But more importantly, it costs people their eternal lives. So we aim at the highest good by bringing the message of salvation to everyone on earth.
We are to be preaching the good news of the kingdom, not naively trying to usher in God's kingdom through various political activities. Now, am I saying that Christians should turn a blind eye to poverty and injustice? Of course not. In fact, one of the earmarks of Christians in the early centuries is the fact that they, and they alone, cared about feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the ones in prison, and helping the sick and needy in all sorts of ways.
Perhaps the strongest testimony regarding the early church's dedication to helping the poor came from a pagan. His name was Julian the Apostate. When he became emperor of Rome in the fourth century, he tried in vain to turn the empire back to paganism. In a private letter to a pagan friend, he lamented the lack of almsgiving among his fellow pagans. He wrote his friend, saying, "Why then do we think our meagerness is sufficient?
Don't we observe the kindness of Christians to strangers, their care for the burial of their dead, and the seriousness of their lifestyle? Don't we see how this is done the most to advance their cause? The godless Galileans not only take care of their own poor, but they take care of ours as well." So Christians have always been involved in helping the poor long before the world ever thought about doing that.
Now, you may be asking, if the New Testament teaches us to stay out of politics, what should our relationship with human governments be? Well, the scriptures give us four very specific instructions. First of all, as we have said, we are called to recognize that human governments ultimately derive their authority from God, even evil governments. God will deal with them to suit His eternal purposes. This should always be an attitude we carry inside of us.
Okay, number two, because we recognize that God established human government, Christians obey the government. I know all of you are familiar with Romans 13, but let's just read it again. Beginning with verse one, Paul said, "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore, whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For He is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for He does not bear the sword in vain. For He is God's minister and avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.
Therefore, you must be subject not only because of wrath, but also for conscience's sake." So Christians don't disobey laws they don't like, or because they come from a political party they don't favor. Christians are to be model citizens in this area of obedience. And that's with one exception. If Caesar commands us to do something that directly contradicts God's law, then we follow the principle stated in Acts, which is we must obey God as ruler rather than men.
But outside that exception, Christians recognize the authority that human governments have to make laws and to punish those who disobey those laws. When Paul wrote those words that we just read, saying, "He does not bear the sword in vain," the way governments dealt with lawbreakers back then was much more harsh than you would find nearly in every country on earth today, with a few exceptions like maybe North Korea.
But as Christians, we don't obey the government simply to avoid punishment, but we do it out of obedience to God. If we disobey Caesar, we will not only answer to Caesar, but ultimately we're going to answer to God as well. Okay, so those are two of the things God requires of us: to recognize that He placed the governments in their positions and that, number two, we are to obey them. The third principle of how we should relate to government is that we pay our taxes.
Paul said, "For because of this, you also pay taxes, for they are God's ministers attending continually to this very thing." This means that Christians don't cheat on their taxes, whether it's income tax, sales tax, or duties levied on imported goods. The fourth statement in scriptures of how we are to relate to our government is that we honor government leaders.
This is both an internal attitude, and it is an external way of relating to government leaders and speaking about them, whether they are tax collectors, whether they are police officers, whether it's the president of the United States or the governor of our state, it doesn't matter. We honor them as Christians. Paul said, "Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs." He's talking there about customs taxes, levies on imported goods. Fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.
Peter said the same thing in his letter, 1 Peter 2:13-17. He wrote, "Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether to the king as supreme or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.
For this is the will of God that by doing good, you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men." He continues, "Honor all, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king." So we don't dishonor the president, whether we agree with his policies or not. We don't dishonor the governor of our state or police officers or whomever it may be who represent the government.
Paul also wrote to Timothy, saying, "I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence." So we are to have reverence for governmental leaders. We might say this is also a fifth way we are to relate to them, and that is we are to intercede on their behalf. And we are also to give thanks in our daily speech and in our prayers to God.
Now, that goes totally against the spirit of the world. And unfortunately, politics and political activism tends to breed disrespect in people for elected officials and for all government officials. People on the political right don't show proper respect towards liberal leaders, and people on the political left are even worse. They heap scorn on conservative leaders, particularly conservative presidents. They also tend to heap scorn on police officers. But followers of Jesus don't do the same.
It doesn't matter which political party is in office. We respect public officials, whether or not we agree with their policies. When Peter and Paul wrote the words that I've just quoted to you about respecting those in authority, well, the emperors in office were either Caligula or Nero, both of whom were incredibly wicked.
When you think of the presidents that we have today, there haven't been any, as far as I know, in the history of the United States, that would even come close to the wickedness of Caligula and Nero and so many of the other Roman emperors. In their apologetic writings to the Romans, the early Christians continually brought up this fact about the matter of the Christian attitude towards the Roman government and towards government officials.
In fact, Polycarp, who was a Christian martyr, told the very official who put him to death, "We are taught to give all due honor to the powers and authorities that are ordained by God." A second-century Christian named Theophilus told his fellow Christians, "In a sense, the king's government is committed to him by God. Accordingly, honor the king, be subject to him, and pray for him with loyal mind.
If you do this, you will do the will of God." Tertullian told the Romans, "Why should I dwell any longer on the reverence and sacred respect of Christians to the emperor? We cannot help but to look upon him as someone called by our Lord to his office. Therefore, on valid grounds, I can say that Caesar is more ours than yours, for our God has appointed him." In another writing, Tertullian wrote, "A Christian is enemy to no one, least of all to the emperor of Rome, whom he knows to be appointed by his God.
So he cannot help but to love and honor him. And the Christian must necessarily desire Caesar's well-being, along with that of the empire over which he reigns." And both of those quotes from Tertullian were concerning Roman emperors who were persecuting the Christians. Before closing, I want to briefly touch on one final question, and that is, what about working for the government in a non-political job, such as working for the post office or fire department?
The answer is that neither the scriptures nor the early church taught that it's wrong to work for the government in a non-political position. In fact, there is a New Testament example of a brother who worked for the government. His name was Erastus. At the close of his letter to the Romans, Paul wrote, "Gaius, my host, and the host of the whole church greets you. Erastus, the treasurer of the city, greets you, and Quartus, a brother." Now, the New King James translation calls Erastus the treasurer of the city.
Actually, we don't know the precise job that he held. The Greek word Paul uses to describe his position is oikonomos. This Greek word appears ten times in the New Testament, and it is nearly always translated as steward. For example, in Luke 12:42, the oikonomos was the slave who was employed to dispense food to the other slaves. The tradition of calling Erastus the treasurer of the city goes back to Jerome.
In his Latin Vulgate, Jerome translated the Greek word oikonomos with the Latin word arcarius, which meant treasurer. The Wycliffe Bible, the first English Bible, referred to Erastus as the treasurer of the city, and that tradition has been followed by most English translations. Now, people who argue that Christians can hold elective offices often point to Erastus as an example.
However, whatever his position was, it certainly was not an elective office since they didn't have elective offices in the Roman Empire in Paul's day. And it was not one of the high offices of the empire that turned on political intrigues and that sort of thing. It was certainly a responsible local government job, but there's no indication that it had any connection whatsoever with politics.
In one of his works, Tertullian discussed the issue of Christians working for the government in some of the non-political offices. As strict as Tertullian was, he did not think that it was wrong in itself to work for the government. However, he did go on to show some of the tests that a Christian would face back in those days.
He writes, "Very recently, there arose a dispute as to whether a servant of God should take upon himself the administration of any dignity or power if he can keep himself through adroitness or some special grace from every type of idolatry. Let us suppose that it is possible for anyone to succeed in operating under the mere name of the office in whatever office it is. Let's also suppose the following: he neither sacrifices nor lends his authority to sacrifices. He doesn't farm out sacrificial victims.
He doesn't assign to others the care of the temples. He doesn't look after their tributes. He does not give spectacles at his own or the public expense, nor preside over them. He makes no proclamation or edict for any pagan festivals. He doesn't even take oaths. Furthermore, he doesn't sit in judgment on anyone's life or character, for you might allow his judging about money. He neither condemns nor indicts. He puts no one in chains.
He neither imprisons nor tortures anyone." And he concludes by saying, "Now, is it believable that all this would be possible?" In other words, there's nothing wrong in principle in working for the government. However, a Christian cannot violate New Testament teachings in doing so. And the higher up you go in government, even in a non-political office, the more issues are likely to arise.
Now, returning to the example of Erastus in the New Testament, if he was in charge of keeping the accounts of the city revenue, he could have performed that job without having to violate any New Testament teachings. But for so many other jobs, yes, there would have been a lot of conflicts. Now, today, the issues are a little bit different because we don't have pagan temples and that sort of thing, but there still are a lot of issues in working for the government.
So here are some of the questions I think a Christian would need to ask himself today if he's thinking of taking a non-political government job. Number one, will I be involved with public holidays, most of which are either pagan or nationalistic? Will I have to administer oaths? Will I have to sit in judgment on anyone's life or character? Will I be involved in marrying two people of the same sex or two people who are not free to marry? Will I have to arrest or condemn or indict someone?
Will I have to carry a gun or some other kind of weapon? Will I be connected in any way with the military? And finally, will I have to do anything that's unscriptural? Now, for so many government jobs, the answer would be no. Personally, I think a person could normally work as an accountant or public health nurse, an emergency care worker, or a mail carrier without having to do anything unscriptural. But each person will have to examine the situation for himself or herself.
Also, some churches have a policy that does not allow their members to hold government jobs. So if you belong to such a church, obviously, you should obey the standards of your church. In conclusion, we've seen that during the period of the New Testament and the pre-Nicene church, there were no elective offices in the Roman Empire. However, there were a lot of politics going on, and there was a lot of social unrest, particularly among the Jews.
We've seen that both the apostles and the pre-Nicene Christians stayed completely out of political affairs and out of the uprisings of the Jews. They recognized that they were strangers and pilgrims here on earth and that they were ambassadors of another kingdom, and that is the kingdom of God. So they focused on spreading the kingdom of God to all nations of the earth as the only real answer to the problems facing mankind.