Hi, I'm David Bercot, and tonight is the first message in a series of messages entitled " The Myth of Christian America. " These messages will address a commonly held myth by many conservative Christians, particularly evangelicals. Now they're also going to address the flip side of mythical history held by secular liberals. Now let's first look at the conservative version of this popular myth. The conservative version goes something like this.
Originally, America was a Christian country, founded by the pilgrims and the Puritans, that the pilgrims and Puritans came here seeking freedom of religion, that the American Revolution was a noble Christian cause, led by devout Christians like George Washington. The myth says that " The Great Awakening " was one of the factors leading up to the American Revolution.
It says that God was on the side of the Americans in that revolution because He wanted to create a Christian nation that would be a new Israel planted on the American continent. America would be a city on a hill that would be a light to other nations. This myth says that one of the things the colonists were fighting for was freedom of religion, and that it was established because of the American Revolution.
The myth continues that although America was established as a Christian nation and was God's particularly favored nation, in the past 50 or 60 years, the nation has drifted away from God. As a result, we've suffered setbacks as a nation, and we'll continue to do so until we as a nation return to God. Finally, the myth says that the best way to bring this nation back to God is to elect conservative Christians to public office, presumably Republicans.
Now, this may greatly shock you, but every part of this popular version of American history is untrue, except for the fact that our nation has definitely moved away from the Bible and biblical teachings in the past 50 or 60 years. Let's just go through some of the principles of this myth. The pilgrims and the Puritans did not found America. They were only one group of people who helped to colonize this continent. Just as many or more of the early colonists were Anglicans.
And a very large number of them were simply unbelievers. The Pilgrims and Puritans did not come here seeking freedom of religion. We'll be talking about that later on. The American Revolution was certainly not a Christian cause. In fact, it violated the very teachings of Christ. And although George Washington as a human leader is greatly to be admired, and I would personally consider him to be our greatest president, looking at it just from the human side. He was not a Christian.
The very churches that put him on a pedestal and view him as this great Christian would not consider him a Christian if he walked into their church today, and they didn't know who he was. We're going to be ultimately looking at the fact that there is no such thing as a Christian nation, and that's why the whole idea of America being a Christian nation is a myth. But now let's look at the liberal version of American history.
In their myth, religion played a minor role in the founding of America, and that more often than not, its role has been a repressive one. According to their myth, religion has been a hindrance to education and science. They say that the United States Constitution puts a wall of separation between church and state, and therefore the state cannot in any way support or be involved in religion. The liberal left says that the government has to be neutral in matters of religion.
But in truth, what they really mean is that the state has to officially be atheistic to pretend that there is no such being as God. Well, the secular left's version of American history is just as much a myth as is that of the religious right. Christianity, or at least what is purported to be Christianity, has played a major role in the founding of America and in its formation. Churches have not been a hindrance to education. They're the very ones who promoted it.
The first colleges founded in this country were all founded to train ministers. Furthermore, the United States Constitution does not say that there has to be a wall of separation between church and state. Rather, all it says is that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. And that's a very different thing.
The men who framed the Constitution, at least the vast majority of them, certainly did not have in mind that there would be a wall of separation in the sense that it's used today, that this would be officially an atheistic nation, one that would in no way assist religion, and that the mention of God would have to be left out of all public affairs left out of our schools. So where am I personally coming from? Well, I have no political ideology to defend or to try to foist on to you or other people.
I'm certainly not anti-American, and assuredly, I don't fit in with the liberal secular left. I'm a Christian who is committed to the historic Christian faith, the faith that was originally taught and lived by the apostles. And as a result, I don't really fit in with the religious right either. Now, I have no idea how many CDs this series of messages will eventually encompass. At the present time, I'm going to be delivering five messages.
But there will definitely be more messages to come, because these five messages will only take us up through the founding of Jamestown and Plymouth Plantation and the early colonial period of America. Now, this work has actually been in progress for more than five years. And I can't blame you if you're wondering why it's taken me five years just to reach this point in the series. Well, the reason is that I'm very committed to digging out the truth by going to the primary sources.
That is from the writings of the very people I'll be talking about, and from documents from that time period, such as the charters of the colonies. When I talk about Luther and Calvin and the Puritans, I'm speaking from having read their writings. So this has necessarily been a big project because there are volumes and volumes of documents to read, and so it will be at least a year or more before I'm finished with it.
During tonight and the next four evenings, I'll be delivering the first five messages in this series on the myth of Christian America. Let me give you a brief overview of what each of these five messages we'll be covering. The message tonight, the first one, and this will be seeing what the original message of Christianity was, and why it's impossible to ever have a Christian state. At least not until Christ returns. We'll be talking about Jesus ' gospel of the kingdom.
We'll also see how an armed revolution is never Jesus ' way to handle a conflict. We'll be looking at what Christians believed and practiced from the days of the apostles right up until the time that Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire, and what happened once Rome did become a " Christian state. " Okay, that's tonight's message. Tomorrow, message number two is going to be about the Reformation.
You see, we're not going to jump straight from the early church, right up to the pilgrims and the other American colonists. The fact is, the vast majority of the men and women who settled in America originally were products of the Reformation, or at least they were affected by the Reformation. So to understand American history, you have to understand the Reformation.
So in message number 2, we'll be looking at the Reformation, particularly the teachings of Martin Luther, and the course of action he took on the issue of the kingdom, on war, on religious persecution, and on freedom of religion. Now, in message number three, we'll be looking at the life and the teachings of a man who had enormous influence on American history, even though he never set foot here. That man was John Calvin.
We're going to be looking not only at Calvin's doctrinal teachings, but also how he governed Geneva, Switzerland. This is particularly important because Puritanism was largely birthed in Geneva and in other places that embraced Calvin's teachings. And Puritan thinking certainly dominated the history of Massachusetts and some of the other New England colonies. In Message 4, we'll be looking at the spiritual revolution in England during the period of time when Jamestown was founded and the pilgrims came to America.
We'll also take a look at what England was like when it was ruled by the Puritans. Did you know that the Puritans ruled England for a number of years? Well, they did. So we'll get a chance to see what a " Christian nation " really looks like in real life. So the first four disks are designed to give you a background to be able to understand the spiritual and political climate in which the American colonies were birthed.
In the fifth message, we'll finally be looking at some of the first colonists to come here to America. In particular, we're going to be talking about Jamestown, about the pilgrims, and about the Puritans. We'll be talking about their motives for coming here, as well as their treatment of the Native Americans who already lived here. So, with that introduction, let's delve into tonight's message, which is entitled " In the Beginning.
" Now, in this case, " The Beginning " refers to what Christianity was like in the beginning. That is, the gospel that Jesus preached. And just what did Jesus preach about? Well, the gospel Jesus preached was the gospel of the kingdom. The theme of his preaching was the kingdom of God. Did you know that there are nearly 100 references to the kingdom throughout the gospels? Not only that, most of Jesus ' parables were about the kingdom.
In fact, Jesus said the reason he was sent to earth was to preach about the kingdom of God. Here are his words from Luke 4:43: " I must preach the kingdom of God to the other cities also, because for this purpose, I have been sent. " Wherever Jesus went, Jesus preached about the kingdom of God. After Christ's baptism and his time of fasting in the wilderness, Matthew tells us this: From that time, Jesus began to preach and to say, " Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
" Likewise, when Jesus commissioned His disciples, He specifically told them to preach about the kingdom. For example, Matthew 10: 7, " As you go, preach, saying, " The kingdom of heaven is at hand. " Luke 9:2, " And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick. " Those aren't just a few isolated proof texts. Rather, in nearly every passage where Jesus gave preaching instructions to His disciples, He nearly always told them to preach about the kingdom.
In fact, the kingdom is the only thing that Jesus called the good news, the gospel. He said, " This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. " People say that Jesus is the answer. But you know, Jesus is the answer only if our gospel includes what he said the answer is. And his answer was his kingdom and himself as king. We can't take the king without his kingdom. If we want Jesus to be our Savior, we have to become citizens of His kingdom.
Now the subjects of God's kingdom are called to be a holy nation, a kingdom of priests, just as the Israelites had been called to be. Remember, Jesus told the Pharisees that the kingdom was being taken away from the Israelites and was being given to a nation that would produce the fruits thereof. That is, the fruits of righteousness. It would be a nation of godly, born-again believers. The test of possessing the kingdom is to bring forth the fruits thereof.
So this lifts the kingdom out of identification with any existing nation and any existing church or movement. Neither America nor England nor any other country can be equated to the kingdom of God. It's producing the fruits thereof that constitute the nation of the kingdom of God. And that's not limited to any country, any church, any particular movement. Now, one unique aspect of the Kingdom of God is that its subjects don't occupy a certain portion of the earth, like the subjects of earthly kingdoms.
Rather, the citizens of God's kingdom are interspersed among all nations of the world. So citizens of God's kingdom always live under two different kingdoms: a kingdom of the world and the kingdom of God. Matthew tells us that as part of Jesus ' temptation in the wilderness and now I'm quoting from Matthew, " The devil took him up on an exceedingly high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, " All these things I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.
" Now let me ask you a question. What kingdoms were shown to Jesus? Well, it says there the kingdoms of the world. And who said he would give these kingdoms to Jesus? Well, it was Satan, wasn't it? So who controls these kingdoms? Obviously, Satan does. Okay, now let's look at a different kingdom, John 18:36, where Jesus said, " 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.
" So you see, we have two classes of kingdoms. There's the kingdoms of the world, the ones that Satan showed to Jesus in the temptation, and then there's the kingdom of God that is not of this world. Now, how we as Christians relate to these two kingdoms and interact with them is sometimes known as the doctrine of the two kingdoms. And unless you fully grasp this doctrine of the two kingdoms and all of its ramifications, you'll never be able to understand the gospel that Jesus preached.
And you'll never understand that the very concept of a Christian nation is impossible. You see, a lot of Christians have the mistaken idea that the kingdom of God is something only in the future. But no, the kingdom of God is something that is here right now. Paul wrote to the Colossians. This is Colossians 1:13. He said, " God has delivered us from the power of darkness and has translated us or conveyed us into the kingdom of his dear Son. " Did you notice there in that verse that Paul speaks in the past tense?
God has already conveyed us into His kingdom. He doesn't bring us into His kingdom after we die. He brings us into His kingdom as soon as we are born again. So the kingdom of God is here and now in the true disciples of Jesus Christ. And it's no figurative kingdom. Rather, it's something real, concrete, with its own set of laws, its own values, its own leadership, and its own worldview. As a result, God's people reside merely as aliens or as foreigners in this world.
That's because we're already citizens of another kingdom. We live by a whole other set of laws. We have different values and a different outlook on world issues than do citizens of this world. Now the kingdoms of this world are part of the kingdom of darkness that Paul says we've been delivered from, we've been translated from. Now to be sure, God is the one who's in ultimate control of the kingdoms of the world. The earthly rulers derive their power from God.
Satan is allowed to have governance over the kingdoms of this world, only by God's permission. But it's important that we understand that God's governing of the earthly kingdoms is separate and distinct from his oversight of the kingdom of God. And these two kingdoms, the kingdoms of the world and the kingdom of God cannot be mixed. I mean, after all, did Jesus involve Himself in the politics of His day? Did His apostles? No, of course not.
The Scriptures tell us, " When Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, He departed again to a mountain by Himself alone. " That's John 6:15. Now just think what a difference Jesus could have made if He had entered into government. Was Jesus being irresponsible to turn it down? Was he neglecting his duty? Of course not. Rather, he knew that it was impossible to serve two masters.
He even told us, " No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. " Matthew 6:24. Now there Jesus was specifically talking about money, about business. But if this principle is true about money and business, how much more so is it true about politics? Because you see, in order to govern any kingdom of this world, a person is necessarily going to be disloyal to Christ and His kingdom.
He is, out of necessity, going to have to break the laws of our King Jesus. To show you what I mean, let's just look at a few of these laws of the kingdom. From Matthew chapter 5, Jesus says, " You have heard that it was said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. " But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also.
And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him too. You have heard that it was said, " You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy. " But I say, " Do you love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. " Now don't you see now that it would be impossible to try to rule one of the nations of this world and still live by kingdom teachings.
And those are only a few of the commandments. But not resisting evil, blessing those who curse you, do you know of any government that works that way? Now, when I say that this is impossible, I'm not just giving you my personal opinion, nor am I saying that, in theory, it won't work. No, it's been tried. The theory has been tested. In fact, for 1,600 years, professing Christians tried to establish Christian nations. And without even one exception, every one of those nations trampled upon the teachings of Christ.
They demonstrated beyond any doubt that you can't run a kingdom of this world by Jesus ' teachings. And therefore, you can never have such a thing as a Christian nation. And in the messages that are going to follow in the succeeding evenings, we're going to be looking at some real-life examples of people trying to establish Christian nations and what happened. Now, I realize that what I've said in the last 10 minutes or so is only a very brief overview of the gospel of Jesus and the doctrine of the two kingdoms.
So let me say this. If there is any question in your mind about the kingdom gospel and the doctrine of the two kingdoms, please read a book that I wrote several years ago entitled " The Kingdom That Turned the World Upside Down. " It discusses these issues in much greater detail. In fact, the material in that book was originally going to be the introduction for the myth of Christian America.
Actually, at that time, I had intended to write a book with that title, The Myth of Christian America, and I may yet put this material in a book form at some time. The book was going to begin with a discussion of the gospel of the kingdom and the doctrine of the two kingdoms.
Well, when I sat down to write the introductory chapters, I realized that I needed really an entire book just on that subject of the Kingdom of God and the two kingdoms, and then follow it up with a separate message or book on the myth of Christian America. Okay, now back to our discussion about the kingdom. After Jesus died, His disciples continued to preach the gospel of the kingdom. The first district they evangelized outside of Judea and Galilee was Samaria, where the response was tremendous.
Luke tells us, " But when they believed Philip, preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized both men and women. " Did you catch there what it was that Philip preached about? He told the Samaritans about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ. In other words, the king and his kingdom.
It's revealing not only to see what Philip preached about, but also who he preached to the Samaritans, the very race or ethnicity that the Jews hated and refused to have anything to do with. So by sending Philip there, Christ showed that His kingdom would have no national, no ethnic, nor any racial boundaries. In fact, just a short time later, Philip helped to bring into the kingdom an Ethiopian, a black man. In fact, before long, the door was opened to all Gentiles.
Christ chose one man in particular to be an apostle to the Gentiles, and that was Paul. And Paul was a zealous preacher of the kingdom. When he went to Ephesus, Acts tells us he spoke boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading concerning the things of the kingdom of God as Acts 19:8. In fact, even arrest and imprisonment didn't shut down the kingdom gospel that Paul preached.
The Book of Acts ends with Paul under house arrest in Rome, and the very final verses of Acts tells us this: " Then Paul dwelt two whole years in his own rented house and received all who came to him, preaching the kingdom of God and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ. With all confidence, no one forbidding him. Once again, the gospel message was the king and his kingdom. It's the only gospel that's relevant to all peoples at all times dwelling in every nation.
Historic Christianity was kingdom Christianity. By the time the apostle John died around the year AD100, Christ not only had citizens of his kingdom in every part of the Roman Empire, he had citizens in faraway lands like Ethiopia, Persia, and India. During the next century, that is from AD 100 to AD 200, his kingdom continued to grow rapidly, just as he had predicted. What had begun as a mustard seed was now becoming a large plant and was filling the whole known world.
Yet, although Christians grew in numbers during the first 300 years of Christianity, they didn't grow in earthly power and influence. Nor did they grow in wealth. Instead, like Jesus, they shunned any involvement in earthly government and any pursuit of earthly wealth. They remembered that their primary citizenship was in God's kingdom. They also fully understood that until Christ's return, it wasn't possible to convert His kingdom into an earthly kingdom.
As one early Christian explained it, " God might have bestowed upon His people, that is, the Christians, both riches and kingdoms, as he had given previously to the Jews, whose successors in posterity we are. " However, God would have Christians live under the power and government of others, lest they should become corrupted by the happiness of prosperity, and then slide into luxury, and eventually despise the commandments of God. For this is what our ancestors did.
That's from Lactantius, written about the year 300. So the early Christians focused on spreading God's kingdom and cultivating an obedient love-faith relationship with their king. They had neither the time nor the interest in getting entangled in earthly governments. The famous Christian apologist, Tertullian, explained to the Romans, " In 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 affairs of state. In the 2nd century, a pagan critic named Celsus, or Celsus, sometimes it's pronounced, wrote a lengthy work against the Christians. Among other things, he criticized them for rejecting public office.
The Christians answered him, saying, " He urges us to take office in the government of the country if that is necessary for the maintenance of the laws and the support of religion. " However, we recognize in each state the existence of another national organization that was founded by the Word of God. And we exhort those who are mighty in Word and blameless of life to rule over churches. So it is not for the purpose of escaping public duties that Christians decline public offices.
Rather, it's so they may reserve themselves for a more divine and necessary service in the Church of God, for the salvation of man. " However, Christians didn't reject public office and participation in government, only because they knew their time and energy needed to be devoted to Christ's kingdom, they fully grasped the impossibility of serving two masters. They knew that rulership in an earthly government would of necessity brought them into conflict with Christ's teachings.
Nearly 300 years after Jesus ' death, an early Christian writer named Lactantius, explained to the Romans why it was impossible for a Christian to rule an earthly government. He wrote, " Why would the Christian carry on war and mix himself with the passions of others when his mind is engaged in perpetual peace with men? Would he be delighted with foreign merchandise or with human blood? He who does not know how to seek gain? " For the Christian is satisfied with his standard of living.
He considers it unlawful not only to commit slaughter himself, but also to be present with those who do it. If desire for wealth and power is restrained, no one will use violence by land or by sea. No one will lead an army to carry off and lay waste the property of others. For what are the interests of our country, but the detriment of another state or nation? To extend the boundaries that are violently taken from others, to increase the power of the state, to improve the revenues.
All of these things are not virtues. Rather, they are the overthrowing of virtues. How can a man be just, who hates, who despoils, who puts to death? Yet those who strive to be serviceable to their country do all these things. When they speak of the duties relating to warfare, their speech pertains neither to justice nor to true virtue. Therefore, it is not befitting that those who strive to keep to the path of justice should be companions and sharers in this public homicide.
For when God forbids us to kill, He prohibits more than the open violence that is not even allowed by the public laws. He also warns us against doing those things that are considered lawful among men. For that reason, it will not be lawful for a just man to engage in warfare since his warfare is justice itself. Nor is it lawful for him to accuse anyone of a capital charge. For it makes no difference whether you put a man to death by word or by the sword instead.
That is because it is the act of putting to death itself that is prohibited. Therefore, with regard to this commandment of God, there should be no exception at all. Rather, it is always unlawful to put a man to death whom God will to be a sacred creature. So the first three centuries of Christians had no illusions that somehow a Christian could remain both loyal to Christ and His teachings, and at the same time, govern an earthly kingdom. Christ's teachings were not meant for governing a kingdom of this world.
It would be utterly unworkable. So the Christian ruler would have to choose between Christ and His country. To effectively govern an earthly state, he would have to abandon Christ's teachings. And to a citizen of God's kingdom, that would be utter treason. A century before Lactantius, Tertullian was asked to explain why it was impossible for a Christian to serve as a magistrate or other ruler. Well, he first explained all of the idolatrous practices a Roman ruler would be involved in.
But he went on then to explain that idolatry wasn't the only issue. He asked his listeners to suppose a Christian ruler could somehow avoid all of the idolatrous activities. Suppose Tertullian continued that this hypothetical Christian ruler does not even take oaths. Furthermore, he does not sit in judgment on anyone's life or character. Free might allow his judging about money. He neither condemns or indicts. He chains no one. He neither imprisons nor tortures anyone.
Now, is it believable that all this is possible? Obviously, it wouldn't be possible to rule an earthly government and not be involved in those things. Tertullian concluded his argument by asking rhetorically, " Shall he apply the chain, the prison, the torture, and the punishment? He who is not the avenger even of his own wrongs? " So for the first 300 years of Christianity, Christians understood perfectly that there simply was no way to rule an earthly government without violating Jesus ' teachings.
You could not have any such thing as a Christian nation. People would have to choose between two masters, and the choice the early Christians made was to follow their king, Jesus Christ. As E. Stanley Jones put it, " Jesus is the kingdom of God, taking sandals and walking. " The early Christians understood this. Being branches on his vine meant that they would walk in his footsteps. As he returned evil for evil to no one, neither did they.
As Tertullian explained to the Romans, " No conspiracy has ever broken out from our body. No Caesar's blood has ever fixed a stain upon us in the Senate or in the palace. No assumption of the purple has ever in any of the provinces been affected by us. " For the first 300 years, Christians lived as sheep among ravenous wolves. Yet they trusted in Christ alone for their protection, not the sword. As Tertullian explained, " The Lord will save them in that day, even His people, like sheep.
" No one gives the name of sheep to those who fall in battle with arms in hand, or those who are killed when repelling force with force. Rather, it is given only to those who are slain, yielding themselves up in their own place of duty and with patience, rather than fighting in self-defense. " A second century Christian apologist named Athenagoras described to the Romans the code by which Christians lived. He said, " We have learned not to return blow for blow, nor to go to law with those who plunder and rob us.
" Not only that, but to those who strike us on one side of the face, we have learned to offer the other side also. " Origen wrote very similarly. He said, " To those who inquire of us from where we come or who is our founder, we reply that we have come agreeably to the counsels of Jesus. We have cut down our hostile, insolent, and wearisome swords into plowshares. We have converted into pruning hooks the spears that were formerly used in war.
For we no longer take up sword against nation, nor do we learn war anymore. That is because we have become children of peace for the sake of Jesus, who is our leader. " As late as the early fourth century, Christians were still testifying, saying, " The Christian does injury to no one. " He does not desire the property of others. In fact, he doesn't even defend his own property if it is taken from him by violence. For he knows how to patiently bear an injury inflicted upon him. " That was from Lactantius.
You know, I often hear American Christians talk about the United States being founded on a Judeo-Christian ethic. Now I have to tell you, that term would have sounded very strange to the ears of the first Christians. They no doubt would have responded, " Well, which ethic do you mean Jewish or Christian? For they're not the same. " I mean, even the pagan Romans saw a clear distinction between the Jewish and Christian moral codes. In fact, they wondered how they both could claim to be worshipping the same God.
One of them asked the Christians, he said, " How could God command the Israelites through Moses to gather wealth, to extend their dominion, to fill the earth, to put their enemies of every age to the sword, and to destroy them utterly? " For on the other hand, his son, the man of Nazareth, promulgated laws quite opposed to these. He declared that no one can come to the Father who loves power, riches, or glory. Jesus said that to anyone who has given them one blow, they should offer to receive another.
So is it Moses, or is it Jesus who taught falsely? When the Father sent Jesus, did he forget his own commands that he had given to Moses? Or did he change his mind, condemn his own laws, and send forth a messenger with opposite directions? Now again, this was a pagan critic ridiculing the Christians with this. But the Christians responded in this way.
They said, " In the case of the ancient Jews who had a land and a form of government of their own, to take from them the right of making war upon their enemies, of fighting for their country, of putting to death or otherwise punishing adulterers, murderers, or others who were guilty of similar crimes would have been to subject them to sudden and utter destruction whenever the enemy fell upon them. For in that case, their very laws would restrain them and prevent them from resisting the enemy.
Yet that same providence that of old gave the law, and has now given the gospel of Jesus Christ, has destroyed their city and their temple, not wishing the Jewish state to continue any longer. However, this providence has extended the Christian religion day by day, so that it is now preached everywhere with boldness. And this is in spite of the numerous obstacles that oppose the spread of Christ's teachings in the world.
However, since it was the purpose of God that the nation should receive the benefits of Christ's teachings, all the devices of men against Christians have been brought to nothing. For the more that kings, rulers, and peoples have persecuted them everywhere, the more Christians have increased in number and grown in strength. Tertullian also addressed this change in God's moral code, saying, " Men of old were used to requiring eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth, and to repay evil for evil with interest.
" But after Christ has supervened and has united the grace of faith with long-suffering, now it is no longer lawful to attack others, even with words, nor to merely say " fool " without danger of the judgment. Christ says, " Love your enemies and bless those who curse you, and pray for your persecutors. " For what difference is there between the provoker and the one provoked? The only difference is that the former was the first to do evil, but the second did the evil afterwards.
But each one stands condemned in the eyes of the Lord for hurting another human. For God both prohibits and condemns every wickedness. In evildoing, there is no account taken of the order of who went first. The commandment is absolute. Evil is not to be repaid with evil. " Now what I've been reading you, this was historic Christianity. This was the historic Christian faith. For 300 years, Christians lived as children of this kingdom. They had both the King Jesus Christ and His kingdom.
They recognized that the essence of Christianity was this obedient love-faith relationship with Jesus Christ. Trusting in God's power alone, the early Christians continued to rapidly grow throughout Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and even the Persian Empire. In fact, their rapid growth has been called by one journal " one of the most amazing phenomena in all of human history. " The truth is, no other religion has ever spread so quickly without the use of the sword. Eventually, the incredible happened.
The Roman Empire itself quit fighting the Christians and instead embraced them. The Christians had conquered the Romans without sword, without wealth, and without any political influence. The " impractical teachings of Jesus " turned out not to be so impractical after all. Unfortunately, the victory of early Christianity also proved to be its very downfall. Christians now began to imagine that it was time for Christ to reign on earth, even though he had not yet returned.
The Christians before them had clearly seen that trying to combine the kingdom of God with an earthly kingdom couldn't possibly work. It was trying to serve two masters. And as Jesus had forewarned, any follower of his who tried to do so would soon hate the one and love the other. And he would soon be loyal to one and despise the other. And the master who would be the one eventually despised would not be the earthly master. It would invariably be Jesus Christ.
In the centuries before Rome embraced Christianity, that is, in the centuries before Constantine, Christians had firmly stated, saying, " Christians are not allowed to use violence to correct the delinquency of sins. " That's from Clement of Alexandria. But now Christians began to say, " Well, why not? " With the backing of the Roman state, we can now stamp out abortion. Yes, they had abortion back then. We can stamp out the gladiator games, the theater. We can outlaw sorcery and pagan worship.
And that's exactly what Christians were able to do through Constantine and the Roman emperors who followed him. Well, surely this is God's will the fourth-century Christians reasoned. And indeed, they were able to wipe out a large number of very evil things, like you say, like abortion and the horribly bloody gladiator games. But it meant that they had to use violence themselves to end those social ills. Christians had once said, " It isn't lawful for the innocent to even kill the guilty.
" But now Christians began to wonder, well, how do you run a state without punishing the guilty? Once Christians accepted the principle that they could wield the sword on behalf of the state to punish sinners and criminals, well, it was a small step to accept war as well. All they had to do was, in their minds, paint every war as a battle between the innocent on one side and the guilty on the other. And of course, whatever side they were on was always the innocent side.
Now at first, this was very easy to rationalize, because all of the battles were ones in which Christians were on one side, and pagans were on the other. But before the fourth century was even over, it was Christians slaughtering fellow Christians. So this raises the whole question of, does God even want a Christian state? Is this the way that His kingdom works? In the 4th century, Christians began to identify the Kingdom of God as being one and the same as the new Christian Roman Empire.
Whereas for 300 years, Christians had recognized that in this interim, before Christ returns, Christ does not force His kingdom on anyone. As Origen put it, " He rules over no one against that person's will. For there are still wicked beings, not only men, but also angels and all demons, over whom we say that, in a sense, he does not rule, for they do not yet yield him a willing obedience.
" But now the Christian Romans began to reason that it would actually be a favor to people to require them to become Christians against their will. Or at least at a minimum, everyone would have to live as a Christian, whether he wanted to or not. See why they thought, well, this is actually doing an unbeliever a favor. Make him become a Christian. What most people don't realize today is that Christian Rome was about as strict as Calvin's Geneva, or as New England in the 1600s.
And from a human perspective to the fourth-century Christians, this surely seemed to be God's will. As I've mentioned, idolatry was outlawed. Abortion was outlawed. Homosexuality was outlawed. What could be a more perfect state? Well, God's answer was not slow in coming. In a short time, he withdrew his protection, and the Roman Empire fell. Now, a lot of Christian textbooks will tell you that Rome fell because of its moral decay, because of its immorality. But that's not true at all.
During the greatest period of immorality and excess that the Roman Empire experienced was in the first century, when it was still growing and prospering. When Rome fell, it was a Christian state and a very strict one. Or maybe I should say a so-called Christian state. Because I think the lesson of Christian Rome should make it quite clear that it's not possible to have such a thing as a Christian state, not until Christ returns.
Now, a person would think that the lesson of Christian Rome would be one that would be never forgotten by Christians. However, it was quickly forgotten. Instead of returning to being children of the kingdom, Christians tried unsuccessfully for the next thousand years to set up Christian states. And in " Christian Europe, " blood flowed freely as Christians slaughtered fellow Christians without end. And those Christians who remained people of the kingdom were often horribly persecuted and put to death.
Certainly, the time had come for God to restore kingdom Christianity.