Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 4 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
The Kingdom that Turned the World Upside Down  /  Chapter 13, Am I of This World  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 4
The chapter calls “Christian nation” an oxymoron and says Jesus and the apostles never spoke in those terms; how does that challenge common assumptions about patriotism, political identity, and Christian influence in society?
Another way to ask: If “Christian nation” is a contradiction and Jesus and the apostles didn’t talk that way, how does that challenge how people think about patriotism and politics? How might it change what we expect Christian influence to look like in society?

Direct Answer According to Bercot, calling a nation “Christian” mixes two categories that don’t fit: Christians are “not of this world,” while nations (apart from God’s kingdom) belong to this world—so political identity and national pride can’t be treated as expressions of Christ’s kingdom.

Support from Transcript:

  • “Neither Jesus nor his disciples ever talk about such a thing as a Christian nation.”
  • He calls it “an oxymoron, like… ‘thunderous silence.’”
  • Reason given: “The word ‘Christian’… must always apply to persons and things that are not of this world.”
  • But “unless we are referring to God’s kingdom, the word ‘nation’… refers to something that is always of this world.”
  • Jesus’ kingdom “is not of this world” and is not preserved by fighting.
  • Later he critiques partisan identity: thinking a party agenda equals separation is mistaken because parties are “the world… part of it.”
Discussion Follow-ups How might patriotism become “friendship with the world” in practice? What kind of influence can Christians pursue that stays consistent with a kingdom “not… from here”?

Jumpstarter 4 of 10
Back Questions Next