Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 10
Using the U.S. citizenship analogy—transferring allegiance so you “can’t maintain allegiance to both”—what concrete “allegiances” (habits, media, slogans, voting hopes, fears, financial priorities, willingness to harm opponents) would need to change if you took kingdom citizenship as literally as Bercot describes, and which changes feel most threatening or unrealistic?
Another way to ask: If you took “kingdom citizenship” as seriously as switching countries, what loyalties would need to change (media, slogans, voting hopes, fears, spending, or willingness to hurt opponents)? Which changes would feel hardest or least realistic for you?

Direct Answer Bercot’s analogy implies that kingdom citizenship requires a real transfer of allegiance away from nationalistic identity, so habits and hopes that bind us to “earthly kingdoms” must be surrendered. The transcript doesn’t list modern items like media habits or voting, but it clearly targets patriotism, divided-hearted loyalties, and willingness to treat enemies as enemies.

Support from Transcript:

  • He compares it to U.S. citizenship: you must “transfer his allegiance from his former country to America. He can’t maintain allegiance to both.”
  • He says it’s “no different” in God’s kingdom—allegiance cannot be split.
  • “Earthly patriotism has no place in God’s kingdom,” and the disciple’s banner is “God or country.”
  • Jesus’ teachings in context imply concrete changes: love “the Romans,” go “two miles,” and pay “the onerous taxes,” rather than resisting.
  • He says the Christians didn’t fight for independence and even fled rather than support the revolt, showing how far the transfer of loyalty went.
Discussion Follow-ups Which loyalties shape your reflexes—fear for your nation, anger at opponents, or devotion to the kingdom? If kingdom allegiance is total, what would have to change first: your speech, your spending, or your sense of who your “enemy” is?