Roots of Religious Liberty

Aurora, there was considerable disagreement over the state supported church. Religious persecution in colonial America was not resolved by the sword, but by appealing to the consciences of Christian men by using the word of God. Isaac Backus was one such man. Religious liberty was won by changing the consensus among Bible believing Protestants.

The persecution that we see is of another stripe. When radical secularism opposes the gospel and the Christian ethic under penalty of law, then the Christians will have no choice but to obey God rather than man by acts of civil disobedience.

I totally agree with civil disobedience when the secular law demands that Christians violate God's law. For example, if government ever forces all businesses to pay the health insurance of their employees' domestic partners regardless of gender, then I think Christian business owners would have no choice but to say "I can't do that! I won't do that!" I see this resulting in situations similar to MLK's non-violent demonstatrations and subsequent attacks by police during the civil rights movement.

My issue is with the idea that it might be acceptable for Christians to take up arms against the secular government of the United States in order to protect our religious liberty. I don't, for example, see Steven lobbing rocks back at those who were stoning him. I think we win nothing for Christ when we react to the world by acting like the world.

I would point out that the Christians dying in the first couple centuries of Christianity are an example of the ultimate civil disobedience.

They were saying, along with Daniel's three friends, "We will not stop being believers. You can kill us, you can torture us, you can take everything we have, you can feed us to wild beasts, but you will not take Jesus from us!"

That was the ultimate civil disobedience.

As Christians we have dual citizenship. We have to make a distinction between our roles as a citizen of the heavenly Jerusalem and as a citizen of the state. I agree that we are never to take up arms to advance the Kingdom of God. At the same time Christian men should be the first to defend their state, because the state is ordained with authority from God to defend the lawful and punish the lawless for the good of His church.

Is it ever right for a Christian to rise up against a corrupt state? Given the abuses listed in the Declaration do you think the Revolution was a just war?

I believe that the revival of Biblical Christianity at the Reformation led to the rebellion against Charles I and that the Great Awakening led to the Revolution. These wars were not fought over religious liberty, but because men understood liberty and that liberty comes from the blessing of God. 'Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.'

Having known the blessings of God and now experiencing His wrath because of the apostasy that surrounds us, we as a nation have much in common with Israel during Jeremiah’s ministry. My prayer is that we will not follow them to destruction.

Thanks for comments. What do you think?

The defense of our country in military service is a tricky one. My mother's family have always answered the call to military service during times of war. My father, on the other hand, was a conscientious objector in World War II. He served in the Merchant Marines because he felt the cause of that particular was was just, but he could not agree to shoot at a fellow brother in Christ on the other side of the line. I am a bit schizophrenic on the subject myself. I think America has fought in just and unjust wars. I think the current war is just because of who we're fighting in the Middle East, but I would opt out of some wars and let my son make his own decisions about them. I'd support his decision, whatever it was, but I'd let him know if I thought it was a just or unjust war. Sometimes you can't tell, but whenever we're talking about supporting a corrupt government against its own people or expanding territory or even securing natural resources that belong to another country, then I'm skeptical of the justness of that war.

I'll have to deal with the second issue later as my ride just arrived to go home. Bye for now!

but not of it. That means we walk a fine line in defense of almost any secular tradition whether it be liberty or military intervention.

I think we're expressly forbidden in the Bible to form a theocracy. Jesus' kingdom is not of this world and Jesus is the only king we owe allegiance to. And, thus is the difficulty for Christians who want to support their country in secular pursuits and also obey Jesus. We are to obey Him before we obey secular authorities and when they disagree, we are to break the law of man before we break the Law of God.

War is more complicated than that. The Revolutionary War spawned a culture of liberty that spread missionaries throughout the world. That was a good thing. I think Jesus would approve. Add to it that we were seizing control of our own government from foreign control and I'm ethically on board as well.

Suppose, however, you were a Christian during the French Revolution. The standing government of royalty is corrupt, but the coming government is going to cut people's heads off. Which side do you stand on? Which side do you think Jesus would approve more? I think He would have said neither side was godly. So how do Christians respond?

We've had similar problems in our own country. Let's not pretend we've always fought on the side of light and right. We haven't. My brother served in Vietnam. The US participation in that war was not godly and it didn't serve godly means. I think we had good intentions that dissolved as soon as our boots hit the ground, but I'm not sure Jesus would have approved our behavior just because our intentions were good. We were supporting a corrupt and abusive government against another corrupt and abusive government. That we had an ideology that supported liberty is immaterial since, had we won, we would have continued to support a government that did not support liberty. Where was the godly goal in that?

So when you say Christians should be the first to rise in defense of our country -- yes, technically I agree, but ....

Is our country really what we're defending? In the current situation, I think it is. Is our government acting in an ethical manner (since government is secular, we can't hold them to morals) in the prosecution of this war? I think we're doing as well as any country at war can be expected to do in an occupation situation. Certainly we're doing better than Japan did in China in the 1930s and 40s or Germany did anywhere during Hitler's reign of terror. And, I know the gospel has been spoken among people who had never heard it before. That's a good thing.

But, that doesn't mean that all wars our government steps into are godly. What should be the Christian response when our government supports the wrong side or when we support one bad guy over another bad guy? It's all well and good to say we should support our country, but Christians are also called to support the good. When our country decides to support the bad, what should the Christian response be?

The areas of the Christian life that are not explicit and where good men may differ must be ruled by the principles of Christian liberty and self denial. This is a case where relativism is valid. What may be OK for one might injure the conscience of another. That’s why the conscientious objector provision in armed services is valid.

Most of my reading on this subject is on the English Reformers and Puritans. Of these I know more about Bunyan. He chose jail rather than compromise his conscience over state directed worship practices. But God used it for good. Armed with his Bible and concordance he wrote Pilgrim’s Progress while imprisoned.

Another historical example worthy of consideration is the Civil War. In the reeducation process that ensued after my conversion one of the most egregious examples of historical revisionism surrounded men like Robert E Lee and Stonewall Jackson. The study of these men gave me a new perspective of the war. They were Christian men with a solid theology, not the stereotypical Southern Man.

Once I could relate to their character my whole attitude toward the war changed. These men had an understanding and appreciation for liberty. I try to understand them, but never question their commitment to Christ, nor their understanding of Biblical Theology.

We are to live by faith just as the many who have gone before according to the measure of grace given to us.

Thank you for your comments.

Thanks for hearing me out!