The Public/Private Split Dodge

This is the fourth post in a series of posts looking at the Sermon on the Mount. I’ve referred to a blog by Michael L. Westmoreland-White which brings up these specific points; he in turn credits John Howard Yoder and Glen Stassen. Westmoreland-White describes “dodges” to the Sermon on the Mount, ways in which people seek to get around applying it today. (I might note that he is specifically discussing pacifism, so his comments at times focus on how the Sermon is applied at a national level)

We’ve looked at the dispensational dodge and the preterist dodge. Today we’ll talk about the public/private split dodge. This approach says that yes, the Sermon on the Mount has moral guidelines for Christian living for the individual, but it says nothing about how countries are to conduct themselves. Again, Westmoreland-White is approaching this topic in the midst of a discussion of Christian pacifism, so his interest is to look at whether or not countries should be held to the standard of the Sermon on the Mount. According to him, this teaching was held to by Martin Luther and has been popular among Lutherans ever since. I’m not familiar enough with Lutheran teaching to confirm or deny that affirmation.

I’ve discussed this concept before, in the context of the idea of the existence of a Christian nation. As I’ve said, if such a thing could exist, I think that it would have to live up to Jesus’ teachings, including turning the other cheek and loving enemies. (Interestingly enough, I noticed that the people behind the Brick Testament picked up on this very idea: note this series of graphics)

I’d also say that I believe that Christians must continue to follow the teachings of their Master, even if they choose to put themselves in service to an earthly nation. The Sermon on the Mount still shows us what is right and what is godly. Again, I’m not talking about how to escape damnation; I’m talking about how to live as sanctified people.

Nations in the Old Testament, even nations not in covenant with God, were judged on several factors from what we see in the prophets: their treatment of their fellow man, their pride, and their willingness to acknowledge God. To some degree I have to think that God continues to look on countries in that same way. Even if they aren’t in covenant with Him, they are held to certain standards. And frankly, I don’t know when any nation has lived up to those standards.

I’d like to hear your thoughts. Are nations given a “free pass” as far as Jesus’ teachings go? Or are they expected to love enemies, turn the other cheek, etc.?

5 thoughts on “The Public/Private Split Dodge

  1. heavenbound

    Its interesting to note that Muslim countries have a very strict code of conduct. Pornography, drugs and illegal sex, if caught could result in prison or even death.
    Buddhist countries also have extreme moral laws and a very submissive society. Scandanavian countries who are Christian allow legal drug use and have legal prostitution. The world has over 100 countries where prostitution is legal, and many which claim to be Christian which include Germany and Eastern Europe. Of course here in this country prostitution is legal in Nevada. With that said can anyone answer this question with any real authority? Thank God we have a savior.
    My question is, What standards is anyone held to? Never mind turning the other cheek. When a country is attacked by a foreign country. No one ever asks the question, What would Jesus do? Looks like a free pass to me.

  2. H Clay McCool

    Tim are you actually saying that the USA should treat all other countries in this manner?

    Love Your Enemies

    27″But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. 29 To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. 30 Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 31And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.
    32 “If you love those who love you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. 33And if you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. 34And if you lend to those from whom you expect to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to get back the same amount. 35But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil. 36 Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful.

    I’m thinking that makes no sense what so ever.

    Paul said:

    Romans 13

    Submission to the Authorities

    1Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

  3. Tim Archer Post author

    No, Clay, I’m only saying that Christians should do that. The U.S.A. can pretty much do what it wants.

    Now, call my views repugnant again. I’m here to please God, not you.

  4. H Clay McCool

    I do remember using the word repugnant Tim. What I didn’t say without even looking is “YOUR VIEWS ARE REPUGNANT” as in all your views. Get the chip off your shoulder Tim it looks ugly on you. Perhaps I come across too harsh at times, but I was TRAINED WELL. I am trying to grow and with your patience I will do just that.

    You said: “I’d like to hear your thoughts. Are nations given a “free pass” as far as Jesus’ teachings go? Or are they expected to love enemies, turn the other cheek, etc.?”

    My response is YES Tim they are given a free pass based on specific teaching from the text I posted.

    Grace and peace Clay

  5. heavenbound

    Tim: I would like you to expound on the comment that “we are to live like a sanctified people.” Another statement you make is to follow the “teachings of the Master”
    This sounds as if you want us to go back to a church based government, is that the implication here? Didn’t our forefathers in their judgement declare there needs to be a separation of church and state. This deprives free will and volition for any individual, does it not? To be honest it sounds like you have a distinct path for all of us to be on.
    I guess you don’t agree that all roads leads to Rome.
    In a society that allows the freedom of religion, for all peoples, where does your statements fit in? I will be looking for your reply.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.