I Pledge Alliagance…NOT!!

Introduction

While the title may imply a wild agenda I must state that I am for an orderly respectful decorum towards God’s institution of government, established to maintain order and longevity of the inhabitance on this planet. I pay my taxes and I obey all laws that are in accordance to the directives that God has given us in His Word. I am unopposed to followers of Christ working through government as we have the opportunity to do so under our terms. If we subject ourselves in anyway to the societal system’s ideology or protocol, we merely become a pawn in their game. God would have us to be a light and salt in this world and we cannot do this from under a rock somewhere, nor can we do it when we compromise by surrendering to the world’s way of doing business.

We must see that when we follow Christ there is a separation between mere humans and those who have chosen to follow Christ. And we, who have chosen the road of Christ, must live this separation amongst the kingdoms of men. We’ve become citizens of a different realm and we should act in accordance to this fact as ambassadors from our realm to the one in which we live and work. I have never seen an ambassador take up allegiance to another country in which he is representing his own realm.

I Pledge Allegiance…NOT!!!

Today in this country there is a growing desire among younger followers of Christ to understand why we do what we do as the “church” and to find out if all that has been handed to us in the way of traditions and teachings are really the way they should be. Much of this has to do with these young people coming into the ranks never having been raised in an understanding of church. Suddenly, many of these searchers are at a crossroads wherein some things that made sense to those before them no longer make sense to the newcomer. One case in point would be “I pledge allegiance.”

For those who have participated in the cultural tradition of pledging over the years, it may seem trite or absurd for anyone to question this practice. Many whom I have talked with feel that it hurts nothing to say, “I pledge allegiance”, since it is “only words.” The pledge does not have much value to the average person in society today so it may seem natural to think that, it’s “only words” However, is saying the pledge indeed “just meaningless words” as some think?

Some wonder why anyone wouldn’t pledge allegiance to a country that has given them “freedom.” Others feel that not following suit with those the world us in society is to draw unnecessary attention to ourselves and may invite trouble of which seems to grow more drastic by the day. Recently, I was informed by a cousin, who was a missionary for many years that I should be investigated by the Feds for what I teach. This may happen, and so be it, if it does! But doesn’t this blow your mind that one believer would threaten another over a difference of opinion about nationalism? What have religious people come to in our day? The insecurity that would cause one to make such a threat against another follower of Christ really brings questions to mind. Are the status quo people in the USA insecure with their temporal mindset? Or, are they insecure about either being challenged or simply found to be inconsistent with what the Bible teaches?

Not a Universal Truth

First of all, for a believer “pledging ones’ allegiance” to anything but Christ is not a universal truth. What do I mean universal truth? By this I mean a truth that is applicable in every situation anyone could find themselves anywhere in this physical world. For instance, we are commanded to love our neighbors [John 13:35] even to love our enemies [Matthew 5:44-48]. No matter where a disciple might be in this world he is commanded to apply this behavior to the way that he lives. There is no exception to this truth, period! Thus, love is a universal truth.

In addition, historically speaking, such a practice as “pledging” to human governments was never been a consistent practice of the early church from the time of Acts and even into the 2nd and 3rd centuries. But since the time of Constantine, when the church began copulating with the state, there has been a caving into this practice of pledging allegiance to the state, but in the beginning is was not so. Many today would say that never before was there a country that accepted us, as followers of Christ as does the USA, as if this makes pledging allegiance ok…

It is thought that since this society was once founded on christianized principles [notice I did not say on Christ] that we can go ahead and pledge an allegiance to it. Can believers in Communist China pledge an allegiance to the societal government they live under? Obviously, they cannot because China is an anti-god regime. Notice the lack of universalness in the ideal of “pledging allegiance.” If truth is absolute there can’t be exceptions to its application.

Taking up what the Bible does tell believers: about HONORING those in authority whether they are kings, emperors, or tyrants… This command is universal truth, which is to be applied no matter the situation; including believers all the way from Albania to Zimbabwe. In addition, notice also that every text in the New Testament dealing with governing authorities is voiced in the impersonal sense: the kings, the rulers instead of the personal sense: your kings and rulers.

Some would use this specter to say that the Bible was written from the cultural reality that government was not representative and so it would not be applicable to make the references to a government being personal. This may seem like a solid argument except that homosexuals have used the same approach to make a lot of headway in their alleged agenda using this same type of argument. In actuality Paul and Peter made these references to government general and impersonal so that they would be applicable in all situations, therefore all could use these texts universally. It’s dangerous to consider the Bible in light of our situation rather than our situation in light of the Bible. One is situational ethics and the other is living consistently to what we’ve been taught through the Bible. In addition, if we become citizens of another Kingdom with Christ, human governments would continue to remain in the impersonal sense to us because we are focused on the eternal, not the temporal when we pass from darkness to light.

A Gift Horse or a Trojan Horse?

One difficulty that we will run into while trying to come to greater truth on this subject is that we live in a seemingly “tolerant” society. This clouds the issue greatly for some people. A “free lollipop” blinds the minds of the naive, as to why he shouldn’t get in or stay in the car of the guy offering him the treat. Church people think that because the government isn’t bashing our doors down and threatening us, that somehow it is a welcome friend and we are equally as welcome to dilly-dally with it.

The institutional church in this country has accepted this practice of “pledging allegiance” because this country was supposedly founded by Christians, which is not the truth at all. True believers according to the Word of God were much less prevalent in this country than many like to think. In addition, many believers see that this government gives place to them in law, governance and politics. Consequently, many church people feel that to question “pledging allegiance” is the equivalent to looking a gift horse in the mouth, i.e. being critical of a gift by inspecting and/or rejecting certain aspects. Instead of feeling that we are doing wrong to “check the spirits” and questioning this practice, we need to see that we could just as well be overlooking a Trojan Horse.

What Are The Ramifications Of “Pledging Allegiance”?

In joining a body politic through a pledge of allegiance we are no longer an autonomous moral body, the Kingdom of God, we are supposed to be. We have rejoined the kingdoms of men. There is no longer a clear representation of Christ in this society because we are one with the society around us in part through this ritual. Any representation of Christ and His Kingdom now exists mostly in the believer’s head. And unfortunately most unconverted people are not mind readers therefore they cannot see the difference between themselves and what has come to be equated as a follower Christ, i.e. the “nationalistic christian”.

We can begin to see there is a great cost wrapped up in going along with the society around us and pledging our loyalty to its’ government. Pledging is just one part of being assimilated back into a worldly culture. Our very understanding of who we are amongst the world today is so skewed; the Apostle Paul would hardly recognize the modern organized-church as being consistent to following Christ.

An Oath

The “Pledge of Allegiance” is an oath. In the Old Testament God’s people took any oath very seriously. There was no such thing as “just words” as is thought about the cultural “pledge” today. In the OT a person’s word meant something and they were committed to keeping any oath or vow no matter the consequences. Read about Jephthah in Judges 11:30-35. The story in Joshua 9 where Israel unknowingly made a covenant with the people of Gibeon is another example of taking an oath seriously even if it meant disadvantage.

Do we have the ability in a biblical sense to keep the oath of allegiance to any country?

If America becomes openly committed to an ungodly end, such as Communist China has been for years, can we continue our oath? Again in the Old Testament oaths were taken seriously and not to be broken, (cf. Numbers 30:2). In truth we can only commit to that which we can personally deliver and to that which is not manipulated by outside forces beyond our control. When we commit to a country we commit ourselves to follow what comes out of secret smoke filled rooms or the minds of mere men which may be totally ungodly and that which we have no control over. There is no advocacy in Christ or the Apostle for this practice. We have to ask ourselves seriously if Christ or Paul were on earth today if they would pledge allegiance? This question is almost ludicrous however most church-people today cannot think properly about this subject unless they are forced to put Christ in the position of doing what they do without thought.

History Please

To gain a better understanding of the magnitude of “the pledge”, even if it were purposely done without meaning it, we need to go back in history and see how others thought about the magnitude of their words and actions. Could they disassociate their words as meaning nothing even though they said them? Additionally, we might be able to draw courage from them to reassert ourselves in restraint from this seeming insignificant practice of “pledging allegiance” in order to be the type of testimony that God meant us to be in the first place.

Saying “the pledge” is nothing different than what pledging loyalty to Caesar was for believers in the first 3-centuries after Christ. The only problem is we don’t see it that way. But back then they would not think of pledging loyalty to anyone save Christ. To them the mere thought of doing such was almost painful; such a grotesque sin it was akin to becoming another Judas. Either these people were extremely ignorant or we have immensely perverted what they started, to the point to where we dismiss their lead.

Yesteryear’s governments are not all together different then the ones we know in modern times, i.e. “there is nothing new under the sun.” Notice if you will that I did not exclude America from this statement. In the book, The Reformers and their StepChildren, author Leonard Verduin made reference to what he called a “sacral society”, meaning a “society held together by a religion to which all members of that society are committed”, to some degree. There are thus significant comparabilities between all types of governmental systems on this level. Even beyond this delineation there is very little real difference between societies of today and yesterday. Freedom is of course the trump card most will play at this point, but how much freer can one be than he who the Son of God has sets free? Does the USA have some thing that Christ hasn’t given us yet?

To be a part of a sacral society one has to be committed or amenable to the belief system of the realm. In a sacral society like this there is no such thing as allowing personal revelation or a personal belief. While this country is a quasi-sacral society [few in it fail to worships “freedom” and the elusive American Dream] it has historical jailed tons of people, who dared to publicly offer a personal revelation separate of the corporate will, just the same as all other countries. Examples of totally “sacral” societies would be an Islamic State or a Communist State. A sacral society can only be based in a common system of belief; with rituals and the pledging public allegiance is the test of loyalty. That is why there can be no such thing as a “Christian Nation.” Following Christ can be reduced to a religion, as it has become so at many points in Western Civilization. But in the purity of a genuine relationship with God, a religion it cannot be, being used to force people in a region to be committed to it.

Ancient Rome was pantheistic, meaning it allowed many gods, but it would not allow Jehovah, who demands exclusive worship, i.e. the God that Paul preached. Verduin wrote that when the gospel is truly preached and believed in any society, that society becomes composite, meaning: there are varying ideas competing for a “following” for lack of better terms. It is this problem of composite thinking and thus living that the full weight of the Roman Empire was brought to bear on a fledgling group of believers, derisively called Christians.

It is this same detail, which Rome sought to eradicate that the Jewish leaders also sought to extinguish by pushing to have Christ crucified. Both civil authorities wanted control. Burning incense and doing a ritual pledge was a means of securing the control Rome wanted. Such words or acts compromised the believer, even if ever so slightly. If a pledge were “mere words”, why was it only “mere words” that governments of godless states since the time of Rome, have sought to acquire from people, especially followers of Christ?

In a round about way Rome realized the religious nature of doing these acts of “pledging” as worship. Satan was at the core of what was going on because the he is the ruler of this world, (cf. Matt. 4:8-11). The enemy knows that there are no idle words which “just mean nothing,” especially when they engender worship and veneration.

Historically rulers have tried to secure for themselves control by means of coercion through the threat of wide spread force, eradicating pockets of composite thinking and living in their public. It has been that way all the way down through history. Yet, God has always had His remnant that would standup to the tide of mere worldly cultural thought. These proclaimed Christ exclusively as the only way to salvation and as the Leader of their Kingdom, which was altogether different than what the world’s system affords a person. This alternative was seditious to Rome and it will continue to be seen as subversive even today, if believers begin to live the same way the early church did.

Throughout history the great struggle of the church has been to “be” the ecclesia: the called out ones. It is easy to hide behind the state’s skirt and proclaim we serve God only while we do homage to a state that protects us and gives us place in their governmental court. But let us come out from this idolatry and become pure on this point. This is just one detail that is missing from today’s teaching. In America believers do not perceive the fullness of what it means that we are part of the Kingdom of God, nor do we see our lifestyle as being called out for His purposes. Yes, we agree that the Kingdom of God exists but what is it? Many would agree that we should be set-aside for God, but that does not infer in many people’s minds that there is any discomfort or austerity from the world when we practice this truth. The living part is where there will be a great falling away because the gospel we teach is one that has our comfort built in as an unspoken tenet.

In the time of Christ, to follow Christ meant to lose all that one had in the ways of the world: family, social position, respect, citizenship and many other things, (cf. Mark 10:29, 2 Cor. 5:17-20 Phil. 3:2-20, Heb. 13:14). There was a high price to pay. Yet in following Christ, one gained a spiritual family, a Kingdom and purpose that defies all the natural laws of human existence under Satan’s control, (cf. Matt. 12:47-50, John 18:36). We were translated out of the kingdom of darkness in to the Kingdom of Light, (cf. 1 Peter 2:9b).

Was not burning incense to Caesar, an act of ignorant stiff-necked religious zealots?

Or was it consistent with living out of the conviction that there is only one God and that burning incense to Caesar was an act of allegiance and worship. It was pledging allegiance to a god and thus an act of idol worship for any believer. So how is “pledging allegiance” to a flag today any different? In plainest of terms this next question is what it comes down to for us today.

Are we going to worship the state and “freedom,” or God?

Fourth Century Donatists refused an oath of loyalty to the bishop of Rome, who by that time was a recognized operative of the state institution. This fact was clearly demonstrated when the Emperor of Rome upheld the “bishop’s” condemnation of the Donatists’ by bringing in armies and exterminating them. Many throughout the Dark Ages, and even after the Reformation, refused such oaths and pledges. The Waldensians, the Hussites, the Bohemian Brethren, Moravians, and countless other groupings and configurations of faithful people throughout history saw what we have refused to see today in this country: declaring loyalty to the state is anti-ekklesia!

Many today, which gather in buildings, mistakenly called “church”, would never in a million years agree to bow before some ugly idol or seek the blessing of a spirit “god.” This would be a clear act of sin, idol worship, as well it should be! Acts associated with bowing or seeking a blessing would also be correctly identified as acts of worship. How come we fail to make this judgment on an act that is no different with respect to the flag, saluting and pledging allegiance to a country?

The government and the flag are token images of that by which we are allegedly “provided for and blessed.” Are we to venerate government/society or are we to thank God for using them to benefit us? It seems to me that the reason “pledging” is not seen the same way as idol worship is because the state has given us place and enticed us with a candy called freedom and power, which has in turn deluded us. Freedom and power are highly valued by believers in this country, but at what cost? And again, how much freer can one be than he who the Son of God sets free?

We must heed Paul’s teaching to not let freedom be a means for sin, and being compromised is a sin. Normally this text is only interpreted in regards to food and such. Yet there is no reason not to bring applications into our subject of church/state relations. In fact it is naive not to make this correlation. The state is not forcing us to do these acts of worship, which is another detail that throws a curve at many believers. Does an act of worship change into not being an act of worship just because it is not forced? Hardly!

We need to see that “the pledge” is nothing more than idol-worship. Through it we combine ourselves with a category of people dissimilar to whom we are supposed to be according to scripture. Followers of Christ are: a Holy people, a Kingdom unto God, the Bride of the King, and Ambassadors of our Kingdom to the kingdoms of this world. How can we turn to anything else for recognition, position and purpose if we are not at the same time turning away from God and our allegiance to Him? We cannot serve two masters, either we will hate the one and love the other, or he will hold to on and despise the other, (cf. Matt. 6:24).

We have defiled ourselves with the states’ choice delicacies of “freedom and power,” by pledging our allegiance to it. Daniel gives us clear testimony of what it means to be set-apart for God in lifestyle and day-to-day living as one dedicated to something outside a belonging to the state’s religion. We have failed to do the same!

Just what can we do?

First of all we need to pray and ask God for clear understanding. We do not need to seek the approval men on what is said here. God is articulate in His universe and He is able to recall to us all that He has said through the Word. To seek men may cause us to stop seeking the truth. God can give us the conviction it takes to stand for truth, even when it is unpopular with the religious crowd around us. We live for the audience of One, not for a denomination or various statements of faith.

Once we have sought God we need to renounce this behavior of pledging allegiance and making oaths to any country, friendly to the teaching of Christ or not, as being unchrist-like, unbiblical and anti-ekklesia. We need to desist in doing this ritual even though it seems so natural and even ungrateful not to do it. We need to repent of our idolatry in state worship and seek God’s forgiveness.

When we learn new truths, often we feel that we have to convert those around us who have not seen the light… This does not work very well in getting people to see the truth. Many are very attached to that which they have done for so long. There is a ritualistic bondage in “pledging” and there is a significant blinding-stronghold the enemy has built in peoples’ minds in order to maintain control over them.

During the coliseum games in Rome it has been recorded that many Christians went to their death quietly. This spoke to a few in the stands, which were so pricked spiritually speaking, that they were moved to the point of committing themselves to Jesus Christ on the spot. Many were thrown to the lions with the crowd already there. When we begin to stand in truth, others around us will be pricked in the same way. They may ask questions or just see the light. It is this quiet approach that gets people’s attention. Others may be moved to more rash behaviors but do not worry about this.

Commonly, my children and I stand in respect of others’ beliefs when “the pledge” is being done. This is a blatant enough approach that people notice but it is not such an aggressive approach that people are commonly offended. Remember true believers are in the minority both in public and state institutions as well as religious constructs. Quiet overtures are the way to give deference to others while espousing the truth we have come into. So far the most abuse we have experienced is from “Christians” who are indignant that we should set ourselves apart in this way. I believe that in time these will not be the only people we’ll receive abuse from over this detail of separating from nationalistic connections. It is puzzling why the religious crowd stirs up the secular culture into extremes against true believers on this point. Doesn’t sound like Demetrius, a silversmith Paul faced in Ephesus?

Commonly, a view such as this [separating from the cultural norm of national belonging] will be seen as antagonistic or “anti” whatever is accepted. Some feel that if we are not for something that we are automatically diametrically against it. And thus violent prejudice is stirred up against anything that looks like opposition, even if it is only quiet non-participation. Take a look at Sir Thomas More as an example of what public silence does. Sometimes silence speaks louder than words. But many are opposed to such a simple approach. Yet, it is this simple approach Christ Himself took in both living an alternative and moving forward with the real agenda. Our objective is to continue to do what God wants in the same step by both doing something about what is current in society and moving forward in God’s plan. The current approach of joining someone else’s game to try and dominate for even a good purpose of good is a ruse. We loose our unique position of being an alternative, we become deluded in the attempt and we only deal with the temporal.

We can also share with open people what we have found in this newly rediscovered truth. Perhaps this pamphlet or some such other written piece will help to convey the truth. Written works are perhaps the easiest way of communicating a complete idea to someone else without spawning an eruption. People can take their time to contemplate ideas without feeling they have to respond to us… There will be violent responses from reactionaries who do not want to come under the discomfort of following Christ, but at least we are not causing more of an eruption.

We must not argue about such subjects because ultimately God needs to be doing the convicting and opening of people’s minds. This subject is connected to many other details, which have a great influence on not only us but also those who are not waking up to the problems attached to this subject. It would be good to do some reading for your own education. Discover for yourself how people thought and lived in the pre-Constantine church and in the radical reformation. In reading material such as this we will not only come to a greater conviction of our own waywardness and ignorance but we will be able to start restoring truth to the bride of Christ one person at a time.

Some suggested reading:

• The Reformers and their StepChildren, by: Leonard Verduin
• The False Presence of the Kingdom, by: Jacques Ellul
• The Pilgrim Church, by: E.H. Broadbent
• Hope in a time of Abandonment, By: Jacques Ellul
• Spiritual Warfare, by: Dean Sherman
• Unveiled at Last, by: Bob Sjogren
• Count Zinzendorf, by: Felix Bovet
• Sinners in the Hands of an Angry Church, by Dean Merrill
• Resident Aliens, by: Stanley Hauerwas

This list of books will give anyone a good lesson in history, which is not commonly understood in most Christian fellowship circles today. Hence people teach and live in ignorance of truth that has been bought and paid for by a greater multitude than those who have bought the “freedom” that this state offers… Additionally, some of these books will challenge commonly accepted ideas today both with regard to politics, patriotism and our thoughts on what church is and is not.

Note: Some of these books are hard to find. You can commonly go to a library and get what is known as an “inter-library loan” for only a few dollars. The library will find a copy at some other library and bring it in for you. Some of these book are extraordinary and maybe of use to you for many years. You can go to places such as ADDALL.Com or Bookfind.com and do searches for good used copies and save a bundle in obtaining one for yourself.

• Related Posts
• Bookmark
• Tags