In the previous article, I argued that Scripture recognizes two fundamentally different categories of allegiance. Not every loyalty is necessarily in conflict with our allegiance to Jesus as Lord. For example, I can love Jesus and love my wife and children, be a loyal employee, and even be a faithful football fan. Those loyalties do not necessarily compete with my allegiance to Christ. They are appropriate as long as they remain properly ordered.

So the real question about patriotism is not whether Jesus is Lord, or whether Christians should seek first His kingdom. Every Christian should agree on that.  The question is whether patriotic allegiance belongs in this same category, which we may label “properly ordered allegiances”, or whether it belongs in a separate category which we may call “mutually exclusive allegiances.”

Scripture describes some relationships that cannot simply be ranked lower on a list of priorities. Idolatry is not excused by serving other gods less than the Lord. Adultery is not avoided by telling your wife that she’s still your highest love while you maintain another romantic relationship. Some allegiances are inherently rivalrous, and thus should be viewed as mutually exclusive.

Before explaining why I believe patriotic allegiance belongs in the second category, I want to first lay out the biblical case for putting patriotism in the first. For many years, that’s where I put it. I believed a Christian could pledge allegiance to his country, be patriotic, and support his earthly government, provided that his ultimate allegiance remained with God. Most importantly, I believed I had good biblical reasons for holding that view.

The Biblical Case for Patriotism as a Properly Ordered Allegiance

1. God instituted government and commands submission

Romans 13:1-7 teaches that governing authorities are instituted by God and are appointed as His ministers, or servants. Christians are therefore commanded to submit to those authorities, pay taxes, and give them respect and honor. Titus 3:1 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 reinforce this same point.

Submission is an act of loyalty, and submission to governing authorities is submission to something God Himself has established. Based on such Scriptures, it does not seem unreasonable for a Christian to view pledging allegiance to one’s earthly country as permissible, or possibly even a Christian obligation.

2. Christians are supposed to cooperate with and pray for their rulers

If Jesus had wanted His followers to reject earthly governments, He certainly had plenty of opportunities to say so. When asked about paying taxes to Caesar, He said instead, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21). Moreover, Paul told Timothy that Christians should pray for kings and for all who are in high positions (1 Timothy 2:1-2).

If there are at least some realms over which Caesar holds rightful dominion, and if Christians are commanded to pray for the well-being of their rulers, doesn’t it stand to reason that Christians should also give them their allegiance? Or at least in those proper areas of dominion?

3. We have biblical examples of faithful people serving earthly governments

Joseph served Pharaoh. Daniel served Babylon and Persia. Nehemiah, Esther, and Mordecai also held high offices within the Persian government. John the Baptist told soldiers to stop exhorting money, to avoid false accusations, and to be content with their wages (Luke 3:14), but never commanded them to leave their positions. Jesus praised a centurion’s faith (Matthew 8:10). Paul even appealed to the rights and protections that should have been provided to him as a Roman citizen.

These individuals all serve as positive examples of faith. None of them were ever commanded to leave or stop exercising the powers of their various positions. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that they were rebellious people who were compromising their faithfulness to God due to their relation to their earthly kingdoms. They were loyal servants of God working within earthly kingdoms.

Taken together, these passages appear to present a compelling argument. So why would anyone argue that allegiance to one’s earthly government is somehow incompatible with allegiance to Jesus? To begin, let’s look more carefully at what the passages referenced above actually say.

Looking More Carefully at Scripture

My purpose here is not to dismiss any of the passages referenced above. Quite the opposite. Each deserves to be read carefully and seriously considered. I’m not going to attempt to refute every argument that might be raised for Christian patriotism. I simply want to ask a few questions for your consideration, point you back these Scriptures, and encourage you to follow those Scriptures in whatever they teach.

1. Does submission necessarily equal allegiance?

There is no question that Christians are commanded to submit to earthly rulers. But perhaps the biblical mandate for submission is not necessarily the same thing as a biblical command for allegiance. To see the difference, simply ask yourself the question, “what loyalty is actually driving the submission? Is it allegiance to rulers themselves, or is it allegiance to God?”

Look at the text again.

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed.

Romans 13:1-2

Paul’s point is not that Christians should submit to Nero because Nero deserves their allegiance.  Christians submit because God is sovereign, and God is the one who has placed these authorities in their positions.

Peter makes this even clearer:

Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution… for this is the will of God..

1 Peter 2:13-15

Not for Caesar’s sake. Not for government’s sake. For the Lord’s sake. Submission and allegiance are not the same thing. Submission is the behavior, but the object of the allegiance driving that behavior is God, not the ruler being submitted to. The New Testament repeatedly commands Christians to submit to rulers, but never once commands Christians to give their faith or allegiance to those rulers.

2. Does God’s use of government mean God’s approval of government?

The Greek word for “instituted” in Romans 13 is tasso. The word carries the idea of arranging or ordering. God has arranged earthly governments for His purposes. But does that arranging imply His approval of them?

Think about a librarian arranging books. Does the fact that she arranges them mean that she agrees with the contents of every book on the shelf? Of course not. She simply takes them as they are, and places them into whatever order is most advantageous for her purposes. The same is true of God’s relationship to earthly governments.

Throughout the Old Testament, God arranges pagan governments to accomplish His purposes without endorsing them. He called Assyria “the rod of my anger” (Isaiah 10:5), using their violence precisely because they were violent. He called Cyrus, an unbelieving pagan king, His “shepherd” (Isaiah 44:28) and His “anointed” (Isaiah 45:1). God used these governments. He arranged them. But arranging does not imply that God approved of all the wicked things they did.

This is the distinction that Joseph draws with his brothers.

As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good.

Genesis 50:20

Their intentions were wicked, but God made use of their wickedness for good. In the same way, God can use wicked governments to accomplish His purposes without that use implying His approval.

If you read Romans 13 carefully, this distinction presents itself yet again. Paul says that government “is God’s servant for your good.” He never says that governments are good, or that being God’s servant makes them good. God takes governments as they are, evil or good, and bends them toward His purposes. Romans 13 makes a powerful statement about God’s sovereignty, but nothing in the passage implies that God gives them a stamp of approval when they are used by Him. More importantly, there is nothing in this passage that gives Christians grounds for pledging their allegiance to them.

3. Why does Paul say to pray for our rulers?

Yes, Christians should pray for rulers. There’s no question about that. But what specifically should we pray for? Their success? Their political agendas?

Paul doesn’t leave that question open-ended. He says that we pray for kings and those in high positions, “that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Timothy 2:2).

That’s why we pray. God is the one who governs governors. Not us. We do not have to fix the problems with government ourselves. We have a direct hotline straight to the King of kings. We pray for rulers and entrust them to God, so that we can get on with the work that God has actually given us. We pray, so that we can live quietly, love our neighbors, raise our children, serve our congregations, and proclaim the gospel, all while trusting Him to deal with the kings.

4. What did the soldiers do after becoming disciples?

Perhaps the strongest objection comes from soldiers who were never commanded to leave their posts. But ultimately, this is an argument from silence.

The New Testament never tells us what happened to these men after their conversions. Did they remain in military service? Did they leave? Did they find some way to remain faithful to Christ within their position? Did they conclude that some things did rightfully belong to Caesar, or did they reject his claims of lordship as incompatible with Jesus’s? We simply don’t know. We can only argue from what the text actually says. Whatever conclusion we may draw about patriotism or allegiance, our argument cannot be established on what the text doesn’t say.

5. Does service within an earthly kingdom necessarily demonstrate allegiance or faith in that kingdom?

Joseph, Daniel, Esther, Mordecai, and Nehemiah were all given significant authority within earthly kingdoms. But their positions of authority don’t tell us where their allegiance lay. This point is highlighted further by the fact that each of them were placed into their positions of service, rather than having pursued their positions of power out of confidence in the kingdom itself.

Consider Joseph. Pharaoh exalted him to oversee Egypt’s food supply. Yet Joseph never became and Egyptian. He remained a Hebrew living in Egypt, and when he died, he asked that his bones be carried to his true homeland.  

6. Does God ever actually command Christians to give their allegiance to an earthly ruler or kingdom?

At this point, three things can be said with confidence.

• Scripture commands submission to earthly rulers
• That submission is rooted not in allegiance to those rulers, but in allegiance to God.
• Nowhere does Scripture command, or even imply, that Christians owe their allegiance to an earthly kingdom.

That doesn’t yet settle the question of whether patriotic allegiance might nevertheless be permissible as a properly ordered allegiance. That’s a question we still have to answer. But I do believe that when we read the proof texts carefully, it quickly becomes apparent that the case for patriotic allegiance isn’t nearly as solid as I once assumed.