Christian Conscience and the State

Sermon  •  Submitted
0 ratings
· 27 views
Notes
Transcript
Sermon Tone Analysis
A
D
F
J
S
Emotion
A
C
T
Language
O
C
E
A
E
Social
View more →

Romans 13:5

Christian Conscience and the State

Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.[1]

How many sermons have you ever heard concerning the conscience?  I confess that I have been in church ministries for over thirty years, and until this day I have never preached a sermon dealing with conscience.  Just as telling is the fact that I cannot recall ever hearing a single message dealing with the subject of conscience.  Comparatively few systematic theologies even make mention of conscience.  Listen carefully, therefore, for the message which you are about to hear may be the only message on this subject you will ever receive.

In our studies through this portion of the Apostle’s contribution to the Word of God, we have discovered that Paul is teaching about the proper function of government.  Additionally, he has masterfully presented the requirement for Christians to be exemplary in their submission before the legitimate authority of government.  As we have seen throughout this series of studies, whenever we speak of submission and authority we enter the realm of controversy.  Accordingly, I am compelled to issue a caution to those who either listen to this message or read it.

I caution against drawing unwarranted conclusions concerning our role as Christians in the modern state on the basis of this message alone.  You must be cautious before making any statement concerning the legitimate authority of government based upon this sole message.  The purpose of this message is neither to explore the authority of government nor to explore the limits of obedience.  These issues have been explored previously.  We previously explored the parameters of governmental authority and the requirement for Christian submission.  I encourage you to review the previous three messages in this particular series before you draw any conclusions concerning a biblical view of the Christian in the modern state.

In the text, we have received two powerful reasons for this required submission.  First, government receives authority from God.  Thus, if we resist the authority of the state, we are resisting the authority of God, and God will judge us.  Second, the state itself will judge us if we resist its authority.  The state will insist upon obedience and will punish us if we do not submit to its authority.

Together, these are two good reasons for Christian submission to the authority of the state.  At this point, we might think that Paul is prepared to move on.  However, just as we think he is prepared to wrap up his argument, he says, almost as an afterthought, “Oh, yes, and also because of conscience.”

No longer is Paul’s argument merely pragmatic, but now it touches the very heart of our lives as children of the True and Living God.  To this point, it is as if Paul had said, “You should obey the state because you will get in trouble if you don’t.”  Now, however, he says, “You should obey the state because it is the right thing to do, and you know you should do what is right.”

James Boice observes, “Instead of treating us as we might treat an animal, training it to respond mechanically by rewarding desired behaviour and punishing undesirable behaviour, Paul treats people as responsible moral agents—that is, as human beings made in God’s image—by appealing to our consciences.”[2]

A Definition of Conscience — We know that the concept of the conscience was more important to Paul than to all other Bible writers.  I say this because the word conscience occurs twenty-nine times in the English Standard Version of the Bible, only one of which occurrences is in the Old Testament.  There, it translates the Hebrew word which was usually translated heart.

The word conscience occurs in the New Testament twenty-eight times.  Peter uses the word twice and the author of Hebrews uses the word four times.  However, the Apostle Paul uses the word no less than twenty-two times (including two times in statements recorded in the Book of Acts).

The English word conscience is from the Latin conscientia, a compound of con (“together” or “with”) and scio (“to know”).  This in turn is a translation of the Greek συνείδησις, which means literally “knowledge with.”[3]  This is fine, but what is the conscience?  The nominal meaning of the concept of conscience is “an inner awareness, a knowledge within one’s self.”[4]  Roger Congdon, in a thorough study of the concept of conscience, concludes that “conscience is our ‘knowing with’ God’s law by which we realise whether or not we are conforming to His standard.”[5]

Conscience appears to be inherited, for though the wicked may act as though they are without conscience, evidence seems to point to the conclusion that conscience is a part of all mankind.  Congdon argues persuasively, “In the natural man, of a surety, it is not dominant, for the sin nature prevails and perverts it.  Education may colour it; exercise will strengthen it.  To disobey its voice dulls the power it has, and to ignore it constantly will result in a callused conscience.  But the voice is still there and still capable of speaking.  It seems probable that if a man were absolutely destitute of conscience he could not be saved, because it would be impossible for him to realise his need of a Saviour otherwise.  As long as the gospel is addressed to all men, then, and all are saveable, it would appear a logical conclusion to say that all have workable consciences.”[6]

If we will understand what conscience is, we must understand Paul’s use of the word.  Secular writers usually employ the concept of conscience in a negative manner.  One could easily argue that this is the proper use of the concept since we are sinful creatures.  Each of us is compelled to confess that we are guilty of many offences against Holy God, and consequently, our consciences usually condemn us.  I would suppose it accurate to say that a guilty conscience is one of the greatest struggles facing any of us as Christians.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of Sherlock Holmes, was also a creative practical joker.  The story is told of one horrendously clever practical joke that he once played.  He wrote a short, unsigned telegram, all in fun, to twelve of the best known men in England.  The anonymous message was the same—six scary words.  “All is discovered.  Flee at once.”  Within 24 hours, not one of those men could be found.

Paul knew that an individual’s conscience can be weak [1 Corinthians 8:7-12].  Perhaps the best definition of a weak conscience is one which is over scrupulous or over sensitive.  “Someone who has been reared by legalistic parents who used guilt and shame to manipulate their children often has a conscience that is overly sensitive.  Some have consciences so twisted and confused, they need extensive help before they can start thinking correctly.  Sometimes it takes a good Christian therapist—someone who can help an individual with a shame-based conscience to understand how things got all fouled up.  Sometimes a long-term friendship helps give grace to a conscience that has known only legalism.  A conscience that is legalistic is not a good guide.”[7]

 The Apostle knew that a weak conscience may easily degenerate into one that is defiled [1 Corinthians 8:7].  “If we persist in some action against which conscience has witnessed, we thereby defile it and thus prevent its faithful functioning.  When a watch stops, it is not the fault of the watch but of the dust which has clogged its delicate mechanism.  So with conscience, especially in the realm of purity.”[8]

According to Titus 1:16, morally defiled unbelievers have minds and consciences that are defiled.  In other words, they are so involved in sin that their consciences are unreliable.  “The more one sins, the more he becomes comfortable in his sins.  By lowering his standards, he is less sensitive to and feels less remorse about previously accepted standards.  As a poor judge, his conscience renders unreliable judgements and does not adequately prompt him toward morally correct actions.  Such an individual possesses an evil conscience [Hebrews 10:22], in need of the spiritual cleansing of regeneration.”[9]

Consequently, a conscience can be evil [Hebrews 10:22].  It is possible for an individual to defy the voice of his conscience habitually until it is reduced to insensitivity.  Paul describes this condition as seared—it is made insensitive like the skin of an animal cauterised by a branding iron [1 Timothy 4:2].

Paul also knew that one’s conscience can condemn.  In Acts 24:16, he states that he takes pains to have a clear conscience toward both God and man.  The Apostle did not wish to be condemned by his conscience, so he sought a clear conscience—one which was void of offence toward God and man.

More generally, Paul speaks of possessing a good conscience [1 Timothy 1:5, 19].  A good conscience permits the believer to love the Lord and others [1 Timothy 1:5], and to be a strong soldier for the cause of Christ [1 Timothy 1:19].  Peter will add that a good conscience brings shame to those who accuse the one with a good conscience.  Paul also teaches concerning the possession of a clear conscience [1 Timothy 3:9; 2 Timothy 1:3].  Deacons are to have a clear [pure] conscience [1 Timothy 3:9].  Likewise, Paul served God with a clear [pure] conscience [2 Timothy 1:3].

Standing before the Sanhedrin, the great man could declare, Brothers, I have lived my life before God in all good conscience up to this day [Acts 23:1].

To the Corinthians, the Apostle wrote, our boast is this: the testimony of our conscience that we behaved in the world with simplicity and godly sincerity, not by earthly wisdom but by the grace of God, and supremely so toward you [2 Corinthians 1:12].  At a later point in that same letter, he wrote, we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways.  We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God [2 Corinthians 4:2].

There is an obvious difference in Paul’s use of conscience and that of secular writers.  Secular writers speak of conscience as that facility which condemns us.  Paul writes of conscience as that faculty which commends us.  The difference is that “God has quickened the Christian’s moral nature so that he or she not only knows what is right as opposed to what is wrong, but also has been given a true desire and ability to do what conscience demands.”[10]

Christian Conscience and Our Relationship to the State — The Czech sociologist Vaclav Belohradsky said during one interview, “European tradition means not ever being able to live above and beyond one’s conscience by reducing it to an anonymous apparatus like the law or the state.  This ‘fixed point’ of the conscience is a legacy of the Greek, Christian, and bourgeois tradition.  The irreducibility of the conscience to institutions is threatened in the era of mass media, totalitarian states, and the generalised computerisation of society.  Indeed, it is very easy for us to succeed in imagining institutions organised so perfectly as to impose any action of theirs as legitimate.  Having an efficient organisation is enough to enable one to legitimise anything.  Thus, we could sum up the essence of what threatens us as this: states programming their citizens, industries, consumers, publishers, readers, etc.  All of society, little by little, becomes something that the state produces for itself.”[11]

This is an ominous view of what is happening within contemporary society.  Unfortunately, I believe Belohradsky is correct in his assessment.  We are more culturally conditioned than we care to think.  Consequently, we are not generally conditioned by our Faith, and we are thus in desperate need of biblical instruction in order to resist conformity to the statist views of our culture.  The messages presented this month have all considered the role of a Christian in the modern state.  In this message, I am addressing the role of conscience as it applies to a Christian’s responsibility to the state.

From the beginning of Christian history, the problem of the relationship with the state has existed.  Paul sent a fugitive slave, converted to Christ, back home.  That slave carried a message to his master, a man named Philemon, who was also a Christian.  In that letter, Paul reminded Philemon that he could no longer consider the returning man as a slave, but as a brother and a friend.  Never before had a Roman citizen dared to affirm such a drastic change from the ancient mentality which enshrined in law that slaves were considered as mere tools.  Nevertheless, conscience dictated that the way things had been done could no longer serve as justification for continuing in that tradition.

An anonymous Second Century author defended Christians in “The Epistle of Diognetus.”  Responding to the charge that Christians did not consider idols as gods and that they thus eluded the common social responsibility, that author wrote that Christians hold, not a doctrine that is an “earthly discovery,” or a “mortal invention.”

Rather, “truly, the Almighty Creator of the Universe, the Invisible God Himself from heaven plated among men the truth and the holy teaching which surpasseth the wit of man, and fixed it firmly in their hearts, not as any man might imagine, by sending (to mankind) a subaltern, or angel, or ruler, or one of those that direct the affairs of earth, or one of those who have been entrusted with the dispensations in heaven, but the very Artificer and Creator of the Universe Himself…  as a king might send his son who is not a king.  He sent Him, as sending God; He sent Him as [a man] unto men; He sent Him as a Saviour, as using persuasion, not force; for force is no attribute of God.”[12]

Therefore, the author could point out that with respect to Christians, “their existence is on earth, but their citizenship is in heaven.  They obey the established laws, and they surpass the laws in their own lives.”[13]  Vignali observes that makes an acute statement concerning “the value of conscience in the conception of the person and of life, well beyond mere observance of external rules.”[14]

What is involved for us when Paul says, one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience?  Two issues immediately come to mind.

We have a higher motive for submission to the state than do others.  Christians are to obey secular authorities.  The first reason given is that God established human government.  This truth is something which only Christians can fully appreciate.  Even this, however, can appeal to a rather low motive if all we mean by that is that God will punish those who disobey the governments He has established.  However, Paul elevates our motive through an appeal to conscience.  He is saying subjection to government is the right thing to do, and because we are moral beings, we should do what is right.

What we do does matter!  There is considerable truth in the old saying that actions speak louder than words.  To be certain, there are many voices prepared to tell us that what really matters is what we believe, and there is an element of truth to that assertion.  However, I must remind you that what we believe will be revealed through how we live.  Consequently, if we believe that God is sovereign, that He grants authority and that there is no authority except which God gives, then we must live as though that truth were valid.  God is honoured through our choice to live submissive lives.  Our message is a message of peace, and it can only be emphasised through subjection to those in authority, beginning with subjection to governing authorities and continuing with appropriate attitudes of submission in the workplace, in the church and in the home.

Society is better because we live in subjection to the governing authorities.  While it is true that some laws are so ill considered that they are generally disobeyed, Christians ought not to be among those disobeying them simply because they are silly or non-effective.  The current gun registration requirement for Canadians is a foolish law and being demonstrated as ill conceived and excessively costly with each passing day.  Nevertheless, Christians cannot argue that their conscience is violated by this concession to big-city hysteria and therefore refuse to register their firearms.

Though James Boice wrote concerning the United States, his words undoubtedly apply in our own nation, especially in this present day.  “One of the great tragedies of our country today is that many people have little or no respect for authority and therefore feel free to break any laws that seem inconvenient to them.  So civil disorder is rising.  The police are unable to contain the disorder.”[15]

We have a stronger reason for disobedience when disobedience is required.  Bear in mind that all authority is given by God.  Authority does not simply devolve by virtue of existence, position, or birth.  Therefore, since authority is given by God, government is responsible to God for how it exercises authority.  We have already established that government cannot forbid the free exercise of religion, nor can government regulate the propagation of religion.  Neither does government have the right to violate the Ten Commandments, nor to compel others to violate those divine laws.  The ruling authorities cannot compel Christians to perform unjust acts or to deliberately violate conscience.

With that word, we have just returned to the focus of this message—conscience!  Christians are expected to have enlightened consciences because they know the Word of God!  You who are believers in the Risen Son of God have a new nature which desires the things of God and seeks righteousness.  The Spirit of God lives within the believer.  We have the mind of Christ [1 Corinthians 2:16].

Secular authorities may know what is the right course of action, but like gophers raising their noses from subterranean playpens to test which way the wind is blowing, they seem compelled to lift their heads to see which way the political winds are blowing before making a decision.  Christians, however, are called to act not out of convenience, but rather out of conviction.  Oh, that we would learn the importance of embracing the Psalm, which praises the one who swears to his own hurt and does not change [Psalm 15:4].  Let us determine that our “Yes” will mean “Yes,” and our “No” will mean “No.”

As Christians, we are obligated to resist the state when it does wrong.  Moreover, resisting the state, we will hold it accountable, without counting the cost.  Christians are not called to live calculating whether their actions will be popular or self-serving, but they are instead called to live such that their actions honour God.  Determine whether you are right, and then stand firm.  Governments are frequently wrong, but Christians are obligated to hold those governments accountable when their errors infringe on conscience.  Christians must so act for the sake of conscience.

Examples of the Exercise of Conscience — No doubt, someone is prepared to challenge me because I contend that governments are frequently wrong.  To answer the question before it is asked, I point to several issues which should concern us as Christians.

Marriage.  We have a government which is unable to stand firm on the issue of marriage.  In June of 1999, Parliament passed a resolution stating that marriage is and should remain the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, and that Parliament will take all steps within the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada to preserve this definition of marriage in Canada.  Now, in light of the rulings by various activist judges, Parliament no longer makes laws, but rather the courts of the various provinces make law and Parliament accepts the court rulings.  Consequently, as of June 10, 2003, marriage in Canada consists of a union between two persons.  Now we are awaiting a redefinition of the word “person.”

What shall we do about this?  Well, each of us can certainly protest to governing officials, both federal and provincial.  Additionally, we can openly affirm marriage, beginning with the one in which we are united.  We can strengthen the concept of marriage before our family and friends by speaking well of our own spouse and living godly lives within the boundaries of marriage, as God intended.  Above all else, we must make ourselves aware of the biblical reasons for marriage as we have known it to this point, equipping ourselves to defend that holy institution in open discourse.

Pornography.  We would not seek to violate the rights of free speech for anyone, but may I say that free speech does not include a right to make or to distribute pornography.  I realise that judges have difficulty defining pornography.  However, I contend that gathering any five citizens from within the average Canadian community, one would quickly be able to determine if material was pornographic or not.  Our children are inundated with pornography.

Surely, I need not go into detail to convince you that this is so.  One need but review movies, television shows, available videos, contemporary music or the news stand to realise the veracity of this charge.  What is to be done?  I recommend that Christians in conscience must review what they watch, what web-sites they visit, the content of their music, and what they read to ensure that they are not consumers of pornography.  I charge that many of us are incapable of saying why pornography is wrong.  We are theologically ignorant and thus helpless before the arguments of the world.

I’m about to quit preaching and go to meddling.  There are parents who permit their children to dress in apparel which is ungodly, and which undercuts any argument against pornography you might mount.  When our daughters dress in bikinis, two strips of cloth which cover less than does their underwear, we need to ask in what way we are promoting modesty.  If you think I am over exaggerating this matter, ask yourself whether your daughter could wear her underwear to school and not be expelled.  What is the purpose of a bikini if not to reveal as much skin as possible in hopes of demonstrating sexual attractiveness?  So long as our daughters insist on undressing in the spirit of a tan line, wearing low-cut pants which reveal more buttock than can be deemed modest, we are vicariously contributing to pornography.

Abortion.  I suppose this is one of the great areas in which government has demonstrated moral failure.  Abortion is said to be a matter to be decided between a woman and her physician.  I wonder how women get into this condition called pregnancy?  Wasn’t there a man involved at some point?  Doesn’t he have any voice in this matter?

More important to the Christian point of view is the failure of government to speak up for the helpless and the voiceless.  In order to murder the unborn, it was necessary to redefine terms.  Consequently, women no longer carry a baby if they intend to abort the child.  The baby is renamed a fœtus, which is Latin for infant.  However, if the term is sufficiently exotic, we no longer see the child as human and therefore he or she may be slaughtered with impunity.

Disenfranchising the unborn is no different from what was once done lawfully to enslave blacks.  To deny the humanity of the unborn is precisely what Hitler did to the unter-menschen, permitting him to slaughter Jews, Slavs, Gypsies and the mentally and emotionally injured peoples who unfortunately fell under the tyranny of the Third Reich.  We must demonstrate that all mankind is made in God’s image.

Homosexuality.  Increasingly, the government appears intent on compelling us to tolerate that which is against nature.  At every level of government, we witness politicians promoting homosexuality as normal.  Should we in conscience resist commending such wickedness, we are increasingly marginalised.  No one thinks that sodomites and lesbians are reproducing.  Therefore, they must be recruiting.  To say the obvious is to be labelled as “homophobic,” which sounds like some sort of allergy to milk.  Increasingly, we are being compelled to be tolerant through intolerance by those who would alter our obedience to the Word of God.

Do you know why such activity as homosexuality is wrong?  If you are unable to state the biblical reason for God’s condemnation of such acts, you will be labelled as reactionary and unreasoning.  However, there is little argument which is capable of being mounted against the Word of the Living God.

Hate Speech.  Government has concluded that all people, with the exception of white, male Christians, must be protected against all unpleasant speech.  Accordingly, that speech which fails to embrace the vapid philosophy of “I’m okay, you’re okay,” is designated as hate speech.  Christians must be prepared to educate an illiterate society that speaking the truth in love is anything but hate.

Public Education.  I realise that many people wish to see prayers and Bible reading reinstated into the public school system.  Personally, I do not favour such activity.  I cannot imagine a more deadening activity than coercing an unbelieving teacher to lead a class in reciting the Model Prayer in a manner that fairly shouts unbelief.  When I mention my concern about public education, I am not speaking of prayer in the schools, however.  I am concerned about the education process itself.

I am concerned that education is not even happening, all too often.  I am concerned by educators that are more concerned about values clarification than they are with preparing students to compete in an increasingly competitive world.  When education does happen, too often in seems to be in an environment which destroys Christian values, coercing students to submit to the prevailing philosophy of the moment.  Christians should have the option to refuse to support such a system and to provide for alternative systems.

As Christians, we are responsible to expose all such failures.  However, we should not be content with merely pointing out the problems, we should be prepared to suggest alternatives, whether religious or secular.  As Baptists, we are responsible to defend the interests of all people, not merely our own interests.

You will understand that I have not attempted to construct a social agenda for Christians.  I have merely listed examples which should concern each of us who name the Name of Christ the Lord.  The realm of conflict between conscientious Christians and the state is constantly growing.  If you have not yet entered into the conflict, it is either because you are still cowering in some theological foxhole, you are absent without leave, or you are deliberately disobedient.  Such refusal to engage in conflict will shortly distinguish mere pretenders from those possessing true faith.

God will not long permit His holy people to continue as though their hearts were unchanged.  He will, as He did with righteous Lot, torment your righteous soul with the lawless deeds of this fallen world.  Soon, you will find that you are compelled to speak and stake out a place to stand.  If not now, then when your children succumb to the allure of contemporary philosophy advanced by the state, you will attempt to stand.

Perhaps it is necessary to caution against the great sin which besets us a Christians.  We are susceptible to pride.  We are easily persuaded that our consciences have been enlightened, and therefore the answers we advance are all correct.  Certainly, we should have convictions, but I caution you that we must hold our convictions with humility.  We don’t have all the answers.  We need to listen to others, even well informed non-Christians.  Our consciences are reliable only when they are enlightened by the written Word of God.

We must individually and collectively determine where we will stand.  We need Christians now who know where they stand and refuse to move from that position.  We need more than ever, Christian men and women who stand for the right and who do what is right for the sake of conscience.  However, if you start a crusade, make certain that your stance is biblical and that you are not merely serving yourself or enhancing your own reputation.  Be a builder and not a destroyer.

Of course, building is impossible if you do not have the Spirit of God.  His Spirit transforms our hearts and our lives as He exercises control over us.  He does this in a perceptible fashion as He enters into our lives following salvation.  If you are content to merely grumble and let the world continue on its way to hell, it may be because you have yet to be born from above.  I warn some, even some who claim membership in this church, that your fruits are wanting.  Listen and act on the Word of God.

If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.  For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.  For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.”  For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him.  For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” [Romans 10:9-13].

Be saved today.  Amen.


----

[1] Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version Ó 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers.  Used by permission.  All rights reserved.

[2] James Montgomery Boice, Romans: Volume 4, The New Humanity: Romans 12-16 (Baker, Grand Rapids, MI 1995) 1664

[3] Roy B. Zuck, “The Doctrine of the Conscience,” (art.), Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. 126, #504, Oct., 1969, 329

[4] Zuck, op. cit., 331

[5] Roger Douglas Congdon, “The Doctrine of Conscience,” (art.), Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. 102, #408, Oct., 1945, 474-89

[6] Roger Douglas Congdon, “The Doctrine of Conscience,” (art.), Bibliotheca Sacra, Vol. 103, #409, Jan., 1946, 68-81

[7] Charles R. Swindoll, The Tale of the Tardy Oxcart (Word, Nashville, TN 1998) 117

[8] J. Oswald Sanders, cited in Zuck, op. cit. 339

[9] Zuck, ibid.

[10] Boice, op. cit., 1666

[11] cited in Raffaello Vignali, “Give Caesar What Belongs to Caesar,”

http://www.traces-cl.com/dic01/giveces.htm

[12] “The Epistle to Diognetus,” J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers (Baker, Grand Rapids, MI 1891) 255

[13] op. cit., 254

[14] Vignali, op. cit.

[15] Boice, op. cit.

Related Media
See more
Related Sermons
See more