Christians and the Pledge of Allegiance

I posted this in the previous thread, but I think it applies to the topic here:


Interestingly, the Constitution allows the POTUS oath to "affirm" his duties, instead of swearing an oath. At least one POTUS made use of that. The accommodation was included by the Framers to accommodate those who, like the Quakers, morally objected to the swearing of oaths.

Scripture encourages us to not have to rely on oaths, but to simply be our yes be yes, and our no be no (aka, an affirmation). But I don't see that swearing an oath, in and of itself, violates scripture. However, I think that "requiring" the swearing of an oath may be a scriptural violation. Does that make sense?

I recently was a court witness in a traffic case, and had no problem swearing an oath to tell nothing but the whole truth.

 

C4K

In view of Paul teaching that we should support government(s), I believe that a pledge of loyalty is not out of line with scripture.

 

no

 

"If I swear allegiance to my country and they decide to send me to war to fight a nation like Israel would I be right to deny my pledge of allegiance to them?"

Good question C4K. I think when you swear allegiance to your country you are doing it on the assumption that they will not do anything immoral, etc. In that case maybe you can swear allegiance to your country. But if they were to do anything immoral your highest allegiance is to God.

As for swearing allegiance to my country? No...why would I? They don't give crap about me.

 

Pity.

 

carpro is just trying to get me to retaliate. Interesting how carpro is the one who always takes threads off of it's civilized demeanor. That...is what we should pity.

carpro, I expected better from you son.

 

it takes two to tango. If you want to fight me you will have to catch me.

don't take that the wrong way I'll be first to fight on someting worth fighting for.

 

my earlier "no" got no comments? now that is surprising.

 

I didn't comment but I noticed. Why don't you explain?

 

But the issue is not me or self gratification. It is about whether or not Christians should pledge allegiance to a secular government. I say probably not. I don't. And nothing you can say about that is going to matter.

 

I see no problem with pledging allegiance to my country as long as it doesn't require me to give up my allegience to Christ. They don't have to be mutually exclusive.

I suggest you rid your heart of your bitterness. Everyone has tough times and times when circumstances go against them. Christ never promised us an easy life, just an eternal one, KJ.


Christ be with you.

 

hey carpro, thanks for your encouraging post. It's nice to see. yeah I'm bitter and yeah I should get rid of it. And yes, Christ didn't promise us an easy life. I do however, want to be able to provide for me and mine you know?

As for your pledging allegiance to your country as long as it doesn't require you to give up your allegiance to Christ, that's fine. I don't disagree with that (I pretty much said that earlier).

 

the reason I was surprised that no one commented was that if they were following they know I want the pledge and under God in it. The reason I said no to the question is because it is stated secular and no I will pledge to my contry which is, no matter what anyone says, under God.That is not secular (now the "you don't have to say it or we are anyway or let's act like it first" people are coming for me)

 

this is why we need to vote out judges who are liberal and get judges in who will not intoduce their liberal bias our number one opportunity with Bush in office is to confirm supreme court nominees John Roberts and then etc

 

It's not a liberal/conservative issue. We need judges who are constuctionist. That is, interpreting laws according to the Constitution. We don't need judges with any "slant" other than that.