Considering the complexity, and depth of the text found, in the book known as the Bible, it seems to me more likely people are bound to get various messages found therein incorrect, rather than understanding them.
I was recently involved in a discussion, in which a person cited the following piece of Biblical content, yet showed exactly how easy it is, to misunderstand what was said.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
If one ignores the context of what is therein said, it’s possible come to the errant conclusion, that the speaker is intending to do away with all differences between, those about whom he’s talking. In one sense, it’s even sort of fair to say that he is, with one exception.
The problem is, considering verse 28 alone, one can assume wrongly—if one works quite hard—the intent of the words in question, was simply to wipe away understood differences that today, can be somewhat properly equated to racism and sexism.
What’s happening instead?
Looking at the context of what’s written, the author can be seen to be generating an intentional separation beforewiping away the differences in question.
That distinction, is between those who choose to follow Jesus, called Christ, and those who don’t fall in that camp.
This is an important realization, since it shows a desire philosophically, to build two camps, those who are believers, and those who aren’t.
It’s hard to look at any such compartmentalization as anything, but the building of a wall—a border as it were.
Still not convinced? Consider the words of Jesus himself.
34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
That seems like a pretty strong set of statements. It also appears pretty obvious what meaning, He intends to impart by them.
He certainly seems to be pretty strongly stating that, if you choose to not follow Him, in the process, potentially alienating yourself to those around you, He considers you to be an unworthy servant—someone not fit to be in His presence.
For those who argue that such statements do not form a boundary between the Christian, and those most count precious, I have one simple question, “Exactly how do you come to such a conclusion?”
Everything I see, indicates quite strongly that’s the case.
The point of what I’ve said here is relatively simple. Christianity doesn’t just accept the concept of borders, it’s predicated upon them.
This is all fine and good, it makes it clear that those who believe in the Bible, as canonized, ought to have no issue with the idea that borders, are a real and meaningful part of Christianity, and are in fact, necessary to it.
Let’s examine another piece of scripture. This one is going to seem just a little off the beaten track, but please bear with me.
15 ¶ Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.
16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.
17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
21 They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.
Where borders between entities like countries are concerned, this idea applies. Lots of Christians count themselves members of the societies and communities, in which they reside, as for me, that’s only the case where higher matters don’t prevail. I’m going to pull just one more piece of Biblical text into play here.
2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Considering what Jesus Himself said in the previous two excerpts, it seems pretty obvious, that doing what’s talked about here, should cause you to fall in line with that which was previously given.
It’s in this spirit, that I generally consider myself a member of the society around me only insomuch as I can do so, without ignoring the things I’ve laid out to this point.
With regard to state, or national borders, they’re “Caesar’s things,” to me. The result is, I don’t have to worry greatly about them. That said, I still see the advantage in their existence.
So does Christianity support the idea of borders? Not only does it do so, but in some measure, it exists for the believer, on their construction, at least in a spiritual and conceptual sense. Does it eschew the idea of state or national borders? Not in any way I’m able to see. I’m always open to consider the possibility I’m in error. To this point, I cannot see how that might be the case.
Thanks for reading, and may your time be good.