Can Christians Serve Two Countries?

[Albion]

It's impossible to ride two horse simultaneously if one has only one butt.

So would you agree that UNLESS we're speaking of two identical entities (as in your example here), it IS possible to be loyal to more than one thing at a time?

To be sure, neither I nor anyone else I've heard from has said that it's possible to be loyal to two different gods at once. That's what your example of the horses deals with.

 

[AlexDTX]

It's impossible to ride two horse simultaneously if one has only one butt.

lol

 

[Xalith]

It was understood by our English ancestors that when they were covered in the blood of Jesus, they prospered and had favor with God. Again, for a nation to receive favor from God, the majority of people need to abide in Christ.

Finally, someone seems to "get it", or at least they say something to the effect.

Ever notice how lately, oh, last two decades or so (or perhaps even before then...), it really doesn't seem like God has been looking all that favorably on the USA? We used to be prosperous, we used to be viewed more highly in the world, we used to be more well-liked.

But now look at what this nation has become. Infrastructure is falling apart, the national debt just keeps climbing, we've had various financial situations that have risen and that we've had to scramble to do something about, these last few years, it seems like high-profile violence is on the rise, and a good chunk of the rest of the world don't think of us too highly these days.

It's kinda like God has taken His hand away from us. There always seems to be a nation that currently has His favor at any given time, and that was us, until we started falling into various sins, such as pride, lust and greed. Then bit by bit, He started looking away and we just keep sliding further down towards the pit.

That raises the question, of who He is going to move His hand to next. I've guesses, but I think we'll see here shortly who will be His favored next. That's not to say every American is damned or anything, but you can tell when He takes His eyes off of a nation, just read the Bible. There was a time when even Babylon prospered, but then, what happened when Nebuchadnezzar II took the holy items from the Temple and used them in a sinful display of debauchery? His kingdom was overthrown that very same night.

Anyways, sorry about the off-topic bit, but it was something that needed said.

Back on topic, @RDKirk hit the nail on the head with the SOFA post. You can follow a nation's laws and honor a nation's earthly sovereignty without actually belonging to a nation. I'll second the example of Daniel, and also point out that Joseph was under a very similar situation. Joseph was a Jew who was forced to live in Egypt, and never once did he break any of God's laws, even though he was serving one of the most pagan and idolatrous nations of the time, right next to Babylon. Not only did Joseph serve in Egypt, but he eventually became second only to the pharaoh.

 

[AlexDTX]

It's kinda like God has taken His hand away from us. ........
That raises the question, of who He is going to move His hand to next. .......

Back on topic, @RDKirk hit the nail on the head with the SOFA post. You can follow a nation's laws and honor a nation's earthly sovereignty without actually belonging to a nation. I'll second the example of Daniel, and also point out that Joseph was under a very similar situation. Joseph was a Jew who was forced to live in Egypt, and never once did he break any of God's laws, even though he was serving one of the most pagan and idolatrous nations of the time, right next to Babylon. Not only did Joseph serve in Egypt, but he eventually became second only to the pharaoh.

I think it better reflects the truth to say that we have left God. He said he would never forsake us or leave us, but that does not mean we can not forsake and leave him. If this nation is to turn around, the Church (i.e., the believers, not the organization) needs to first be genuine disciples then focus on sharing the gospel to the lost and the unrenewed minds of believers.

This question of loyalty and serving our country brings the admonition of James not to be double minded. His context is mixing faith with unbelief. I think that anything that is contrary to the gospel is unbelief. Jesus said a house divided will not stand. If the church is entangled in worldly affairs, we are a house divided. Renewing our mind is a process of believing what the Bible says and discarding, or placing lower esteem, on what the world says. As Paul told the Corinthians in his 2nd epistle to them, we are to hold captive every thought that is obedient to Christ and cast out with a readiness of revenge all thoughts that are disobedient. I read and listen to what many Christians say in real life and on this forum and I see double mindedness in regarding the wisdom of this world as equal to the wisdom of God. But the Bible says that the foolishness of God is greater than the wisdom of this world.

Walking with Christ comes in many degrees. The degrees are determined by the individual, not Jesus. The inner circle of Peter and the sons of Zebedee was only because they chose to walk closer with Jesus. At one point in the book of Exodus someone said that there was a person prophesying, and should they be stopped? Moses was aghast and wished that all would prophesy. Someone was casting out devils and the disciples of Jesus asked him to stop him. Jesus said that no one could do so unless they are for them. He further stated that if they are not for us then they are against us. When we use the ways of the world (i.e., the political arena) to try and accomplish transformation of a nation (i.e., establish Christian values) we are working against Jesus. Moses knew he was to deliver Israel from Egypt and tried to do so in his own strength by killing the Egyptian. He failed. God's plan was to bring the 10 plagues on Egypt, but it took Moses 40 years before he was able to be used by God to do it God's way.

Turn your hearts towards Jesus and his way of doing things.

 

[RDKirk]

So would you agree that UNLESS we're speaking of two identical entities (as in your example here), it IS possible to be loyal to more than one thing at a time?

To be sure, neither I nor anyone else I've heard from has said that it's possible to be loyal to two different gods at once. That's what your example of the horses deals with.

Atheists often attempt to define "god" very narrowly as a "personalized deity," which is the trap you appear to be falling into with that statement.

The apostle Paul broadens the definition substantially in Romans. Your "god" is whoever or whatever you obey. Whatever you obey, whatever you serve, whatever determines the decisions you make...that is your "god."

If a person decides to take his daughter to Sunday morning soccer rather than to church, for that decision his "god" was something other than God.

 

[Albion]

Atheists often attempt to define "god" very narrowly as a "personalized deity," which is the trap you appear to be falling into with that statement.

The apostle Paul broadens the definition substantially in Romans. Your "god" is whoever or whatever you obey. Whatever you obey, whatever you serve, whatever determines the decisions you make...that is your "god."

If a person decides to take his daughter to Sunday morning soccer rather than to church, for that decision his "god" was something other than God.

I'm sorry, but I find no merit in the line of argument you're pursuing here. You appear to be trying to fit me into some mold that you can then denounce, but that's going way, way, beyond anything I've said here.

 

[AlexDTX]

Atheists often attempt to define "god" very narrowly as a "personalized deity," which is the trap you appear to be falling into with that statement.

The apostle Paul broadens the definition substantially in Romans. Your "god" is whoever or whatever you obey. Whatever you obey, whatever you serve, whatever determines the decisions you make...that is your "god."

If a person decides to take his daughter to Sunday morning soccer rather than to church, for that decision his "god" was something other than God.

Idolatry is a forgotten concept in the current Church. We live under grace, so there is no sin that separates the love of God towards us. However, we can separate ourselves from the love of God through idolatry. Colossians explains it this way:

(Col 3:5) Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:

Idolatry is a matter of the heart, not an object. As you said, one's "god" is what one serves. The answer that Paul gives us is to mortify our flesh with its affections. Loyalty to a country is not necessarily idolatry, but it is when it conflicts with loyalty to Jesus. It conflicts when it draws our attention and energy away from the will of the Father.

Part of renewing our minds and maturing in discipleship is recognizing the many forms that idolatry can take in a believer's life. Divided loyalty between the Kingdom of God and a nation of this world is one form of idolatry. We can not serve two masters.

 

[Xalith]

Atheists often attempt to define "god" very narrowly as a "personalized deity," which is the trap you appear to be falling into with that statement.

The apostle Paul broadens the definition substantially in Romans. Your "god" is whoever or whatever you obey. Whatever you obey, whatever you serve, whatever determines the decisions you make...that is your "god."

There's a difference between obedience, moderation and necessity. For example, money. Having enough money to live one's life in a reasonable, comfortable fashion is necessity and moderation. However, hoarding money and using any deceitfulness, lying, cheating, stealing, and exploiting others to gain more wealth, is mammon (love of money, serving money as an idol, etc).

Or, if you happen to be a football fan and you enjoy a game occasionally, and you are fan of a team, it's moderation. However, if you spend hours upon hours upon hours, and hundreds, if not thousands of dollars in a year on tickets, memorabilia, memorizing every stat of every player in that team, then it becomes an idol.

That leads me to....

If a person decides to take his daughter to Sunday morning soccer rather than to church, for that decision his "god" was something other than God.

While I agree with a lot of what you said in this thread, this I disagree with. You're implying here, that one must worship God on Sunday, and only Sunday Morning, and that doing anything else on Sunday Morning is a sin.

Nowhere in the Bible does God ever dictate a day (much less Sunday) that one should worship Him. In fact, we should be gathering together, and worshipping Him often, on all days, or at least many days. And the definition of "gathering", Jesus defined by saying "when two or more are gathered together in My name, there I am in the midst". He didn't say anything about building Brick&Mortar buildings, or required Sunday worship.

Therefore, if you want to take your daughter to Sunday Morning Soccer, nothing's stopping you from coming home, getting on the internet, loading up any of the many pastors whose sermons are available online, listening to one of those, and then also loading up some Gospel Worship Music thrown in, as there's plenty of that on Youtube as well.

Doing it that way, you can take your daughter to Soccer AND worship God. Just as long as you're not making Soccer more important than God, there's no sin in it.

 

[AlexDTX]

There's a difference between obedience, moderation and necessity. For example, money. Having enough money to live one's life in a reasonable, comfortable fashion is necessity and moderation. However, hoarding money and using any deceitfulness, lying, cheating, stealing, and exploiting others to gain more wealth, is mammon (love of money, serving money as an idol, etc).

Or, if you happen to be a football fan and you enjoy a game occasionally, and you are fan of a team, it's moderation. However, if you spend hours upon hours upon hours, and hundreds, if not thousands of dollars in a year on tickets, memorabilia, memorizing every stat of every player in that team, then it becomes an idol.

That leads me to....



While I agree with a lot of what you said in this thread, this I disagree with. You're implying here, that one must worship God on Sunday, and only Sunday Morning, and that doing anything else on Sunday Morning is a sin.

Nowhere in the Bible does God ever dictate a day (much less Sunday) that one should worship Him. In fact, we should be gathering together, and worshipping Him often, on all days, or at least many days. And the definition of "gathering", Jesus defined by saying "when two or more are gathered together in My name, there I am in the midst". He didn't say anything about building Brick&Mortar buildings, or required Sunday worship.

Therefore, if you want to take your daughter to Sunday Morning Soccer, nothing's stopping you from coming home, getting on the internet, loading up any of the many pastors whose sermons are available online, listening to one of those, and then also loading up some Gospel Worship Music thrown in, as there's plenty of that on Youtube as well.

Doing it that way, you can take your daughter to Soccer AND worship God. Just as long as you're not making Soccer more important than God, there's no sin in it.

I think you are being fair in your comments. Just a two points, however.

First, regarding moderation and comfort, we are told to be content with food and clothing (1 Tim 6:8 - no mention of shelter). comfort is part of the blessing of Christ, but is not a necessity.

Second, I also agree that worshiping God is a 24/7 activity not limited to Sunday nor to any geography. But it is an error to say that Jesus meant that two or more gathered in his name he was referring to the assembly of saints. The context of Matthew 18 is reconciliation. If you have ought with your brother and you make effort to reconcile, then Jesus will be there in the midst facilitating the reconciliation.

 

[Xalith]

I think you are being fair in your comments. Just a two points, however.

First, regarding moderation and comfort, we are told to be content with food and clothing (1 Tim 6:8 - no mention of shelter). comfort is part of the blessing of Christ, but is not a necessity.

There's a difference between "being content" and "lusting".

If you happen to have a decent paying job, and have extra money, I don't think there's any sin in having a few comforts as long as you are not stingy with your money, and as long as you partake of said comforts in moderation. God made the Earth for us, after all, and He meant for us to enjoy our stay on it. He meant for us to enjoy the things He placed on the Earth, such as the various foods, and even the ability to have sex.

What He did NOT mean to happen, however, was for people to be gluttonous and/or take these things as idols. Sex may be enjoyed between a married man and wife, not just two random people who decide to have a romp for fun. Wine is to be enjoyed, but He never meant for anybody to get outright smashed. Money is something that He ordained and allows the use of, but He never meant it to rule our lives.

If He did not wish for us to partake of comforts, then He wouldn't have placed said comforts on Earth.

When we do not have said comforts, however, we are not supposed to lament it, and/or commit sin to gain what we think we lack.

In the end, if God blesses you with something, you are to give thanks and enjoy it in moderation. If He doesn't give it to you, and it is not possible for you to obtain it without sinning, then you are supposed to accept it and move on, and do without it.

Second, I also agree that worshiping God is a 24/7 activity not limited to Sunday nor to any geography. But it is an error to say that Jesus meant that two or more gathered in his name he was referring to the assembly of saints. The context of Matthew 18 is reconciliation. If you have ought with your brother and you make effort to reconcile, then Jesus will be there in the midst facilitating the reconciliation.

Hmm. Perhaps so, but the rest of the point still stands -- the Bible never gives any specific guidelines as to what size groups, how often they should meet, where they should meet or when they should meet. I personally believe that God/Christ leaves that up to us and our individual needs/situations. I, myself, believe in small personal tight-knit groups (4-10 people) that meet 2-3 times a week to worship Him, perhaps in a home, or in a park or what-not, wherever is quiet and private to spend some good time with Him. Of course, not everybody is capable of setting this up, so many people still go to churches.

 

[AlexDTX]

There's a difference between "being content" and "lusting".

If you happen to have a decent paying job, and have extra money, I don't think there's any sin in having a few comforts as long as you are not stingy with your money, and as long as you partake of said comforts in moderation. God made the Earth for us, after all, and He meant for us to enjoy our stay on it. He meant for us to enjoy the things He placed on the Earth, such as the various foods, and even the ability to have sex.

What He did NOT mean to happen, however, was for people to be gluttonous and/or take these things as idols. Sex may be enjoyed between a married man and wife, not just two random people who decide to have a romp for fun. Wine is to be enjoyed, but He never meant for anybody to get outright smashed. Money is something that He ordained and allows the use of, but He never meant it to rule our lives.

If He did not wish for us to partake of comforts, then He wouldn't have placed said comforts on Earth.

When we do not have said comforts, however, we are not supposed to lament it, and/or commit sin to gain what we think we lack.

In the end, if God blesses you with something, you are to give thanks and enjoy it in moderation. If He doesn't give it to you, and it is not possible for you to obtain it without sinning, then you are supposed to accept it and move on, and do without it.



Hmm. Perhaps so, but the rest of the point still stands -- the Bible never gives any specific guidelines as to what size groups, how often they should meet, where they should meet or when they should meet. I personally believe that God/Christ leaves that up to us and our individual needs/situations. I, myself, believe in small personal tight-knit groups (4-10 people) that meet 2-3 times a week to worship Him, perhaps in a home, or in a park or what-not, wherever is quiet and private to spend some good time with Him. Of course, not everybody is capable of setting this up, so many people still go to churches.

We are not in disagreement. My first point is that the call to contentment is a lower standard than what American Christians think it is. God did give us the abundant life through Jesus Christ and health and prosperity is part of that life. This is what I referred to as the blessing.

As to the second point, it is a realization that I came to a few years ago. I do not participate in organized gatherings, except for friends who come over to my house for fellowship, prayer and Bible study. I used to say the same thing for many years when I first left organized gatherings. The truth is, Christ is always with us because He dwells in our hearts. He said he'd never leave or forsake us. This is why Hebrews 10: 25 encourages us not to forget to connect with other believers. There is one argument that the Greek word translated as "assembly" is episunagogue means more than just to assemble, which is usually just sunagogue. The prefix epi implies hospitality. So the exhortation of Hebrews 10:25 is to be hospitable and except people into your homes, which was especially important in the days of itinerant preachers, apostles, evangelists and prophets. But, yes, your point is correct. I am not in disagreement with you.

 

[Xalith]

We are not in disagreement. My first point is that the call to contentment is a lower standard than what American Christians think it is. God did give us the abundant life through Jesus Christ and health and prosperity is part of that life. This is what I referred to as the blessing.

As to the second point, it is a realization that I came to a few years ago. I do not participate in organized gatherings, except for friends who come over to my house for fellowship, prayer and Bible study. I used to say the same thing for many years when I first left organized gatherings. The truth is, Christ is always with us because He dwells in our hearts. He said he'd never leave or forsake us. This is why Hebrews 10: 25 encourages us not to forget to connect with other believers. There is one argument that the Greek word translated as "assembly" is episunagogue means more than just to assemble, which is usually just sunagogue. The prefix epi implies hospitality. So the exhortation of Hebrews 10:25 is to be hospitable and except people into your homes, which was especially important in the days of itinerant preachers, apostles, evangelists and prophets. But, yes, your point is correct. I am not in disagreement with you.

Ahh, okay. I must have misunderstood what you said then. Sorry for the misunderstanding, and it's good to see that we agree!

 

[RDKirk]

While I agree with a lot of what you said in this thread, this I disagree with. You're implying here, that one must worship God on Sunday, and only Sunday Morning, and that doing anything else on Sunday Morning is a sin.

Nowhere in the Bible does God ever dictate a day (much less Sunday) that one should worship Him. In fact, we should be gathering together, and worshipping Him often, on all days, or at least many days. And the definition of "gathering", Jesus defined by saying "when two or more are gathered together in My name, there I am in the midst". He didn't say anything about building Brick&Mortar buildings, or required Sunday worship.

Therefore, if you want to take your daughter to Sunday Morning Soccer, nothing's stopping you from coming home, getting on the internet, loading up any of the many pastors whose sermons are available online, listening to one of those, and then also loading up some Gospel Worship Music thrown in, as there's plenty of that on Youtube as well.

Doing it that way, you can take your daughter to Soccer AND worship God. Just as long as you're not making Soccer more important than God, there's no sin in it.

I was continuing to refer to my earlier comment about specific parents who have specifically discussed knowing they should be taking their daughters to church but choosing instead to take their daughters to play soccer. That "knowing" came to them through the Holy Spirit, and although they knew what they were to do through the Holy Spirit, they wrestled with Him and chose a different course to appease a different "god"--popularity in school for their daughters, in that case.

If I'm sitting tonight at the end of my day, and the Holy Spirit--or my own conscious--suggests to me, "This would be a good time for a bit of scripture and prayer," and I determine instead to watch more television and go to bed, choosing to "make up" that time later when my flesh felt it would be convenient would not be acceptable obedience to the Lord. That decision was a matter of obedience to my flesh, and choosing instead to worship when I felt like it--rather than when bidden by the Holy Spirit--would be continued obedience to my flesh. God didn't respect that kind of "obedience" from the Israelites in the OT...I suspect He does not respect it from us.

 

[david rodriguez]

Today is July 4th, which is the day the United States declared its independence from Great Britain. In my own journey of life I had gone from a rebellious pagan against my country, to a believer in Christ who was encouraged by other Christians to be a patriot for my country, to a biblical anarchist. When I was a patriot, I grimaced at the thought of Americans celebrating Cinco de Mayo (5th of May) which is the day that Mexico declared its Independence from Spain. Also, how can Mexicans emigrate to the USA to become American citizens and still honor Cinco de Mayo? But the truth is, it has been capitalized by American merchants seeking another excuse to have a sale to lure customers in to shop.

Which brings me to the point of my question. Jesus said that a man can not serve two masters. He will either hate the one and love the other, or hold to one and despise the other (Matt. 6:24). The context of his statement is either serving God or money, but as a principle it could be any two things in opposition.

I am asking this question because of another thread on the forum which declared that Jesus was an anarchist. The author of that thread did not really invite conversation, which is why, I believe, it never took off. But, as I said in the beginning of this thread, I am now a biblical anarchist, by which I do not mean I believe in rebellion to earthly governments.

Instead, I mean I have one master, my Father in heaven, who is my king and I am a subject of his kingdom. How then, could I be a patriot to an earthly government at the same time I am a patriot to my Father's kingdom? So how do you all reconcile these two things? For I do not believe that such expressions as "for God and country" are biblical. Neither do I believe that God blesses any political organization, let alone America. He blesses those that are in Christ, since it is in Christ only that all blessings flow. What do you think?

i think Christians ought to only serve ONE GOD.

 

[Armoured]

Finally, someone seems to "get it", or at least they say something to the effect.

Ever notice how lately, oh, last two decades or so (or perhaps even before then...), it really doesn't seem like God has been looking all that favorably on the USA? We used to be prosperous, we used to be viewed more highly in the world, we used to be more well-liked.

But now look at what this nation has become. Infrastructure is falling apart, the national debt just keeps climbing, we've had various financial situations that have risen and that we've had to scramble to do something about, these last few years, it seems like high-profile violence is on the rise, and a good chunk of the rest of the world don't think of us too highly these days.

It's kinda like God has taken His hand away from us. There always seems to be a nation that currently has His favor at any given time, and that was us, until we started falling into various sins, such as pride, lust and greed. Then bit by bit, He started looking away and we just keep sliding further down towards the pit.

That raises the question, of who He is going to move His hand to next. I've guesses, but I think we'll see here shortly who will be His favored next. That's not to say every American is damned or anything, but you can tell when He takes His eyes off of a nation, just read the Bible. There was a time when even Babylon prospered, but then, what happened when Nebuchadnezzar II took the holy items from the Temple and used them in a sinful display of debauchery? His kingdom was overthrown that very same night.

Anyways, sorry about the off-topic bit, but it was something that needed said.

Back on topic, @RDKirk hit the nail on the head with the SOFA post. You can follow a nation's laws and honor a nation's earthly sovereignty without actually belonging to a nation. I'll second the example of Daniel, and also point out that Joseph was under a very similar situation. Joseph was a Jew who was forced to live in Egypt, and never once did he break any of God's laws, even though he was serving one of the most pagan and idolatrous nations of the time, right next to Babylon. Not only did Joseph serve in Egypt, but he eventually became second only to the pharaoh.

Yep, it's all about God's favour. Human mismanagement is irrelevant. Better throw a few more homosexuals into the fire. That'll improve foreign relations and fix the unemployment rate. Invade countries for spurious reasons? Destabilise whole regions? So long as you have God's favour, the rest of the world will love you.

 

[Xalith]

Yep, it's all about God's favour. Human mismanagement is irrelevant. Better throw a few more homosexuals into the fire. That'll improve foreign relations and fix the unemployment rate. Invade countries for spurious reasons? Destabilise whole regions? So long as you have God's favour, the rest of the world will love you.

That's a Strawman and you know it.

I never said to throw homosexuals into the fire, nor did I say we should invade other countries (I have, many times, condemned our going into Iraq for WMDs that did not exist, that even the general populace knew didn't exist) and I certainly never approved of us meddling in other countries' affairs.

In fact, I've long held the belief that we should keep our nose in our own business. You know, maybe the USA wouldn't be so disliked if we didn't act like we were the world's police force? We've been acting like bullies, and the President seems to think he just found his daddy's gun and is eager to wave it around in everybody's face. Of course everybody else hates us.

Had we been true followers of Christ (the nation at large, I mean), we wouldn't be burning homosexuals, we'd be attempting to teach them why what they are doing is wrong and where it will lead them in the end if they don't repent and turn away from their evil lifestyle rather than encouraging them to keep sinning. If we had been true followers of Christ, we wouldn't have been bombing third-world countries into oblivion and selling weapons to various people who end up eventually turning said weapons against us in the future.

Christ wouldn't have done any of these things. But yet, our government did.

 

[RDKirk]

Christ wouldn't have done any of these things. But yet, our government did.

If by "our" you mean Christians, Christ is "our" government...which is the point of this topic.

The Lord has dispersed His citizens all around the world as diplomats for His kingdom. We aren't supposed "go native"--we're supposed to remember that we are pilgrims and sojourners in these various nations.

 

[Xalith]

If by "our" you mean Christians, Christ is "our" government...which is the point of this topic.

The Lord has dispersed His citizens all around the world as diplomats for His kingdom. We aren't supposed "go native"--we're supposed to remember that we are pilgrims and sojourners in these various nations.

Well, I meant "our" as in the Nation, USA, as I was talking about the USA in general. I wasn't talking about Christians.

I suppose a better way of saying it, is "The nation in which we live" I suppose if you really want to get technical about it.

 

[RDKirk]

Well, I meant "our" as in the Nation, USA, as I was talking about the USA in general. I wasn't talking about Christians.

I suppose a better way of saying it, is "The nation in which we live" I suppose if you really want to get technical about it.

I don't think that's "technical," it's basic to the view of the world given to us in scripture. If we don't understand that we are "in the world, but not of it," we utterly fail to understand our mission in the world and how we are to relate to it.

That's why so many Christians in America treasure being American.

But of course, "Where your treasure is, your heart is there also."

 

[Xalith]

I don't think that's "technical," it's basic to the view of the world given to us in scripture. If we don't understand that we are "in the world, but not of it," we utterly fail to understand our mission in the world and how we are to relate to it.

That's why so many Christians in America treasure being American.

But of course, "Where your treasure is, your heart is there also."

Well, like I said, I understand it, and I never "treasured" being an American, however there are times that I lament how far this nation has fallen in recent times, but yet hasn't all nations that has once had His favor done so in the past?