On several occasions I have seen questionnaires, or have reviewed materials, raising the issue about whether a nation should be guided by the Bible in its government.  The implication in some of these instances is that even the question must be antiquated, and irrelevant in current debate.  My response to the question is that to run a country by Scriptural injunctions would create as useful a government as mankind might be able to form.  The Bible is first of all the story of the plan of God for mankind’s redemption.  In the unraveling of that story a great many important sub-themes are addressed such as the quality of life, the place of righteousness and love in relationships, the place of virtue in living such as moderation, and other issues related to our lives, including orderly government.  Many persons highly placed in government were given considerable attention in the narrative of Scripture.  Not including the obvious leaders of Israel’s government such as Moses, Samuel, David and Solomon, there were persons named to important posts in secular governments as Hiram in Tyre (Lebanon), Joseph, the prime minister of Egypt, or Mordecai and Daniel in Babylon serving as prime ministers.  These persons were represented as prepared men of integrity, competency, wisdom, and success.  We find them in the model of Moses conducting affairs, both personally and professionally.  The New Testament does not address a specific government plan except in ideals and experience (free and fair) which factors are consistent with the way the best representatives served in the Old Testament.  The people, in Israel had more to say about their government than is commonly remembered.  For example, the people invited David to be their king.  Earlier they rejected Samuel’s son as judge successor.

The Bible assumes that government will serve the people, under law, so that there is an even handedness.  Aliens have some rights equal to residents.  There is no dictation about the way the leader is selected – by right of king’s sons, by election, by autocracy, theocracy, or whatever.  There were elders in each tribe of Israel expressing the will of the tribe.  The point is that governments are to be for the benefit and good of the people.  Whatever was tried in biblical history, the process could be clumsy, but it is presumed that leaders and citizens will address problems.  There were periods of no government, government by tribes (confederacy), by a royal house, and by colonial domination.  No matter what the origin of the form, the government was to serve in a righteous way.  Righteousness relates to personal/social balance, freedom and values.

If government followed Scripture, it would: 1)- be concerned about the protection of the people within its borders; 2)- be friends with other governments; 3)- be fair in taxing and law making; 4)- be accountable in some way to the people; 5)- be helpful in assuring the feeding, housing, health, and general welfare of the people; 6)- be caring for the needy in some way; 7)- be diligent to provide courts of justice; 8)- be alert to provide appropriate public works; 9)- be cooperative to maintain commercial lanes; 10)- be able to promote and protect peace and safety; 11)- be concerned about the education of the people; and, 12)- be clean and objective in its affairs, which is a factor of being righteous, assuring rights  There are some provisions also supported such as the division of Church (Aaron) and State (Moses), but such matters are subsumed under one or more of the guidelines above.  One wonders how a better outline of government may be found. And, one wonders why we do not work to achieve it for all peoples.  To have good government is easier than having poor government.  The problem is in the nature of mankind which may invite greed, love for power, ego politics, jealousy, and the offensive list grows long. *Mark W. Lee, Sr.2016, 2020