Kerby Anderson
When I talk about the polarization in this country, I am often asked why is there so much hostility against Christians? We are often the greatest source of ministry and encouragement in the community.
In his book, Christians in a Cancel Culture, Joe Dallas devotes a chapter to this question about hostility toward Christians. You can summarize his excellent discussion with three words that begin with the letter “C.”
The first is convenience. Whenever truth is told, someone is inconvenienced. Former worshippers of the Goddess Diana were upset when the gospel was preached in Ephesus. The silversmith who made money selling shrines was negatively affected. Elijah’s words to Ahab were an inconvenience to the King.
The teachings of Jesus were certainly troubling to the religious leaders of His day. He rebuked their hypocrisy (Matthew 23) and presented Himself as Savior (John 3:16) and the way to salvation (John 14:6).
The second is conscience. Presenting biblical truth can prick the conscience of unbelievers and carnal Christians. One example, he cites, is the accusers of the adulterous woman who were convicted of their own sins (John 8), because that conviction can be found in both Christians and non-Christians (Romans 2:15).
The third is conviction. It would be a mistake to assume that hostility toward biblical truth springs only from an inconvenienced agenda or a pricked conscience. Saul of Tarsus had strong convictions. He “persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it” (Galatians 1:13). But after his conversion was able to later say that he “lived in all good conscience before God until this day” (Acts 23:1).
Should we expect hostility? Jesus faced hostility, so we will likely face hostility as well as we present biblical truth. We should speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15) and leave the rest to God.

Kerby Anderson
Yesterday I talked about the book, The Sovereign Individual which decades ago predicted the death of the nation state. To paraphrase Mark Twain, the rumors of the demise of the nation state are greatly exaggerated. Governments may still exist and exercise their power, but we can see how the power and influence of some governments are in decline. There are many reasons for this trend.
First, is geography. The information revolution has made it possible for many people to make a living online or by working remotely. A factory has a more difficult time changing locations, though many have done so by even leaving the US. By contrast, an individual participating in the cyber economy can pick up and leave a jurisdiction if taxes, regulations, or even climate is unfavorable. They can move from one state to another or from one country to another, and usually, the government is powerless to stop them.
Second, is the reality of a government monopoly. When we go into a store or a coffee shop, we expect customer service, but governments take us for granted and rarely treat us like customers. The authors use this example:
If you went into a store to buy furniture, and the salespeople took your money but then proceeded to ignore your requests and consult others about how to spend your money, you would quite rightly be upset… The fact that something very like this happens in dealings with governments shows how little control its “customers” actually have.
A third reason, not mentioned in the book, is the sad reality that governments are broke. You could argue that the US is $31 trillion past broke. Put another way, the US national debt is significantly more than GDP. And there are a dozen other countries in the world with higher debt loads. This is not sustainable.
Nation states are not dead, but most of them are dying.