Love Your Neighbour and Get Your Vaccine?

11 Comments

One of the most common arguments that has been repeated again and again across the last year and a half is that we should all get vaccinated to protect the vulnerable. Or in Christian circles, we should get vaccinated as an act of love for our neighbours. The expanded version goes on to talk about how we might not be worried for our personal health with respect to COVID, however, if we are unvaccinated and gather in groups, we place others at risk. We should not stubbornly hold on to our personal rights and preferences at the expense of others. To do so would be unloving and selfish. If we can reduce the risk that others face from COVID why would we not get the vaccine? Some even go further and suggest that because of these considerations, it is right and just for the government to mandate vaccines for large swathes of the population.

While I can see the appeal of this kind of argument, I am convinced that this reasoning is massively inconsistent with the Biblical framework for ethics.

What is the Risk?

Firstly, this argument assumes that putting people at risk is inherently sinful. Yet, we all put people at risk every day. Driving my car puts others at risk. Swimming at the beach puts the lifeguards at risk.

The argument needs to establish the point that being unvaccinated is so great a risk that to go around while unvaccinated is morally wrong.

If this is the argument, then it needs to be demonstrated, and not just asserted. What is the risk in real numbers? One in a hundred thousand? A million? And not just the risk that someone will die of COVID if contracted. What is the risk that if I go to church, feeling perfectly healthy, that I infect someone with COVID, and they die or are hospitalised?

Secondly, how does this risk compare with other risks that we take on a daily basis? And where do we draw the line for risk mitigation? By what standard do we make this determination?

Consider the following scenarios and tell me which carries a greater risk?

A) A man works a normal week as a schoolteacher. All his students are healthy. He is unvaccinated yet decides to go to church on Sunday.

B) Another man works in a hospital and treats a number of patients, some of whom have COVID. He is double vaccinated and also decides to attend church on Sunday.

C) A stay-at-home mum has a sick husband and child. They both have a bad flu, and she has been sharing a bed with her husband for the last three days. She certainly does not have COVID but may have the flu. She takes herself to church on Sunday morning.

Assuming all three of these people are feeling fit as a fiddle on Sunday morning, no hacking or wheezing, no temperature, which person poses the greatest threat to their church family? Which ones are acting selfishly and failing to love their neighbour? And finally, by what standard do you make these determinations?

If all of this seems impossibly difficult… it is! That is my point. To make ethical decisions this way requires God-like knowledge. You need to know all the variables, all the odds, and all the unintended consequences of our actions. Thankfully we do not need to be omniscient to love our neighbours.

When State Becomes God

One of the defining features of modern secular government is the rejection and replacement of God. For our modern ruling elites, there is no God above the state. No God to regulate and limit their behaviour and actions. And because there is no God above them, they become the god of the system.

Like every other false god, they promise to give us things that only the true God can; safety, security, hope for the future, and freedom. However, as Christians, we should recognise that all false gods are tyrants who will ultimately destroy us.

Since civil authorities have been instituted by God, they should be eager to submit to their natural limitations. Be that as it may, those who reject God also reject the ordinary limits placed on them by God. If there is no God who can give freely from his abundance, then the state must forcibly take and redistribute wealth as it sees fit. If there is no God who can govern the conscience, then the state must govern the conscience by making all its preferences mandatory. If there is no God who knows all and sees all and can give us wisdom and freedom, then the government must seek to become expert epidemiologists, doctors, economists, educators, and ethicists.

Unfortunately for them and for us, they must do all of this without any guidance from God in his word. They have visions of grandeur and consider themselves to be competent to be gods over us. Of necessity, the end result must be chaos.

Those who forsake the law praise the wicked,

    but those who keep the law strive against them.

Evil men do not understand justice,

    but those who seek the Lord understand it completely.

(Proverbs 28:4-5)

What Does it Mean to Love Your Neighbour?

A second problem with this argument is that it fails to understand what it means to love your neighbour. Unfortunately, many Christians are more influenced by the culture around them, than they are by God’s law. Moreover, many Christians do not even see the intimate relationship that exists between God’s law and love for neighbour.

Biblically defined, to love your neighbour means to treat them in accordance with God’s law from the heart.

Now, as soon as I say that loving our neighbours means applying God’s law, some will immediately respond, “we are not under the law. That was for the Old Testament”. However, throughout the New Testament God’s law is the very definition of what it means to be loving toward our neighbours.

36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 22:36-40)

While some want to maintain that we are not required to obey all the Old Testament’s commands, virtually all Christians will concede that we do, at least, need to obey the two greatest commands from the Old Testament, namely, love God and love neighbour. If you are willing to grant this much, you have just given me the entire Old Testament law! Notice Jesus’ words above. He says that all the Law and the Prophets are an expression of love for God and love for neighbour. If you want to know how to love your neighbour, look to God’s law.

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

If you weren’t convinced by the first passage, then notice just how clear Jesus is here. Not one dot will pass away from the law. We are not even permitted to relax any of God’s commandments. I am suggesting then that the entirety of the Old Testament law has an abiding validity. We are obliged to keep all of it.

What about the dietary laws? Or dress codes? Or priests and temple laws? Or sacrifice laws? The point to recognise here is that certain laws primarily pointed forward to Christ and are fulfilled in him. Dietary laws and dress codes were a particular practice that was intended to teach the principle that God’s people are to be distinct from the surrounding nations. While the practice of this law has lapsed, the principle is still obeyed. Moreover, the principle contained in the law is obeyed with even greater clarity. Likewise, the practice of sacrificing animals has lapsed but the principle of substitutionary atonement is observed with even greater clarity in the Death of Christ. Other laws like the requirement to have a parapet around the roof of your house (Deuteronomy 22:8) have also lapsed in terms of the way they are practiced. The principle of avoiding reckless endangerment is still observed.

Every law has a principle and a practice. When the principle and the practice coincide then both remain. When the principle and the practice are not inseparable, then the principle still remains. This is what theologians call the general equity of the law. This is why I can say that the entirety of the Old Testament law is still abiding.

I do not mean that we should just drop the Law of Moses down on 2021 New Zealand in some wooden way. What I mean is that the general equity of the whole law still applies.

8 Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. 9 For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. (Romans 13:8-10)

Love for neighbour means keeping the whole law. The ten commandments and “any other commandment”. Like Jesus, Paul also believes in the abiding validity of the entire law of God.

Governments Should Also Love Neighbour

Here is where the rubber meets the road for our current context. If my argument thus far stands, then we must ask, what does it look like for the government to love their neighbours during a pandemic? To answer this question, we must consider what the Bible has to say about how governments can be just and righteous. In other words, we must look to the general equity of God’s civil laws given to Moses.

For a fuller explanation of the moral obligations of civil government, see my four-part series on this topic.

A Christian vision of just government must be informed and shaped by a judicious application of the general equity of God’s law.

What would this look like for our present context? If God’s law was applied to the current COVID situation, the wise and judicious thing for a government to do would be to search God’s word for guidance. Particularly, the civil laws that limit and regulate state authority. With this in mind, I suspect that a God-fearing government would recognise their limitations and do what they could. This would include quarantining the sick (Leviticus 13:45–46). The principle seen here is that in order to protect life the government is permitted to quarantine the sick until they recover. Notice a few things though; the sick must clearly be presenting as sick. To mandate a quarantine for the healthy is to completely reverse the general equity of God’s law. The government should also pray and ask God to be merciful and spare our country.

If they did all they could from within their sphere of authority, more people may have died from COVID than what we have seen here in New Zealand. The hospitals may have become overrun. The economy may have taken a big hit. However, we must recognise that if this happened it would be a tragedy that no one was morally responsible for. A government is not sinning by refusing to transgress God-ordained limits. The ends do not justify the means. The government is called to be a minister of God to avenge his wrath against the evildoer.

We have not been fortunate enough to have such a government lead us through COVID. Instead, while ignoring all biblical restraints on state authority, our government has forced millions of healthy people into quarantine for weeks on end. They have caused tens of thousands of people to lose their livelihoods. They have racked up more than 100 billion dollars worth of debt. They have prevented families from attending the funerals of their loved ones. They have violated the consciences of thousands by mandating irreversible medical procedures. And they have forbidden the gathering of the church.

Even if we assume that these actions have saved thousands of lives, no Christian should consider this to be appropriate. Much less, should any Christian support these actions and enable them. In the first scenario there would be consequences, but these would be tragic consequences that could not be avoided without violating God’s law and sinning against God and neighbour. Instead, we have been subjected to unrelenting sin by our political leaders. Every point mentioned in the previous paragraph has a victim and an oppressor. No one should be held accountable for the consequences of living in a fallen world. But over the past year and a half, the victims of our government’s actions can not be counted. Who could put a number on it? Our children and grandchildren will be paying for their wicked overreach. Any Christian who has supported this regime in their actions should be ashamed of themselves. They have violated millions of our neighbours in the name of love and to the shame of Christ’s church, many Christians have been complicit.

  The mercy of the wicked is cruel. (Proverbs 12:10)  

11 thoughts on “Love Your Neighbour and Get Your Vaccine?”

  1. Rob Berger

    First, I would like to say I appreciate the thrust and heart of this article. I agree that turning “love thy neighbor” into an imperative to get penetrated is completely wrong. I agree that the State has overstepped its bounds, and considers itself God, and this is destructive to all that is good.

    However, you have followed the traditional religious approach on the Law, and this approach does not in my opinion agree with scripture. It ignores the existence of contemporary jurisdictions with differing authority. There is a heavenly jurisdiction and citizenship; there is an earthly jurisdiction and citizenship. This has been so from the first verse of Genesis, and proceeds right through to Revelation.

    The Law is not supreme. It has a jurisdiction, and that jurisdiction is earthly. But those who are reborn from above have another jurisdiction, which is heavenly. Thus there are two laws working simultaneously, one of which is earthly and passing away. To be sure, it continues in full force until God creates all things as new, but not all are under its jurisdiction. I would ask you to ponder this reality.

    On this planet, one side is in sunlight, it is day, and it is governed by the sun. On the other side, it is in darkness, it is night, and it is governed by the moon. Both have present, simultaneous realities, but they are not the same realities. The one reflects the other, but it is not identical to the other. Those who live in darkness are subject to the Law. But those who have passed into life are subject to the Spirit. Because the Spirit authored the Law, there will be no contradiction in leading: the Spirit will not lead one into contradicting the Law. But that is not the same as following the Law: the Law exists for those who are in darkness, not for those who are in light.

    Paul talks about this often, but it is not understood well because people are stuck in their traditions.

    By another analogy. For thousands of years, men were earth-bound, even to the present. Even until the end it will be so. But in the last hundred years or so, another way has opened up which is not earth-bound. One can travel from Wellington to Auckland overland, and is subject to all the laws of that earth-bound jurisdiction. One can also travel from Wellington to Auckland via air, and that one is subject to the air-bound jurisdiction. The jurisdictions are contemporary, and each one continues in full force. But aircraft are not limited to the 100kph national speed limit, nor do they stop at traffic lights below. An aircraft will not break any of the earth-bound laws, because it cannot…it is in an entirely different jurisdiction. And an automobile cannot fly, it is impossible. Again, Paul wrote about this constantly, including in Romans.

    That the Law is not supreme is made clear in that it followed and did not precede the Promise. The Promise is greater. The Law is temporary, to allow judgment and elimination of evil. It was introduced for the godless, those who refuse to walk with Him in the Light, that they would be without excuse. It is not for the Sons of God.

    He who has ears, let him hear.

  2. Grace

    I really do think you’re over complicating things. Vaccination doesn’t need to be a moral decision. It can be a common sense decision based on simple maths. And why not reduce the risk if you can?

  4. Allan

    Where’s the confusion? Actions and intentions have consequences and God holds people accountable for them. Or inaction. Specifically from the heart. OT Israel’s constant fault, well any man’s for that matter.

    Do unto others also means not deliberately being an ass to them.

    Case A is being an ass to his students and their families. He knows the math that the vaccine reduces the spread rate. He can act for their protection but he chooses not to. He’s defiant against them. Or he’s a denier who thinks the virus isn’t hurting people as they say it is. Either way he’s at fault.
    Case B if he isn’t getting a test to confirm his negative state, as his job description requires, is at fault for not doing what he could even tho he knows the risk as an expert in the subject.
    Case C sounds like a nasty person. Most mothers stay home if the family has the flu because they know full well they might spread it to others at church. Either that or it’s ignorance. And in this case it sounds like they are too impudent to get a test to confirm it isn’t actually covid so it very well might be in Auckland today.
    All three are also lazy. Doing the bare minimum for others or less.

    Suffering, economy, lives. You’ve directly said they don’t matter to you weighed against the government not deciding to self neuter and sit on their hands because of your belief on their job’s technical limitations. Don’t be an ass.

    Protest the government. We’re expected to when they breach God’s law. Take legal action if you want such as my church is against limiting of worship. But don’t be an ass to others for the sake of you don’t think you should have to take responsibility for your own actions or inactions. There are expectations on people and governments that go beyond the letter of their job descriptions. God will judge by those not by “I did the bare minimum you said to”.

    God did not say let others suffer if they don’t fit these specific requirements. That’s not love by any twisted definition. It’s hate. Hate where you don’t do something to help because you don’t want to. Even worse if you don’t think you should help.

    I have friends suffering and their family dying overseas. And you’re here saying God wants their governments to stop helping with proven methods. To deliberately let many more people die because it’s not their job to help. What religion is that from? “Do the bare minimum for those you serve.”

    Legalism to not perform anything that is not written. Suffering and death is totally fine if I don’t break the laws. God doesn’t expect me to go past what the text says. Is that not a Pharisee?

    • Ethan Aloiai

      Thank you for this comment, Allan. It is helpful to have such a clear example of someone failing to read my words as they were written, and instead, assume unspoken motives in order to impugn my character and refute an argument that was never made.

      • Harper Simpson

        I think the phrase you’re looking for Ethan is “strawman argument”, whereby someone engages in deception by giving the appearance of refuting an argument, but is actually refuting another point which they have invented themselves. You should be familiar with this, because it is exactly what you’ve done in your post by harping on about government and mandates while simultaneously glossing over the very important fact that the “love thy neighbour by getting the vaccine” guidance (you know, the title of your post) is the advice of established and respected Christian churches in New Zealand and around the world. Ethan, you do know the churches are the ones giving this advice, right? When did you last get on the phone and talk to your pastor or your priest about this?

  5. James Jin

    I think you are complicating things. In times of a pandemic with a a novel coronavirus, it is acceptable for the government to have health mandates to protect the general population. As Christians we should follow them.

    Taking your analogy of driving: putting people at unnecessary risk can be argued as sinful, as is reckless endangerment, because it’s not loving your neighbour. Yes, driving our car is risky, but that’s why the government has traffic laws: that’s why driving dangerously at excessive speed, is considered a sin.

    The government is not trying to become God. They are doing what governments are supposed to do. They aim protect its people, especially the most vulnerable in a time such as a pandemic. They follow the advice of medical and public health experts. If the government did not have any public health mandates, no lockdowns, it would have resulted in many unnecessary deaths, and those who are vulnerable.

    We may not agree on some of the policies, even I think they are too conservative and cautious in their approach, with some restrictions are arbitrary and imposing; and it is terrible that that livelihoods have been impact significantly from lockdowns. But is it really acceptable for a government to only “quarantine the sick” ?- It may work for leprosy but doesn’t work for COVID unfortunately. That’s why we have virologists and public health experts. To not mandate any public health measure, and to let the virus run its course, in the name of “freedom” will result in many unnecessary deaths. Yes you can argue the government can wash its’ hands of it, as “it would be a tragedy that no one was morally responsible for”. But God ordained governments for this very reason, for authority and stewardship over us, to protect us and provide welfare, among others.

    We live in a broken world, with sin, death and sickness. Because of this, God has ordained human authority in the form of government, and human authorities are accountable to God. We have also been given the tools so we can fight this brokenness, this includes science, medicine, vaccines and knowledge of how viruses work and how we can mitigate spread. The result is that lives are saved and people don’t have to die unnecessarily.

    All would agree they didn’t want their vulnerable elderly parents or grandparents get taken away early from COVID, when it could be prevented by public health measures and vaccination. For the love of your neighbour, I urge you not to put yourself above others, and simply trust in what God has provided.

    • Ethan Aloiai

      Hi James, thank you for the comment. Firstly, I think you really need to think through the role of the government from a Biblical perspective. Where do you draw the line regarding the limits of state authority? By what standard do you determine government actions to be unjust? For example, why do you think the state has the right to “provide” welfare? The state can not be charitible, because all their money has to be taken from others. What would be a just penalty for a man who refused to pay welfare for another man who is unemployed? And by what standard do you make these determinations?

      I would strongly reccommend reading my four-part series on theology of government. It is a bit of reading, but it is so important to be thinking biblically during these times.
      https://sojournal.co.nz/theology-of-government-and-covid-part-1/

      God bless.

  6. Rob Berger

    “These things I did write to you concerning those leading you astray; and you, the anointing that ye did receive from him, in you it doth remain, and ye have no need that any one may teach you, but as the same anointing doth teach you concerning all, and is true, and is not a lie, and even as was taught you, ye shall remain in him.” 1Jn 2:26-27

    This was written for us, for our time. The whole letter emphasizes its direction at ‘the little children’. Not primarily the fathers…not the young men…but the little children. In a historical context, that is us.

    “and when his own sheep he may put forth, before them he goeth on, and the sheep follow him, because they have known his voice; and a stranger they will not follow, but will flee from him, because they have not known the voice of strangers.'” Joh 10:4-5

    The little children are now being led forth, and His sheep are following His voice, not the voice of ‘another’ ‘strange one’. Listen to His voice, do not listen to these other voices. They are deceivers.

    ‘These things I have spoken to you, that ye may not be stumbled, out of the synagogues they will put you; but an hour doth come, that every one who hath killed you, may think to offer service unto God; and these things they will do to you, because they did not know the Father, nor me. ‘But these things I have spoken to you, that when the hour may come, ye may remember them, that I said them to you, and these things to you from the beginning I did not say, because I was with you;” Joh 16:1-4

    That hour has come. You may not yet believe it; but you will believe it soon.

    “Wherefore, also Jesus—that he might sanctify through his own blood the people—without the gate did suffer; now, then, may we go forth unto him without the camp, his reproach bearing; for we have not here an abiding city, but the coming one we seek;” Heb 13:12-14

  7. Tom Nook

    Nicely written! My partner and I were both been diagnosed with ‘coronavirus’ earlier this month… I’m fine and so is my partner. It all began with some coughs and fever but his work forced him to take a test. We were called the ‘Susceptive’ by his work because we refused to take the damn vaccine. We live in Auckland and life has been hard especially being discriminated like this…
    Brother I like your points let’s meet up and organise something for the people. They deserve to know the TRUTH.

    • Ethan Aloiai

      Thank you Tom. I appreciate your comment. Sorry that things have been tough! It is certainly time to push back against the discrimination that is coming and has already arrived! Feel free to reach out on Facebook and we can chat more. God bless.

Comments are closed.