When Scripture prohibits adultery, this presupposes the validity of the bonds of marriage. Without marriage, there is no such thing as adultery, and the prohibition becomes nonsensical. These marriage bonds are established by God (“what God has joined together”) and are to be recognized by the state. When the state refuses to honor the institution of marriage, as God created it, the state is violating the seventh commandment. The state is guilty of adultery in this sense if the local magistrate reestablished the spurious privilege of prima nocte at all weddings in his jurisdiction, and the state is violating the seventh commandment when they give sanction to marriages that God has prohibited — as in the current validations of homosexual marriages.
Now when the eighth commandment prohibits stealing, this presupposes private property, just as the prohibition of adultery presupposes marriage. Without private property, there is no such thing as stealing. This means that God has established in His law an assumption that I have a right to possess and use stuff, and this possession cannot be interfered with. One who violates that possession is a thief.
But my point is not these specific violations in themselves, but rather to establish the point that there is not one of the Ten Commandments that the established civil authority cannot cannot violate. They can establish the worship of other gods, they can set up graven images, they can dishonor the Lord’s name, and so on, right down the line. The Ten Commandments provide us with a moral order that overarches more than just individuals. The Ten Commandments are obligatory for man the individual and man the collective.
Now this means that the civil government is capable of falling into thievery. Magistrates can steal, as Ahab stole Naboth’s vineyard. Stealing is the unlawful taking of someone else’s property. At the same, Scripture is also plain that magistrates can tax, and that such taxation is not thievery. Paul is plain that we should pay taxes to whom taxes are due (Rom. 13 7). Up to a point the magistrate is not stealing, and after that point he is. It appears to me that one of the responsibilities we have as Christians is to figure out where that line is.
Those who think about such things biblically know that the sign at that particular border is already small in the rear view mirror. Samuel predicted dire tyranny for Israel when the king would be impudent enough to claim ten percent — laying claim to the same amount that God did (1 Sam. 8:15). And Joseph placed a levy of twenty percent on the residents of Egypt (Gen. 47:26), and that amount was eloquent testimony to the fact that all things belonged to the government and that they were slaves. This means that while our men overseas may well be fighting for our safety — a discussion for another time — they are certainly not fighting for our freedom.
I am quite prepared to admit that the principal threat to my safety (especially as I travel) comes from radical Muslims. But the principal enemies of my freedoms are ensconced in Washington. If you don’t believe me, let’s test them. How much of my property are they willing to put off limits, beyond their reach? Ah . . . exactly so.