Romans 13 Revisited

Discussion in 'Faith and Religion' started by seeker, Apr 2, 2010.


  1. seeker

    seeker Monkey+

    ROMANS CHAPTER 13 REVISITED

    By Chuck Baldwin
    July 15, 2009
    NewsWithViews.com -- Where Reality Shatters Illusion

    It seems that every time someone such as myself attempts to encourage our Christian brothers and sisters to resist an unconstitutional or otherwise reprehensible government policy, we hear the retort, "What about Romans Chapter 13? We Christians must submit to government. Any government. Read your Bible, and leave me alone." Or words to that effect.

    No doubt, some who use this argument are sincere. They are only repeating what they have heard their pastor and other religious leaders say. On the other hand, let's be honest enough to admit that some who use this argument are just plain lazy, apathetic, and indifferent. And Romans 13 is their escape from responsibility. I suspect this is the much larger group, by the way.

    Nevertheless, for the benefit of those who are sincere (but obviously misinformed), let's briefly examine Romans Chapter 13. I quote Romans Chapter 13, verses 1 through 7, from the Authorized King James text:

    "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour."

    Do our Christian friends who use these verses to teach that we should not oppose America's political leaders really believe that civil magistrates have unlimited authority to do anything they want without opposition? I doubt whether they truly believe that.

    For example, what if our President decided to resurrect the old monarchal custom of Jus Primae Noctis (Law of First Night)? That was the old medieval custom when the king claimed the right to sleep with a subject's bride on the first night of their marriage. Would our sincere Christian brethren sheepishly say, "Romans Chapter 13 says we must submit to the government"? I think not. And would any of us respect any man who would submit to such a law?

    So, there are limits to authority. A father has authority in his home, but does this give him power to abuse his wife and children? Of course not. An employer has authority on the job, but does this give him power to control the private lives of his employees? No. A pastor has overseer authority in the church, but does this give him power to tell employers in his church how to run their businesses? Of course not. All human authority is limited in nature. No man has unlimited authority over the lives of other men. (Lordship and Sovereignty is the exclusive domain of Jesus Christ.)

    By the same token, a civil magistrate has authority in civil matters, but his authority is limited and defined. Observe that Romans Chapter 13 clearly limits the authority of civil government by strictly defining its purpose: "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil . . . For he is the minister of God to thee for good . . . for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

    Notice that civil government must not be a "terror to good works." It has no power or authority to terrorize good works or good people. God never gave it that authority. And any government that oversteps that divine boundary has no divine authority or protection. This is a basic principle of Natural Law (and all of America's legal documents--including the U.S. Constitution--are founded upon the God-ordained principles of Natural Law).

    The apostle clearly states that civil government is a "minister of God to thee for good." It is a not a minister of God for evil. Civil magistrates have a divine duty to "execute wrath upon him that doeth evil." They have no authority to execute wrath upon him that doeth good. None. Zilch. Zero. And anyone who says they do is lying. So, even in the midst of telling Christians to submit to civil authority, Romans Chapter 13 limits the power and reach of civil authority.

    Did Moses violate God's principle of submission to authority when he killed the Egyptian taskmaster in defense of his fellow Hebrew? Did Elijah violate God's principle of submission to authority when he openly challenged Ahab and Jezebel? Did David violate God's principle of submission to authority when he refused to surrender to Saul's troops? Did Daniel violate God's principle of submission to authority when he disobeyed the king's command to not pray audibly to God? Did the three Hebrew children violate God's principle of submission to authority when they refused to bow to the image of the state? Did John the Baptist violate God's principle of submission to authority when he publicly scolded King Herod for his infidelity? Did Simon Peter and the other Apostles violate God's principle of submission to authority when they refused to stop preaching on the streets of Jerusalem? Did Paul violate God's principle of submission to authority when he refused to obey those authorities who demanded that he abandon his missionary work? In fact, Paul spent almost as much time in jail as he did out of jail.

    Remember that every apostle of Christ (except John) was killed by hostile civil authorities opposed to their endeavors. Christians throughout church history were imprisoned, tortured, or killed by civil authorities of all stripes for refusing to submit to their various laws and prohibitions. Did all of these Christian martyrs violate God's principle of submission to authority?

    So, even the great prophets, apostles, and writers of the Bible (including the writer of Romans Chapter 13) understood that human authority--even civil authority--is limited.

    Plus, Paul makes it clear that our submission to civil authority must be predicated on more than fear of governmental retaliation. Notice, he said, "Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake." Meaning, our obedience to civil authority is more than just "because they said so." It is also a matter of conscience. This means we must think and reason for ourselves regarding the justness and rightness of our government's laws. Obedience is not automatic or robotic. It is a result of both rational deliberation and moral approbation.

    Therefore, there are times when civil authority may need to be resisted. Either governmental abuse of power or the violation of conscience (or both) could precipitate civil disobedience. Of course, how and when we decide to resist civil authority is an entirely separate issue. And I will reserve that discussion for another time.

    Beyond that, we in the United States of America do not live under a monarchy. We have no king. There is no single governing official in this country. America's "supreme Law" does not rest with any man or any group of men. America's "supreme Law" does not rest with the President, the Congress, or even the Supreme Court. In America, the U.S. Constitution is the "supreme Law of the Land." Under our laws, every governing official publicly promises to submit to the Constitution of the United States. Do readers understand the significance of this distinction? I hope so.

    This means that, in America, the "higher powers" are not the men who occupy elected office; they are the tenets and principles set forth in the U.S. Constitution. Under our laws and form of government, it is the duty of every citizen, including our elected officials, to obey the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, this is how Romans Chapter 13 reads to Americans:

    "Let every soul be subject unto the [U.S. Constitution.] For there is no [Constitution] but of God: the [Constitution] that be [is] ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the [Constitution], resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For [the Constitution is] not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the [Constitution]? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For [the Constitution] is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for [the Constitution] beareth not the sword in vain: for [the Constitution] is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute also: for [the Constitution is] God's minister, attending continually upon this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour."

    Dear Christian friend, the above is exactly the proper understanding of our responsibility to civil authority in these United States, according to the teaching of Romans Chapter 13.

    Furthermore, Christians, above all people, should desire that their elected representatives submit to the Constitution, because it is constitutional government that has done more to protect Christian liberty than any other governing document ever devised by man. As I have noted before in this column, Biblical principles and Natural Law form the foundation of all three of America's founding documents: the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.

    As a result, Christians in America (for the most part) have not had to face the painful decision to "obey God rather than men" and defy their civil authorities.

    The problem in America today is that we have allowed our political leaders to violate their oaths of office and to ignore--and blatantly disobey--the "supreme Law of the Land," the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, if we truly believe Romans Chapter 13, we will insist and demand that our civil magistrates submit to the U.S. Constitution.

    Now, how many of us Christians are going to truly obey Romans Chapter 13?

    Chuck Baldwin -- Romans Chapter 13 Revisited
    © 2009 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved
     
  2. fortunateson

    fortunateson I hate Illinois Nazis!

    It's a good message, but really reinforces my decision to part with a literal or "relevant to today" interpretation of the Bible.

    Ro. 13 says what it says. It does not say "unless the higher power is corrupt". It says submit.

    and here:
    It does not say "must not" but "is not".

    Substituting the word [constitution] doesn't make sense when the verse is clearly speaking about human figures and not laws or principles.

    It just makes much more sense to say that Paul was writing to the Romans at that time and therefore that instruction was relevant to the Romans of that time.
     
  3. Hispeedal2

    Hispeedal2 Nay Sayer

    NASB:
    Romans 13

    Be Subject to Government

    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28268">1</sup>Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28269">2</sup>Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.
    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28270">3</sup>For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same;
    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28271">4</sup>for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.
    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28272">5</sup>Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake.
    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28273">6</sup>For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.
    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28274">7</sup>Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.



    I agree with fortunateson on this one.



    Other texts do not support this theory of resistance. For instance, Kings, I Chronicles, Ezra- if a rule is not in line with God's plan, He will topple that king.



    I think the best thing that a Christian can do for a government that he is at odds with (abortion is about the only thing I am at odds with spiritually) is to pray. As of yet, the gov't has not tried to make me do something that is not spiritually sound. If anything, we are given the right to make the choice...... "as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."(Josh 24:15)



    (Disclaimer..... if, and that's a big if, Big Brother decided to make mandatory something that went against my spiritual beliefs, I would still follow my higher power first. All the law of the land can't change a heart.)
     
  4. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    Other texts do not support this theory of resistance. For instance, Kings, I Chronicles, Ezra- if a rule is not in line with God's plan, He will topple that king.

    One might suppose that civil disobedience would be the tool He uses to do the toppling. I can see the devout peaceful citizens worrying some about that.


     
  5. fortunateson

    fortunateson I hate Illinois Nazis!

    Just to clarify my position. I do believe there are circumstance under which resistance - even by force - is justified.

    What I'm saying is that Ro 13 does not say this. Paul is advocating absolute obedience to authority.

    The author is correct that this is in direct conflict with other scriptures and with the idea of a higher moral law which is foundational to the Christian faith.

    A common method of interpretation is being used by the author to rectify this conflict. That is to say "It is absolute, with some exceptions which we find in other scriptures" I don't agree with this type of interpretation. It is clear in Ro 13 that Paul makes no exceptions.

    This can be taken two ways.
    The first is to say that the Bible contradicts itself. I do not believe this.
    The second is to say that Paul was writing to a specific group of Romans, and providing them instructions that fit the times in which they lived.
    I find the latter to be the most logical interpretation.
     
  6. Hispeedal2

    Hispeedal2 Nay Sayer

    You would be correct Ghrit. Especially with recent current events. The problem I see is that some warp parts of the Word to justify disobedience to about anything. It's not a far leap from there to blowing up police cars or abortion clinics.

    Our God is peaceful.

    Do you think that God cares about taxes? Large government? Small government? State's rights? I think not. I don't think He cares about things of a worldly kingdom. Nor should we. We will be... because we are human. To use Him to justify is to use His name in vain.

    Does abortion being legal change what you and yours do? If homosexuals have the right to marry, are you going to change what your children are taught (the Bible)? I don't think He would be interested in these laws either because the laws of a worldly kingdom are not what we are bound by. Ours is a higher Law.

    If you don't like something, protest it. Conservatives are protesting more today than ever. Vote. Do the hard right and vote outside the party lines when both are wrong. There are plenty of ways to show your discontent that don't put you at odds with the law/ gov't.
     
  7. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

    But do we believe that all Government is ordained by God? Does God recognize legitimate and illigitimate authority?

    I always thought that when Paul was speaking, he was speaking to the group of Brothers in Christ, who would all be under that ordained chain of governmental authority stemming from God.

    Maybe we interpret things how we would rather read them... Gets us into a lot of trouble lol
     
  8. Hispeedal2

    Hispeedal2 Nay Sayer

    Paul was writing to Romans that some had and some hadn't accepted the gospel. They were in the process of balancing Roman authority and understanding the authority of God. Many took the authority of God as meaning they were no longer subject to the worldly authorities. Also, the difference in culture. It's impossible to leave out the Romans 13:13- it indicates what the Romans were struggling with at a cultural level. Thus, we have Romans 13. Interesting enough, Paul finishes up Romans 13 with fulfilling the Law through love (verse 8). For this is how we can get along in a world that is at odds with our beliefs.


    Here is what I read:
    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28268">1</sup>Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28269">2</sup>Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

    Maybe I am reading it as I want it to read. I am certainly fallible. When I read the above verses, I read it as it is... meaning that yes, these kingdoms on earth exist because God allows them.

    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28270">3</sup>For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same;

    Here, I read that we should do what is good. As Americans, we have the choice to choose. Exercising this right and choosing what is good to Him is how we can best fulfill what Paul means.

    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28271">4</sup>for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.

    Here I read that since a nation exists because God allows it to, it has authority to punish for breaking laws. We are not exempt from those laws.

    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28272">5</sup>Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake.
    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28273">6</sup>For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing.
    <sup class="versenum" id="en-NASB-28274">7</sup>Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.

    I feel like I am beating a dead horse at this point. But there is one part here that is important. "rulers are servants of God"..... meaning that they are subject to the Laws of God. We are still to obey the authority even when we don't agree. If the authority is wrong....... it will answer to Him. Round about way to it but....

    1) We are to obey authority
    2) Authority on earth is allowed by God
    3) That authority is subject to Him

    I don't see a verse that advocates civil disobedience. When read for what it is, it's simply not there.







     
  9. fortunateson

    fortunateson I hate Illinois Nazis!

    I agree with that statement. That is precisely why I don't think the verse is necessarily applicable to all situations.

    A German Christian during the holocaust would not close his eyes to the persecution of Jews. If it meant providing food, that would be civil disobedience, yet it would uphold the higher moral law.

    But you are correct about the fact that Paul's statement is absolute.

    That is why limiting its strict application to the Roman recipients of the letter makes the most sense. I use the word "strict" because there are certainly principles that we can learn from the verse.
    I don't take it as a commandment, however.
     
  10. melbo

    melbo Hunter Gatherer Administrator Founding Member

  11. tacmotusn

    tacmotusn Mosquito Sailor

    religion and politics.... hmmm. Do I believe in God, Jesus, and the holy trinity? Yes. Do I believe everything in the bible? Nope. There are just too many contradictions to list and to go into between the old testament and the new. What about the lost or censored by the holy roman catholic church chapters or books of the bible, or dead sea scrolls, where do they fit in, or do they? Politics, power and religion.... lol. Its all been censored, it was passed down word of mouth told for centuries at times before being written down. Errors of ommision, can totally twist something into something that it is not. Do we only have half of the bible to study and read? or... 10 percent? 25 percent? 75 percent? 95 percent? Give me a video with sound, start to finish of a long winded speech. Now let me redact just 5 percent, and lets just see how twisted I can make the truth become. Think about it people. No errors in the bible? Believe it all? I think not. JMHO of course.[loco].[stirpot]
     
  12. FWC

    FWC Monkey+

    fortunateson,
    I think 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 supports your point.
     
  13. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Founding Member

    Here we have a perfect example of how scripture can be selectively quoted and misinterpreted to give it a whole new meaning. To fully understand Holy Writ, you must do your research and understand the context in which that which you are reading was written. To whom, at what time and for what purpose. To blindly quote passages and extrapolate a theory or a command from that without understanding the context is folly and leads to all manner of confusion and mistaken theology.

    Romans Chapter 13 has absolutely nothing to do with obeying civil authority, it has nothing to do with civil authority whatsoever. Paul is writing to the believers in Rome who he has not had the chance to minister to in person. In chapter 1 he says that he has "oftentimes purposed to come to you(and was hindered hitherto)".

    He goes on to exhort and preach to them the grace and salvation of Christ he lays out the history of the church through Abraham down to Jacob and to the twelve tribes. In chapter 6 he tells them how that as Christians they have become the "servants" of God and his Christ and that they are subject to his laws.

    Chapter 11 tells of the "grafting" in of new believers into the Israelite family tree. Chapter 12 is an exhortation on living a Christian lifestyle.

    In verse 8 he tells of the gifts that each member of the body is given. To some to be prophets, others to be teachers, and to some to "ruleth". This is talking about within the church body. It has nothing to do with civil authorities.

    Then in chapter 13 he goes on to exhort the church to "be in subjection to higher powers". Who are these "higher powers"? They are "a minister of God" verse 4. Verse 5 tells them that they "must needs be in subjection" "for conscience sake". And in verse 6 "for this cause ye pay tribute (tithes) also; for they are ministers of God's service."

    Throughout scripture, throughout history, the people of God have resisted tyranny. There would not have been a reformation if the protestant reformers had of subscribed to this flawed interpretation of scripture. This has come down to us in large measure do to the influence and interference of King James in seeking to use scripture to quell a growing rebellious sentiment among his subjects
    .
    There would likely not be a United States of America if the famed "Black Brigades" of pastors had not preached rebellion from their pulpits and took arms with their fellow patriots to fight for freedom.

    For any preacher or teacher in Christiandumb to preach/teach that submission to wicked and tyrannical authority is submission to God is heretical and damnable in the greatest degree. It is the work of the enemy and those that teach such heretical doctrine should be shunned.

    Scripture warns of the false teachings and false teachers that would arise in the latter times to deceive the church. Don't fall to their vanities and deceptions. Study to show yourselves approved. It is the glory of Kings to search out a thing.


    This is a good article on the subject, but far from definitive. It still labors under the false assumption that this is referring to civil authority.


    MisInterpretation of Romans chapter 13


    Some critics argue that civil disobedience is prohibited by the clear admonition in Romans 13:1, “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is not authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God” (NASB). Yet even this passage seems to provide a possible argument for disobeying a government that has exceeded its authority. The verses following these speak of the government's role and function. The ruler is to be a “servant of God,” and government should reward good and punish evil. Government that fails to do so is outside God's mandated authority and function. Government is not autonomous; it has delegated authority from God. It is to restrain evil and punish wrongdoers. When it does violate God's delegated role and refuses to reward good and punish evil, it has not proper authority. The apostle Paul called for believers to “be subject” to government, but he did not instruct them to “obey” every command of government. When government issues an unjust or unbiblical injunction, Christians have a higher authority. One can be “subject” to the authority of the state but still refuse to “obey” a specific law which is contrary to biblical standards.[1]
    Similarly, Francis Schaeffer warned, “One either confesses that God is the final authority, or one confesses that Caesar is Lord.” We will serve God or serve man, but we cannot serve both. We obey government officials except when those authorities support civil laws that violate the laws of God. First Peter 2:13-14 also makes it clear that God's plan for civil government is to punish evildoers and to protect and praise those who do right: “Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.”

    Kerby Anderson describes the significance of “Lex Rex,” a great historical piece written on the subject of civil authority:
    The best articulation of these biblical principles can be found in Samuel Rutherford's essay “Lex Rex.” Arguing that governmental law was founded on the law of God, he rejected the seventeenth-century idea of the “divine right of kings.” The king was not the ultimate authority, God's law was (hence the title Lex Rex, “The law is king”). If the king and the government disobeyed the law, then they were to be disobeyed. He argued that all men; including the king were under God's law and not above it. According to Rutherford the civil magistrate was a “fiduciary figure” who held his authority in trust for the people. If that trust was violated, the people had a political basis for resistance. Not surprisingly “Lex Rex” was banned in England and Scotland because it was seen as treasonous and fomenting political rebellion.[2]

    While we can hope never to have to disobey the laws of our communities and country in order to walk in good conscience with God, there is no guarantee that we'll never be called to civil disobedience. Knowing where you stand from a Biblical viewpoint, though, is the first step in being prepared to do what God requires.
    When civil government steps outside of God's ordained purpose and persecutes righteous people, promotes evil, and does injustice to the innocent, the moral authority of the civil government has been lost, and Christians are free to disobey. As we just said, disobedience to government may be required in the process of opposing evil, promoting righteousness, defending the weak, and providing for the safety of one's family.

    While God allows governments to come into being, that does not mean God approves of every government. To draw an analogy: God allowed the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, but God did not approve of them. If, for example, the people of Cuba are sick and tired of the killings, beatings, and imprisonments dispensed by the government of their country, they are Biblically justified in overthrowing Castro (who has clearly not fulfilled the God-given purpose of civil government).

    Scripture calls rulers “ministers of God.” The description “ministers” shows clearly how important the responsibility of a civic leader actually is. Since Scripture calls these people “ministers,” it stands to reason that God would call Christians into this occupation just as He calls some people into the ministry of being a full-time pastor.
    Christians in Germany should not have shown “honor” to Hitler. The Bible says we are to give honor to those who are due honor, and Hitler did not deserve any such thing. He was not a “minister of God” and was not a legitimate government official because he violated the God-ordained purpose for civil government.

    While God allowed Hitler to come to power, He did not approve of him. I do not believe God would hold it against German pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer for assisting in the assassination attempt on Hitler. Pastor Bonhoeffer understood Romans 13 correctly and understood the Biblical mandate to defend the defenseless and to oppose evil. He also understood the Biblical right of self-defense.

    We live in a fallen world where man has a free will to do good or evil. While it is true that the church often flourishes during times of extreme persecution, this happens largely because of the civil disobedience of Christians who worship underground, smuggle Bibles, and distribute Scripture contrary to the laws governing them. Some governments are so evil, corrupt, and ungodly, Christians are obliged not to support them because to do so would be to participate in what they do.

    According to Christ, the government according should work in harmony with the church (Matthew 22:21), and when it does, God approves of the government in power. Understand, though, that church government is not inevitably superceded by civil government.

    Many people in the Bible took part in civil disobedience:
    • When Pharaoh commanded the Hebrew midwives to kill all male Hebrew babies, Moses' mother lied to Pharaoh and did not carry out his command (Exodus. 1-2);
    • When Nebuchadnezzar ordered Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego to bow down to his golden image, they refused and were cast into a fiery furnace (Daniel 3);
    • Daniel prayed to God in spite of the king's dictate to the contrary (Daniel 6);
    • In Acts, when Peter and John were commanded not to preach the gospel, their response was, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).[3]
    We should do the same and that includes the Biblical mandate to protect your family.
     
  14. BAT1

    BAT1 Cowboys know no fear

    Jesus told his disciples to sell their robe and buy a sword. I will obey God's government which ours isn't.
     
  15. Gray Wolf

    Gray Wolf Monkey+++

    This whole thing becomes much easier to understand once you factor in the being that has dominion over the whole earth at this time.
     
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7