Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Resistance
See other Resistance Articles

Title: Christian Resistance: "Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God." -- Romans Chapter 13 Revisited
Source: [None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Apr 14, 2014
Author: Chuck Baldwin
Post Date: 2014-04-14 12:22:41 by James Deffenbach
Keywords: None
Views: 363
Comments: 31

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.

(See: www.chuckbald winlive.com/c2005/cbarchive_20050630.html )

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?

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 16.

#2. To: James Deffenbach (#0)

Excellent - thanks!

Lod  posted on  2014-04-14   12:54:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Lod (#2)

Thank you. Wouldn't it be great to have Chuck Baldwin and Andrew Napolitano as Prez and VP? I could vote for either of them for either job and think they would be the best you could get.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2014-04-14   13:00:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: 4UM, or anyone that will listen (#3)

Wouldn't it be great to have Chuck Baldwin and Andrew Napolitano as Prez and VP.

Any man wishing to hold the Office legitimately would have to inform the country that the FEDERAL RESERVE owns the corporation that acts as the U.S. government.

Both of those guys are always belly-aching about how ridiculously blatant the Constitutional violations committed by the U.S. government are, to no avail because there ain't no Constitution in a commercial zone. All law today is by agreement or contract, period.

noone222  posted on  2014-04-14   19:13:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: noone222, Jethro Tull (#10)

See Doug's post above...

christine  posted on  2014-04-14   19:41:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: christine, noone222, 4 (#11)

Both of those guys are always belly-aching about how ridiculously blatant the Constitutional violations committed by the U.S. government are, to no avail because there ain't no Constitution in a commercial zone. All law today is by agreement or contract, period.

We've been saying similar things about all the folks who wave the Constitution and point to specific violations by government goons. They/we all need to understand that this land we live on isn't a nation and it's so called ruling document is toilet paper. We need more Bundy ranch stand downs and less constitutional pontificators.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2014-04-15   13:24:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Jethro Tull (#15)

We need more Bundy ranch stand downs and less constitutional pontificators.

You're so right. And, I believe it's coming.

noone222  posted on  2014-04-15   14:33:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 16.

        There are no replies to Comment # 16.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 16.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest