Enter your e-mail to join other freedom seekers who choose to see the world as it really is... and get a free report that explains explains how to live on your own terms.

We respect your privacy,plain and simple. You will also start receiving our free weekly ezine.

Proof that the Bible is Anti-Government

anti-government religionsJudaism and Christianity are, at their cores, subversive, anti-government religions. This is strongly reflected in the holy books of these religions, a.k.a. the Bible.

So, I’m going to provide a quick cheat sheet for biblical anarchy – a list of passages that make a clear case: The God of the Bible has nothing to do with the governments of Earth and, in fact, considers them evil.

This list may offend people. But their anger doesn’t make it any less true.

The List:

Starting with the Hebrew Scriptures, then moving into the Greek, here are the relevant passages:

In Exodus 1, Hebrew women openly defied the king of Egypt:

And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives… when ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools, if it be a son, then ye shall kill him; but if it be a daughter, then she shall live. But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive.

You can find other defiance passages in Daniel 3 and 6.

The classic passage on rulership is from 1 Samuel 8, where the Israelites, then living in a tribal anarchy, go to Samuel the prophet and request a king. Samuel was displeased by this, but prayed to God anyway. God tells Samuel to warn the people how badly their king will abuse them (He gives him a detailed list) and then tells Samuel:

They have not rejected you, they have rejected me.

Another great story involves King David: God hand-picks this young man and says that he possesses a “heart like God’s own.” After a few years in power, however, he is corrupted and kills one of his soldiers, in order to steal his wife. This is the great example of “power corrupts.” (2 Samuel 11)

Neither Abraham nor Moses gave Israel a king or a government, and they were fully aware that such things were the way of the world. The Hebrews lived in their own land, with no ruler, from perhaps 1400 BC to 1000 BC. Then came the 1 Samuel episode mentioned above and lots of trouble.

What people sometimes fail to grasp about the Hebrew Scriptures is that they initiated a permanently subversive concept: Placing justice above the ruler. That concept alone undercuts every government on Earth.

But, But, But…

Leaving the Hebrew Scriptures, let’s continue by addressing the great refuge for statist Christians, a few verses in the 13th chapter of the letter to the Romans. The passage says:

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. Whoever therefore resists the power, resists the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil.

To interpret this as referring to presidents and princes, every one of them would have to “be a terror to evil works” and not to good works. Shall we apply that to Stalin? To Mao? To Pol Pot? To Nero?

If “there is no power but of God,” and if these powers are Earth’s rulers, we have to say that Hitler did good works, and so did Vlad the Impaler. That cannot be honestly argued. (Though it can be blanked-out.)

Was it right for the Christians of Germany and England to kill one another in WW1? Will we really say that God orders his children to destroy each other?

Beyond this, nearly every major figure in the New Testament defied their rulers. For example:

  • Jesus refused to answer any of Herod’s questions (Luke 23:9).
  • An angel broke Peter out of jail in Acts 12. (And Paul and Silas in Acts 16.)
  • In Acts 5, Peter and John defied their rulers and ended up telling them, to their faces, “We should obey God rather than men.”

Now, with that silliness behind us, let’s move on.

Back To Our List

The government of Judea tried to kill Jesus as soon as he was born. An angel had to appear to his father and tell him how to evade the government. (Matthew 2.)

In Mark 8, Jesus tells his students to “beware of the leaven [the teachings] of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.” In other words, “Don’t believe the religious people, and don’t believe the government.”

In Luke 4, the devil shows Jesus all the kingdoms of the Earth and says, “All this is mine, and I give it to whomever I please.” He offers it to Jesus, who considers it a legitimate offer but rejects it.

Jesus said on two separate occasions that Satan is the ruler of this world. (John 12:31 and 14:30) So writes Paul in 2 Corinthians 4:4.

Jesus flatly denies any association with the rulers of this world in John 18:36:

My kingship is not of this world.

Jesus warns his students not to be like rulers in Mark 10:

You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you.

Paul, in 1 Corinthians 6, warns Christians not to use government justice systems.

I’ll conclude this section with the big one, from Luke16:15:

That which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

So, what is “highly esteemed among men”? That’s easy: The entity people give the right to take their money, to order them to be punished, and to kill. Nothing on Earth is more highly esteemed than government.

And yes, this passage says that government is an abomination. If you don’t like that, blame Jesus, not me.

“Wait! There’s Another Scripture!”

People always grasp for reasons to ignore what they don’t like. For anyone so minded, here’s your “gotcha” list: Eph. 6:5; Col. 3:22; 1 Tim. 6:1; Tit. 2:9; Tit. 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13-15, 18.

After everything I’ve pointed out above, I’m not going to waste my time on desperate objections. People determined to hold their current beliefs won’t change their minds anyway.

The Truth

The hard truth is that people want to align God with government, because they want an easy way out. They don’t want to suffer for righteousness’s sake.

Which of the prophets weren’t abused? Which righteous man didn’t suffer for his righteousness? Cowardly believers are simply trying to avoid this.

Here are a few of Jesus’ comments on the subject:

  • You shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake. (Mark 13:13)
  • You are blessed when men hate you, when they exclude you and revile you, and cast out your name as evil, on account of me… Their fathers did the same to the prophets. (Luke 6:22-23)
  • If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you. (John 15:20)

By turning the state into a polished fantasy and inserting it into “God’s plan,” people convince themselves that there is no need to suffer. It makes for a cheap, painless (and spineless) religion.

Jesus, however, says that this is false. So do Abraham, Moses, Samuel, the prophets, and the apostles.

If you’re not willing to suffer for your beliefs, you’re not much of a believer.

Paul Rosenberg
FreemansPerspective.com

See the world as it really is and find freedom. Free updates.

We respect your privacy,
plain and simple.

Next Post: Destroying the Myth That Military Power Equals Freedom
Previous Post: They’re Not Gods – They’re Not Even that Smart
  • Freespirit

    By virtue of their “word” in the various religious books, you demonstrate that Rellgion seems to be “anti-government”, however I, as a Atheist,say by VIRTUE of their very NATURE, COLLECTIVIST, albeit VOLUNTARY, they are VULNERABLE/Susceptible to Government, itself a COLLECTIVIST(by force) concept..

    This seems to me a contradiction between WORD and ACTION and most rational individuals would have to admit that ACTIONS ” Speak louder than words”.

    Although Hypocrisy MAY not have been the intent of religion . The result is the same.

    • Trutherator

      Hypocrisy is all the more an attribute of atheism. They have no external foundation common to all men upon which to base any moral accusation but they do it anyway, judging by their own capricious selection of moral codes. When real atheists get absolute power, they they act out a belief that they do not have to answer to any God that rewards good and punishes evil. (Stalin, Mao, Kim il Un, and yes Hitler).

      The Inquisitors act like Mao when it comes to enforcing doctrine, and who knows what brutalities would visit upon the innocent if the Richard Dawkins’ view of religious teachings as child abuse were to become state law?

      Truth is that actual believing Christians are always the ones that suffer worst at the hand of both atheists and their *practicing” fellow believers (as defined by actions) when these get full-blown consolidated power.

      But it never lasts, because of a truth, God “setteth up one and putteth down another”. Throughout history he’s given men ample opportunity to learn that they cannot trust any kind of kingdom. The nobles in the Czar’s Russia paid no heed and in killing the almost impervious Rasputin, by his prophecy, they were overthrown by their own covetous jealousy and palace intrigues, by which they filled their cup enough to merit their fate. And then the Russian people who, like Solzhenitsyn said, quoting his grandfather, had turned their back on God and he turned his back on Him.

      Saddam’s statue was torn down, people in Russia spit on his grave when nobody’s looking, and Latin American countries like Honduras curse the day that Hugo Chavez won a presidency.

      Even “the” Antichrist himself, it says, “shall come to his end and none shall help him”.

      Yes, I expand on these things at my trutherator.wordpress blog.

  • xlbadger

    The divine spirit within us strives to make the “Hard Right Choices” while the devil steers us into “Easy Wrong Choices” … we can become easily dissuaded from the discomfort of “Hard Right Choices”, especially when the earthly temptations are the lucrative pleasures we would otherwise abandon and deny for ourselves … IMO, this is the driving force that supports Obama through his “entitlement” agenda to enslave all of the people.

    • Hey You

      It is somewhat questionable as to what Obama is trying to achieve. My own opinion is that his driving ambition was to get into the office of US president. Then, when accomplished, he was adrift. Being adrift, he’s susceptible to all kinds of anti-USA traditions and has surrounded himself with all kinds of collectivists.

  • Charles Fisenne

    Jesus,the Jewish Rabbi, saw errors in government. It is an error to claim he or others were anti government. Jesus tackled individual and government with Moses commandments and the Lord’s prayer. It was and still is the best philosophy for a peaceful world. Too bad that it is not recognized as such. Early adherents called it the way rather then a religion. Does religion confuse?

  • 0point

    “Judaism and Christianity are, at their cores, subversive, anti-government religions.”
    Of course! They are each (religions & governments) competing for your mind, and by extension your wallet.

    • Hey You

      Religion and organized religion are not the same.

      However, sometimes organized religion and governments are the same.

      • 0point

        A distinction without a difference? Perhaps you’d have to define what you mean by those different terms, for me to grasp the point you’re making…

        • Hey You

          Religion is a spiritual thing which somewhat guides a person in relation to his personal environment. Organized religion is having a connection to a church or other collectivist organization which lays out guidelines for personal action based upon an official word.
          I could probably write an essay on the distinction, but it’s not my place to expand much on that.

          • 0point

            Interesting perspective, thanks for taking the time to explain. I wonder which of your definitions is closest to what Mr. Rosenberg had in mind while writing this article. He names Christianity and Judaism in his first sentence, they both seem to me to be highly organized religions.

          • Trutherator

            Hahahahahahahaha! “Highly organized religions”! ROTFL!
            Wikipedia says there are about 41,000 denominations around the world. Estimates vary, pone source up 30,000, another source says 40,000. Nobody knows and it keeps changing. They fellowship in groups. Atheists merely take over existing institutions are sue to keep out competing religious beliefs from having a voice in them. That’s why universities, schools, governments are filling up with them, including the ones who put on sheep’s clothing to get credibility for their rulership over the rest of us. Expel all competing faiths from government, when they get a chance.

            They are disorganized, their is no central command, and despite all the lying propaganda about cults that deceives both believers and atheists alike, the best defense against a totalitarian government is faith in Jesus Christ. It is the most effective civil disobedience happening right now in North Korea. And meantime, the Christians that stay in lands that become militantly Muslim are the ones who become a bright shining light there.

            And the Christian martyrs of the Sudanese government’s literal war against Christians of the South paid in blood for their witness, including the pastor who remained faithful after they purged his eyes out.

    • ansonheath

      If you think this was just about ‘religion’, you are DD & B!

      • 0point

        Mr. Heath! The eloquence of your rebuttal astounds! Your use of reason, your command of logic, the evidence you bring to bear — the likes of these we’ve not seen in years…. heh.

        • ansonheath

          Succinct – :)

  • Hey You

    Although I am not a student of the bible, I do believe that the bible provides some insight and personal directions of living.

    • 0point

      Well yeah, but couldn’t we could say the same of many, many books, religious or not? The point is by what standard do you decide which parts to embrace and which parts to discard.

      • Hey You

        One needs to have faith.

        How’s that for an intellectual answer?

        Yes, that could be said of many books. I suppose that it takes some insight to determine what is in accord with things like the golden rule.

        • 0point

          Yeah, I’m not sure what faith has to do with anything, faith being belief despite the absence of evidence, and many times professed belief in spite of contradictory evidence.
          But the Golden Rule, now there’s a standard that can be useful, there are certainly many worse.
          For myself, I start with the Non-Aggression Principle as the foundational moral standard, and its corollaries Respect for Property Rights, and Peaceful Parenting are worthy of specific mention.

          • Hey You

            Actually, I threw in that “faith” bit because that’s what the collectivists like to promote as differentiated from reason. But I usually adhere to the philosophy of my freedom of action stopping where your nose begins.

            Of course, I sometimes get angry and sometimes regret acting like a fool. However, over the years I have stayed out of major trouble. Even all my 5 adult-children like me. In this often senseless society, that is a reasonably good record. You sound as if you have a reasonable approach, too.

            Incidentally, I recall that during WWII, one of the celebrities of the time commmented that “We would certainly win because God’s on our side”. I suppose that it’s comforting to have such a simple mind.

    • ansonheath

      That’s the American religious perspective – God is our divine butler.

  • ansonheath

    This is – by far – one of the most profound declarations I have ever seen on the bible and its message – PERIOD! I thank you, Mr. Rosenberg – and I thank God for inspiring you to write it!

  • HasdrubalMaximus

    Gotcha list is still scripture

    • http://texnat.org/ Texas Chris

      True, but it in no way refutes the anti-state scripture.

      • HasdrubalMaximus

        All depends on how you apply “anti-scripture” verses

    • Paul Rosenberg

      As mentioned above, for a full discussion on the gotchas, see James Redmond’s “Jesus Is An Anarchist”.

      • HasdrubalMaximus

        Cop out. Why don’t you explain it

        • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

          Because he can’t. No one can. This is incomprehensible. See my original post (first). Even after this study, questions will remain. Our craving for truth does not end. It will not be satisfied until Judgement Day, and eternity. We are humans. We have yet to become “gods.” And, we will NOT become them by our own hand.

      • Joch C.

        Hi Paul,

        Per your suggestion, I just finished reading Jesus is an anarchist.

        There is 1 part I would disagree with or maybe simply expand
        upon. When the author explains Jesus cleansing the temple he says the Jewish
        leaders were taking payment (animals) for unnecessary sacrifice, is essence
        stealing. Hence the reason Jesus accused them of making the temple a den of thieves.

        I have always had a slightly different interpretation.

        It is my understanding the Jewish money changers referenced in
        the story would take in various types of coinage, not necessarily denarius or
        any other Greek standards because at this time, there were many currencies made
        of precious metals. The money changers would then exchange the different money types
        for Jewish money so the people could then participate with the church. The stealing part comes from the Jewish money
        changers exchanging money with significantly less metal precious metal content.
        They were skimming the till in vain.
        This made Jesus irate. 1 of the only times Jesus showed real anger.

        The Roman Empire eventually diluted their coinage which led
        to the fall of Rome.

        Today the Federal Reserve and nearly all other central banks
        are guilty of “money changing.” Money
        changing for less is the very nature of fractional reserve banking…

  • Aristo

    Paul, I enjoyed reading this article until you got to the part of the “gotchas” and did not take the time to explain why those passages don’t contradict your position.

    I could write an article titled “Proof that the Bible is Pro-Government” and start with the “gotcha passages” you pointed out, then when it comes to the part of the “gotchas” I’ll write this –
    People always grasp for reasons to ignore what they don’t like. For anyone so minded, here’s your “gotcha” list – then list the passages that are anti-government which you started out with in your article.

    Then I’ll add this note at the end as you did.

    “After everything I’ve pointed out above, I’m not going to waste my time on desperate objections. People determined to hold their current beliefs won’t change their minds anyway.”

    Huh?!! ;-)

    Of course this is no way to argue one’s position, i.e., “My Bible passages trumps your Bible passages!”

    We can’t pick and choose passages that support our preconceived position, and then ignore or downplay the ones that contradict it.

    (So, how do you explain the gotcha passages?)

    • ansonheath

      Context?

    • http://texnat.org/ Texas Chris

      Eph. 6:5; Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.

      Slavery in that era was bond service, or as a payment of debt. The “slave” owed the master, and was paying his debt to said master. It does not equate to government (the state) on any way.

      Col. 3:22; Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.

      Again, pay our debt, and do so with a glad heart as you serve also God, who has forgiven your debt. Again, not referring to the state.

      1 Tim. 6:1; All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God’s name and our teaching may not be slandered.

      Again, honor your debt obligation as if you are repaying the debt you owe to God, so that He may receive the glory.

      Tit. 2:9; Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them,

      Recap of above.

      Tit. 3:1; Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good…

      See bold. The implication being submit to laws which are good, but disobey laws which are evil.

      1 Peter 2:13-15, 18. 13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, 14 or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. 15 For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people. 16 Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves. 17 Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor. 18 Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

      Clearly, Paul says to honor the just authority, but disregard and resist the evil. If owing a debt, submit to the holder of that debt, even under “those who are harsh”, because those are the terms of your debt being forgiven.

    • Paul Rosenberg

      For a full discussion on the gotchas, see James Redmond’s “Jesus Is An Anarchist”.

      • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

        No! We can’t say that. Anymore than we can say we understand and can explain the Trinity. While he lived here as a man, he was no anarchist. (Though he was perceived as a threat to the Establishment) Was he like Barabbas? What did he say to the Centurion? What did he say to the Lucifer/Satan in the wilderness? He paid his taxes to Caesar, as did his father, and his brothers. Anarchist? I don’t think so. He is above govt. Something we simply cannot comprehend. In the New Creation, where sin no longer exists, govt(s) will be obsolete. Try as we may, this is incomprehensible.

        • http://laliberty.tumblr.com/ LA Liberty

          You may have a misconception of what an “anarchist” is. Reading Redmond’s piece will help.

  • John

    As an add-on for your point: When Jesus was asked about paying taxes, He said “show me the coin”. As one of the Pharisees flashes one, saying “here’s one”, I expect the older, better debaters among them are thinking “No, you IDIOT!” He had just exposed all that group as quislings, people who were having commerce & doing business with the same hated Romans, and using coins with a forbidden *image* of a false *Lord* on them.
    So rather than choosing whether to get the Romans killing him for provoking an open anti-tax revolt, or else having His followers all leave because He was supporting the hated Romans, He first exposes the legal snakes as the quislings and traitors they were, and then gives the classic “Give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s (nothing) and give to God the things that are God’s (your life, loyalty, and tithe, which by the way was never more than 10% of your *increase*, or profit on business, and probably nothing on wages.)
    So Jesus was not much of a help to the statists, at all.

    • http://texnat.org/ Texas Chris

      Excellent point. the “coin” was the Roman Denari, stamped with Caesar’s seal, which revealed the questioner as a paid operative of Rome.

    • born2think

      And at the end of the timeless statement, “Render unto….” what did Jesus do with the coin? I suspect he gave it back to the owner. In action saying, “…and give to each man what is his.” In other words, “Don’t steal!” This implies that taxation just may be a sophisticated type of theft. Further, read the first part of that passage, folks: “Certain pharisees and Herodians (think Rome here) went to Jesus in order TO ENTRAP him. They already knew what he’d say about taxes, people! How can you entrap someone if you’re not sure what they’ll say? In fact, to lead a person to say what they have always said, you prep them by saying exactly what they told Jesus before THE QUESTION of paying taxes. Remember? “We know that you [basically] are a man of your word and don’t change with any pressures of man.” See? Read it in you own Bible. Why would they bring the men of Herod? Simple. When Jesus said what he had been saying (apparently to NOT pay taxes and be stolen from), they could do what the Pharisees could not – arrest Him. Look at it like a lawyer and it becomes quite apparent we may have a tax protester on our hands, named Jesus.

  • Gil G

    This would only convince the types of Christians who seriously believe God will come down and smite the unbelievers in the immediate future. Then again the punishment for working on the Sabbath is death yet people do it anyway unharmed.

  • Trutherator

    Paul Rosenberg has written an excellent exposition of the scriptural case against governments of men of all kinds, including, by thy way, indirectly of the rulership of religious institutions. The scripture itself tells the believer, to hold the ones who wrote it as anathema, a curse, if they should ever “preach any other gospel”. “If they speak not according to this word, it is because they have no light in them”.

    The forgotten passage that even Paul Rosenberg missed in the references is toward the end of Matthew 17. Tax collectors came to the apostles and asked whether their master –that would be Jesus– paid taxes (“or else”, presumably).

    On taxes, most pastors today in America, at least, are preaching that people should pay everything they legally owe, *as if it were a moral principle*. Not so Jesus Christ.

    Jesus asked the disciples that came to him with the question, “17 of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? 26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
    27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.”

    In other words, Jesus says right there that anybody who decides your tax bill by the force of law, is a thief who is corrupt and that any tax regime corrupts its architects.

    Pastors who are over-protective of 501(c)3 and proclaim proudly that they refuse to tell their flocks any spiritual pronouncement upon their wicked rulers are giving the devil his earthly due. Selah.

    • Thomas Little

      The issue of accountability to government is a vital one, as I have seen some of the worst anarchist type “Christians” flagrantly violate the law in the name of “freedom”. Irresponsibility, wanton presumption, unaccountability and greed masquerading as family prerogative, all are serious departures from the truth. Too many lives have been broken in rebellion against government, pieces like this do a disservice to readers in many ways.
      http://www.glenacres.org/Documents%5CWeilandReviewed.doc‎

      • Trutherator

        Christ’s lesson that the people who tell you what taxes to pay OR ELSE, is obviously NOT a “gladly” attitude. He obviously says these overloads to not pay the taxes they extort from everyone else. He says “lest we offend them” go get the piece to give to the tax collector. Not because it’s “fair” or “spiritual”, it was a tactic like the “Render unto Caesar” and “Render unto God” remark. When he was ready for Golgotha he let loose with Matthew 23 exposing those hypocrites.

        The widow was (from her perspective) giving to God. It certainly was not Rome. But the same priests controlling that treasure also got some filthy lucre from the money changers, and we know what Christ did with them.

        “Thou shalt not steal” is still in effect. The Good Samaritan helped the wounded traveler with HIS OWN coin. He did NOT steal it from another traveler. I contributed twenty years of my life to total service to others with “just enough” to live and raise my children. I did NOT steal it from anyone.

        It gets you nothing to say you want to help the poor with a government program either. David said: “I will not give to the Lord that which cost me nothing”.

    • http://texnat.org/ Texas Chris

      Selah, indeed. Well said.

  • MarEng

    To be consistent, the Bible does define TWO (and only two) responsibilities for the Civil Magistrate:
    1) Punish Wrong Doers (this requires a real injured party – not violation of some man-made statute, punishments include death and restitution to the injured party – not fines payable to government and a prison industry based on man-stealing).
    2) Repel Invaders (by numbering the population for war, yet excluding all who object – the people had to, individually, agree with the purpose).
    Everything else is anti-Biblical and therefore anti-Christ.

    • http://texnat.org/ Texas Chris

      Well said.

  • Greenbean950

    I’ve always liked the 1 Sam 8 passages where God describes what earthly kings are/do and warns Israel against having one. It took 3 kings to destroy Israel – Saul, David, & Solomon.

    • http://www.mormonstruth.org/products.html Dave P.

      Even after that, the kingdom split between Israel and Judah. The Kingdom of Israel did not have a single king that could be described as “righteous” until its fall when Assyria scattered the ten tribes. Judah had a small handful of righteous kings, but they were the minority.

    • Greenbean950

      Here are the passages specifically related to God’s verdict on earthly kings (the state) in 1 Sam 8. When I first read it I thought God was an anarchist… :-)

      9 So, do what they ask; only, you must give them a solemn warning, and must tell them what the king who is to reign over them will do.’
      10 Everything that Yahweh had said, Samuel then repeated to the people who were asking him for a king.
      11 He said, ‘This is what the king who is to reign over you will do. He will take your sons and direct them to his chariotry and cavalry, and they will run in front of his chariot.
      12 He will use them as leaders of a thousand and leaders of fifty; he will make them plough his fields and gather in his harvest and make his weapons of war and the gear for his chariots.
      13 He will take your daughters as perfumers, cooks and bakers.
      14 He will take the best of your fields, your vineyards and your olive groves and give them to his officials.
      15 He will tithe your crops and vineyards to provide for his courtiers and his officials.
      16 He will take the best of your servants, men and women, of your oxen and your donkeys, and make them work for him.
      17 He will tithe your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves.
      18 When that day comes, you will cry aloud because of the king you have chosen for yourselves, but on that day Yahweh will not hear you.’
      19 The people, however, refused to listen to Samuel. They said, ‘No! We are determined to have a king,
      20 so that we can be like the other nations, with our own king to rule us and lead us and fight our battles.

  • Chaz22Gill

    Romans 13:1-4 teaches that God appoints a civil government as a necessary evil. Due to man being sinful by nature, a government is necessary. They are to use God’s law as a standard. Without objective social law we live in anarchy which leads to tyranny by the the strongest group that arises.

    • Paul Rosenberg

      “we live in anarchy which leads to tyranny by the the strongest group that arises.”

      Chaz, that is precisely what we’re living in already! The strongest group calls itself “government” and we pretend that they are righteous.

      • Chaz22Gill

        Paul,
        True, we are living in a tyranny of sorts. The issue is that a civil government is still a necessity vs. anarchy where the helpless have no protection. The argument from a Christian worldview is that the civil government is ‘SUPPOSED TO RULE RIGHTEOUSLY’, yet I agree with you that they don’t. The Feds violate Art.1, Sec.8 daily where their particular duties are described. They use our tax dollars in unconstitutional ways and violate the tenth amendment. It is the best system we have, yet it is still flawed, as man is basically evil by nature until regnerated by God’s Holy Spirit.

  • http://texnat.org/ Texas Chris

    A wonderful piece. Thank you!

  • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

    The Bible is not against government, it’s ALL ABOUT government under Christ (Isaiah 9:6-7): self government, family government, church government. and civil government by His perfect law and altogether righteous civil judgments (Psalm 19:7-11). See also Romans 13:1-7, 1 Corinthians 6:1-6,1-3, 2 Corinthians 10:4-6, 1 Timothy 1:8-10.

    For more, see our free online book “Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our Online Books page and scroll down to title.

    Also, please consider an alternate interpretation for John 18:36:

    “Many Christians reject these inescapable facts of Yahweh’s
    sovereignty, believing He has no kingdom at present or that His kingdom
    is limited to heaven. They lift their favorite proof text from John 18:

    ‘Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of
    this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants
    fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is
    my kingdom not from hence.’ (John 18:36)

    “The
    exact same Greek phrase ek toú kósmou, translated “not of this world,”
    is used several times and is explained in the preceding chapter:

    ‘I
    have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they
    are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that
    thou shouldest take them out
    of the world, but that thou shouldest
    keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of
    the world…. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also
    sent them into the world.’ (John 17:14-18)

    “Clearly ek toú kósmou does not mean
    Yahweh’s kingdom exists only in heaven. Although it is certainly true
    that His kingdom is not of this world, this does not mean that He does
    not intend for it to be in this world. His statement in John 18 is
    better understood to mean that His kingdom is nothing like the other
    kingdoms in this world. As someone once said, “The only kingdom that
    will prevail in this world is the kingdom that is not of this
    world.”….”

    Excerpted from “Law and Kingdom.”

    • Gregory S. Gill

      Ted, you again have spoken the biblical truth. Amen.

    • HasdrubalMaximus

      How ironic that Paul used his Roman citizenship and appealed to Caesar

    • Lorin Chane Partain

      yet there is nothing in the OT or NT requiring the establishment of a state. Civil government, if it exists is to remain within the confines of dissemination of justice, but the question is, is a state necessary? The Israelites before Saul are evidence that God does not require that his people live under human government.

      • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

        Lorin, thank you for responding.

        While it is true that God does not require (or desire) that His people live under human government (for example, government of, by, and for the people), humans are nonetheless required to carry out His justice and therefore His civil judgments (government of, by, and for God).

        See our latest blog article “375 Years Later: Constitution vs. Constitution.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our blog and see top article.

        • Lorin Chane Partain

          I disagree with your interpretation of Romans 13. It is often the case that this is interpreted as a Carte Blanche for civil government, however that is not interpreting scripture in light of scripture. No government is outside of God’s law, and there can be no civil government if we consistently apply a mere two commandments. “No Murder” and “No Theft.” I do not know of a single government that exists today that does not violate both of this commandments, and therefore operate outside of God’s authority. God has not given authority for man to collectively disobey his commandments. To interpret Romans 13 in this way gives rise to a conflict within scripture. I do not believe such a conflict exists therefore it is your interpretation that needs to be examined.

    • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

      I think you may understand when we refer to “left-hand” stuff. It is not necessarily more important than the “right hand.” It is simply where we live from day to day. It is where our witness is. We think ourselves capable of governing ourselves. We have yet to prove that, and that we deserve it. Perhaps this “great experiment” was our opportunity. Thus far, we have blown it. Franklin, the interestingly enough luciferian, may well have been right. We do require “Rulers of Evil.” (F.T. Saussy)

    • Luther_1517

      EXACTLY. Spot on Ted. Can I get an amen, everyone?

  • D J

    To believe that Jesus was an anarchist is bizarre. Did He not submit to the Jewish powers? He could have called on His Father who would have sent legions of angels, but did not.

    Basically we have to submit to legal authority so long as they exercise power in a Godly manner. The beating to death of that man, at the hands of the police, and the jury who acquitted them, were not exercising power in a Godly way. Does that however justify extra-judicial actions? There still exists civil court in which to sue, and frankly the man’s civil rights were violated. Though the odds of this man Eric Holder going after the police is very slim. In this world there will always be a tension between government and people, always has been, always will be. Someone is always in charge.

    Saying the Bible is anti-government is a stretch. Israel had Judges over them prior to asking for a king. They already had a King, that was the Lord their God. Saying the Israelites were living in anarchy is very much a stretch.

    • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

      Since my previous, and in my first charge, I make the exception. We may well be on the same page here. You mention “tension.” I’m not sure how we agree in context, or if we do at all.

  • Jeff D

    Yes, we should, in fact, apply Romans 13 to Nero. It is a letter to actual Romans during the reign of Nero.

  • Squid Hunt

    Wow. If I’ve ever seen a case of taking scripture out of context, this is it. The Bible clearly says to submit to authorities, not buck them. It does, however, acknowledge that rulers do not supersede God’s law. In fact, their authority is from God. So rebellion against any authority is a rebellion against God and God promises that those authorities have his permission to punish it. (Matthew 23, I Peter 2:13-20)

    Rebellion is one of those sins that is called out again and again in the Old and New Testament. The Bible states that rebellion is every bit as bad as witchcraft, which God hated. This is all based on the premise that you believe in God first, but assuming not, why are you using the Bible to prove your point? That would seem a bit silly.

    • T. Edward Price

      So let me get this straight. When Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego DEFIED King Nebuchadnezzar, they rebelled AGAINST God? And God punished them by … letting them live? When the Hebrew midwives Shiphrah and Puah DEFIED Pharoah, by NOT killing all the Hebrew boys, they rebelled AGAINST God? And God punished them by … blessing them with their own families? I’m glad I understand that now.

      • Squid Hunt

        That’s not at all what I said. I said that God is the supreme authority and the governors are answerable to God. That being said, we are obligated to obey God’s law regardless of man’s law. We aren’t justified in taking someone’s life just because our boss told us to do so. However, most of your everyday civil disobedience doesn’t even touch God’s law. It’s just petty tantrums and rebellion. Such as the rage against paying taxes as demonstrated in previous notes above. Christ very clearly said render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. He didn’t get involved. It’s not part of his agenda.

        The verses in I Peter I posted above very clearly says to obey your rulers. Even the bad ones. For the cause of Christ.

        If you want a biblical description of the prerogative of government, go take a look at I Samuel 8 where Israel asked for a king. God said their king would take their sons for war and their daughters to work for him and tax them and take their land. That’s what government does.

        I don’t like taxes. I don’t like government. I wish that we had a hands off congress and president. I don’t believe in wars of aggression. That doesn’t alleviate me of my biblical, God-given responsibility to obey my rulers short of breaking the commandments of God.

        • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

          Please consider another interpretation of what’s meant by rendering to Caesar:

          “…In Mark 12:17, we find Jesus’ oft-misused statement “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Many people interpret this to mean Yahweh and Caesar have separate jurisdictions, powers, and possessions. Is this true?

          “The term “Caesar” is used today to represent government in general. However, at the time Jesus made this statement, Caesar was a flesh and blood Roman dictator. What was it that Jesus was saying should be rendered to the Roman Emperor? Did the bodies, souls, and spirits of man belong to Caesar? Did reverence and obedience belong to Caesar? Did the people’s land and other possessions belong to Caesar? What about taxes? Romans 13:7 tells us to “render therefore to all their dues: tribute [tax, NASB] to whom tribute is due;
          custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.” In Verse 6, Paul indicated all these things are due to God’s ministers or servants. Did Caesar qualify as one of the ministers of God described by Paul in Verses 3 and 4?….

          “Because only Yahweh determines what is good and what is evil (Romans 13:4), the government described by Paul in Romans 13:1-7 is clearly a Christian government established upon the moral laws of Yahweh. Therefore, the taxes Paul described as due to God’s ministers, are Biblical taxes. Are we to believe Jesus was suggesting Christians pay Biblical taxes (tithes) to Caesar?

          “What belongs to Yahweh? And what belongs to Caesar? The answer to the first question answers the second question. Yahweh reigns over and owns everything:

          ‘The earth is YHWH’s, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.’ (Psalm 24:1)

          “What does this leave for Caesar? Even Caesar didn’t belong to Caesar.

          “Jesus’ answer was merely another example of His trapping the Pharisees with their own words – in this instance, forcing them to choose their god, Yahweh or Caesar….

          “Mark 12:17 was never meant to be general instruction to
          everyone, but only to those who forsake Yahweh’s authority….”

          For more, see online Chapter 19 “Amendment 10: Counterfeit Powers” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our Online Books page, click on the top entry, and scroll down to Chapter 19.

          • Squid Hunt

            In a word, yes. Caesar is a minister of God. As are all governments. That’s the context of Romans 13. Verse one says there is no power but of God. God ordains all authorities.

            They are used to punish the wicked. I don’t find it coincidence that we have a lying, deceitful, rebellious populace and we’re running straight for a police state. How many people go to court for speeding these days, knowing full well they were, and when they get to court, what do they plead? Not guilty.

            Proverbs 21:1 says God holds the heart of the king in his hand, to turn it in whatever direction He wants.

            I Timothy 2, Paul tells Timothy pray for rulers and kings and give thanks for them so you can live in peace. He said that when Nero was emperor.

            And I’ve heard your version of “Render unto Caesar.” I don’t think that fits the context. They were asking about money so that they could get him for rebellion. To refuse to pay taxes being the rebellion. He pointed out plainly that He had other things to worry about and sent them on their way. Why would we as Christians spend our time in rebellion against government when we should be preaching Christ? This is reiterated in I Peter 2.

            This whole article above is a nice little piece of anarchic propaganda, but that’s about all it is, abuse of religion to attain a political goal.

          • Joch C.

            You are conveniently overlooking the qualifier portion of authority granted in Romans 13. Does Caesar meet the flowing standard, if not he is not a God ordained authority.

            3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

      • Joch C.

        Don’t forget about Rahab the wall prostitute who misdirected the city police during the battle of Jericho in the Book of Joshua and was later exalted in the Book of James.

        James 2:25

        New International Version (NIV)

        25 In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction?

    • Joch C.

      Hi Squid,

      Romans 13 does instruct to submit but it also does much more. R13 says God granted authorities continually tend to Gods service. So by definition any so called authority who is corrupt in any manner and does not continually tend to Gods plan is not an authority. The way I see it, this erases the supposed authority of 99.9% of all existing governments. Romans13 also accomplishes 1 more critical objective. R13 explains the very role of government, therefore prohibiting all other government actions. Do you know what R13 blueprint for government is? I do and will tell you. From the Bible, “They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.” That’s it. This is the only directive given by Paul and Romans 13 to government. He does not give government 40,000 pages of instruction and privilege. He does not give government a multi trillion dollar budget.
      This Romans 13 establishes an incredibly finite role for government, nothing like the leviathan is has become today…

      • Squid Hunt

        Please show me where it says any of that. And where it is our responsibility to rebel against them if they don’t.

        • Joch C.

          Hi Squid,

          Read all of Romans 13: 1-7. Don’t simply clinch up and forfeit your logic after you read the first verse. Specifically read verse 3 and 4. It is not so much that you are instructed to rebel, rather Paul defines the character of God ordained authority. When a so called authority does anything contrary to verse 3,4 and 6, they have by definition lost all authority and submission is no longer required by God.
          Paul was dangerously treading on thin ice when he challenged Caesars authority, Paul stayed alive by using a giant helping of tongue in cheek. Think about it.
          Romans 13

          New International Version (NIV)

          Submission to Governing Authorities

          13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

          6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

          • Squid Hunt

            You’re dicing things up again. Subject yourself to governing authorities. No authority except God established it. Which authorities? Those governing you.

            The impression that Paul was mincing words out of fear of retribution really ignores the boldness with which Paul spoke. it also ignores Paul’s blatant patriotism in other passages and his appeal to submit and preaching against rebellion as something horribly wicked in God’s eyes. To sit back and say, there are only some governments that God ordains so you can rebel against the rest is convenient, but false.

          • Joch C.

            Hi Squid,

            So you are saying that I am to submit to each and every entity that claims to govern me? So all that is required is a claim on me and I must submit? So in a magical or supernatural method, all entity’s that claim authority over me are instituted by God. Once instituted these governing bodies can conduct themselves in any manner, such as ruthlessly beating me to death or shooting me, because once again, God instituted them and ordained them. These same authorities can steal, waste, destroy, rape and conduct themselves in all sorts of questionable mannerism because once again, God instituted them and ordained them. And I know for sure God instituted these governments and ordained them because these governments simply appeared and claimed authority over me.

            So let me see if I get this straight.

            Government regardless of discernable origin, behavior and conduct + Invisibly yet super naturally God ordained and instituted= unquestionable submission by me

            And just to make sure I get this, God cannot lie (Heb. 6:18; Titus 1:2; Num. 23:19; 1 Sam. 15:29; 1 John 1:10; 5:10) and God is truth (Exod. 34:6; Deut. 32:4; Ps. 31:5; Isa. 65:16) yet the governments he ordains and institutes can lie and are not truth.
            Makes sense to me.
            Hey Squid, we here at the Freemans Perspective decided that you must immediately give us 30% of your wealth. If you decline, we are going to send over a surplus Hummer and some black boots to motivate you. This is your government speaking, failure to comply may result in property loss and or bodily harm…

          • Squid Hunt

            No, what’s going on is you are pretending the government has no authority over you and attempting to use the Bible to do so, which is not possible. As well as pretending to ignorance rather spectacularly and suddenly and without warning. Best of wishes. Take care.

          • Joch C.

            No, you are pretending this government has no authority over you. You had better send payment soon, or else…

            Do you not see the Pandora’s box you have opened? I think you do see it, crystal clear.

            I submit to any and all government that strictly adheres to the following Biblical instruction.

            R13:3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.For the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.
            1. Does not terrorize the righteous.
            2. Does not create fear among the righteous.
            3. Commends me for doing right and does not tax me or punish me for doing right.
            4. Is Gods servant for MY good.
            5. Instills fear when I am unrighteous rather than promote/condone unrighteous behavior.
            6. Gods servants whose only responsibility is to punish the wrongdoer.
            7. Give their full time to governing, not wasting time, not running a small business from their government desk…
            Righteous and unrighteous as defined by the Bible, not defined by mans government.

      • Squid Hunt

        The thing I’m overlooking is your disqualifier, which is just not present in the scripture. Anywhere. Nor is a call to rebellion.

  • 7thPillar

    And you need scripture to claim your natural liberties because…?

    Scriptures are the onion skin of any organized religion and as such appeal to the sheeple we are trying to awaken.

    That Jesus Feller (not his actual name, but few Xtians realize this) is foisted on us as a “rebel” with a cause. The Prophets are no less fallible than the astrology they sometimes condemn.

    Cast dogma aside, grab the balls between your legs and demand your innate Liberty. You don’t need Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed or any other founder of oppression to make your case.

    The Boot-Strap Expat
    http://7thpillar.wordpress.com/

    • Joch C.

      Most non Christians I have met do not have the courage to self govern and face the world in absence of socialism. They lack faith therefore gather in herds. Unfortunately the modern church has also become rather herd like and dependent upon massive amounts of government intervention. Rugged individuals are few and far between…

      • http://7thpillar.wordpress.com/ 7th Pillar

        You must not get out much. Much of the non-Xtian world does just as well with “self-governance,” as any Xtian and Socialism has nothing to do with religion or spirituality, unless that feller in the Vatican has anything to say about your personal economics.

        The “herds” prefer the printed word.
        Not the direct experience of the divine known as “Gnosis.”

        Some claim that Jesus Feller was a Gnostic. Guess that’s why their gospels were burned and their teachings had to go underground.

      • http://7thpillar.wordpress.com/ 7th Pillar

        You must not get out much. Self-Governance, also known as Anarchy and Socialism have little in common. Though I hear that feller in the Vatican, a Xtian of some stature is a big fan of Socialism.

        The herds tend to prefer the printed word. Direct experience of the Divine is so much work. They call it “Gnosis.”

        I hear that Jesus feller may have been a Gnostic. Guess that’s why their gospels and teachings were suppressed by the other Xtians.

        • Joch C.

          That feller in the Vatican is a Catholic. Catholics prefer manmade creeds and sacraments rather than the Word. And yes, the new leader is probably socialist but no more of one than his predecessors. Catholic bashing is tangent. The herds I refer to are the masses in America and world wide, no matter what they claim to be. They vote for and clamor for more state, many of these are prideful atheist…

          • http://7thpillar.wordpress.com/ 7th Pillar

            I see. And you prefer other man-made creeds and sacraments?

            As I recall, that Jesus feller spoke Aramaic, wherein “god” is called Allaha, which means “unity” and is a bit closer to Allah, than “god” or Yaweh or Jehovah or “Yod Heh Vau Heh” which is exactly how that Jesus feller would have addressed “his lord.”

            But then, the folks that actually wrote the gospels in Greek decades later, without having ANY direct teaching from this Jesus feller. Then the Romans translated this Greek into Latin, then the Germans translated it into German, then King James translated it into English and not a divine word was lost.

            BTW – Holy Communion (or whatever you prefer to call it) is a Pagan Rite that precedes the time of this Jesus feller by quite a spell.

            Yeah, right teenage beauty queen…

            Beyond that we seem to agree.

            You might want to check out http://www.amazon.com/The-Hidden-Gospel-Decoding-Spiritual/dp/0835607801 if you really wanna have a clue about your Lord and Savior.

          • Joch C.

            Hi 7th. Pillar,
            I am not sure what is going on here? It almost seems you are trying to convince yourself God and Jesus are not real? I live by Faith, so all of your history, facts, figures and “logic” do not phase me. With that being said, I am not a Catholic, I do not believe in the sacraments, and Holy Communion for me, is any time 2 or more Christian gather in the name of the Lord. I conduct Communion every single night at my dinner table with my family. We eat and drink in the name of Yahweh or Jesus, the name is not important, the sentiment is. I don’t need a religious hierarchy and a building and bunch of idiots, to follow my Bible. It is all right there for everyone, free of charge and chains, if you just read it .
            The most important thing you need to know about me regarding my Walk is that I do not believe in the standard concept of trinity so prevalent in the majority of todays churches. I am more along the lines of Arius. You should do some homework, you may find it fascinating.
            The 4 Gospels hold more than enough information, I need no hidden works, which I am incredibly aware of. Furthermore I do not care about the Hebrew to Greek translation flaw. According to this way of thinking, any and all knowledge humanity has, that was gained prior to the Greek Language, should be ignored due to possible translation inconstancy’s? Wow. Like I said, I live by Faith and Guidance from the Holy Spirit. The words in a Book are only part of it.
            Now that we have this out of the way, can we stop going down tangents, 2 stepping and straw manning and get back to the original claim you make. YOU say Christians are socialist, atheist are not. Your god Ayn Rand was a giant socialist when you look at the totality of her philosophy. Her “minimalist” mandate is Pandora’s box.
            I just don’t think it is a fair and honest assessment to view individualism and freedom in terms of Christian versus atheist. Fact is, I have met only a few Christians who really understand Liberty, most are a combination of socialist/fascist and they view God through the lens of their politics rather than viewing their politics through the lens of God. Jesus said my Kingdom is not of this world… Additionally I meet many big mouth atheist, secularist, objectivist, etc. who would not know freedom if it hit them upside the head. You need to practice what you preach and start viewing people as individuals.

          • http://7thpillar.wordpress.com/ 7th Pillar

            God is real, I’ve met her. That Jesus feller I’m not so sure about.

            Faith is the Dollar Store substitute for gnosis, direct experience of the divine.

            I gno “facts, figures and logic” are confounding to the “faithful” but they exist whether your faith likes them or not.

            I’m not a Catholic either (you probably figured that out without asking your pastor), however we have much more in common than you realize.

            Communion is just as you describe with one exception, it doesn’t require “Xtians” to be a sacred experience. Did that Jesus feller invent sharing a meal with your loved ones? I don’t think so.

            Nor do I need a Hierarchy to commune with the divine. Preachers, priests and the like are just middle-men. You may be okay paying “retail,” but I go right to the source and cut out the middle man.

            That Jesus feller had a few teachers of his own. None of them were Xtian. Most were Jewish and a few were likely Pagan. Don’t limit yourself to a sliver of reality. It’s a huge universe and you are not the center of it.

    • Squid Hunt

      Without an absolute authority, there is no such thing as an innate right. Without God, you’re just a bag of chemicals. No such thing as innate rights for rocks and gas.

      • http://7thpillar.wordpress.com/ 7th Pillar

        “Innate Rights” do not require any authority but your own.
        Everything that exists is part of God, however you relate to the divine. As such, your authority is within, not on any printed page.

  • HasdrubalMaximus

    How ironic that Paul used his Roman citizenship and appealed to Caesar

  • Gregory Alan of Johnson

    There’s a difference between the Government of Yehovah-God through Yeshua (Isaiah 9:6-7) and government through Lucifer/Satan (Matthew 4, John 18:36) which is separate (Luke 10:18) from Yehovah.
    Romans 10:9 Believers (being one, I do not call myself a “Christian”) are supposed to enforce the victory of the resurrection of Yeshua from the crucifixion. Clearly that’s not going well at this time. Repentance is necessary and needed by all who claim Yeshua/Jesus.
    With that typed, I agree with his points. I do not agree with the reasoning behind it nor his title of this posting.

  • Bob

    Comparing judaism and the biblical Christianity to ONE thing like government is ludacrous – why? BECAUSE they are diametrically opposed to each other.

    Your FALSE assumption is that YOU dear AUTHOR believe you understand the bible.
    IT’s morality & that of mans nature are opposed in the same way – diametrically.

    The bible is SPECIFICALLY about Government in the BALANCE of Yah’s STANDARD – period – it REFLECTS Yah’s truths & our roles both for Yah as well as mans shortcommings to Yah. The BIBLE is what was once called THE BOOK OF THE LAW and without KNOWING Yah’s law in equity with a love for truth you will fail to see in harmony the whole of the message and make a law unto yourself supplanting GOD for your own idol/god which YES HE is opposed to that — in fact it is about Yahweh proving his word and establishing HIS government and the roles of his people in that process which so happens to include highlights of GOOD & BAD examples… GOOD are in alignment to HIM the BAD are OPPOSED to his structure i.e. FORM of government.

    The PAYMENT of the coin from the fish to EVERY other event can be gleaned from this: Obedience in singleness of heart, fearing God.

    Colossians 3.22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:

    James 1.8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

    We KNOW God is not double minded but man certainly can be unstable.

    James 4.8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.

    Exodus 1.17 But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them….

    It’s about your WORLD order or view – YAH is the standard of measurement or Mankind is a humanistic standard — unmovable tested true equitable

    It’s about CHOOSING Yah’s system in season or out of season with the mass populations opinion: Joshua 24.15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve יהוה, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the elohim which your fathers served that [were] on the other side of the flood, or the elohim of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve יהוה.

    It concerns MANS self will to adulterate TRUTH in support of a lie for acceptance or tolerance from others in the world opposed to love of Master & Creator Jesus.

    2 Peter 2.All

  • GoodBerean

    No, the Bible is not “anti-government.” The Bible prescribes Godly government limited to what God says is the purpose of civil government.

    John Lofton
    Director,The God And Government Project
    Institute On The Constitution
    JLof@aol.com

  • magister343

    How could you make a post like this without referencing Jotham’s Parable of the King of Trees?

    “And when they told it to Jotham, he went and stood in the top of mount Gerizim, and lifted up his voice, and cried, and said unto them, Hearken unto me, ye men of Shechem, that God may hearken unto you. The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them; and they said unto the olive tree, Reign thou over us. But the olive tree said unto them, Should I leave my fatness, wherewith by me they honour God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees? And the trees said to the fig tree, Come thou, and reign over us. But the fig tree said unto them, Should I forsake my sweetness, and my good fruit, and go to be promoted over the trees? Then said the trees unto the vine, Come thou, and reign over us. And the vine said unto them, Should I leave my wine, which cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees? Then said all the trees unto the bramble, Come thou, and reign over us. And the bramble said unto the trees, If in truth ye anoint me king over you, then come and put your trust in my shadow: and if not, let fire come out of the bramble, and devour the cedars of Lebanon.”—Judges 9:7-15

    It was in particular an attack on Jotham’s half-brother, Abimelech son of Gideon, who killed all of his other brothers in order to make himself the first King of Israel. The principal is broader though, strongly implying that rulership over others is something which good men would never desire and that the wicked men who would accept it cannot do well.

    You should also have noted Hosea 8:4, where God Himself says to the prophet:

    “They made kings, but not through me. They set up princes, but I knew it not.”

    That would seem like a pretty clear contradiction of the common interpretation of the troublesome verses from Romans.

  • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

    Before I began to respond, I did a word search in this article and entire discussion. That word(s) is mentioned nowhere. I searched for “Luther,” and “Two Realms/Kingdoms.” Nowhere to be found. Funny our founders mentioned them quite prevalently, so far as government goes. Proper govt that is. We are talking Madison, Locke, and Milton primarily. To lesser extent, though seems contrary, even the deists Jefferson and Paine. So why hasn’t the OP and everyone else here? Perhaps we are missing something?

    This is the challenge I issue to all. The OP and the commenters. Go to:

    https://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/lbi-from-sea-to-shining-sea/id537636936

    This is a FREE download. It will take some concentrated study. About eight (8) hours worth. It is eight lectures. But well worth it. The instructor is well qualified in the context of religion and govt. He is a systematic theology professor at the graduate and post-graduate level. He slays every single sacred cow from all aspects of the realm of religion. He leaves everyone uncomfortable from their preconceive ideas about both govt in the temporal and the eternal.

    Understand it is condensed from an entire semester course (Civic Affairs), that after even completing that, questions and discussions will still remain. The tensions between temporal and eternal citizenship are not easy. Thus the word — tension. This is a necessary process, which goes hand and hand with sanctification. Having said that, it is still insufficient to satisfy our craving for truth here. There is a seeming contradiction between the Scriptures of Rom. 13 and 1 Thes. 4:11-12. The conflict between pure authoritarianism and libertarian thought. Again, the tension. It is necessary. It is as the soul requires the purifying fires as does gold.

    Perhaps, some day, before the second coming, presidents, governors, and legislators will consult these types as chaplains and religious advisers. The ones they have consulted thus far have proven largely insufficient. Look at our application of warfare, in the past century, and even into the beginning of the next. Until then, we get the govt and society we deserve. Once you complete this study, you will know exactly what I mean. Then we can begin this discussion anew, and maybe get it right this time around. That is, given a second chance, if we are ever offered it.

Read more:
use bitcoin anonymously
Why Gary North Is Wrong About Bitcoin

I like Gary North. I appreciate his work and I spent a very pleasant hour hanging out with him at...

Close