ExpertCounter Free Hit Counter & Web Site Statistics

God Never Ordained The State

« State Officers Repent Of Evildoing
Christian Anarchy & Realized Eschatology

Whenever a non-statist Christian says, "God never ordained the State," a statist churchgoer will likely retort, "Romans 13 says that the powers that be are 'ordained' of God."

One person argues for the Kingdom and Lordship of Christ on Earth, and the other argues for the Kingdom and Lordship of Caesar, yet they both rely on the Bible to support their arguments.

Can Christ’s Kingdom really be so divided against itself? Or, can Christians really serve two masters, as the state-incorporated, federally regulated, 501 (c) 3 “churches” suggest?

Well, we do know that Christ’s Kingdom was ordained in the Bible, when Christ said, “I will build my ‘Church’ (ecclesia/govt.); and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it...” Mat. 16:18

And we also know that States have always ordained themselves, from the earliest times to the more recent, e.g., "We the People... do ordain and establish this Constitution..."

Anyone can see how that the statist interpretation of Romans 13 helped to cause  German Protestant churchgoers to be complicit in a genocidal campaign against harmless Jews. Adolph Hitler didn't do the actual confining, killing, or incinerating of those 6 million Jews, statist churchgoers did it all for him. And they did it because of statist propaganda, but not from Joseph Goebbels alone. It was from their “churches” and a mindless process of worshipping the false god of Democracy that caused those "good Germans" to be politically organized into a fictional Nation-State, which then fully conditioned them into mental bondage to a Madman.

Of course, only 20 years later, the Supreme War Crime, as defined at the Nuremberg Tribunals, that of Aggression, from which all other war crimes come, was being perpetrated upon another, largely defenseless People, who only wished to be free from foreign, imperial domination by the State of France and Wash. D.C. And it was mental bondage again, to some English-speaking Madmen, like JFK, LBJ, Nixon, and Kissinger that caused a host of mindless souls who, like the Germans, wore the  uniform of a State to create another Holocaust, as they murdered over 3 million people in Southeast Asia (Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos). Again, like Hitler, none of those so-called "leaders" did the actual killing of those poor, overseas peasants. It was all done by average people from another so-called Christian Nation.

We could go on about the less-known US-supported atrocities in Africa (Angola) and Indonesia, that lasted into the 1980s, too. Western domination through puppet dictatorships of the Middle East and so-called Latin America is probably better known, though. But the more recent atrocities through direct and indirect action by a so-called Christian Nation can probably be characterized by the comments made by then US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, regarding the US-led UN sanctions on Iraq to an interview by Lesley Stahl on 60 Minutes (5-12-96), when asked, "We have heard that a half million children have died (due to the sanctions, periodic bombings, and undoubtedly the depleted uranium (DU) from the armor-piercing missiles and bombs). I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" And Albright's televised response was, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." And Albright has also said, “What's the point of having this superb military you're always talking about if we can't use it?”

That's the racist, homicidal, and genocidal voice of a modern "Secretary of State" (with a Jewish heritage, no less) bent on global domination via nuclear armed intimidation. And it's not hard to see that the Spirit of Adolf Hitler has easily morphed into the hearts and minds of more "good Americans."

Underlying all of this, today in North America and in the rest of the so-called West, that same statist propaganda is still being churned out by the so-called "Clergy", suggesting that people like George Bush, Arnold Schwarzenegger, or Bill and Hillary Clinton are the so-called authorities over the Body of Christ, and who must be slavishly obeyed just because they violently overthrew the previous State apparatus, or effected a bloodless coup, or because they won an election or were corronated by a magical number or percentage of fellow human beings.

So, this is not some light problem that has been long ago solved by Western "civilization." But for those who haven’t already read the Bible from cover-to-cover a few times, I hope what follows will demonstrate the biblical attitude toward the State in its various forms throughout human history, up to 70 AD. And, we will attempt to quickly answer the following questions to the satisfaction most any sincere individual in this somewhat brief article:

• Is it really possible that God "ordains" every hostile power and so-called authority that comes down the historical pike?
• If so, when exactly in time and space did God "ordain" the State as “the powers that be?”
• Did God "ordain" the State at the very moment Apostle Paul penned Romans 13?
• Or can we find an earlier point in time where it happened?
• And does Romans 13 seem to refer to the Roman-occupied Jewish state of Judea, or just the jurisdiction of Caesar and the Roman Empire?

Many here may already suspect that Romans 13 is a continuation of Romans 12, which is talking about the rulers and offices in the Ecclesiastical government (Romans 12:8), and that there is no original chapter break in Paul's Epistle, which was written around 57-58 AD. Paul had not even been to Rome yet, and was trying to orient the Roman Christians from afar to good ecclesiastical function, because the Roman Church had not been founded by any Apostle. It's very unlikely that Paul suddenly switched the context into a Public Service Announcement (PSA) for compliance to the Roman Empire, at Romans 13. The crucified bodies that littered the Appian Way was all the advertising that the Pax Romano needed for that.

If Paul was talking about the Roman State at Romans 13, then Paul was giving very bad advise to Christians, and to himself, because it says that, "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." Notice how Paul used the singular pronoun, “he” is the minister.

Does history bear out how Christians received "praise" from the State as the so-called "minister of God?" No, not at all. The State is not the minister of God. The tiny Judaean State was the first to persecute Christians, with Paul himself leading the charge before his conversion. And the Roman State murdered nearly all of the Apostles and martyred Christians for 250 years, until the Church became a state-corporation under Caesar Constantine via the Edict of Milan, in 313 AD, which legalized Christianity and offered the Clergy Power and Prestige. Constantine was pretty savvy as he tricked the Body of Christ into mingling itself with the Body of the State, because the Roman Empire was falling apart at that time, and Caesar needed fresh minions to fight on the battlefields for Rome. Previously, Christians  were separate from the State, and never killed for the State. Of course, the Church was immediately corrupted at that time, but the State got the transfusion it desired. Not much has changed since the Edict of Milan in 313 AD or the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.

Nero "The Beast" Caesar couldn’t possible be “the minister of God.”  Nero is fittingly referred to as the “Man of Sin” in John’s Revelation, right before Nero gave the command, in 66 AD, to “destroy Jerusalem and level the Temple.” During the gruesome 42-month Siege and Fall of Jerusalem, Jewish mothers are known to have cannibalized their own dead children before it was all done, in 70 AD.

And it was Nero that had Paul’s own head chopped-off, after Paul made his “appeal unto Caesar,” which was a so-called benefit afforded to Roman citizens. Paul had tried to get himself out of a jam in Jerusalem, because, as Luke records for us, Paul refused to listen to the warning from the Holy Spirit and the prophecy by fellow Christians, not to go to Jerusalem at that time. (Acts 21:4, Acts 21:11) Sure enough, it happens just like the Holy Spirit warned, as Paul was beaten, jailed, and bounced around between two jurisdictions: the Roman Procurator, Felix, Portius Festus (Felix’s successor), and Herod Agrippa (the Jewish puppet king). Then Luke also informs us that Paul would have been released had he not made his “appeal unto Caesar.”  (Acts 26:32)

So, was Apostle Paul an "evildoer" who deserved to be beheaded by the State in Rome? Or was Paul just giving bad advise to Christians at Romans 13, which helped lead them to their needless deaths, and his own? Or is the statist interpretation of Romans 13 flawed?

Those are the three main choices or conclusions to be drawn. But, if you're still unsure, take a look at the phrase "minister" of God, at Romans 13. The transliterated Greek term is “diakonos”:

1) one who executes the commands of another, esp. of a master,

  a servant, attendant, minister

  1a) the servant of a king

  1b) a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned to him

      by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and

      distributes the money collected for their use

  1c) a waiter, one who serves food and drink

You got it; “he” is a "deacon." The term "minister" as used by Paul and translated in the old King James Bible from “diakonos” is, always and only, used in an ecclesiastical context. Paul uses it five times in Romans, and another six times in his other Epistles via the KJV.

So, lets go back to the earliest times of humanity, to see if we can find any budding City-State in which God "ordained," besides the Judaean one which became obsolete in God's plan shortly after the Incarnation of Christ, and which was soon thereafter completely destroyed by the Roman State in 70 AD, as Christ prophesied would occur around that time in his Olivet Discourse at Matthew 24, and elsewhere.

Beginning with the first family, when Cain gets jealous and kills his own brother, Abel, at Genesis 4, God punished Cain with a kind of a farmers curse, and Cain complains to God, "My punishment is greater than I can bear." Cain was also worried and feeling guilty that that someone might kill him. So, God gave protection to Cain via a mark, which somehow warned others of a sevenfold curse to anyone who might take vengeance by killing Cain. Then Cain went out from the presence of the LORD and dwelt in the land of Nod, east of Eden. Cain has a son, Enoch, and the Bible tells us that Cain "builded a city" and named it after his son, Enoch.

There it is! Cain sought security and protection within a city that he, himself, ordained to build. Lets call it the City of Cain, because he was its Founder. Was it ordained by God, too?

Well, Cain had a great-grandson, named Lamech, who had two wives. One day, in the City of Cain, Lamech comes in and tells his wives that he killed somebody. And Lamech has the audacity to them them that he deserved a seventy-sevenfold level of  protection from vengeance from his own potential murder (Gen. 4:24), or eleven times that of his Grandfather. So, we already see an escalation, a sense of entitlement, and a skapegoating of the murdered victim.

By Genesis 5, Lamech has a son, and names him Noah, saying, "This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed." Well, for his part, Lamech was pretty grandiose, because of all the descendants that he and his two wives undoubtedly produced, only his son Noah and three grandsons survived what was coming. But, Lamech lived another 590 years, until about 10 years before Noah (who had been building the Ark for over 100 years) and Lamech’s three grandsons hopped onto the Ark, because God said unto Noah, "The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth." Gen. 6:13

So, clearly, the antediluvian City of Cain and any other City-State were never "ordained" by God. Or, if they somehow were, it was certainly withdrawn by the time Noah and his family stepped onto the Ark.

By Genesis 8, Noah and his family arrive in a new World, of sorts. God blesses them and says, "And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth."

By Genesis 10, Noah has a great grandson, named Nimrod, who "was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar." Gen. 10:9 & 10

Nimrod the mighty hunter (of men) and Kingdom-builder of Babel! That doesn't really ring of any God-ordination, does it? In fact, Nimrod so distrusted God and His covenant with his Great Grandpa, Noah, and the rest of humanity, that the Nimrodian attitude was that, "...as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth." Gen. 11:2-4

Now that's very telling. God promised not to flood the earth, ever again, yet these Nimrodian statists kiln-fired their bricks to resist moisture, used tar as mortar to make it water proof, and then built their tower to reach into Heaven, so if they got flooded, then so does God! Then, the Bible says, "And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city." Gen. 11:5-8

Well, there it is! Another un-ordained City-State-Kingdom "builded" among the children of men in the Bible.

I think we can quickly skim over the historic and peculiarly “ordained” tribes and nation of Israel. Of course, even they came under foreign and domestic statist bondage at various times, which was never viewed upon as something to be sought after. Quite the opposite, as the Egyptian exodus demonstrated, even though, immediately afterward there was the golden calf incident at Mt. Sinai. And Moses' prophecy of God is very telling, too, in the Song of Moses, which says, "For they are a nation void of counsel, neither is there any understanding in them. O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end!...For their vine is the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter: Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps. Is not this laid up in store with me, and sealed up among my treasures? To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste. For the Lord shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone, and there is none shut up or left." Deut. 32:28-36

Later, God had extensively warned the congregation of Israel (1Sam. 8:10-19) of the tyranny that would follow if they sought to have a king to rule over them, like was so common among the Gentiles. But they didn't listen to God, and God reluctantly let them have their way, saying to Samuel, "Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them." 1Sam. 8:7

So far, we have taken a brief look at pre-Christian biblical history. And there is no hint of any God-ordained State, outside of the the peculiar congregation of Israel, who were really a bad example. And we will pick up in Part II, with the time of Christ’s Incarnation, to see if there is any place or time that God or Christ suddenly “ordains” the Roman State as the “powers that be” who are supposedly “the minister of God to thee for good.”

Peace to you all, NJT

2/3/07

God Never Ordained The State, PT II of II

In Part I, we covered the City-State in the Bible before and after the Flood. And God nowhere “ordained” any State, except for the peculiar congregation of Israel, which God reluctantly allowed to engage in statist idolatry, as told to Samuel, through their preference for an earthly (and unordained) king like the Gentiles, rather than to have God reigning in their midst until the true Seed of Abraham was to arrive with the Blessing (Holy Spirit) for all of humankind. (Gal. 3:14)

So, we now get to the time of Christ and the Apostles, to see what they reveal about the authority and jurisdiction of the tiny, foreign-occupied Judean State and of the Roman Empire, and if they could really be “ordained” by God as “the minister of God to thee for good” as some believe Romans 13 suggests.

Apostle Paul was a contemporary of Our Lord, and was a rabid persecutor of the early Church before his conversion, being formerly known as Saul of Tarsus. As a previous Pharisaic Jew, his Epistles usually announce or reflect a directive from a higher authority via the words of Christ or an imperative from the Old Testament. Although, sometimes he'll give a  personal opinion on a topic, saying, "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord..." 1Cor. 7:12

So, Paul should be in agreement with the words of the Master regarding the nature of the State:

"And he (Christ) said unto them (the disciples), 'The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so among you...'" Luke 22:25 & 26

Notice how Christ says that the kings of the Gentiles "exercise" lordship over them. That's just like Nimrod “the great hunter,” and is completely un-ordained. And Christ says they are "called" benefactors. You see, the State is a fraud. It’s a so-called protection racket or a monopoly on the use of force and coercion. These were not really great revelations from Christ. But the disciples needed to hear these words directly from the Master, so that the Apostles would not foolishly succumb to statist propaganda and mistakenly import any of those un-ordainded and hostile methods into Christ's non-hostile and politically separated (holy) Kingdom.

God is long-suffering, and He allows a lot of things on planet Earth that He doesn't ordain or approve of. The State is one of them. The State ordained itself. The State is always an idolatrous attempt at rivalry with, or autonomy from God, even when it claims to be a defender of the Faith as it goes around the planet like Nimrod the "great hunter," slaughtering and plundering the poorer peoples of the Earth.

Christ told His followers that they are the Light of the World and the Salt of the Earth. Mat. 5:13 & 14

Of course, you can't be a Light to the World if you're just another part of it.

Let’s go back for a moment to a prophetic book from the Old Testament, because Christ and the Apostles sometimes quote them directly, stating that their fulfillment was in the 1st-century AD. Now pay attention, because David, speaking through the Spirit of God, about 1000 years before Christ, at Psalm 2, says something about the State, but he’s speaking about the State that would exist 1000 years into the future.

David says:

“Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his Anointed, saying, 'Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.' He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel. Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.” Psalm 2:1-12

That’s the whole Psalm; its’s only 12 verses. And it is clearly and purely prophetic of the time of the Incarnation of Christ, since, in David’s time there could be no actual “heathen rage” “against his Anointed,” because the “Son” hadn’t been “begotten,” that is to say, brought forth, yet.

Which brings us back to the State that existed around the time of Christ’s ministry, which was still, strictly speaking, the Old Covenant Era. And we know how “the heathen rage” was expressed by Herod the Great, who was the puppet-king of Judea, appointed by Octavian and Antony during the Second Triumvirate of Rome. Herod caused every two year old male child in Judea to be killed, in an attempt to murder the young Christ. (Mat. 2:13) And Herod Antipas would go on to have John the Baptist beheaded, and Herod Agrippa I would have Apostle Peter killed and James the Just (brother of Jesus) arrested, while Agrippa II appears much the same as his father, great-uncle, and great-grandfather by the latter chapters of the Book of Acts.

That makes it biblically clear that the Jewish State, even before the beginning of Christ's ministry, and during the time of Christ's earthly ministry, and afterwards could not possibly be characterized as “ordained” as “the minister of God to thee for good” that Paul would later describe at Romans 13.

Interestingly, “the heathen rage” described the Judean State/Church just as much as it did the Roman/Pagan State, when the fully mature Christ sarcastically referred to Herod  as "that fox” when, “The same day there came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence: for Herod will kill thee. And he (Christ) said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected. Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate... “ Luke 13:31-35

You see, even the temporarily ordained Judean/Israelite Nation was declared obsolete, and was about to be replaced by Christ’s non-hostile Kingdom before the passing of that very generation. (see also Mat. 16:28 & Luke 9:27)

As we have seen, Christ delegitimized the State of the Gentiles as it exercised lordship and claimed to be a benefactor. And now, we see that Christ delegitimized the State of the Jews, too.

So, the non-statist Christian has a precedence from Christ Himself, regarding the illegitimate nature of every State, right up to that point in time. But Apostle Paul was not even a Christian yet, and would not pen Romans 13 for another 20 years, or more.

Can we find anywhere in the New Testament during the following 20 years, where God apparently reverses Himself and suddenly “ordains” either the Jewish or the Gentile State as “the minister of God to thee for good?” And if we could find something like that, wouldn’t that make God somewhat schizophrenic?

Not to worry. Apostle Peter reaffirms and demonstrates by quoting from Psalm 2, as he boldly preaches to the Jews after Christ’s resurrection, how illegitimate the State is. Luke records it for us (although he wasn’t there, as the pronouns are still “they” and “them” until they change to “we” and “us” about half way through th Book of Acts) some time later, in Acts:

“Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, ‘Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.’ For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together.” Acts 4:25-27

Do you see that? The Holy Spirit says, prophetically through David, that the State would be against God and against Christ when He arrived. And sure enough, the four Gospel accounts show an observable “heathen rage” that was coming from various Jewish sources: the Herodian Dynasty, the Priesthood, the Sanhedrin, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Scribes, etc. But Peter declares that the Roman State was also part of the fulfillment of the “heathen rage” that was being “gathered against the LORD and His Anointed/Christ.” Peter specifically says, “both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,” against what God was doing.

It was a no-brainer. The mindless Roman State office-holders crucified Christ, at the insistence of the Jews when Pontius Pilate asked, "Shall I crucify your King?" And the Judaean State's Roman-appointed High Priest answered, "We have no king but Caesar." (John 19:15)

The Roman State went on to cause the killing of most of the Apostles, too. Although John was only imprisoned for life by Rome. And Thomas was killed in India, by a statist Brahman sword. Christ explicitedly warned all of His potential followers of these hazards which would be perpetrated against them, by the State:

“And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles. But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you. And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.” Mat. 10:18-23

There’s the “heathen rage” again. Christ prophesied that it would be expressed by the State right up to the destruction of Jerusalem, in 70 AD, except that it would continue to be expressed toward the Body of Christ, after Christ’s Resurrection.

The statist interpretation of Romans 13 defies the biblical attitude against the City-State in the antediluvian World of Cain, and after the Flood, as seen by the City-States created by Nimrod. The statist interpretation of Romans 13 also contradicts Christ Himself, who expressly delegitimized the Roman State, the Kings of the Gentiles, and the formerly-ordained Judaean State, at least up to the time of 70 AD (undoubtedly beyond then, too). The statist interpretation also contradicts the testimony of the Prophets, which have an anti-statist interpretation, according to Apostle Peter. The statist interpretation of Romans 13 even contradicts Paul’s own writing, elsewhere, when he says:

“And having spoiled principalities and powers, he (Christ) made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” Colossians 2:15

How is it that Paul could possibly be intending to mean, at Romans 13, that the Roman State is “ordained” by God as “the powers that be” and are “the minister of God to thee for good,” when he says that Christ “spoiled” such hostile “principalities and powers” by “exposing” them for what they were, and that Christ had “triumphed over them?” Without violence, that is.

It is impossible!

Some of the very last recorded words of our Lord's earthly ministry, at his Great Commission, claimed all heavenly and earthly authority for Himself, leaving no bestowed authority for Caesar or the State, as far as Christians are concerned: "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, 'All authority is given unto Me in Heaven and in Earth.'" Matthew 28:18

The word “authority” there is from the Greek, exousia {ex-oo-see'-ah}, meaning: power, authority, right, liberty, jurisdiction, strength.

Therefore, the State is a usurper against Shiloh, the Rightful Ruler over the whole Earth (Gen. 49:10).

Yet, virtually every state-incorporated churchgoer uses a statist interpretation of Romans 13, to seemingly trump everything Christ Himself has said about the State. And they use it to try to trump the whole attitude of the Old Testament, too. They use it to defy the testimony of the Christian martyrs for 250 years, who lived politically separate or underground from the Roman State, unless they were being thrown into the Roman arenas as they fearlessly refused to declare an allegiance to Caesar, saying rather, “Jesus is Lord,” as they preferred a physical death to Statist Idolatry. Those early Christians knew who their "higher authorities" were, and it wasn't Nero or Diocletian.

Sadly, statist churchgoers are the last ones to dare to believe that those “ordained” as the “minister of God to thee for good” could possibly be those filling offices in the long-awaited Kingdom of God, which Christ repeatedly preached and ordained as an alternative to the State and a hostile World System?

Ask any of them if God wants them to pay extortion on their own labor for things they don’t want or use, or if God wants them to be threatened into becoming slaves and killing machines of the State against poor people in faraway places. 93% of the time they will say, “Give unto Caesar, is what we’re supposed to do until Jesus comes back someday.”

You see, “the heathen rage” and the idolatrous demand for a hostile carnal king continues. And so do atrocities, many of them being perpetrated by statist churchgoers who are in mental bondage to a Madman, or to a series of Mad men and women via the agency of political fictions, known as States.

But I trust that is not the case with you.

Peace to you all,

C. Livingstone, NJT


2/3/07

Contact