Okay, this is lecture number 27 in Romans. Lecture number 27 of Romans. And we're in Romans chapter 13. We'll be looking at Romans 13 verses 1 to 7 in this lecture. We might be able to move on further than that depending on the time limitations that we have. verses 1 to 7 of Romans 13 I've titled this this section the Christian and the government the Christian and the government so it's the Christian and his dealings with the government brief introduction remember Romans chapters 1 to 3 teaches that all mankind is condemned the pagan man the moral man and the Jewish man are all condemned then Romans chapters 3 to 8 deals with salvation Romans chapters 3 and 4 deal with justification, actually 3, 4, and 5. Chapters 6 and 7 deal with sanctification, and chapter 8 deals with glorification. Romans chapter 9, 10, and 11 speak on God's dealings with Israel, and Romans chapters 12 to 16, the section we're on now, how Christians should live. Romans 12, which we've already covered, It says that the Christian should live a life of consecration, his life consecrated and devoted to the Lord. Also that a Christian should live a life of humble service, using his gifts to help other Christians and to glorify God. And that the Christian should live a life of love. Now we're on Romans 13, and Romans 13 verses 1 to 7 discusses how Christians should submit to the government And then verses 8 to 14, the remainder of Romans 13, how Christians should love their neighbors. So let's take a look at Romans 13 verses 1 to 7, the Christian and the government. Now the first five verses of Romans 13 tell us that the Christian should submit to the governing authorities. Just take a look at a few other passages before we get started just to show that this is a common teaching in the New Testament, Titus chapter 3 and verse 1. says, "...remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed." So Paul there tells us to submit to the governing authorities. The Apostle Peter tells us to submit to the governing authorities in 1 Peter 2. 15. Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him, for the punishment of evildoers, and the praise of those who do right. For such is the will of God, that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men. And then, of course, our Lord Jesus Christ, in Mark chapter 12, also told us to submit to the governing authorities, Mark chapter 12, verses 13 to 17, and they sent some of the Pharisees and Herodians to him in order to trap him in a statement. And they came and said to him, Teacher, we know that you are truthful and defer to no one, for you are not partial to any, but teach the way of God in truth. Is it lawful to pay a poll tax to Caesar or not? Shall we pay or shall we not pay? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them, Why are you testing me? Bring me a denarius to look at. And they brought one. And he said to them, Whose likeness and inscription is this? And they said to him, Caesar's. And Jesus said to them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they were amazed at him. And so Christ said to them, they should pay their taxes and submit to the governing authorities. So Peter, Paul, and Jesus all taught that we should submit to the governing authorities. Now what we are going to read here probably the most exhaustive passage in scriptures Romans 13 1 to 7 on The Christian and the government governing authorities and how the Christians to submit to the governing authorities when I try to do this passage justice But the reason why we should submit to governing authorities is the first five verses says of Romans 13 Is number one the human government gets its authority from God look at verse 1 Paul states Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God." So human government gets its authority from God. See, in Genesis 9, verse 6, God instituted human government. There's no evidence in scriptures that human government existed before the flood of Noah. In fact, Genesis 6, with the wickedness and the violence of mankind and man killing himself off, it appears that there was just total anarchy in the world at that point. So, there's no indication there was human government. Right after the flood, God tells Noah, that he can begin to eat animals. Before that point, before the flood, mankind would just eat vegetation. and did not need to eat animals and so now God tells man that he can kill animals and eat animals probably because the vegetation was not as wholesome as it used to be due to the fact that the 40 days and 40 nights worth of water came down and now the poisonous rays of the sun were damaging the plant life to a greater extent than it was before the flood but after telling Noah that man could now kill and eat animals In Genesis 9.6, God says, "...whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed. For in the image of God he made man." And so, God was telling Noah that there needs to be human government to exercise capital punishment on anyone who takes the life of an innocent person and it's because of the sanctity of human life. Human life is sacred, man was created in God's image and any man who does not respect the sacredness of human life and kills an innocent person forfeits his right to life. And so God instituted human government, man did not. Man had nothing but anarchy and so God shares his power to take life with the government Exodus chapter 21 the Old Testament law by the way the Genesis 9 passages is many years before the Old Testament law so capital punishment is is not just the Old Testament law. It was given to Noah for all mankind, not just the Israelites who came much later. Exodus 21, verses 23 to 25, God, after giving His law, says, But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. Basically, it is stating that justice, you know, what is just is what is right, and what is right is what is fair. So justice is fairness. For somebody to say that murderers should be given seven years a 7-year prison sentence or a 50-year prison sentence but then let out in 7 years on good behavior, that is not justice. Justice means fairness. It means the punishment must fit the crime. So if someone takes the, in a premeditated manner, takes the innocent life of another person, then they forfeit their right to life. And so justice means the punishment must fit the crime. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. Now, human governments often abuse their authority. Still, the principle of human government is God-ordained. God is not into Karl Marx's utopia, classless society, which is wherever you have people without government, you have anarchy. And wherever you have people with government that is unlimited and has too much power, then you have tyranny. But the principle of human government is God-ordained. So therefore, since human government gets its authority from God, verse 2 tells us that to resist the government is to oppose God. Look at verse 2 of Romans 13. Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God, and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. so to resist the government is to oppose God God instituted human government and therefore violators will be punished both by God and the government God basically man reaps what he sows but the government will punish violators that it catches as well now the God-ordained role of human government government has a limited role that's hard for Americans to believe because government does everything for us It seems that the government wants to brush our teeth for us and right down the line do every little thing for us. But the fact of the matter is there is a limited role for government. So what is the God-ordained role of human government? It is found in verses 3 and 4 of Romans 13. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword for nothing. For it is a minister of God and an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil." So the God-ordained role of human government is to bring God's wrath upon evildoers. Now the government is a servant of God, a minister of God. It bears the sword. It doesn't mean that the government officials are saved or go into heaven, but they do serve a temporal purpose of God for this planet and for mankind. The government is a servant of God. It bears the sword. in order to protect human life, as we mentioned in Genesis 9, 6. In other words, God has given the human government power to execute judgment. This speaks of military to protect us from evildoers from other nations. It speaks of law enforcement, the power to enforce laws. And hopefully those laws are based upon God's laws written in the consciences of all men. And it speaks of, the sword speaks of the right of capital punishment to put to death those who take the lives of other innocent people. And so the God-ordained role of human government, it is an avenger that brings God's wrath and God's vengeance upon evildoers. And we need to keep in mind, you know, Tony Campala, right, I wrote a book recently, Is Jesus a Democrat or a Republican? And if you know anything about Tony Capaldi, you know he tries to say that Jesus is between a Democrat and a Republican. He's not either. The more I read the book, the more it sounds like he thinks Jesus is a Democrat. In actuality, Jesus is neither Democrat nor Republican, but he's probably way to the right of many Republicans today. In the contract with America, I think Jesus be thrilled about that if they did the abolition of abortion to that contract and if they'd also put in certain clauses that would keep us from moving towards a one world government which will probably lead to the kingdom of the antichrist but Tony Kampala will often find passages in the scriptures telling the individual Christian that he needs to help the poor and therefore Tony Kampala will conclude as a typical sociologist and non-biblically trained man that he is will usually conclude therefore we need to get the government to feed the hungry that is not the role of government and Tony Kampala he loves the poor just as much as I do But I don't know why he demands that we continue to sink our hard-earned money into government programs that end up starving the same people that they're supposed to help and damning these people to the cycle of poverty. A government handout isn't going to feed anybody. A government handout is just going to keep people dependent and keep them poor. There is a limited role of government. The church's role is to express God's compassion upon victims of evil. That is the church's role. We are all victims of evil in that we are all sinners and we need the gospel message. We need Jesus to be saved. And if we are victims, if we are orphans or widows or too unhealthy to work, then yes, the church should provide a warm meal for us. It is the church's role. to share God's compassion with victims of evil. But it is the government's role to express God's wrath against evildoers. So why Tony Kampala has the government carrying a daisy when it's supposed to be carrying a sword, I don't know. I think Tony Kampala needs to recognize that much of his socialistic teachings, the teaching that he received, Those are the views of Karl Marx. He holds more to Karl Marx's view of government, probably why in one of his books, one of his students asked him, said, well then, if what you're saying is true, Karl Marx wasn't far from the kingdom of God. And Tony Campala responded, you're right. Well, Tony, you're wrong. Karl Marx was about as far from the kingdom of God as you can get. The government doesn't have all the answers. and we should not be heading towards a classless, utopian society. Man is sinful and the only way that Jesus is going to be able to enforce peace in a world of sinful men during the millennial kingdom is to carry a bigger stick than anybody else has got and then enforce peace through his strength. But the government's role is bringing God's wrath against evildoers. It is a limited role. Individual believer. Look at Romans 12, 19. Remember the break between chapters 12 and 13 of Romans is artificial. We put it there later on. So the context really hasn't shifted. Paul is telling Christians how they should live. And in verse 19, for the individual Christian of Romans 12, Paul says, never take your own revenge, beloved. But leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord. See, that's the role of the individual Christian. Don't take your own revenge. Leave room for God's wrath. Vengeance is mine, says the Lord. It's much like Matthew 5, 38 and 39. Jesus says, turn the other cheek. If somebody slaps you across the face, turn the other cheek. Now, nobody's been killed with a slap that I know of, so he's not talking about self-defense. We need to defend ourselves. But he is saying that we are not to be vigilantes. We are not to take our own justice and get our own vengeance. However, the role of government in the same context in verse 4, Paul talking about the government says, for as a minister of God to you for good, But if ye do what is evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword for nothing, for it is a minister of God, an avenger. So it takes vengeance, which we're not supposed to do, who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil. In other words, see, Tony Kampala, he just waters down the fall of mankind to the point where if Christians don't own guns, then maybe the thugs will get rid of them too. Tony, this is the real world. This is a real universe. This is a fallen universe, Tony. And the fact of the matter is, without human government and strong human government, and without law-abiding citizens owning weapons to protect themselves, These thugs are going to get worse and worse and worse. And so Tony, you need to stop bragging about your Quaker friends. You need to stop bragging about your Mennonite friends. And you need to get yourself to come alongside some of these King David type Christians who recognize that there is such a thing as evil. And I don't know, Tony, you live in Philadelphia. You should see how bad things are. I see these liberal programs only making things worse and worse. But it is the church's job to share God's compassion. It's the government's limited role to express God's wrath against evildoers. And Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen out of Seattle, Seattle Archdiocese, Roman Catholic, he used to argue that the government should stop building nuclear warheads and should start building homes for the homeless. Well guess what Archbishop Raymond Haunhausen, any verse you quote from the scriptures is talking to the individual Christian. It's our job to build homes for the homeless, the church's job. And by the way, if a homeless man is healthy enough to get a job but just doesn't feel like getting one, then I don't call him a homeless man, I call him a bum. And so we need to shelter only those who can't help themselves. Orphans, widows, and those who are too sick to hold on a good job. But basically it is the government's job at this time to build nuclear warheads because swords and shields are a little obsolete. And in fact, I think it's the government's job right now, if the government has the funds, and our country does, to start building a Star Wars defense system. But basically, the God-ordained role of human government is to bring God's wrath upon evildoers. You know, God basically delegates some of his authority. You know, Jesus said, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Well, God delegates some of that authority to human government in order to protect the law-abiding community. So the government is to punish the evildoer. Only lawbreakers should fear the government. Without the government, crime would increase. You see, the reason why thugs don't like to hassle police officers is because police officers have guns. It's not because they have a little bit of respect for the government inside, this and that. Without the government, crime would increase. Government can either protect society or criminals, but it cannot protect both. Now, at this point, the United States government is beginning to fail to protect society. We protect the thugs and the criminals. We let rapists and murderers out of prison after just a few years. But if we want to deter crime, the punishment must fit the crime. Again, Exodus 21 verses 23 to 25. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life. The punishment was fit to crime. If I stole $1,000 from somebody and was found guilty and then he paid $20 back, the punishment didn't fit to crime. But when a man murders somebody in Washington D.C. he serves an average of two and a half to three years. Other parts of the country he serves an average of seven years. That punishment is not fitting the crime. That's not justice. Now Paul in verse 5 gives two reasons why we should submit to the government. Verse 5. Wherefore it is necessary to be in subjection not only because of wrath but also for conscience sake. So, two reasons why we should submit to the government. Number one, fear of wrath. In other words, fear of punishment by the government. False saying, you obey the government, otherwise they're going to come after you with a big stick. And so, fear of the government. Fear of the punishment by the government, fear of wrath. And also for conscience sake. Remember, God instituted the government, therefore you want to have a clear conscience before God. Now, before we get any further, In verses 6 and 7 we need to talk about two things. Since we're supposed to submit to the governing authorities, what does this say then about civil disobedience, which is the disobeying specific laws of the government, and revolution, which is the overthrow of a government? If all authority is instituted by God, is it ever right to overthrow a government? Rather than answer questions here, I'm going to probably raise more questions than answer them, but I'll just share a little bit of my views, but I'm not dogmatic on them. But civil disobedience, I think this is really clear, civil disobedience is clear. A revolution is a lot foggier of an issue. But civil disobedience of disobeying certain or specific laws, Our allegiance to God overrides our allegiance to the government. Therefore, if a specific law either commands us to do an ungodly thing... Well, if a specific law commands us to do an ungodly thing, then we must disobey that law. Now, Norman Geisel would say if the law commands us to have abortions, then we must disobey it. But if the law says you can have an abortion but you don't have to and then they make a law you can't trespass and blockade abortion clinics although I've never felt led to blockade an abortion clinic and the state calls that trespassing. Norman Geiser would say it's a sin to trespass there and blockade that abortion clinic but I think that a case can be made that we're still being commanded not to prevent a murder from taking place. So if the pro-lifers could prove to me that they're actually saving lives by blockading, by trespassing, I would say that they have not sinned. They have obeyed the greater good. It's much like Rahab the harlot. In Joshua 2, she refused to submit to the governing authorities and then she lied. She bore false witness to the governing authorities. She broke two laws in order to save the lives of two innocent godly Hebrew spies, Jewish spies. Apparently God's laws came in conflict and she realized she had to obey the greater law and receive an exemption on the two lesser laws, which is what Geisler teaches, but he doesn't apply it to the pro-lifer situation and trespassing. But there's much scriptural evidence for civil disobedience, disobeying specific ungodly laws, because our allegiance to God overrides our allegiance to government. Daniel chapter 3, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, Daniel's three friends, are thrown into a fiery furnace to be rescued by the Lord, because they refuse to bow down before Nebuchadnezzar's statue and worship the image. In Daniel chapter 6, Daniel is thrown into the lion's den because he refused to obey a law which forbid him to pray to any god but the king, the Persian king. And then God rescued Daniel from the lion's den. In Exodus chapter 1, the Hebrew midwives lied and disobeyed the government authorities. They disobeyed the Egyptian pharaoh by claiming that the Israelite women were having their babies before they got to them because the Egyptian pharaoh had ordered them to kill the babies if males were born to keep down the population of the Jews because they were getting to be more numerous than their slave masters, the Egyptians. Again, we mentioned Rahab the harlot In Joshua chapter 2, she lied to the governing authorities and refused to submit to the governing authorities to save the lives of two godly, innocent Jewish tribes. Even in Mark 12, verses 13 to 17, where Jesus said, give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's, it's implied there that if Caesar demands what is God's, we are to say no. We will give to Caesar what is Caesar's, we will not give to Caesar what is God's. Because Caesar later on forced everyone to say, Caesar is Lord. The Christians refused to say that and that's where they coined the phrase, Jesus is Lord. And that's why they were being thrown to the lions. They were not being thrown to the lions because they worshiped Jesus. They were being thrown to the lions because they refused to worship anybody else but Jesus. They wouldn't worship Caesar plus Jesus. and all the other people who were worshipping their own false gods were worshipping Zeus plus Caesar and so and so plus Caesar but the Christians refused because we should give to Caesar what is Caesar's but we should give to God what is God's look at Acts chapter 4 Acts chapter 4 and verses 18 to 20 This is the Jewish ruling council, and they had the apostles on trial there. Acts 4.18-20 reads, And when they had summoned them, they commanded them not to speak. or teach it all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answered and said to them, whether it is right in the sight of God to give he to you rather than to God, you be the judge, for we cannot stop speaking what we have seen and heard." So the Jewish Sanhedrin, the Jewish ruling council, had a certain amount of authority, a large amount of authority over the Israelites as given to them by the Roman Empire in fact they could do everything but exercise the death penalty although they could exercise the death penalty if their temple was desecrated but they could not execute anybody for any other reason, that the capital punishment was left in the hands of the Roman authorities. But here, rather than submitting to the Roman authorities, they chose to disobey them and obey Christ. This also occurred in Acts 5, 27-29. And when they had brought them, they stood there before the council, and the high priest questioned them, saying, We gave you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name. And behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. So Peter and the apostles answered and said, We must obey God rather than men. And so the apostles responded, when the laws of men, the laws of the governing authorities, come in conflict with the laws of God, we must obey God rather than men. In fact, in Revelation 13, verses 5 to 8, Revelation 13, verses 15 to 18, the mark of the beast will be instituted in the end time, one world government, And we are commanded not to receive the mark of the beast, to disobey, civil disobedience. In fact, Revelation 14 verses 9 to 11 tells us that anyone who accepts the mark of the beast will be tossed into the lake of fire, the flames of hell. and will be tormented day and night, forever and ever. So therefore it shows that we can and should disobey ungodly laws. So civil disobedience, by the way the apostles themselves were in prison and most of them were even executed for civil disobedience. Some of them were stoned, some of them were nailed on crosses, Peter was nailed upside down, Paul was beheaded. They were imprisoned and executed for civil disobedience when their preaching of the gospel was outlawed. And so therefore we can and should disobey ungodly laws. Now, that's civil disobedience, but what about revolution? The overthrow of a government? I would say my opinion is that a revolution can only occur, would only be right, only if the government is an illegitimate government. You see, God instituted human government to punish the evildoer and protect the innocent. Yet, illegitimate governments cease to punish the evildoer and protect the innocent. and then the innocent would need a new government to protect them from the old one. This would basically apply as the Romans 13. This would also use the greater good ethic, which would say that we are commanded to submit to the governing authority, yet the governing authority got so corrupt that it was the greatest threat to human rights. Even a greater threat to human rights than gangs walking the streets then we would receive an exemption from that command and we would obey a greater command and that would be establish a new government that would protect the rights of others. I mean, Ephesians 5.24 is an example of this. Ephesians 5.24 commands the wife to submit to her husband, Ephesians 5.24, but as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. So that's the command, the wife is to submit to her husband in everything. Yet I know of no preacher, no conservative evangelical preacher, who would say that if a husband commanded his wife to never go to church, that she should refrain from it or if a husband commanded his wife to go kill the next door neighbor because he plays his music too loud I know of no preacher that would say that the wife should therefore submit and do it so even a command as absolute as that there is a time when the wife would be there are certain conditions when a greater law of God must be obeyed and an exemption is received for this lesser law and I would think this would apply in certain instances. Now our founding fathers, their reasons for revolting was that they believed all men are created equal. Now they weren't very consistent with this because the equality of the black man apparently was less equal than the equality of the white man, which doesn't sound like equality at all. And so they did not apply this across the boards like they should have and it took the Civil War to write this long and even many years after that to move in the right direction. But they recognized that all men are created equal because we were created in God's image. We're not equal in man's eyes but we're equal in God's eyes because we were all created equal. Therefore God gave man certain unalienable rights. God-given rights that no government can take But God instituted human government to protect these God-given rights. These inalienable rights that can never be taken from man are the right to life, which the unborn, that right is not being protected by the government of America today, but the right to life. liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The government is not supposed to guarantee happiness. The guy's lazy, he doesn't want to get out of bed, then he should starve to death. 2 Thessalonians 3.10. But if any man will not work, neither let him eat. So the government is not supposed to protect our... is not supposed to give us happiness. The government is supposed to protect our right to the pursuit of happiness if we choose to pursue it. Okay? That's why America is supposed to be the land of opportunity, not the land of free lunches. But they believed that their unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were denied by Great Britain. They believed that there was a lack of religious freedom. They were not free to worship God as they chose. They believed that the British soldiers, their crimes were going unpunished and that they had murdered many of the colonists. and they were being tried in Great Britain and the word was out that they were not being prosecuted or being found not guilty on insufficient evidence and the witnesses couldn't go to Great Britain and they believed that Great Britain had far surpassed the limited role of government instead of protecting the rights of the individual, that Great Britain, the government, had actually become the greatest enemy of the rights of the individual. They were protecting the criminals and punishing the law-abiding citizens and therefore the colonists felt that they needed a government to protect them from the illegitimate government. Now whether they were right or not, Each person, each Christian needs to decide. But as far as the right to revolt, Francis Schaeffer, the great Christian thinker, the late great Christian thinker, he believed, as John Calvin did, that there is a point where a government becomes illegitimate, and that there is a right to revolt, there is a right for revolution. However, Norman Geisler believes that there is never a right to revolution. I don't know why Geisler holds that, because he holds to the greater good ethic, that if two of God's commands come in conflict, we receive an exemption from the lesser command and must obey the greater good, yet Geisel says there is never, the oral government is instituted by God, therefore it is never right to revolt. A quote from Augustine from his City of God, in section 4, Part 4, passage 4, Augustine in The City of God stated, Without justice, what are kingdoms but great gangs of bandits? Let me repeat that. Without justice, what are kingdoms but great gangs of bandits? I myself do not believe that America has reached the point where revolution is justified, at the same time I do believe that communist governments go way beyond, you know, let me say that Paul was not calling for a revolution against the Roman Empire, and the Roman Empire in many ways was worse than America today. At the same time, America, especially because of modern technology, that America can threaten our freedoms and our unalienable rights much more than the ancient Roman Empire did. In fact, I don't think the Roman soldiers would have any problem with Israelites who weren't even Roman citizens walking the streets with large swords. I think they just assumed, good, there's one guy I won't have to protect, he'll take care of himself. Yet in America, it's evil. all of a sudden for a man to own a weapon. And so a man's basic right to self-defense, to protect his life, is called into question in America today. But basically, if a government reaches a point where it punishes the law-abiding citizen, the godly citizen, and protects the evildoers like a communist regime, which just suppresses the people, then basically you need... you basically need a new government to protect you from the evil government which has just become one big giant gang of bandits, as Augustine said. But the more the government strays from what God instituted it to be, the more Christians will have to obey God and oppose the government. Christians are always called by God to be good citizens, but evil governments despise good citizens. Now, let's say that America reaches the point to where Phil Fernandez would classify them as an illegitimate regime. Would I then call for, be preaching from the pulpit that we should have a revolution? Not necessarily. Let me give you, just list, this is not a class in ethics, but let me just list for you the just war doctrine, the just war criterion as spelled out by great theologians of the past and philosophers such as Aquinas and Augustine. The just war criterion It has basically eight parts to it. I've added a ninth part, which I think should have been in there. But number one, there must be a just cause. There has to be a sufficient reason for having any kind of a war, especially a revolution. Just cause would be self-defense to protect the innocents. It must be issued by competent authority, which is usually understood to mean a government. A bunch of people can't declare war. I kind of question this premise. I can accept it as long as we recognize that competent authority could be a government within the government which God is calling out from among the people, like possibly our founding fathers. But in Genesis 14, verses 11 to 16, Abraham took his 300 servants, who were trained for combat, and basically declared war, kind of a commando action on four or five nations that had taken Lot captive, and they defeated them in battle. So I believe he was competent authority, yet he wasn't really a government. Comparative justice, another, the third part of the just war doctrine. In other words, those who wage the war, decide to wage the war, must be more just than the enemy. In other words, Hitler trying to knock off Stalin For Stalin trying to knock off Hitler, basically you got one thug beating up on another thug. Neither one of them could ever claim to be just. I mean, they're butchering their own people left and right. How could there be any justice in either one of them slamming the other? Right intention? We must desire peace. If it's going to be a just world, we must desire peace and really attempt to restrain evil and protect that which is good. It must be done as a last resort. In other words, all peaceful alternatives must have already been attempted and failed. There must be a probability of success. Is victory possible? This is one reason why I doubt there will ever be a day that I'll call for a revolution. There may be a day where I would say that Americans should, American Christians should head for the hills and hide in the woods, maybe during the tribulation of a post-tribber, and protect ourselves from a ruthless government. But as far as a revolution, I just can't foresee any possibility, even if the American government got so bad that they were an illegitimate regime, without possible victory, all we would do is just waste, you know, shed our blood in vain. And then proportionality, the good of the war must outweigh the evil. Outweigh the evil. In other words, there's going to be some bad consequences such as anytime you enter into a war whether it's a revolution or regular war there's going to be good people that are going to be dying and so the results must outweigh the blood that is being shed and then the final point in the just war doctrine is discrimination we must discriminate between military targets and innocent civilians and we must go for military, aim at military targets but not target innocent civilians. Basically, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I agree with Pat Buchanan and I agree with... I don't know if it was Joe Martino or Al Martino, the guy who wrote a fighting chance, the moral use of nuclear weapons, I kind of agree that there were other options open, and that the killing of innocents should never be an option in a just war. But I would also add a ninth point, and that is that a God-ordained war overrides just war doctrine. Now if we look back at Joshua 1040, here's what I'm talking about. If we leave the just war criterion just as it is, then many of the Old Testament wars were unjust, yet they were ordered by God. Joshua 10.40 reads, Thus Joshua struck all the land, the hill country, and the Negev, and the low land, and the slopes, and all their kings. He left no survivor, but he utterly destroyed all who breathed, man, woman, and child, just as the Lord, the God of Israel, had commanded. So Joshua killed every man, woman, and child just as God had commanded when the Jews were taking the promised land. And so basically a God-ordained war overrides just war doctrine. God has the power to give and to take life. Now, verses 6 and 7 tell us that Christians should pay their taxes. So let's read verses 6 and 7 of Romans 13. So because of this you also pay taxes for rulers or servants of God devoting themselves to this very thing. Render to all what is due them. Tax to whom taxes due, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor. So basically Christians should pay their taxes Rulers are servants of God. They protect citizens and their rights. Now, often our government goes beyond its limited role. It tries to do the work of the church and feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, and help the poor. That's the government's job. Our government also aborts babies. But so did the old Roman Empire. And Paul didn't say that we shouldn't pay our taxes. He still said that we should pay our taxes. So still, we are commanded to pay our taxes as long as we have a legitimate government.