Obeying Governing Authorities

I have been listening to some “Principles and Policies” radio broadcasts about Kim Davis.  Chuck Michaelis and Barry Sheets have been talking about how Romans 13:1-7 has been used by sodomites and their sympathizers against Kim Davis on the basis that she has failed to obey the governing authorities.  Barry has said that he hasn’t found any Christian blogs that have made a response to this false argument.  So I have decided to make a response.  Before hearing their podcast, I hadn’t actually heard this argument being applied to Kim Davis.  First I quote for you the Scripture in question:

1 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. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 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: 4 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. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Romans 13:1-7 (KJV)

I will go over the arguments that Chuck and Barry have already given.  Kim Davis, being a duly elected County Clerk of Courts is a “ruler” and a “minister of God” according to the way the terms are used in the above Scripture.  So according the argument of the sodomites, everybody should do what Kim Davis says.  The Supreme Court has no legal authority over the issue in question and furthermore Kim Davis cannot be in contempt because she was not one of the litigants in Obergefell v. Hodges.  Furthermore God’s word condemns both sodomites and those who approve of such practices in Romans 1.  The key issue is that governing authorities are no longer recognized by God if they fail to operate within their appointed purpose which according to the above passage is to punish evildoers.  I would add that in Acts 5:29, when told to stop spreading the gospel by the council of the elders of Israel, the apostles said, “We ought to obey God rather than men”.  The sodomites’ argument tells us that if we were living in Nazi Germany, we ought not to help Jews and others escape the concentration camps because we would be disobeying "the law of the land".

Chuck and Barry also talked the Supreme Court's misuse of power by misinterpreting the 14th Amendment as well as the misinterpretation Article III judicial power.  I don't believe that the 14th Amendment was limited to protection from racial injustices, but I would add that the original meaning of "equal protection" is just what it sounds like.  No law (at any level of government) can give someone more protection from a criminal than someone else.  The "immunities and privileges" clause of the 14th Amendment does not change the definition of marriage or require that equal benefits be given to same sex couples as are given to couple who are really married. But the 14th Amendment does unwisely extend the powers of the judiciary as they get to decide whether a state has given someone "equal protection" in a particular case.  The 14th Amendment shouldn't even be in the Constitution because it was not properly ratified.    And judicial power extends only to litigants involved in a particular case.  The principal of stare decisis is valid, but not absolute.  Judges are not the ultimate arbiters of the Constitution.

Chuck also mentioned that Davis had been married four times.  I had heard this before, but I hadn’t heard that she was not a Christian until after she was married a fourth time.  I also heard that one of her marriages was to a former husband after having since married some other man which is a violation of Deuteronomy 24.  (But more importantly she violated Matthew 5:30, Mark 10:12, Luke 16:18, Romans 7:2-3, I Corinthians 7:10-11, 39 just by remarrying any man after having been divorced.)  I did hear a portion of an interview where she was asked if her decision was not hypocrisy in light of her past.  Her reply was, “I’m forgiven.”  This is an excellent point.  When people get married, divorce and then remarry and the church accepts this as an acceptable lifestyle, the institution of marriage is effectively destroyed.  Marriage was not ruined by the sodomites, but by the mainstream church.  However, no matter what sin someone has committed, if they simply repent and make Yahshua Messiah (Jesus Christ) the absolute Lord of their life, then they are forgiven.  At that point there is no hypocrisy in refusing to participate in sinful behavior including the granting of marriage licenses to sodomites.  To issue those licenses would be in itself a sin which one would need repentance in order to be saved.

The "Three Goats and Cow", Romans 13 and all other arguments that the sodomites have come up with have all been so obviously false that any critical thinking person should easily see through it.

Just War Theory and Charles Rice at Camp American

A must hear podcast from the Institute for Principled Policy:

http://www.principledpolicy.com/?p=1327

Keep the Posse Commitatis Act: Oppose S. 1867

Listen to Chuck Michaelis and Barry Sheets discuss the dire implications to unconstitutional provisions in amendments to the latest Defense Authorization Act.  This bill would allow Barack Obama to send any American citizen to Guantanamo Bay at will and indefinitely with no trial and no right to appeal.

http://www.principledpolicy.com/?p=1062
http://www.principledpolicy.com/?p=1063

Vote No on Ohio Issue 1, 2011

Hear Barry Sheets and Chuck Michaelis on their new radio show "Principles and Policies" talk about Issue 1 at the links below:

part 1: http://www.principledpolicy.com/?p=982
part 2: http://www.principledpolicy.com/?p=984

I don't think that there should be any age limits for judges at all.  But while I disagree with Barry and Chuck about raising the age limits, I am glad that they called to my attention that this is not the only issue addressed by Issue 1.  Issue 1 would repeal an 1851 provision which allowed the General Assembly to create courts of conciliation and an 1867 provision allowing a Supreme Court Commission to be created to deal with backlogs.  Courts of conciliation were designed in part to help stop divorces.  Please read the article at the following URL before voting on this issue:

http://www.divorcereform.info/index.php/Failure-of-Current-Divorce-Laws/Marriage-Saving-in-Court-Ohio-s-Conciliation-of-Marital-Controversies.html

Here is the ballot language:

1  PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT 
TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM AGE AT WHICH A PERSON MAY BE ELECTED OR APPOINTED JUDGE, TO ELIMINATE THE AUTHORITY OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO ESTABLISH COURTS OF CONCILIATION, AND TO ELIMINATE THE AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNOR TO APPOINT A SUPREME COURT COMMISSION PROPOSED BY JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO AMEND SECTION 6 OF ARTICLE IV AND TO REPEAL SECTIONS 19 AND 22 OF ARTICLE IV OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF OHIO 


A majority yes vote is required for the amendment to Section 6 and the repeal of Sections 19 and 22 to pass. 
This proposed amendment would: 
1.  Increase the maximum age for assuming elected or appointed judicial office from seventy to seventy-five. 
2.  Eliminate the General Assembly’s authority to establish courts of conciliation. 
3.  Eliminate the Governor’s authority to appoint members to a Supreme Court Commission. 
If approved, the amendment shall take effect immediately. 
A “YES” vote means approval of the amendment to Section 6 and the repeal of Sections 19 and 22. 

A “NO” vote means disapproval of the amendment to Section 6 and the repeal of Sections 19 and 22.