Civil Order & Elections

as we read from God's word. I'll be reading to you from page one of the handout

I have there for you, Luke 20, verses 20 to 26. So they watched him, speaking of Jesus, and sent spies who pretended to be righteous that they might seize on his words in order to deliver him to the power and the authority of the governor.

Then they asked him, saying, Teacher, we know that you say and teach rightly, and you do not show personal favoritism, but teach the way of God in truth.

Is it lawful for us to pay taxes to Caesar or not?

But he perceived their craftiness and said to them, Why do you test me?

Show me a denarius whose image and inscription does it have? They answered and said,

Caesar's. And he said to them, Render therefore to Caesar the things that are

Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. But they could not catch him in his words in the presence of the people.

And they marveled at his answer and kept silent. You may be seated.

At the time of what is recounted here in Luke, it's also recounted in Matthew and in Mark, at the time of what was recounted here, the enemies of Christ were presenting to him a dilemma.

The two horns of the dilemma were this. One, if Jesus affirmed the rightness of paying taxes to Caesar, he would not be paying taxes to Caesar.

It was thought that it would lose him support amongst the Jews because Caesar, the

Roman imperium, had oppressed the Jews in many ways.

Secondly, if Jesus said that it was lawful, that was the first scenario.

But in the second scenario, he said that it was unlawful to pay taxes to Caesar.

He would not lose popular support, but he would lose the support of the magistrate and more dangerously be charged with rebellion or treason and thus have the danger of being put to death.

And so this dilemma put forward to Christ is a dilemma that's meant to trap him and make him so that whatever he answers, he either loses his support or he is killed, which is just as convenient, maybe more.

Now in our modern time, people cite this text and they think that it is an answer that will silence any

Christian effort to influence politics. You know, you should really give to Caesar what is

Caesar's and to God what is God's. The people who present this text to Christians to seek to silence them have no better intent than the people who presented this dilemma to Christ.

Christians have a monopoly on the knowledge of the truth.

We have a word from God that communicates what justice is.

And without the word of God, we are left with human inventions and opinions.

And we do not know our right hand from our left. This text is interpreted in the following way by moderns.

We should give to Caesar what is Caesar's, which apparently is whatever Caesar wants. And we should give to God what is

God's, which apparently is whatever Caesar leaves him. Now let me ask you a question.

Do you think that reverses the order of things? To pretend that God is subject to the whim of Caesar as opposed to Caesar being subject to the whim of God?

Let me give you a few propositions to help you to rightly understand this text. The bottom of the page. First, God owns everything.

There are no things that are things that God does not own. He owns everything.

Secondly, this text is not a contrast of the church and the state. Our age is filled with a muddled thinking that thinks that God belongs in churches and no place else.

This is not a text that contrasts the church and the state. It is contrasting

God and Caesar. And Caesar is only in one place at a time because he's a creature.

But God is everywhere. This text does not contrast the church and the state.

It contrasts God and Caesar. Third, God defines what is

Caesar's jurisdiction. Caesar has no rightful authority except the authority that God has given to him.

Fourth, this text is not a contrast of the church and the state. It is contrasting God and Caesar. Fifth, explanation by Jesus points to a coin and says, render unto

Caesars the things that are Caesar's. People think that means because there's a picture of Caesar on the coin, therefore

Caesar has a right to all of the coins. Do you think that's actually the argument that Jesus is making?

I mean, let's follow this. Premise one, if your picture's on a thing, you own it. Premise two, I gave this to you, but it had my picture on it, so give it back.

Premise three, I'll just put my picture on everything, so it's all mine now. I've lost track of the argument.

This all seems silly because it is. This is not what Jesus is saying. Jesus is not saying

Caesar's picture on the thing means he owns it. Caesar makes coins and gives them to people in payment for things, and the payment means a transfer of ownership.

The point is not that Caesar has a right to tax infinitely or to demand everything. The point is it's interesting that Caesar puts his image on some things that he claims.

What did God put his image on? What is

God's image? It is man. So God owns man, including

Caesar. He owns everything, and so this is sort of a mockery of Caesar.

Man is God's image. God owns man, including Caesar. The coin with the image of Caesar is not owed to him merely because it is

Caesar's picture on it, but rather the text teaches that it is not sin to give money even to sinful or tyrannical governments.

Giving money to an oppressive government to avoid punishment is like giving your wallet to a mugger to avoid harm.

However, the ruler ought to remember the God who owns him and only tax the appropriate amount.

Now go to page 2. So having remembered that, that's the common text that is used to rebuke us, let us now consider what does the scripture teach in general about the state.

Genesis 9 verses 5 to 7 teaches us about the origin of the state. The text reads,

Surely for your life blood I will demand a reckoning. From the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man.

From the hand of every man's brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed.

For in the image of God he made man. And as for you, be fruitful and multiply, bring forth abundantly in the earth and multiply in it.

In Genesis 1 and 2 God created the individual, male and female, as the image of God.

He made the household and gave it authority, created marriage. In Genesis 3 and 4 we have the church as distinct from the world, but we do not have the state until Genesis 9.

Nations are defined in Genesis 10. The state exists to be a minister of justice, to punish criminals, to defend the innocent.

Look at the initiating covenantal command to the state.

For your life blood I will demand a reckoning. From the hand of every man's brother

I will require the life of man. If someone takes the life of a man,

God will use the state to take the life of the murderer. Why?

What's the context? Do you remember before the flood the earth became filled with the blood of men because there were violent and wicked men and there were no magistrates.

Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives. He gives to Noah as a sort of Adam a command to fill the earth to be fruitful and multiply.

This time he gives a new tool, the state, the sword for vengeance against evil doers to restrain evil in the earth.

The appointment of civil power into the hands of men, notice that the blood is extracted by a man's brother.

This isn't just a providential judgment from God. This is not a Christianized karma.

This is the state exists with coercive power to punish evil.

The civil power is put into the hands of men to avenge crimes by due process of law and to wage just warfare.

The state is the right of the defense of your own rights or the rights of others from imminent or ongoing oppression is an individual right and it existed before the political order was established by God.

It is a right before and outside of the institution of civil power as is made plain in many other texts of scripture.

I do not have time to go over those today. The most famous text in the

Bible for demonstrating the purpose of government. It's normally Romans 13 verses 1 -7.

I have given you more of the context because it is important to understand that this text is talking about our duties as individuals in contrast to our duties in the political sphere.

First as individuals, we are commanded to bless those who persecute you, to bless and do not curse, to rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep.

That is a picture of compassion. Entering into the suffering of others and seeking to bless them in it and the idea of rejoicing with them is you look at the things that they get, the blessings they get and you rejoice like they were given to you.

You love your neighbor as yourself. Verse 16. Be of the same mind toward one another.

Do not set your mind on high things but associate with the humble. Do not be wise in your own opinion.

As opposed to trusting our own opinions about how to live a good life. What is one of the most popular things you will find in a self -help book?

You are the composition of the five people you spend the most time with. So therefore you need to go find rich and famous people so you can get rich and famous.

That is the idea. That is not what the Bible teaches. What the Bible teaches is that you should associate with the humble.

There are blessings from God for caring for those who are of low station.

So you might think pragmatically it is not worth my time to care for people who are of low station but God promises blessing and says this is the good life.

Bless those who persecute you. Bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep.

Be of the same mind toward one another. Do not set your mind on high things but associate with the humble.

Do not be wise in your own opinion. Now the next thing tells us the

Christian doctrine about avenging ourselves. 17. Repay no one evil for evil.

Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. If it is possible as much as depends upon you live peaceably with all men.

Beloved, do not avenge yourselves but rather give place to wrath for it is written vengeance is mine

I will repay says the Lord. Here we are taught we are not to seek vengeance for ourselves.

We do not have a right to vengeance. Only God has the right to vengeance. If you steal vengeance for yourself, if you go to punish people who have done you wrong yourself, you are stealing

God's property. Vengeance is his. You have no right to repay yourself.

We are commanded to live peaceably as far as it depends upon us. And then we are also reminded that there is providential justice.

Sometimes evil doers fall into their own traps and if they don't in this life, unless they repent, the

Lord will bring judgment upon them. And so we are reminded that this is not the doctrine of karma.

This is a doctrine of providential justice. God, a personal being, brings justice in history and at the end of history.

Now God says vengeance is mine. I will repay. He is a just God. And that should cause us to fear

God and to recognize that we are ones who have committed wrong and so we ourselves must recognize our need for forgiveness.

Christ came as a substitute for the unjust, that God might make payment so that he could be both just, having demands of justice, and also be righteous, calling those who are wicked righteous.

Christ paid for the sins of his people and gave them his righteousness as a covering.

All who believe in him have their sins forgiven by his blood and are righteous in him.

They have his good works counted to them. But for those who have not been paid for by Christ, the just God who rules heaven and earth brings punishment.

We leave place for God's wrath rather than trying to exercise our own wrath.

Vengeance is mine. I will repay, says the Lord. Now verse 20 teaches us out of the book of Proverbs.

Paul quotes, he says, Therefore if your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him a drink.

For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head. That behavior will either bring conversion as you bless them, causing them to love the

Lord, or it will bring increased judgment from God. And so we're told the plan of world conquest that the

Lord Jesus Christ has. Verse 21, Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

That word overcome you could just as easily translate conquer. Do not be conquered by evil, but overcome or conquer evil with good.

So that's the text about individuals. Now when we go to the state, chapter 13 verse 1,

Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.

Therefore, whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.

For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority?

Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good.

But if you do evil, be afraid. For he does not bear the sword in vain, for he is

God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.

Therefore, you must be subject, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience sake.

For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God's ministers, attending continually to this very thing.

Render therefore to all their due. Taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.

This text is a death knell to anarchism. The Bible has no patience for people who reject all civil authority.

The Bible teaches us that legitimate authority ought to be honored, and when it gives lawful commands, it ought to be obeyed.

At the same time, the law of God provides to us a limit of authority, and it teaches us our liberties.

The law of God is called in the book of James, the law of liberty. It defines our rights.

It gives us our rights. And so this text, verses one through seven of Romans 13, does not teach us to just obey anyone and everyone to all extent.

Instead, it teaches us a way of judging lawful authorities. Lawful authorities are the ones that command things that cohere with the law of God.

So when the authority commands a person to participate in unjust conduct, unjust killing, that authority is showing itself to be illegitimate.

If an authority extracts from you money with confiscatory levels of taxation, it is showing itself to be covetous and to be illegitimate.

If an authority will not punish the wicked but instead punishes the righteous, it is showing itself to be illegitimate.

If the authority allows lawbreakers who destroy property and persons and reputations and all things of value and who do all sacrilege and wickedness in the streets and it does nothing to restrain their evil, then what is this authority for but to be a buttress for wickedness and a restraint on righteousness?

These are the things to be used to judge authorities as to whether they are authorities or just tyrants.

So this gives us principles to evaluate in general the state. On page 4,

I've given to you side by side for your own reading the two different ways that people read that text.

We've done that in the past and so I hope that is useful to you for your review. On page 5, we end out chapter 13 as regards the state.

I want to remind you, Paul ends the section on the state with a reminder that our duties towards our fellow man are defined by the law of God and he does this by quoting from Leviticus to say that you should love your neighbor as yourself and he quotes from the

Ten Commandments to remind us how do we love our neighbor. The love of God is shown to us in the first, second, third and fourth commandments.

No gods but the true God, no idolatry, do not take the Lord's name in vain and remember the Sabbath to keep it holy.

But the second table of the law teaches us to love our neighbor and it does so by telling us to honor legitimate authority, the fifth commandment, to not murder, sixth, to not commit adultery, seventh, to not steal, eighth, to not lie or bear false witness against our neighbor, ninth, and to not covet, tenth.

That's how we love our neighbor. So Paul quotes those and he tells us, owe no one anything except to love one another for he who loves another has fulfilled the law.

No owe one anything except to love them. That includes magistrates. We should not recognize a duty of conscience to listen to wicked commandments, but we only owe to magistrates what the law of God requires of us.

That's why at the Nuremberg trials when Nazis who committed horrific crimes said,

I was only following orders, the appropriate response of that court was to say, those orders were unlawful, you ought to have known and so you will be executed.

When men murder other men simply because someone with a badge tells them to murder other men, those men with badges must be resisted.

Owe no one anything except to love one another. Why? Because he who loves another has fulfilled the law.

You look at the listing of the commandments, Paul lists for us the commandments. He cites from Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 and he reminds us of what

Leviticus says, love your neighbor as yourself. And he explains to us verse 10, love does no harm to a neighbor, therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

The only way we know what love is, is by the commandment of God.

Love is desiring the well -being of the object. How do I know what's good for you? God reveals it in his law.

He gives commandments that teach me how to seek your good. So the commandment of God is what teaches us that.

Exodus 18 is the text at the bottom of page five that shows us a number of things about the form of government, qualifications for officers of the state and things like that.

It's obviously a worthy read. Let me show you the part I've bolded. Chapter 18 verse 21 says, moreover you shall select from all the people able men such as fear

God, men of truth hating covetousness. Deuteronomy on page six,

Deuteronomy 1 talks about Moses telling the people of Israel that they should in verse 13 choose wise understanding and knowledgeable men from among your tribes.

Now there's instruction to those men by the way that help us to understand the role of judges.

Look at verse 16. Deuteronomy 1 verse 16 at the bottom of page six. Then I commanded your judges at that time saying, hear the cases between your brethren and judge righteously between a man and his brother or the stranger who is with him.

You shall not show partiality in judgment. Impartiality. Applying the law in a way that is consistent across persons.

You shall not show partiality in judgment. You shall hear the small as well as the great.

You don't show favoritism to the powerful. You also don't show favoritism to the weak.

We live in a time that says if you're weaker you must be right. No, it is often the case that people with less power still commit evils against people with more.

We must judge the case carefully and not merely say you seem more pitiable and therefore

I'll judge in your favor. You shall not show partiality in judgment.

You shall hear the small as well as the great. You shall not be afraid in any man's presence for the judgment is

God's. The case that is too hard for you bring to me and I will hear it and I command you at that time all the things which you should do.

We have here the principle that there are courts of appeal and there are also courts of original jurisdiction that are more advanced for more difficult cases.

Deuteronomy 17 talks about the idea that some day the people contrary to God's command would select a king, want a king.

He says well when you do this make sure to follow things that are laid out there which have to do with qualifications for office and also the limits of power and the duty of that person, that king to study the word of God.

Interestingly even when the form of government, the form of republic that's laid out in Deuteronomy and in Exodus with councils of elected officers is thrown off.

When the Hebrew republic was given up and the people demanded a king, in 1 Samuel 8 we have warnings about kingship.

That kings are the most centralized of authority as opposed to the rule of many men.

You have the rule of a single man. So centralization tends towards the abuse of power.

So the danger of centralization is that tyranny can be easily imposed and so there's a list of the behaviors that a king would do.

Verse 11 reads, this will be the behavior of the king who will reign over you. He will take your sons and appoint them over his own chariots and to be his horsemen and some will run before his chariots.

It's military conscription. Verse 12, he will appoint captains over his thousands and captains over his fifties.

He will set some to plow his ground and reap his harvest. So we have, he's imposing military officers rather than allowing the people to elect them.

He's having state -owned agricultural production as opposed to the persons of the state being able to deal with their own private property.

He will have some make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. State -owned war industry. Verse 13, he will take your daughters to be perfumers, cooks, and bakers.

Now he's got state -owned luxuries and food. All of the systems of industry, all of the things that are for private persons and families to do work in, the state creeps in and steals control.

Verse 14, and he will take the best of your fields, your vineyards, and your olive groves and give them to his servants.

The taking of private property to give it out with favoritism.

Verse 15, he will take a tenth of your grain and your vintage. A tenth. A tenth.

Ten percent is supposed to be a tyrannical rate of taxation. Why? Because God requires a tenth as a tithe to him.

Who does the king think he is? God? And so the tax rate of ten percent or more is tyrannical.

Beloved, how many times more than ten percent are the taxes that you pay?

And he will take your male servants, your female servants, your finest young men and your donkeys and put them to his work.

He will take a tenth of your sheep and you will be his servants. And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves and the

Lord will not hear you in that day. The selection of wicked rulers and the forming of foolishly designed governments brings curse.

Curse of tyranny. We are given from all of these texts principles of what we are supposed to look for in our civil rulers.

Go to page 8. See point 17. First, rulers are to be chosen from among the people.

They are to be native citizens. Next is to be a man, adult male.

Next, he is to be competent or able, a man of valor. The Hebrew is kaiel. He is decisive in business and decisive in battle.

He fears God. Remember the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. When we read the

Deuteronomy text, it says choose from amongst yourself wise, understanding and knowledgeable men. When we read the text of Deuteronomy about a king, it said he should be a man who has studied the law from his youth.

He has written it with his own hand. He is to be a man of truth.

It means he seeks out the truth and he tells the truth. He is to hate covetousness.

We saw in the section of the kings, I didn't read it for you but I encourage you to go read the Deuteronomy 17 section.

It warns to not have kings multiply horses. That's a covetousness of power.

Remember horses were the weapons of offensive warfare at the time. Horses and chariots. The multiplication of horses and chariots is the creation of a standing army with a covetousness towards power.

We are not to multiply wives when we are rulers. In all cases, men are not to multiply wives but especially kings.

The objectification and using of women not as persons but as objects for pleasure is a great wickedness for men of power.

And then, to not multiply money by use of your office. If you enrich yourself through bribes or through taxes and taking of money out of public coffers, that is a great wickedness, a covetousness to use power for yourself to make the people your slaves.

But what are kings supposed to be? They are to be the servants of the people.

But when they steal from the people, they make the people their slaves. Now, lest we run with error to believe that we must have the perfect form of government or else we can throw off any rulers.

Let us remember that 1 Peter chapter 2 tells us to submit ourselves to every ordinance of man.

What does that mean? It doesn't mean submit yourself to every law that men make up. We have already talked about the fact that you must know the difference between immoral and moral orders.

We can't say like the Nazis, I was just following orders. We must say no to wicked commands.

What is being taught here? The word ordinance of man there would be better translated as institution of creation.

I have the Greek for you in the handout. I won't walk through that now. But the basic point here is that human institutions that are created, offices that are invented by men, do not make a government invalid.

So even a monarchy can be a valid government if the monarch is ruling justly.

The Bible teaches that a republican form of government is what is wise. That multiple elected officers sitting in councils with written constitution and limited powers is what

God has told us to do. The other thing is foolishness.

The more centralized the government, the more foolish the form. But the act of that government must be unjust before it becomes invalid.

Go to page 9. We have the general principle that government is to be servant in its leadership.

Jesus in Matthew 20 says, you know that the rulers of the

Gentiles lord it over them. The rulers of the nations lord their power over the people.

Those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you. But whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant.

And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave. Just as the son of man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life a ransom for many.

He paid for us with his blood. He gave himself a ransom, a payment for us that our sins would be forgiven.

That kind of self -sacrificial service is what authorities are called to, which is why husbands are called to lead their wives sacrificially, which is why church leaders are called to pour themselves out in service, which is why civil magistrates are called to sacrifice themselves for their people.

Authority is not a place to luxuriate. Authority is a place to serve. The more

God gives you, the more you are called to serve and to bless and to love with what God has given to you.

We have Job giving to us an example of this.

Job served as a king around the time of Abraham, 2000

B .C. And he said this when he was talking to his miserable friends who would not leave him alone, who would not allow him to have a defense stand, though he was right according to God.

He says this about his time in service as a king. The whole chapter is worth reading, by the way. Just go read

Job 29. Just find some time today and do that. Verse 12, page 9,

Job 29, verse 12. Because I delivered the poor who cried out, the fatherless and the one who had no helper, the blessing of a parent and personal capabilities to care for people, but also using his office to serve by resisting the wicked, breaking the fangs of the wicked.

What is that? To break the fangs of the wicked is to remove the power of the wicked to do harm to others, to protect the innocent, even those who are of low position, orphans and widows and the poor.

There must be a special concern to look out for and see that justice is done for those who are in low position.

So how does that fit together with the idea of not being partial? Well, the magistrate is to serve the people by being careful to look into the cause of the poor and the needy, but to be very careful to judge rightly and to only give what is due.

If there's an investigation and there's no guilt found of anybody, there's nothing to be done.

If there's an investigation into a situation where the poor is oppressed, then the state exists to bring justice to that poor man.

But also, if a rich man is being unjustly treated, page 3, look at point 11 there, the state is a minister to administer justice with the concern for the following objectives in this order.

These are principles of justice to be applied. First is the principle of restitution. The state is a minister to the victim.

When a victim loses something, the state's job is to give back to the victim what has been taken.

That can't always be done, right? If you lose an eye or you lose your life, you can't always get back the thing that's been taken.

So the next point of justice is retribution as a minister of God, to give a just penalty, life for life.

When you murder a person, there's no way to restore that person's life. All you can do is administer retribution, and the state exists to do that.

The effect of retribution is deterrence, and that's how the state serves the people, by limiting crime through deterrence.

And fourthly, one of the effects of the administration of justice is that the pain is a teacher to the criminal, and it has the effect of rehabilitating by deterring future sin.

So, jump with me back now to page 10. There are a number of things on the ballot.

You have many people to consider voting for, from many offices, and what I want you to understand is that you should apply the principles of qualification that are given to us in God's holy word.

So as you look at people on the ballot, you should consider whether they meet those qualifications or not.

And if you don't have evidence of qualification, then you should not vote for them.

Do not lend your hand to granting power to a person who is unqualified.

Next, there are propositions on the ballot to be voted for.

These propositions, there are many, and I have opinions about what is wise about all of them, and I'd delight to share them with you over coffee or some other context.

But there is one proposition on the ballot that is of such horrifically wicked proportions that it must be publicly declaimed because this is an emergency.

Proposition 139 is a wicked proposal. Proposition 139 would amend the constitution of the state of Arizona to make abortion a fundamental right.

This would make the civil government of Arizona, which was instituted by God with the most fundamental purpose of protecting human life, into an instrument of the protection for murder.

Such a constitutional amendment would make the state into an explicit enemy of Christ. It is evil law, and to include it in the constitution would be to put the constitution against itself and against the

God that it claims to give thanks to as the source of rights. I have a number of verses here that help to prove to you that children, yet unborn, must be defended by the state as persons.

I want to give to you the most clear one on that very specific point on page 11,

Exodus chapter 21, verses 22 to 25. If men fight and hurt a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine.

Just causing a premature birth, but no harm, still results in a penalty. Secondly, but if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

Children, yet unborn, are persons to be guarded by the full extent of the law.

They are human beings. They have rights from God. Babies are to be guarded just like toddlers and full -grown and old people.

If we take to ourselves the wicked power to try to define persons as non -persons, what would our state be that is any different from Nazis or communists or wicked regimes of every variety?

If we say that children, yet unborn, are not persons, then why couldn't the state just say old people aren't persons and capitalists aren't persons and Jews aren't persons?

When the state gets in the business of defining persons, the state gets in the business of killing those non -persons.

That is the problem. This is a wicked law, and it must be opposed.

If this law were to be adopted into the Constitution, it would make the Constitution itself self -contradictory in an absurd way.

Let me read to you the preamble of the Arizona Constitution, page 12.

The Arizona Constitution starts with, we the people of the state of Arizona, grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this

Constitution. I want you to imagine giving thanks to Almighty God for the liberties he grants to us, including the liberty to live and not be murdered, and then to enshrine in the

Constitution a right to kill certain persons. Article 2 of the

Constitution of Arizona reads in section 1, fundamental principles, recurrence 2. A frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is essential to the security of individual rights and the perpetuity of free government, the perpetuity of free government.

Section 2, political power, purpose of government. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.

The rights of people, born and unborn, must be defended as the purpose of government.

These rights come from whom? Who do our liberties come from? The preamble said it, God. What God do you think the

Protestant Arizona was talking about in 1912 when they approved the

Constitution that was drafted in 1910? Which God do you think they were talking about?

They were talking about the God of the Bible, which is why when they formed the university in Tucson as a second place prize to Tucson for not being the capital, they created a

University of Arizona and its emblem has a cross on it. These people were thinking about the

God of the Bible. Section 4 of Article 2 says regarding due process of law, no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

If you kill a baby, what process can it have? Section 16 is against the corruption of blood and forfeiture of the estate.

No conviction shall work corruption of blood or forfeiture of estate. You know what corruption of blood is? Corruption of blood is when you receive criminal penalties because of the sins of your father.

For example, imagine that you kill a baby because his father is a racist or a rapist or a murderer of any variety.

Oh, a rapist. Hmm. A rapist. Isn't one of the exceptions that we talk about for why we should allow the death of children is in the case of rape?

Kill the child for the sins of the father. Kill the child for the crimes of the father.

Hmm. Well so much for due process and avoiding the corruption of blood.

Section 32, constitutional provisions mandatory. The provisions of this constitution are mandatory unless by express words they are declared to be otherwise.

Our state is currently failing to protect the unborn which requires that no person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.

Section 32 of article 2 says that it's mandatory that the state maintain that. It is failing to do so.

The failure to do so is already a great cause of curse on this state. If we have a constitutional amendment adopted that makes it so that abortion is a fundamental right, then we have now codified into law murder as a justified form of homicide.

Comments, questions, objections for the voting members and those with speaking rights? Mr. Nye?

Thank you Mr. Nye. So the text in Job 29 does not authorize the use of state funds to redistribute wealth.

It's not a statement of that. He's talking about his own behavior. Remember he's talking about himself and his own behavior while a king or while a magistrate and in doing that he's defending himself against the charges of his friends.

So his discussions show that plainly he was a civil magistrate when you read that chapter but his behavior there when you're in a position of high authority you're typically a well resourced person.

And so using your resources personally, right, it's not generous to give away other people's money, it's generous to give away your own, right?

If generosity is clear, right, so that's the issue there. So we can't interpret it that way without creating conflict with other passages of scripture.

And real quick about that, there's some ways, remember everybody in authority is considered a father of the people who are under their authority, right?

We see that in scripture in many places. So he could be saving the poor by stopping the oppression to allow them to continue to have access to their own resources and also by extracting money from those who had stolen and giving them restitution along with the multiple, right?

So we find that the case laws of the law of God teach us that when someone steals they have to give back what was stolen as well as more for repayment, right?

So those are ways in which that could have happened from his official office. We don't know. So to impose the welfare state under that text is the worst of eisegesis, right?

Sorry, continue. Great, thank you.

Any others? Mr. Cordova? So the scriptures provide a very easy mechanism for avoiding cheating in elections.

Elections in the scripture are by show of hands in public. So only if a guy's like, are you going to get extra votes in there, right?

And so that idea that you have a public vote, in America we have made holy the secret ballot.

The secret ballot is only holy to people who like to cheat. The secret ballot allows for cheating.

Public votes prevent cheating. And so the question is, well, if you have public votes then people will suffer from social pressure and they might have employers that don't like the way they vote.

That sounds like a problem that requires you to have fortitude and to just do what you think is right even when other people see you doing stuff they don't like, right?

So our options are allow for cheating because of secret ballots or to have public votes in a way that prevents cheating.

So that's what the Bible provides for to avoid that. Thank you. Mr. Boyston? Yeah, so I don't believe

Donald Trump is qualified for the office. I believe that we should write in a man who's qualified.

And whether you say, okay, so Donald Trump's a man, he's a native born citizen. You can say he's competent, he's accomplished a lot.

You can say that he, you might even want to say he's a man of truth. I don't know, I'd have questions about that.

And you could say that he's a person who hates covetousness, at least to the extent that he's willing to cut taxes.

Great. But I don't think you can say he fears God. He's not a God -fearing man. And we don't have a basis for believing that he does fear

God. His behavior, he's recently abandoned the unborn. He's abandoned the protection of biblical marriage.

He's not clearly able to profess the belief in the gospel. So we don't have a reason to believe that he is a

God -fearing man. And so I will not be voting for him. I will be writing in somebody. I told Pastor Webben on his show,

I'll write him in. And so, you know, if you want to follow suit there, let's do that. Write in Pastor Webben.

But I think that that idea that there's a responsibility to not vote for men who are unqualified.

And so that's my understanding. If somebody has evidence for me that I haven't seen that he's a qualified man,

I would happily consider it. It would make me a lot more popular if I would vote for Donald Trump. And yes,

Mr. Boyston. I haven't thought much about it.

I certainly don't have a problem with it. I think that the, I think that one of the mechanisms we have is, of course, the impeachment process for high crimes, misdemeanors, and violations of the constitutional oath.

And so those are things. But obviously our Congress is filled largely with men who are oath breakers.

So we're stuck in a rough spot. And I think that the entering a vote, if Christians would vote in mass for a qualified man, if some, if God would raise up some man with resources to encourage

Christians to do their duty and vote for godly men who would see justice done in the land and liberty protected,

Christ acknowledged in his word seen as authoritative, if that would be done, then we would see godly magistrates put into office immediately.

It is the cowardice of Christians that has given us wicked rulers. Okay. Mr.

and I, this is the last one. Sorry, Mr. Price hasn't spoken yet. I'm going to give him the floor first. Mr. Price?

He is, so yes. The question is, when God, when Christ mentions that the image of Caesar is on the coin, is that, does that mean that man is the image of God, is

God's property? I'm saying that he is pointing to the image of Caesar on the coin and saying, interesting, the image of Caesar, huh?

And then the idea is, well, what does God own? And if man is the image of God, unlike Caesar who doesn't own everything with his image on it,

God does own everything. And so men ought to honor God before Caesar, but also it's not wrong to pay taxes to Caesar, just like it's not wrong to hand your wallet to a mugger to save your own life.

Okay. All right. And yes, Mr. and I, this is the last one. Okay. You can write them in, but I understand that they might not count it towards something.

Yes. Well, if there's no recognized persons that meet the qualification, then that's where you have to go.

So great. Thank you. All right. Let's pray. Father, we ask that you would bless the reading and preaching of your word.

We ask that you would cause us to be renewed after the image of your son, that you would help us to go forth from here and do our duties more fully.