August 8, 2016 Show with Jamin Hubner on “A Christian Libertarian’s Reflections on the 2016 Race for President of the USA”

Live from the historic parsonage of 19th century gospel minister George Norcross in downtown Carlisle, Pennsylvania, it's Iron Sharpens Iron, a radio platform on which pastors, Christian scholars, and theologians address the burning issues facing the church and the world today.

Proverbs 27 verse 17 tells us, Iron sharpens iron so one man sharpens another. Matthew Henry said that in this passage, quote, we are cautioned to take heed whom we converse with and directed to have in view in conversation to make one another wiser and better.

It is our hope that this goal will be accomplished over the next hour and we hope to hear from you, the listener, with your own questions. Now here's our host Chris.

Arntzen. Good afternoon Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, and the rest of humanity living on the planet Earth who are listening via live streaming. This is Chris Arntzen, your host of Iron Sharpens Iron, wishing you a happy Monday on this eighth day of August 2016, and I'm delighted to have a guest on the program today that I have never before interviewed.

His name is Dr. Jamin Huebner, and Dr. Huebner is an American theologian and author from South Dakota. He is a graduate of Dort College where he received a BA in theology. He is also a graduate of Reform Theological Seminary where he received an MA in religion, and the University of South Africa where he received his THD in systematic theology, and currently serves as the Director of Institutional Effectiveness and Founding Chair of Christian Studies at John Witherspoon College in the Black Hills.

And we are also going to be discussing today a recent event that Dr. Huebner spoke at, the Christians for Liberty Conference, which was just held over the weekend, and we're looking forward to discussing that.

And the primary topic today is a Christian libertarian's reflections on the 2016 race for President of the United States. But it's my honor and privilege to welcome you for the very first time ever to Iron Sharpens Iron,.

Testimony and Path Toward Christian Libertarianism

Dr. Jamin Huebner. Well thank you Chris, I really appreciate the invitation and I think this should be some fun, and I hope it's for our listening audience. Yeah, and I am confident it will be. And before we go into the heart of our.

Subject. Today, I'd like our listeners to understand a little bit about your own religious background, what kind of a religious atmosphere you were raised in, and when you came to Christ, obviously an abbreviated version of your testimony, and how you came to be fascinated and actively involved in libertarian.

Politics. Okay, sure, incredible blessing of being born into this world in the United States and with two Christians, and right there, that's a lot. Yeah. You know, and they're supportive of me generally, and throughout my life, in a pretty small way, into theology, and I was thinking of going into a career in music.

You know, my family supported me, but on the other hand, and I didn't know. It was faith, and we, you know, I tried to keep my expenses low and continue that whole thing. I mean, when I really became a Christian, I didn't really have the, you know, there's two or three in my teenage and early creature and problems.

I can't really be God. Anyway, I mean, that's, you know, that, it's... On the other hand, you know, I've always had a very curious kind of mind, and you know, as I continue to learn and look at the different areas, and so that has really, you know, varies internally.

It's a big world, and there's a lot of ideas, even within Christianity. You know, everybody's a work-in-progress journey, and we go through different phases, and what God has done to me, and that's how I got into, you know, I mean, you can't really escape politics living in the United States.

I mean, find the biggest hole in the ground. At least I am. So, for good or ill, relationship, everything that goes into the leaders and the, and that goes all the way in manipulation. You know, I grew up in, you know, in the field, on the farm, and sort of adopted, you know, a neoconservative perspective.

If you could,.

If you wouldn't mind defining that for our listeners who have heard and understand liberalism to a degree, they understand conservativism to a degree, and I've noticed that many people often don't really understand the genuine definitions or origins of those points of view, but if you could contrast a neocon from an authentic, in your opinion, historically conservative.

Neoconservatism Versus Libertarianism

Individual. Okay, well, that's an interesting question. I guess different people would take different approaches, but I guess mine would be the, let me just, who wrote a book called, I just read that book last year, I think it's an excellent book, is basically libertarianism, with the exception of probably his views on foreign policy, and so that would entail an extremely limited, you know, view of government regarding not just what the government does, but the purpose and the nature of the government, which has sort of evolved over time.

And, you know, a lot of different ideas about free markets and economics go into that, and that has kind of shifted from the 60s, maybe early 70s, I wasn't born, I wasn't alive during that time, so I don't want to be too presumptuous, but from what I've heard, and that has sort of, you know, evolved to the Amark war, and interventionists, you know, I mean, we can parse out things like that.

Largely, neoconservative divested, the president really emphasizes and understands human beings as free, and can really, you know, only works with force, and that's part of its nature, and that's a problem.

It's gotten out to a point where, well, some of the rhetoric is left, slogans and the ideas remain, but the so-called limited government fiscal responsibility. I mean, as far as I'm concerned, I haven't seen that from either party.

Yeah, I mean, wasn't George W. Bush more irresponsible fiscally than his predecessor, Bill Clinton?

Well, that's a great point, and that was what really got me disillusioned with the neoconservative model was, here we supposedly know all our dreams would come true, and the world would be at peace, and what happened with Bush?

Well, we invaded countries, we bailed out a bunch of corrupt banksters, and the debt, you know what I mean? So, while my parents and my friends and the sort of bubble I was in and grew up in, we believe in, you know, limited government.

The more and more I looked into it, and I was actually a political science minor in college for a while, and the more I really looked into these things, just the, I don't know which metaphor to use, but what even the government is, even on definitions, what the state is, what our relationship should be to different organizations and social entities, and he was talking about how there's really only one party in Washington, but it was true.

And like the left-white dichotomy and dualism, as far as the East is from the West, when you really get down to it, you think about it, you read about it, you understand all the different variables, and see what happens in Congress and so forth, the differences are, you're seeing that recently with some of these great Republican leaders endorsing Hillary, and that doesn't surprise me too much, but, so, I mean, one of the basic assumptions in contemporary politics in America is parties, and libertarianism questions that assumption.

It says that actually, well, there's so many memes, and one of the memes I love, it has pictures of both parties, in case you haven't figured it out, if I buy on you, both parties will start illegal wars, both parties will, you know, are owned by banks, both parties will continue the drug wars, and it goes on and on and on, and it was things like that that really kind of opened my eyes, that, you know, oh my goodness, this is, the parties are owned, and they're owned by people higher up in other, really, the election system is more of an offensive people, so.

Yeah, my friend William Grigg, who is a Christian libertarian, I believe he said that the parties are in the same crime family, they're just different cartels, or something like that.

Yeah, there you go.

Something to that effect. And I'm going to give our email address here for anybody who would like to join us on the air with a question of your own for Dr. Jamin Hubner about a Christian libertarian's reflections on the 2016 race for President of the United States.

Our email address is chrisarnsen at gmail .com, C-H-R-I-S-A-R-N-Z-E-N at gmail .com. Please give us your first name, city and state of residence, and country of residence if you live outside of the USA.

It's been interesting lately how I've been getting overseas emails with questions from my guests about our political race for President, so even from Scotland recently. But anybody is welcome to join us, no matter what your beliefs are, you don't need to be a Christian.

You could be atheist, agnostic, Muslim, Jewish, Swedenborgianist, or a Christian, we look forward to hearing from you regardless. And so, now you've become fascinated or drawn towards further investigation of libertarianism, and how did that lead you to be fully entrenched in it, if you will?

That's a good question. I guess, yes, in one, I've already been with the, and another was, well, one was economics. I've always been interested in economics, and I'm half into economics right now and helped to teach it at a college level.

And really, the only kind of group that gave any substantial weight to sound economic thinking were libertarians. I mean, you know, the political route, maybe we should do something about, and creating all the standards in Massachusetts, and the printing of the current 100 years, and 2008 bubble, all that can be traced back to currency, and fractional reserve banking, and making problems, and hardly anyone mentioned these things.

I mean, when you have an entity like the Federal Reserve that controls the entire currency.

Of a country, that's a lot of power. That's a lot of power.

And when the U .S. dollar, the Federal Reserve note, these and most politicians and parties don't critique that, it's because they need a central bank to print fake money, and these currency, and these notes, so that they can spend them, spend those notes through borrowing,.

You know, to the people who have elected them.

So libertarians are the only people who really started thinking that was part of, you know, the idea that debt is bad, for instance. You know, that we can't, a huge cave, a cavern of debt is, you know, you'd think would be pretty common understanding of things.

And you know, it always kept, well, should we lower income tax, or should we even have.

Income tax?

Right.

Income tax, no American paid income tax prior to 1913, they held on to 100 of their income. It was started to fund World War I, it was temporary, hopefully for only a couple years, you know, these big problems, and here it's today, and it doesn't just exist, it's huge,.

It swallows a third of what we make.

And it's just incredible.

Yeah, I didn't even become aware of this until about, I don't know, seven or eight years ago when I discovered the documentary that Aaron Russo produced called America, Freedom to Fascism. Have you seen that?

I have not, no.

Oh, that's an excellent documentary, specifically on the income tax issue, and you will be fascinated because he actually, Aaron Russo, by the way, is a movie producer who produced 48 Hours starring Eddie Murphy, and The Rose starring Bette Midler, and he was being accosted, if you will, not physically, but he was being harassed in a friendly way by those who were aware of what you are speaking about now, about the origins of the income tax system, and he finally, thinking that they were nuts, he was being barraged by so much information and so many people that he decided, I've got to really look into this myself, and he found out that much of what these people were saying, if not all of what they were saying, was true, so he did this really great documentary, you can see it for free on the internet, America, Freedom to Fascism, and he interviews an attorney for the IRS, and the guy actually stopped the interview mid-stream because he didn't realize he was going to be exposed for the hypocrisy and deceit that the IRS is built upon, and it's kind of interesting how the Constitution is a very small document, and he and Aaron Russo brought out the IRS tax code and it was like the size of three phone books put together, but if you could, I'm sorry, I interrupted you there, but I just thought I'd do it.

Oh, that's fine.

Yeah, that's interesting, I'll check that out, and that brings up an interesting point in just, I mean, I have the privilege of being in the academic world and going through different studies and research projects, so I've kind of developed it, you know, because it's banking, it's finance, and you know, it's always tempting for people to just dismiss it all, you know, or accept it all without any kind of qualification or thought, and then who knows where that might lead in this important aspect, but anyway, in finishing the answer, because of economic caution, and then there was another big shift, it has to do with just under what government is, I mean, if you talk to different people and you ask what the government is, you get, you know, a dozen different definitions, and you would think that, well, we all sort of know what it is, but it's a really fascinating.

Book.

You know, they put a definition to the state in a way that light bulbed for me that, you know, if a, you know, if you decline our offer, we'll punish you. It's like, wait a minute, whoa, I mean, it's, you know, when the government makes an offer in education, food, housing, immigration, national defense, you turn this down, we'll.

Punish you.

We'll fine you and make you steal, sell, if you decline, long enough, anyway, and so this realization that the state is the only entity, it is the only social organization assumed, you know, otherwise, well, otherwise what?

We won't have, you know, all the things, and that was kind of a final turning point, realizing that, you know, oh my goodness, why do we believe this is just okay, because, you know, the use of force is, that's just violence, is when you initiate force against.

Someone, that's violence.

And so, it kind of opened my eyes to the, that we lived in, violation of liberties that Americans originally, you know, acted upon, you know, that are, that are continually violated. I just read a story in the Rapid City Journal about a 17-year-old girl from Sturgis who was coming back from some mission trip or something, and TSA asked if she could be molested.

And for what, for what reason? Well, for national security, of course, as long as, you know, and what can happen to government agencies? Well, there's no accountability. See, in the free market, we could do something, write reviews on Amazon, or, you know, on the Internet or whatever.

Well, we can't do that with the government.

Right.

It's like, if our rights are violated, we just have to, that's it. I mean, it's just, the abuse of power is just a systematic thing that they can continually.

Get away with.

So, there's no mechanism of correction. There's no accountability. And so, anyway, yeah, I mean, just realizing the nature of this thing to me, and then, wait a minute.

Jesus hated these.

Voluntarism, it just permeates the New Testament. And even when it comes down to giving, like under compulsion, you know, the New Testament writes spirit, not under compulsion. And that's always, that's kind of part of the New Covenant, is a community of voluntarism, of freedom and liberty within the law of Christ together.

Libertarianism is the shared goals and values and assumptions of peace.

Oh, yeah.

Well, what do you do with the fact that the scriptures are clear that we are to pay taxes, we are to render to Caesar what is Caesar's, and so on? And, obviously, believe me, there's a part of this conversation that is going to be devil's advocate, because I realize that much of what the United States population believes their taxes are going to, are just not going to fund those things.

People think that there would be, without our income tax, there would be no more highways, roads, bridges, schools, the military would cease to exist, and all that.

A couple different questions there. The first one about, you know, the New Testament and relationship to the state. It's very interesting. Well, there's really nowhere, as far as I understand, that when, I mean, I'm not, I mean, it's really interesting when that question came up.

Is it with Caesar?

Well, what's so interesting, you know, Jesus doesn't say, you know, give your property, and it's yours. In a really interesting and subtle way, Jesus says, give this Caesar what is Caesar's. And, of course, he was doing three and four different things by that one phrase.

And, of course, you know, teachers of the New Testament for centuries. But an interesting point to make that he didn't just say, well, yes, you should just, you know, just work with him. The government back then had an approved word on that list.

If you're a counselor, you know, the government has this list of the approved things, the approved businesses, the approved war factories. Well, it was the same back then with religion. Judaism was the Jesus guy.

Why Christianity is not atheist. The Incarnation fit these other pagan mythologies and Greek goddesses. It just didn't seem to fit very well. So, that made Christianity eventually, you know, became illegal.

Atheistic, or not approved, and not Jesus as Lord. Okay, we don't see Jesus as Lord. Caesar, the emperor of the entire, just the deity of Christ, troning the head of the government. It was as treasonous and as, it made them enemies of the state as much as was possible.

Because it was Augustus Caesar who, he was worshipped as divine. And now all of a sudden, there's this group of Jews and Gentiles singing songs about Jesus of Nazareth. And saying Jesus is Lord. Praying, even, to Jesus.

Really complicated things. And then another thing about early Christianity that made them very, had a very unstable, totally different society, totally different way of operating, was the Resurrection Doctrine.

Because, you know, Resurrection Doctrine was not, and by Resurrection Doctrine, I mean That was not extremely common and widely believed. When Jesus came back, they didn't believe him. They had to be, they demanded evidence.

But didn't the Pharisees, didn't the Pharisees strongly believe in the Resurrection, not that they believed in Christ?

They did. That's the one thing that the early Christians and the Pharisees had in common. The very big thing that they had in common. The Sadducees didn't believe in the Resurrection. And for that reason, we're in cahoots with the state a bit more.

Because when you believe that people come back from the dead, the use of force loses its power. I mean, think about it. Well, we know how that plays out. Yeah, I believe Jesus is Lord. What are you going to do, kill me?

I'm coming back from the dead. I mean, Jesus has conquered the grave. And so, the Resurrection Doctrine was revolutionary, in N .T. Wright's terms, and belief started to not feed. And for a second reason, the Old Testament prophecy, the nation of Israel.

So, talking about Resurrection was one thing. You know what I mean? It was really these basic teachings in the society that they were presenting, which was not based on force, but turn the other cheek.

And it was based on voluntarism and freedom. All these things, it was a whole new way of looking at the world. And as David Bentley Hart points out in his really good book by Yale University Press, Atheist Delusion, he talks about where Jesus was being mocked.

The greatest irony. Because here's the king of the world. Here's God in the flesh. People think that, you know, because suppose the big deal, you know, being the emperor or the head of the government or some official is a big deal, you know, the question is what is really being changed?

It's really subtle and in a way sort of anarchic in the ways of the government and military and different things. You know, in the Christianity, and that's why it really became AD. So, anyway, that's what I would just say.

We go back then and read Romans 13.

And could you stop right there? Because we have to go to a break.

Oh, yeah.

And obviously Romans 13 is where the whole idea of a Christian paying taxes is really coming from here. And if we, if you are listening and would like to join us on the air with a question, in fact, we already have several people patiently waiting, well, at least I hope they're patiently waiting to have their questions asked and answered.

You could join them as well by asking a question of your own by emailing us at chrisarnson at gmail dot com. Chrisarnson at gmail dot com. And don't forget to please give us your first name, city and state of residence and country of residence if you live outside the USA.

We'll be right back with Dr. Jamin Huebner right after these messages. So don't go away. Hi, I'm Chris Arnson, host of Iron Sharpens Iron Radio, here to tell you about an exciting offer from World Magazine, my trusted source for news from a Christian perspective.

Try World at no charge for 90 days and get a free copy of R .C. Sproul's book, Relationship Between Church and State. I rely on World because I trust the reporting, I gain insight from the analysis, and World provides clarity to the news stories that really matter.

I believe you'll also find World to be an invaluable resource to better understand critical topics with a depth that's simply not found in other media outlets. Armed with this coverage, World can help you to be a voice of wisdom in your family and your community.

This trial includes biweekly issues of World Magazine, on-scene reporting from World Radio, and the fully shareable content of World Digital. Simply visit wmg .org forward slash iron sharpens to get your World trial and Dr. Sproul's book all free, no obligation with no credit card required.

Visit World News Group at wmg .org forward slash iron sharpens today.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon once said, Give yourself unto reading. The man who never reads will never be read. He who never quotes will never be quoted. He who will not use the thoughts of other men's brains proves he has no brains of his own.

You need to read. Solid Ground Christian Books is a publisher and book distributor who takes these words of the Prince of Preachers to heart. The mission of Solid Ground Christian Books is to bring back treasures of the past to minister to Christians in the present and future, and to publish new titles that address burning issues in the church and the world.

Since its beginning in 2001, Solid Ground has been committed to publish God-centered, Christ-exalting books for all ages. We invite you to go treasure hunting at Solid-Ground-Books .com. That's Solid-Ground-Books .com and see what priceless literary gems from the past to present you can unearth from Solid Ground.

Solid Ground Christian Books is honored to be a weekly sponsor of Iron Sharpens Iron Radio.

Welcome back, this is Chris Arns, and if you just tuned us in for the full two hours today, our guest is Dr. Jamin Hubner, Director of Institutional Effectiveness and Founding Chair of Christian Studies at John Witherspoon College.

He's addressing a Christian libertarian's reflections on the 2016 race for President of the United States, and we are starting off our two-hour discussion, and have been for the last half hour or so, or actually close to 40 minutes, by getting more of a background and definition of what Christian libertarianism is, and of course, Christian libertarians, as I've discovered, are not cookie-cutter individuals.

There are disagreements even amongst them, just as there are any group of people. And if you'd like to join us on the air, our email address is chrisarnsen at gmail .com chrisarnsen at gmail .com and give us your first name, city and state and country of residence if you live outside of the USA.

For those of you waiting to have your questions asked, we just ask for a little patience right now until we get into the heart of the topic. Before I even go any further with our discussion, Dr. Huebner, can you tell us what a Director of Institutional Effectiveness does?

You know, I wish I could, but I really can't. No, you know, the octopus arms of the government in higher education. You know, I think I actually learned a lot, and I never would have expected, and then reflected on that and thought, why don't you?

But I did a couple times. But at any rate, you know, it's an administrative sort of thing.

Could you describe, for our listeners, what John Witherspoon College is?

Sure.

And of course, in this interview, I'm just speaking on behalf of myself, not of the college or any church. I have my own views. But yeah, it's a really interesting and exciting project here in the Black Hills, about 25 miles from Mount Rushmore.

And it's weird that there, like, is no Christian college in this, you know, sort of finely, like, really great Christian... You know, when you start a Christian college from nothing, you don't expect to have, in your second year, you know, one of our professors is the world's expert on words.

And, you know, a professor of humanities is in the country. So, like, the people are great. Most of our students are homeschooled, and they already come in knowing how to read and write, which is more than you can...

I mean, that's like a blessing these days, because they have writing skills. Not as many as we would like, but yeah, it's really been a tremendous accreditation as well. I got three doctorates, and he was the president of the Criswell.

And, you know, you know...

Now, you got your M .A. from Reform Theological Seminary. I've interviewed a number of the faculty, in fact, the current president, and even the former president of RTS. I've interviewed him on my program.

I happen to be theologically reformed. Do you retain that theological position? And what is that... How does that fit within John Witherspoon?

Well, the college is non-denominational, so we have, you know... I think most are probably... I don't speak on behalf of the college, but, you know, we have evangelical-free, Presbyterian, Baptist professors, and we've had students who are Catholic, you know.

So it's non-denominational, but I still largely identify with... You know, I find myself more in line with a pretty nuanced, you might say, like, neo-Calvinism. One of my favorite theologians is Herman Bovink, and some others.

And so I'm not one of those guys who's like, you know, the Westminster Standard is the greatest thing since sliced bread, you know what I mean? Or to question the Westminster Standard is basically the...

But I'm just not as dogmatic, you know, as a lot of people who identify in that particular circle.

Yeah, and Herman Bovink was a Dutch theologian, wasn't he?

Yeah, yeah, he took Abraham Kuyper's place at the Free University of Amsterdam.

So you think the three forms of unity are the greatest things since sliced bread, then?

Well, you know, in terms of confessions I have about PCUSA, there are hundreds and hundreds and hundreds, just amazing how many there are. And they're really cool, and they're really great, and I wish we would have heard about them earlier.

And one is this 1983 Statement of Faith, because it was when two Reformed denominations got back together, and two churches got back together,.

And that's often not the case.

Usually, when a creed or confession... And that really kind of changes the tone, I think, when you actually read through different creeds and confessions. That was one of my favorites I learned about recently.

You know, I've had a new appreciation for the Nicene Creed of 381 and some others in different ecumenical ways.

I was just going to ask you who John Witherspoon was.

Well, Witherspoon, he was the only pastor to sign the Declaration of Independence. It was New Jersey College back then. And he was of Scottish descent and moved to the States. Frankly, he's one of the only Founding Fathers where you can say with certainty, okay, this guy's a Christian.

He believes in the Jesus Christ Lord and the deity of Christ, and he's not ordeas for things like that. And he also wrote some interesting works on money. He wrote a treatise on money and economics and things like that.

So yeah, he's a pretty interesting guy and he had a bounty on his head and apparently some guy got killed because they thought he was Witherspoon.

Poor guy.

Romans 13, Taxation, and the Limits of State Authority

Well, let's return to the subject at hand now and I want to read Romans 13 1 through 7. And then you could return to what you were saying when we left off at the break. Romans 13, this is the Apostle Paul's letter to the Romans, beginning at verse 1.

Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities for there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

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 for 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 an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection not only because of wrath but also for conscious sake for because of this you also pay taxes for rulers are servants of God devoting themselves to this very thing.

Render to all what is due them tax. To whom tax is due. Custom. To whom custom fear. To whom fear honor. To whom honor. And that is Romans 13 1 -7 if you could respond to that and pick up where you left off when we had the break.

There. Sure in case people didn't have it and without getting into repeating myself and all that one of the things that is necessary to know actually what it means. One thing that is interesting in hermeneutics is a person can do things by saying things.

You know the classic example of that so called speech act theory is in marriage when you say I do well you are not just saying something. You are not just by saying I do. You are actually assigning yourself a really important question in interpreting any text of scripture.

Certainly Romans 13. Ok here is what.

Is said but what is all.

I'll come back to what I was saying about the cultural context. The early church was in a very very tight spot can you imagine being Jesus was condemned by not just the government leaders his own people the Jews and of course scattered and but after the resurrection there is this new discovery and things start getting going.

And what are their.

Options in terms of preaching the gospel and spreading the good news. And how does this relate to the proclamation of the resurrection and the gospel that Jesus was mourned. And the relationship of the church to the state.

Well I mean I guess the church could basically say to the emperor and to the establishment and the authorities you have no authority. The Jews sort of did that. You have the Maccabean revolt centuries earlier.

And then the Jewish revolts. And that of course first of all it's not the way the kingdom of God armed revolution is not embodied. And leadership and people who killed them changed the world. And now it's becoming.

It's not just going to because they would get crushed first of all they're going to get smashed. And who's going to be there then to tell the story. And actually I would look called here is not and the collection of essays by New Testament scholars.

And they look at empire criticism in the New Testament. Because there's a lot of debate about how much the early church criticized the government. Some people think you know they're reading in people reading too much into it.

And maybe it's more than we think because you can't just write a letter on the black list. And you know you're going to be in trouble. Criticizing you know it's not just criticizing the government. They criticize the government.

Well in the language of power they take form in the embodiment of emperor and different things like that anyway. Yeah it's an essay in there by Michael Bird and he writes on Romans 13. It's pretty good.

And he has a quote. And he says this. He says survival is one of the greatest forms of survival is one of the greatest forms of survival. And so in that light we then look at the church's other doing everything the government says.

Which sort of sounds like what Romans 13 implies. Obviously it doesn't. Because the Christians did not. They certainly didn't burn incense to the emperor. They didn't do all kinds of things.

That the government required. Right. And that would have involved if you take it to the 20th century Christians turning in Jews.

Things like that exactly in Nazism in the Barmen Declaration all that right. It's a similar thing because it was so clearly a real deep violation of a person's conscience and of the kingdom of God. So you have those two.

The Christians aren't going to do either. They're not going to get crushed through an armed revolution and just resist. And they're not just going to submit what you have then. Chris is it's not just in Romans 13 because we have to view all of scripture in light of each other.

It's not the only place at all but the thing to remember is this is like a certain Rome not your ordinary village not your ordinary town in the empire. And these Christians I'm sure are very very tempted to overthrow their lords and the various people who are Paul gives his instruction.

In that context. The criticism that's baptism is you have Paul saying these things which really sounds like we. Just sort of there's no kind of resistance there's no kind of critique in the first chapter of Romans.