Wecome to Logia, the personal blog of Paul Hartwig. Reflections and resources to enhance understanding of what God has revealed of himself in Scripture.
Tribute to a Colleague and a Friend
Dr. Kevin Roy (left in picture)
October 10, 1948 - November 27, 2021
Is it possible to discover a 'Jonathan' after he has left this world? A week ago on this hour you slipped into the presence of your Lord. How fitting that you were out walking in the hills of Cumbria, near the Lake District, marveling at the beauty of the recent fallen snow. You stopped to talk to a friend and while sitting in his car, leaned back and were home with your Lord. Like Enoch you “walked with God, and you were not, for God took you.”
Memories of the decade we had together as colleagues teaching at the Cape Town Baptist Theological Seminary are fresh and vivid thirty years later. You were loved by all. Your winsome disposition, self-deprecating humor, and disarming smile—how could we all not be won over by your sincerity. Hubris and guile were strangers to your person.
You came to us at the Cape Town College in 1989 after nine years in the Dorothea Mission and almost a decade in the pastorate. As a consequence, the lantern of your spiritual life always burned bright and you traveled light, not distracted by the weight of any materialistic aspirations. I loved to hear you pray because you were not conversing with us but with a Father who you knew and talked with daily. The reverence with which you spoke the name “God” in lectures and in prayers struck a cord in our souls.
Your idiosyncrasies endeared you to all. You would stand before a class and during the lectures naturally fold both arms behind your back — a feat that I doubt Houdini could emulate —and then challenging gravity you would rock back and forth on your heels. When the arms were unwrapped they would at times flail out to stress a point of enthusiasm like discombobulated windmills. I remember the day I walked past your closed office door and heard a commotion. I paused for a moment and it sounded like you were finally taking a student to task. I had never heard such censure from you before. I heard no student voice and knocked on your door. Seeing no-one I enquired, “are you alright.” You replied, “Yes, and merely giving myself a good talking to.”
You loved the student’s questions and your classes were always a safe place to grow and learn. I remember well our theological discussions and search for truth and courage in our evolving political South African context. Your heart was always wide and the broken and the hurting found an advocate and champion in you. Always you were willing to dispense forgiveness and in our faculty meetings I was the hawk and you were the dove. I would often tease you with the comment that “you would give the Devil the benefit of the doubt.”
Our histories overlapped: you were born in Northern Rhodesia (Zambia); my birthplace Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe). You grew up on a farm near Broken Hill and attended a Catholic private school, St. Georges, in Salisbury. I went to University a few miles away. You went to Bristol University to study Civil Engineering on a prestigious academic bursary. After a year you came back to African soil and sunshine and your life moved in a different vocational direction. Your heart was captured by the Lord and you never let go.
Although an ocean and 10,000 miles separated us these past twenty years our friendship never wavered. We stayed in touch through the gift of email and, when I returned every May to Cape Town we met for coffee at Constantiaberg. We picked up our friendship and conversation like we had seen each other yesterday. The three hours of banter, news briefs, laughter, and sharing of information evaporated as if a few minutes as we covered updates on our students across the world that we had both taught and shared stories of our friends and family. In 2016 you flew down to Cape Town and we had ten days to catch up as you taught Carson-Newman University students at Team House on the Noordhoek Beach. You were pastoring in Gauteng then and I encouraged you to retire and enjoy farm life and family in northern England. You waited a few more years because you did not want to abandon the church in transition —so typical of the Kevin Roy axiom of life — others first, Kevin second.
I always looked forward to your Christmas letters with news of the family you treasured and loved and imagined the beauty of your surrounds. I had hoped to come your way during my sabbatical in the fall of 2020 but Covid struck and threw us all off balance. In days to come I will visit the oak tree on your farm where your ashes will be sprinkled and walk down the village road that you took before walking into God’s presence. I have re-read your recent emails with tears and joy this past week, You wrote in an email in August of 2018 of the joy of settling on the farm in the Cumbria environs, “Having been born on a farm, it looks like I am going to die on one.”
Up to the last you were giving away your life in ministry to people and shepherding a flock of believers at Castle Sowerby Chapel. When you went walking you memorized Scripture and prayed. What living words were you speaking and praying on that last walk shortly before the Lord came and took you home? Your life touched your students, parishioners, and colleagues with such encouragement, friendship, and grace. Our hearts are bruised and the loss of your presence profound, but we know now you live “forever in the house of the Lord.”
. . . a 'David'
December 2, 2021
Dr. David Crutchley
Dean of Religion
Jefferson City, Tennessee, 37760
Every remembrance of Kevin Roy’s sudden and unexpected home-call on the 27th November 2021 is echoed in my heart with feelings of deep and uncommon sadness and loss. This tribute of mine is a personal attempt to articulate why my knowledge that Kevin is ‘absent from the body and present with the Lord’ produces those strong feelings within me. I write for very personal reasons, but believe it will also honour Christ and his servant whom he loved ‘to the uttermost’.
I was in my second year at the Cape Town Baptist Seminary, 1989, when a rather idiosyncratic new lecturer was presented to the student body. His rather quirky characteristics and abstracted bearing told us we were receiving a lecturer without precedent, whose uniqueness would be easy prey for comical imitation. Who amongst us can forget his early modes of lecturing: the frequent rocking motions in all directions, his compulsive wiping of the whole face with his hand for reasons known to him alone, his gesticulations synced to his varied intonations, etc. His clothing was also memorable, especially his short ties and those trousers which continually needed preventative intervention- explicit and visible to all! Dr Roy was a phenomenon to us, and his entire manner was entirely the opposite to the composed and well groomed Dr Crutchley. We were blessed by some very able teachers, but the manner of Kevin surpassed them all.
Kevin was my lecturer mainly in the fields of Systematic Theology and Church History. In those subjects he came into his own, excelling especially in Church History. I’m sure we all knew then, and still do, that Dr Roy knew Church History. Though in teaching Systematics Kevin frequently expressed his ignorance of certain details (he was never pretentious), in matters of Church History he infrequently expressed ignorance. His immersion in Church History - especially that story in its South African chapter - and his own living faith in Jesus Christ had combined in him to give us a lecturer who eschewed all extremes and sectarian Christianity and humbly sought to direct his life and students ‘to the faith once for all given to the saints’. I now can identify him as a reformed catholic. This made him a friend to the Charismatics and the Reformed, the Activists and the Pietists. He was a catholic (with a small ‘c’), a mere Christian alert to any ‘tribalism’ in the Kingdom of God. It was also evident to me that Kevin loved his Bible. Though he did not give any courses in Biblical Exegesis, his love for the Scriptures and belief in their inerrancy clearly fuelled his life and ministry. He would frequently share from some text that had just spoken to him in his private reading. It was refreshing to have a lecturer who was not ‘preparing lectures’ but one who taught from out of a life in tune with both the Saviour and the Scriptures. Little did I know in 1989 how formative that inimitable Dr Roy was to be in my life and career.
Fast forward to 1999. In this year I decided to enroll with Pretoria University through CTBS for my PhD. My topic interfaced with the subjects of Eschatology and Ecclesiology, and I knew who I wanted as my Supervisor. Kevin was glad to take on the role, and I think from that time onwards he became a friend who travelled with me through subjects and materials that we both felt passionately about. I was very fortunate to have someone at hand even in Pinelands to give knowledgeable feedback on the 19th century Brethren Movement. We spent some good time together in his home, a home which I always felt matched the friendly, sympathetic and godly man that characterised Kevin. My conviction that all theological research should be illustrated by Church History probably grew out of that formative time in my relationship with him. When I graduated in 2002 at St James Church, how glad I am now that it was Kevin who presented me to the assembly for the conferral of my PhD. Who would have guessed that evening that God was preparing me to return to the Seminary 11 years later to lecture in those exact subjects Kevin had taught me - Systematic Theology and Church History!
We shared much in common. We both liked to walk alone to meditate and pray. We both served in Baptist pastorates. We both taught Theology and Church History at the same institution and then both of us went on to pastor churches outside our denomination. We both wanted the Baptist Union to adopt a clearer theological identity in terms of creation and gender. And we both embraced a more reformed catholic identity in theology. Yet in other ways we are very unlike. Kevin was a ‘consultant’ for me who would give wise and experienced guidance. He was an authority in South African and Baptist History. He was a mature man in life and in thought. Even though living far away in Carlisle, I could text him with a query and just share something I had found interesting in church history. He was a senior friend on the one path we were both travelling toward the Celestial City.
How grateful I am now that Heather and I could have visited him and Ina in 2019 in Carlisle. Closer personal friendship around common theological and denominational matters were formed in his cozy loft above a busy family home. The memories of standing with him at Hadrian’s Wall in the pouring rain and talking of the Roman Empire and Early Christianity will not be forgotten. And of course Kevin driving those narrow farm lanes with his body in the car and his mind somewhere else! He was as inimitable as ever. I have lost a comrade and friend in Kevin. But I think he has given me enough over the past 33 years to continue some of his work in his absence. When the Master of the household calls one of his servants to leave the fields and come in to the Main House, who can begrudge such a honour to a fellow worker, and a veteran at that. I’m very grateful that the Master sent him to work in the fields close to where I was learning to labour. The Lord could have sent him somewhere else. Later, when I am called in, we can complete this good relationship that has only just begun.
I close with a text that I think Kevin personally cherished, and I often think of him when I read it.
“ For this is what the high and exalted One says – he who lives for ever, whose name is holy: ‘I live in a high and holy place, but also with the one who is contrite and lowly in spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly and to revive the heart of the contrite” (Isaiah 57:15)
Paul B. Hartwig
“Christianity takes its substance as well as its name from Jesus Christ. It is not a construct of human philosophy, though it points to true wisdom. It is not a system of theological dogma, though dogmatic truths are involved. It is not just an inward and subjective experience, though it entails a personal relationship with God. It is no mere code of ethics, though it carries with it a way of life. ... It is supremely christological: Christ is the beginning, centre and end. Christianity is Christ”
(G W Bromiley ISBE)
G.K. Chesterton once made this astute observation:
It is only by believing in God that we can ever criticize the government. Once abolish God, and the government becomes the God.… Wherever the people do not believe in something beyond the world, they will worship the world. But, above all, they will worship the strongest thing in the world.
At present here in South Africa, we are under an indefinite ban on all worship services of any size or location. Yet Scripture commands us not to forsake “our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near” (Heb. 10:24-25). What then must the Christian do?
In this series, we are looking at two biblical reasons for Christian civil disobedience when earthly authorities clash with our highest allegiance to heavenly authority:
(1) Christians May Disobey Because of the Three God-ordained spheres of Authority (family, church, and state).
(2) Christians May Disobey Because of a Right Use of Romans 13.
We’re answering five key questions of Romans 13, the first two of which were answered in Part 4 previously: (a) Who is writing this text?; (b) When was Paul writing? Now let’s tackle the remaining three questions:
(c) To whom will all rulers give an account?
Look back at our text and count how many times the name of God appears. Six times it is emphasized that God is the one who establishes governments and uses them as His servants. Every last ruler and cop will answer to the Almighty. No human authorities are ever absolute, no matter how powerful or terrifying. Ask Nebuchadnezzar what happened when he forgot that, and had to learn about God’s supremacy the hard way! (Dan. 4). As the saying goes, ‘Rulers who don’t fear God will try to be God.’
John Gill comments on Romans 13:2, which seems to forbid any resistance to government:
This is not to be understood, as if magistrates were above the laws, and had a lawless power to do as they will without opposition; for they are under the law, and liable to the penalty of it, in case of disobedience, as others; and when they make their own will a law, or exercise a lawless tyrannical power, in defiance of the laws of God, and of the land, to the endangering of the lives, liberties, and properties of subjects, they may be resisted (1 Sam. 14:45). But Romans 13 prohibits resisting magistrates in the right discharge of their office.
(d) Why has God appointed them to govern?
Notice again, just as we saw (Part 3) in 1 Peter 2:14, so also in Romans 13, the text itself contains clear limitation clauses showing the God-ordained boundaries around the government’s sphere of authority: “For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behaviour; but for evil…a minister of God for your good…an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil” (vv. 3-4; cf. Ps. 101:8; Prov. 20:8; 29:4). Yes, these are descriptive clauses, not conditional ones; but still they put boundaries upon government authority. (Answering to what extent we submit to abusive authorities is not an easy question, nor the purpose of Paul’s teaching in Romans 13:1-7; but this blog series seeks at least to establish some biblical principles as a starting point for the discussion.)
God calls government to a focused, limited role of mainly criminal justice and protection of human rights, not universal parenting in a nanny state. As a friend of mine recently said, “When law-abiding citizens are more afraid of the police than criminals are, government is outside of its God-given role.”
As Francis Schaeffer said in applying Romans 13:
The State is to be an agent of justice, to restrain evil by punishing wrongdoers, and to protect the good in society. When the State does the reverse, it has no proper authority. It is then a usurped authority and as such it becomes lawless and is tyranny.
As pastor Tom Buck sums up well the biblical limitations of government’s role:
…The government is not responsible to ensure that everyone avoids death as long as possible. The government does not have the right to outlaw pizza, because consuming too much pizza might clog your arteries and result in a heart attack. Or to regulate how much sugar a citizen eats to make sure no one dies from diabetes. Eating too much pizza or drinking too much soda do not infringe upon another person’s rights, and so the government should not meddle in these types of actions.
The government only has the authority to make laws that incentivize obedience to God’s commands and criminalize disobedience to God’s commands within society. …The government does not have the authority to close the church in the name of protecting life – that’s not their job. Government has been established by God to protect rights, not to prevent all illness and death.
Or as David deBruyn stated in a recent sermon:
…The most dangerous governments are those who think of themselves as pure and righteous, because they see their acts as for the greater good, and are blind to the pain they produce. To be more specific, the more the government takes on the role of omni-protector, the more freedoms will be crushed and extinguished. Modern governments are a far cry from what the Bible charges governments to do: which is simply maintain order by punishing crime or threats to life. That's the biblical role of government as seen in Romans 13.
(e) Who defines “good” and “evil”?
Look again at Romans 13:3-4: Three times Paul speaks of “the good”, and three times he speaks of “the evil”. But who defines and who decides what is “good” or “evil”? Secular society today defines morality by political correctness, the LGBTQ agenda and censorship of all ‘hate speech’, and by all that is pro-abortion and anti-marriage. In communist countries, “good” is atheism, racism, worship of the state, rejection of all private property, and resulting genocide; “evil” is any opposition to the state or political treason.
But that cannot be how God defines morality in Romans 13 or anywhere in His holy Word and His perfect Law. In the very next verses (vv. 8-10), Paul proceeds to show that God’s absolute and objective Law defines our ethics, not any man-made subjective or situational standards. From the Garden of Eden, to Mount Sinai, to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, God has made clear that His character and Law are the fixed, universal standard for “good” and “evil” (Exod. 20; Lev. 19; Micah 6:8; Matt. 5:17-20).
Therefore, rulers don’t create morality; they must conform to it. Rulers don’t define good and evil; their job is to reward the good and punish the evil, based on God’s standards. As John Knox states, “Kings have not an absolute power in their regiment to do what pleases them; but their power is limited by God’s Word. …Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.”
But of course pagan governments often disregard the divine standard, though God’s Law is still inscribed on their hearts and written on their consciences (Rom. 2:14-15). So we submit wherever possible and keep paying our taxes (Rom. 13:6-7); but we are watchful for any infringement on our first allegiance and highest duty of obedience to God’s Law. As the famous Magdeburg Confession states, “divine laws necessarily trump human ones”.
There is not one verse in all of Scripture that says you are never allowed to disobey the government. Let me illustrate: Wives are mandated to submit and “be subject to their husbands in everything”, which sounds like absolute language (Eph. 5:22-24). Yet that cannot include obeying a husband who instructs his wife to break God’s Law (e.g., be immoral, cheat on taxes, abort a baby, etc.). Children are commanded to “be obedient to your parents in all things”, which sounds unconditional (Col. 3:20). Yet that cannot include submitting when dad asks his son to commit a crime or to sin, or when mom asks her daughter to steal or lie. What Scripture teaches is that we always obey government “in the rightful exercise of their authority”.
Whenever a human authority (in home, church or state) asks you to disobey God, at that point their authority is null and void. Likewise, Romans 13 presupposes an authority that is functioning justly, not requiring us to disobey the Word of God in any way. Writes John Calvin, “For earthly princes lay aside their power when they rise up against God, and are unworthy to be reckoned among the number of mankind.”
In closing, Scripture makes clear that submission to authority is not agreement. We submit “for the Lord’s sake” to every human institution, no matter our opinion or preference. Any time a legitimate authority gives a lawful command, like it or not, we must trust God and submit, no matter how irrational or unreasonable it seems.
But whenever we are commanded by an illegitimate authority (out of their biblical sphere) or an unlawful command (against the Law of God), we “must obey God rather than man” (Acts 5:29). Biblical civil disobedience is required anytime we are commanded to do what God forbids (e.g., Exod. 1; Dan. 3, etc.), or told not to do what God requires (Dan 6; Acts 4-5).
The heart of a Christian is not for maximum obedience to the state and minimum obedience to Christ. Especially in the church sphere, our Lord has given us New Testament epistles packed with dozens of “one another” commands and principles for our church life, and our highest priority is to study and obey those divine regulations to please Christ our Lord and King, our Head, Shepherd and Ruler of His Church, whose glad slaves we are, who bought us with His own blood.
We dare not have a view of near-absolute submission to the State that effectively rules out any underground church, leaving only the registered churches that meet Caesar’s approval and boast of their full compliance.
David deBruyn drives this home to our present situation here in South Africa:
…The difficulty we are going to face in the coming months, and maybe even years, is that as wave after wave of the virus comes our way, the government may keep banning religious gatherings.…We cannot live through another year where we are tossed to and fro by every announcement coming from Pretoria. At least one thing needs to remain certain in our lives, and that is our covenant with Christ and His people. We need the rock solid pillar of the church, the pillar and ground of the truth, not the shifting sands of whatever happens with Covid-19.
 See my sermon here explaining this further, “Why We Gather”: https://youtu.be/8u8e7Z0FNvQ
 https://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/romans-13/; Cf. D. Moo, “all our subordinate ‘submissions’ must always be measured in relationship to our all-embracing submission to him. …Our own sad experience of situations like the Holocaust during WWII suggest that genuine Christian devotion to God must sometimes require disobedience of the government. …Clearly, a willingness to resist the demands of secular rulers, when those conflict with the demand of the God we serve, is part of the ‘transformation of life’ which Paul speaks about in Rom. 12-15. …we should refuse to give to government any absolute rights and should evaluate all its demands in the light of the gospel.” (pp. 797, 806-10, Romans, NICNT) Cf. Schreiner on Rom. 13, “This text is misunderstood if it is taken out of context and used as an absolute word so that Christians uncritically comply with the state no matter what….” (p. 687, Romans, BECNT).
 p. 90, A Christian Manifesto
 p. 372 in M. Cassidy, The Passing Summer
 p. 146, J. Murray, Epistle to the Romans (NICNT); he continues, “we are compelled to take account of exceptions to the absolute terms in which an obligation is affirmed (e.g., Acts 4-5)” (p. 149).
 Commentary on Daniel Lecture XXX, Daniel 6:32
Francis Schaeffer was one of the 20th century’s most stalwart defenders of the gospel and an influential Christian author, teacher and apologist. After the catastrophic Roe versus Wade legalisation of abortion in 1973, Schaeffer was deeply burdened over the apathy of the evangelical church in not opposing such murderous, wicked laws. He wrote:
If there is no final place for civil disobedience, then the government has been made autonomous, and as such, it has been put in the place of the living God. …And that point is exactly when the early Christians performed their acts of civil disobedience, even when it cost them their lives. …Acts of State which contradict God’s Law are illegitimate and acts of tyranny. Tyranny is ruling without the sanction of God. To resist tyranny is to honour God. …The bottom line is that at a certain point there is not only the right, but the duty to disobey the State.
In this series, we are looking at two biblical reasons for Christian civil disobedience when earthly authorities clash with our highest allegiance to heavenly authority:
(1) Christians May Disobey because of the Three God-ordained spheres of Authority (family, church, and state).
In other words, outside of their own sphere, rulers have no authority. The state needs no permission from the church or family to perform its tasks (elect officials, go to war, punish crime, etc.). The family needs no permission from the church or state to do its God-given job of raising and caring for the bodies and souls of that household. Speeches from a head of state are not “family meetings”; they are speeches. Likewise, the church needs no permission from the family or state to fulfil its role.
What happens when one sphere swells, expands, overreaches and trespasses into another God-ordained realm? Here’s a sobering example, when the Jews declared to Pilate, “We have no king but Caesar!” (John 19:15). That is statism – idolising the state, dethroning the Lord, and exchanging the true God for the false god of civil government.
It is the opposite of Jesus’ famous answer when asked about paying taxes: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mark 12:17).
In one brilliant statement, our Lord both legitimizes and limits the role of the State.
As Doug Wilson states, “If you were to summarize the essential feature of Christian political thought in one phrase, it would be limited government.”
Because man is fallen and finite, his authority must always be bounded and restricted, never absolute. Only our thrice-holy God is not corrupted by universal power. All human authority (in all three spheres) is limited both vertically and horizontally: limited upwards by the Law of God; limited outwards by the boundaries and jurisdiction of the other two respective spheres, which may not be trespassed.
Paul Hartwig again helps us here in our local context:
The State in South Africa (SA) is increasingly encroaching upon the integrity and autonomy of both the family and the Church. Our State wants to regulate practices in nuclear families (such as child-discipline, sexual values, etc.) and coerce the family to comply with its ideologies. The temporary legal banning of Church gatherings is characteristic of this trend of the State to overreach into realms not under its authority. There is much to convince us that our Government considers itself sovereign in regulating the behaviour of its citizens; and there is little to gainsay the conclusion that it is fast moving in the direction of state absolutism.
Many statutory principles and laws of the SA government give Christians every reason to question its morality and integrity, including the science it bases its practices on. If we consider our government’s policies on the beginning of human life, natural gender identity, the nature of marriage and its views on sexual ethics, the Christian in SA finds the values of its government are opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ. Biblical Churches believe that our State’s position on these basic and fundamental matters is destructive to human society, and reveals an ignorance in knowing what is actually good for its citizens. The position of our government on these matters makes any form of State interference in ecclesiastical matters all the more alarming.
But you say, ‘The Apostle Paul wrote Romans 13 under wicked Nero, a vicious tyrant; yet Christians were still called to submit and obey.’ Great question, which brings us to our 2nd biblical reason for civil disobedience:
2. Christians May Disobey Because of a Right Use of Romans 13.
Romans 13:1-7 reads:
Every person is to be subject 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 behaviour, 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 servant 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 servant 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 the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Pay to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; respect to whom respect; honour to whom honour.
Let’s ask five key questions of Romans 13, allowing the text to speak for itself:
(a) Who is writing this text? Clearly it was penned by the Apostle Paul (Rom. 1:1), the same man who says earlier in this same epistle that for the Lord “we are being put to death all day long…considered as sheep to be slaughtered”, i.e., his precarious existence as a Christian before the powers of the day. Romans 13 is written by the same Paul who later publicly charged as a treasonous, seditious troublemaker and threat to the empire. The same Paul who got arrested countless times and wrote many of his epistle from state prison, in chains for his Lord (Eph. 3:1; 4:1; Php. 1:7,13-17; 2 Tim. 1:8,12,16; 2:9, imprisoned “as a criminal”). Clearly then, Paul wasn’t writing Romans 13 thinking of absolute, unconditional submission to government.
(b) When was Paul writing? Scholarly consensus is that this is early in Nero’s reign, before his persecutions began. Contrast this to the Apostle John’s view of civil government in Revelation 13, writing during Domitian’s fierce persecution (about AD 90). John describes the beastly, demonic, evil and murderous character of pagan government in persecuting Christians (just as Daniel depicts in Dan. 7-8).
A whole-Bible view of politics requires both Romans 13 and Revelation 13 (and the rest of Scripture). On the one hand, when government is in line with God’s will and fulfilling its purpose of rewarding the right, punishing the wrong and not clashing with God’s Law, it must be obeyed. But when a government rewards evil, punishes the right and requires us to disobey God, it has become a beastly tool of Satan and must be resisted.
In Part 5, we’ll conclude by answering the remaining three questions about Romans 13, with some timely applications. Stay tuned!
 See here for one of his final and most powerful projects summarizing the last 2,000 years of history in light of a biblical worldview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6c8EOyAg1U&list=PLBtCqYJcR2R0cOnm_M_ScQZk17UmfH7Xx
 p. 130, Christian Manifesto; on this, see also these excellent and helpful resources: https://www.nlnrac.org/classical/late-medieval-transformations/documents/defense (the Huguenot classic, A Defense of Liberty Against Tyrants); Glenn Sunshine, Slaying Leviathan: Limited Government and Resistance in the Christian Tradition; Matthew Trewhella, The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrates: A Proper Resistance to Tyranny and a Repudiation of Unlimited Obedience to Civil Government. See also the influence of the past 200 years of pietism in causing Christians to retreat instead of resisting: https://defytyrants.com/a-brief-history-on-pietism-and-statist-rulers/
 Nero’s persecution began about AD 64; Paul probably penned Romans around AD 57 (Moo, p. 3) That doesn’t mean Paul was naïve about evil rulers and tyrants, like those that crucified our Lord; but it does imply that Paul, while writing Romans 13, was neither ignoring or condoning Nero’s evil, nor any other injustices.
Often in Scripture we see a kind of ungodly submission to authority, an obedience that dishonours God: Doeg the Edomite obeys the king to murder 85 priests (1 Sam. 22); Bathsheba obeyed the king to commit adultery with him, and Joab obeyed to murder her husband (2 Sam. 11); soldiers obeyed wicked rulers by putting the innocent, righteous ones into prison (1 Kgs 22; Matt. 26:55-27:66); Aaron obeyed the voice of the people with the golden calf (Exod. 32).
Surely no Christian wants to displease his/her Lord with an unrighteous submission to earthly authorities. That’s why we are exploring here the first of two biblical reasons for disobeying lesser authorities out of obedience to our highest authority, the Lord Jesus Christ.
Civil Disobedience is Sometimes Required to preserve the Three Biblical Spheres of Authority
Last time we looked at: (1) the family sphere of authority; (2) the church sphere of authority. Today we dig into the third God-established domain of human sovereignty:
3. The state sphere of authority
We see government first established by God after the flood to institute the death penalty on murderers and establish the value of human life (Genesis 9:6). In the Old Testament we get to see God governing a nation directly through theocratic laws, judges and kings. In the New Testament the apostle Paul makes it clear that even a godless state is a servant of God and is sanctioned for a particular purpose. The main function of the state is to punish evil (Gen. 9:6; Rom. 13:1-7).
Sola5’s Core Value #3 says of this civic realm, it “is for the well-ordering and protection of society; this includes the appropriate punishment of criminals (Rom. 13:1–7).” The state’s symbol of authority, as Romans 13 makes clear, is “the sword”, clearly a tool for punishing criminals (v. 4). The focus of the state is not the care of souls (as in the church), or both souls and bodies (as in the family), but is focused on the protection of bodies, specifically of the human rights of its citizens.
In Scripture, the entire modus-operandi of the church and state stand in stark contrast to one another. As Paul Hartwig writes: “The State has a coercive and forceful function; the Church has a non-coercive and persuasive one.” People attend worship services freely and voluntarily; people pay their taxes by necessity, right? In the church ‘you ought to’ is the motive; but in the State it is ‘you must’.
This is why any compelling ‘must’ commands issued by the State over church affairs are an alien intrusion into the nature of the Church and contrary to how she functions. If the armed response came to your door and insisted that you should let them in to nurse your children, you would say, “No entry. Please stay outside and guard the property.” Their presence in your home would be a threat, as much as it is a blessing outside. In the same way, the government as a “servant of God for our good” (Rom. 13:4) may warn churches about a possible threat and appeal to them to temporarily cease congregating; but the government must not bring its sword into the church mandating when and how we will worship.
The key parallel text to Romans 13 (which we’ll examine in Part 4) is 1 Peter 2:13-17:
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. Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bond slaves of God. Honour all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honour the king.
This passage calls us to godly civil obedience based on Christ’s sinless, selfless example of trusting God and submitting to wicked and unjust rulers (1 Peter 2:21-25). Christians must submit to legitimate rulers giving lawful commands whether they agree or not, or like it or not. Even if we don’t agree with the amount of taxation, we pay our taxes. Even if we don’t like the speed limits, we follow them.
Yet unqualified Christian obedience to government cannot be taught from texts which explicitly limit the boundaries of government authority and the extent of our submission. God Himself clearly restricts the role of government, not giving it unlimited authority: it acts “for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right” (1 Pet. 2:14). When rulers reverse that, as often happens, by praising evildoers and punishing those who do right, they violate their delegated, God-given authority and transgress their divinely established boundaries and assigned jurisdiction.
With the present Covid lockdowns, when governments are trampling over human rights and replacing rule by constitutional, parliamentary law with rule by martial law (emergency regulations) under a dubious and indefinite ‘state of disaster’ (a known tool for tyrants historically; see Part 1), it must be admitted this creates a number of ethical dilemmas for citizens, especially God-fearing, law-abiding Christians. When one’s religion, family duties, livelihood, education, or human dignity are at stake, believers need great wisdom and much grace toward one another in knowing when, and when not, to obey harmful dictates.
We obey our rulers, not for their own sake or just because they say so; no, we submit “for the Lord’s sake” (v. 13), out of obedience to a much higher authority, King Jesus. God has clearly put a hierarchy in place, and we dare not circumvent or reverse that. When an earthly authority clashes with our highest, majestic and supreme heavenly authority, we must disobey Caesar and obey Christ, every time.
We must be whole-Bible Christians and learn from godly examples. The Hebrew midwives were honoured by God when they disobeyed the pharaoh’s command to kill all of the baby boys (Exod. 1). We see Jonathan’s nobility when he refuses to obey his father and kill David (1 Sam. 20). David refused to turn himself in, trusting God’s promise (1 Sam. 19). Daniel kept praying, openly (Dan. 6). His three friends refused to bow (Dan. 3). Peter and John refused to stop preaching (Acts 5). If we can’t obey government “in the Lord,” we shouldn’t obey. Passivity is not a virtue; protest is not always a vice. After all, we are Protest-ants.
This means we can make righteous appeals when we see authorities being unjust. We have record of the Apostle Paul twice appealing to his Roman citizenship, especially for the benefit of other believers and the churches he’d planted (Acts 16:37-38; 22:25-28).
Paul would be thrilled with the freedoms that Christians today enjoy in countries like South Africa. We are heirs of centuries of constitutional democracy built upon Lex Rex (‘Law is King’), instead of the medieval idea of the divine right of kings (see Part 1). We are voting, involved citizens, not mere serfs and vassals. The highest human law of the land in South Africa is not a president, deputy minister, or disaster regulations; it is our Constitution, and to that we can rightly appeal.
It would be foolish and ungrateful for believers not to appreciate all the benefits we’ve received from these Judeo-Christian ideas and the price paid for these freedoms by our forefathers. Surely part of the Church being “salt and light” in society, and “loving our neighbour as ourselves”, would be active participation in a democracy so that we are not responsible for allowing laws that punish good and reward evil to become entrenched (Matt. 5:12-14; 7:12). 
God is sovereign and Christ can build His Church under the worst of tyrants and fiercest of persecution; but that doesn’t mean the consequences for the Church, missions and human dignity in those lands has not been devasting. Nor does it mean that we passively wait for South Africa to become the next North Korea or Venezuela, not doing all that we can to prevent it. It’s been rightly said, “All that it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
So we see from Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2 that God has given the government a specific sphere within which to function. It is ordained to punish evil and reward good. Christians are called to submit to the government only in the Lord. Obedience to these Scriptures protects us from anarchy and tyranny.
 See many more examples here: https://www.sonofcarey.com/?p=2727
 Last year in our church small groups we did an excellent study by R.C. Sproul (free on-line) on the overall biblical and historic doctrines of civil obedience and civil disobedience: https://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/church_and_state/
 Written by the devout and renowned Scottish pastor, and saturated with biblical references defending the biblical view of limited government and rule of law: https://www.monergism.com/lex-rex-ebook. It was said that at the Westminster Assembly, that great original gathering of our Puritan forefathers and heroes, every single member had in hand of copy of Rutherford’s Lex Rex.
 Wayne Grudem’s superb text, Politics According to the Bible, grapples with many such questions.
A Biblical Case for Civil Disobedience & the Right Use of Romans 13, Part 2 - Guest Post by Tim Cantrell
Thanks for joining me (Tim) for this important study, in which we’re exploring two biblical reasons for disobeying lesser authorities out of obedience to our highest authority, the Lord Jesus Christ. Today we dive into the first one.
Civil Disobedience is Required Because of the Three Biblical Spheres of Authority
This must be our fundamental starting point in this discussion; otherwise, nothing makes sense: God alone has absolute authority, none other, regardless of what they may claim. Only the triune LORD has inherent, intrinsic, and undelegated authority; unlimited dominion, unconditional and unqualified rule and reign over all His creation and all His creatures, including humanity. God requires permission from no one (Matt. 28:18; Romans 13:1).
Our local association of churches, Sola5, holds to a number of excellent, biblically-grounded, historically-rooted Core Values. Of these, the 3rd value is called, “Authority” Under our Almighty God and King, He has established three spheres of human government and earthly authority/sovereignty.
Sola5 states that this 1st and most foundational sphere “is for the upbringing and education of children, as well as for the nurturing of orderly human relationships in honour, discipline and love. The family is the basic unit of society (Eph. 5:22–6:4; Deut. 6:4–9).” The family symbol of authority is the rod of correction, the very thing being outlawed by godless state governments (Prov. 13:24; 22:15; 23:13-14).
Think of God’s design for the family as, ‘The Ministry of Health, Education and Welfare’, as responsible for the care of both soul and body. From food, clothing and shelter, to curfews, beliefs, and choosing a spouse and career – never in Scripture are these tasks assigned to the state, but always to the family (Gen. 18:19; Deut. 6:7-9; 1 Cor. 7:36-38; Eph. 5:22-6:4; 1 Tim. 5:8),. Nowhere does the Bible hold secular governments responsible for universal healthcare. Always that is listed as a family duty first, and then secondarily a church duty in caring for her widows and orphans (1 Tim. 5:1-16; Jam. 1:26-27).
South African pastor, author and lecturer, David deBruyn, warns of what happens when the state transgresses into the family sphere:
Governments now get voted into power by promising to oversee housing, education, medicine, the economy, a good currency, a minimum income, food, water, land, and the list goes on. The government becomes a parent, and the citizens are dependents. The government in this role becomes a monstrous juggernaut of bureaucracy, devouring taxes and trying to regulate every detail of life.
2. The church sphere of authority
Our Sola5 statement goes on to say, “Church government is for the spiritual well-being and ministry of God’s people (1 Cor. 12:12-27; 1 Thess. 5:12-15; Heb. 13:7,17). The local church’s God-given symbol of authority are the keys of the kingdom – admitting and excluding members based on the gospel of Christ alone. Consider God’s design for the church as, ‘The Ministry of the Word and Sacrament’. Scripture calls the church’s main focus to be, not the care of bodies, but souls (Heb. 13:17). Only King Jesus gets to complete this sentence, ‘You may worship if….’
Right now in churches around the world, a crisis of spiritual authority is occurring that is testing believer’s understanding and application of this 2nd biblical sphere. Members are watching to see how their leaders handle Covid and lockdowns, and should keep praying much for them. God’s Word is clear: “…be subject to your elders”; “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account” (1 Pet. 5:5; Heb. 13:17). It is a sad day when the body of Christ is paying more attention to Caesar's fallible regulations than to Christ's infallible Book and the loving counsel of their spiritual leaders who know and care for them.
Duly appointed church leaders are God’s legitimate authorities over the spiritual health of their flock, and all of their biblical instructions must be obeyed, whether one agrees with them or not. Of course members can appeal, clarify, and engage with their leaders; but mutiny or divisiveness is not an option (1 Thess. 5:12; Rom. 16:17; Eph. 4:1-6; Tit. 3:10-11). More than ever, believers need to turn off the media and sit at the feet of their own godly, wise, proven shepherds who are called to "understand the times" and teach the saints (1 Chron. 12:32; Tit 1:9; 1 Tim. 3:2; 2 Tim. 2:24-4:5). The flock are being constantly bombarded by today's popular narratives; they urgently need to hear the calming, clear voice of their Good Shepherd through His appointed under-shepherds expounding His Word (John 10:16; 1 Pet. 5:1-4). Members can rest in knowing that, in the end, their leaders are the ones who will answer to Christ for how they’ve led the flock (John 20:15-19; Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:4; Jam. 3:1).
In terms of how the church sphere relates to the government sphere esteemed theologian John Murray wrote:
The sphere of the church is distinct from that of the civil magistrate … What needs to be appreciated now is that its sphere is co-ordinate with that of the state. The church is not subordinate to the state, nor is the state subordinate to the church. They are both subordinate to God, and to Christ in his mediatorial dominion as head over all things to his body the church. Both church and state are under obligation to recognize this subordination, and the corresponding co-ordination of their respective spheres of operation in the divine institution.
Each must maintain and assert its autonomy in reference to the other and preserve its freedom from intrusion on the part of the other. …when the civil magistrate trespasses the limits of his authority, it is incumbent upon the church to expose and condemn such a violation of his authority.
R.B. Kuiper’s classic text, The Glorious Body of Christ, rings out with a biblical rebuke to his age and to ours:
Our age is one of ecclesiastical pacifism. …When a church ceases to be militant it also ceases to be a church of Jesus Christ. …A truly militant church stands opposed to the world both without its walls and within. …Time and again in its history the church has found it necessary to assert its sovereignty over against usurpations by the state.
Kuiper then gives biblical examples – like when King Saul or King Uzziah usurped the priesthood (1 Sam. 13; 2 Chron. 26), stating, “…In both cases, a representative of the state was severely punished for encroaching upon the sovereignty of the church.”
Lord Macauley of England summed up the Puritan reputation this way: “He bowed himself in the dust before his Maker; but he set his foot on the neck of his king.” As Kuiper continues:
…Ours is an age of state totalitarianism. All over the world statism is [rising]…. In consequence, in many lands the church finds itself utterly at the mercy of the state whose mercy often proves cruelty, while in others the notion is rapidly gaining ground that the church exists and operates by the state’s permission.
Now, if ever, is the time for the church to assert its sovereignty over against encroachments by the state. The church is in sacred duty bound to rise up in majesty and proclaim to the world that it enjoys freedom of worship, not by the grace of the state, but as a God-given right; and that it preaches the Word of God, not by the grace of human governments, but solely at the command of the sovereign God and its sovereign King, seated at God’s right hand.
…It must be admitted to the church’s shame that it has often cowered before the state. …those power-hungry potentates who neither fear God nor regard man but take counsel together against the Lord and His Anointed, saying, ‘Let us break their bands asunder and cast away their cords from us’ (Ps. 2), must be told by the church that He that sits in the heavens will laugh, that the Lord will have them in derision, and that if they fail to kiss the Son, He will break them with a rod of iron and dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel. Let the church speak sovereignly for the sovereign God and the ‘blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords’ (1 Tim. 6:15).
To which our churches give a thunderous reply, “Amen and amen!” Tomorrow, we come to the 3rd biblical sphere of sovereign authority and presently (and often) the most controversial one, Caesar’s sphere of state government, and how it relates especially to the church. Your prayers are appreciated!
 Here are two recent and definitive biblical statements of this position, from two different countries: https://www.gty.org/library/blog/B200723; https://trinitybiblechapel.ca/here-we-stand-the-church-must-meet/
 John Murray, Collected Writings, 1:253-54
In the next few posts the important topic of the Church's relationship to the State is picked up by Tim Cantrell. It is published to rouse Christians to serious thought and behaviour as we hold our Bible open at Romans 13 in one hand and the current Government Prohibitions on Churches in the other. May the Lord give us his wisdom as we seek to follow Him as good citizens in our country. Paul Hartwig
The Christian Duty of Disobedience &
The Right Use of Romans 13, Part 1
By Tim Cantrell
In July 1933, during Hitler’s first summer in power, a young German pastor named Joachim Hossenfelder preached a sermon in the towering Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church, Berlin’s most important church. He used the words of Romans 13 to remind worshippers of the importance of obedience to those in authority. The church was all decked out with Nazi banners, its pews packed with the Nazi faithful and soldiers in uniform.
Earlier that same year, Friedrich Dibelius, a German bishop and one of the highest Protestant officials in the country, had also preached on Romans 13 to justify all the Nazi seizures of power and brutal policies, and misquoting Martin Luther himself about the supposed paramount powers of state authority. Three days after this sermon, the German parliament dissolved and Hitler took over. Within a few years, six million Jews had been slaughtered and the world devastated by World War Two.
Likewise, Romans 13 was a favourite text of presidents John Vorster and PW Botha here in South Africa to defend the evils of apartheid. Said Botha on Easter 1985 when addressing the Zion Christian Church masses of worshippers at their ‘Mt. Moriah’, quoting straight out of Romans 13:
The Bible … has a message for the governments and the governed of the world. Thus we read in Romans 13 that every person be subject to the governing authorities. There is no authority except from God. Rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad conduct. Do what is good and you will receive the approval of the ruler. He is God’s servant for your good.
Recall that before the biblical clarity and bravery of our Protestant Reformers, for centuries the Dark Ages revolved around the great lie of the “divine right of kings” (i.e., ‘Rex Lex’, ‘The King is Law’). Most of Europe at the time believed that if you were from the royal dynasty, God must have put you on that throne, and everyone obeys you, always and unconditionally.
Because of this one deadly myth, the divine right of kings was used to justify the slaughter of countless innocent people and many of our Christian forefathers. Yes, God was sovereign. Yes, Christ was exalted through these faithful martyrs. But realise that many of these brutal kings and tyrannical monarchs eagerly quoted Romans 13 to justify a pagan and godless ideology.
One New Testament scholar writes that the misuse of Romans 13 has "caused more unhappiness and misery…than any other seven verses in the New Testament by the license they have given to tyrants…used to justify a host of horrendous abuses of individual human rights.”
But you say, ‘Hitler’s Holocaust and racist Apartheid have nothing to do with responding to a global pandemic!’ To which the verdict of history answers: Both the Jews in Germany and blacks in South Africa were viewed as a threat to public health (the “Swart Gevaar”, “Black Danger”), as a grave danger to the overall safety and protection of society. ‘Trust us,’ said govt (even with tears), ‘we truly have your best interests at heart. All we want to do is help, to keep you safe. Nothing more, we promise.’
Friends, do you realise? By legalising abortion, world governments kill more unborn babies in one year than all the lives Covid 19 would kill in 100 years at the current rate - always in the name of 'women's health' or 'reproductive health'! Already, by mid-January 2021, over two million babies have been murdered by these wonderful, loving governments that are so concerned about safety and protection for people! Not to mention countries like here in South Africa, where violent crime is still rampant and out of control; yet suddenly our authorities have a incredible zeal about protecting you and me?
William Pitt (famed Prime Minister of UK, close friend of William Wilberforce) once wrote, “Necessity (i.e., ‘public health, common good’, etc.) is the plea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.” Get people afraid, and they’ll do whatever you want. A fearful society becomes very compliant; panicking people will believe anything.
During the gruesome and bloody days of the French Revolution, when 40,000 innocent citizens lost their heads, simply because a neighbour snitched on them – who was it that operated the guillotine day and night? It was run by the Committee for Public Safety.
Theologian Owen Strachan recently wrote:
We need church. Embodied congregational worship of Christ is essential--in all seasons. Should we be wise, and thoughtful, and even careful? Yes we should.
Wisdom is not the enemy of divine commands, however. We modern Christians may have many "options" regarding whether we go to church or not, but outside of serious health concerns (and even possibly including them on a case-by-case basis), we do not have the "option" of skipping congregational worship.
Our society says this is so, but our society is subsuming an entire ideology under the banner of "public health," one of the least-explored and most-exploited concepts on planet earth today. When you hear that term "public health," your brain should switch on, and you should examine very critically what you hear from that point forward.
In this series of articles, I’d like for us to explore two biblical reasons for disobeying lesser authorities out of obedience to our highest authority, the Lord Jesus Christ. Once you are convinced of this biblical duty, it is not only an option but a mandate for civil disobedience. First, we’ll look at the three God-ordained spheres of authority. Second, we’ll dig into a right use of Romans 13. See you next time!
10 Points for South African Christians and Churches to Consider in January 2021
(‘There is a time to be quiet, and a time to speak up’ - Ecclesiastes 3:7)
“Halt! Who goes there?”
For every soldier on border patrol there comes a time when his routine and eventless tasks suddenly become real encounters with an intruder. An unusual and suspicious event sobers him up and reminds him why he is posted there, uniformed and armed. Yet before that sentinel on night patrol braces himself for confrontation it is vital that he establish ‘who is out there in the dark’ and ‘what behaviour is lawful’ between the countries he patrols. His interrogatory summons seeks to clarify such matters and determine his course of action.
Moving from this hypothetical scenario let me take up the same interrogatory question and direct it to a very current issue: Is it not time for Christians and Churches to give a respectful but firm ‘Halt! Who goes there’ to the State as it asserts itself over their Sunday congregations? I believe it is. Below I present to you a sort of check-list for soldiers of Christ who are seeking to know what boundary needs to be patrolled between the Church and the State and what behaviour is appropriate for those on either side of that line. The particular situation that has prompted this interrogation has been the South African Government’s temporary ban on all religious gatherings at the beginning of January 2021. It is claimed that such gatherings would expedite the transmission of the Covid19 flu virus. How should Churches respond to this new ban? Should they take it in-good-faith ‘lying down’ or in-better-faith ‘standing up’?
The 10 points for your serious consideration are the following:
1. A statement that most Christians have affirmed and still do is that Church communities should always obey the State unless the State commands them to do what God has prohibited, or when it prohibits something God has commanded. The words of Paul in Romans 13:1 (‘let every person be subject to the government authorities’) and the words of Peter in Acts 5:29 (‘we must obey God rather than men’) witness to both Biblical State Obedience and Biblical State Disobedience which the above principle seeks to navigate. Christians should always respect and uphold their governing authorities for the Lord’s sake but they are not called to translate that respect into unconditional obedience. As there is a time for children to disobey their parents (e.g., when they instruct them not to become Christians), so there is a time to disobey the State.
2. A separation between Church and State was implied by Christ when he said ‘Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God’ (Mark 12:17). His wise words were as radical for his day as they are for ours. Christ’s words point to a separation in people’s responsibilities between the State and their Religion. This differentiation of responsibility means that neither the Religious body nor the State has the right to command the other on matters unrelated to their sphere of responsibility. This is why the Church has no more right to command the State to elect its officials or deploy its troops than the State has to appoint pastors or regulate worship services. These two social realms are autonomous (self-governing) and have no jurisdiction over each other since their membership, policies, practices and natures are different.
3. The modus-operandi (‘mode-of-operation’) of the Church and the State is totally different. The State has a coercive and forceful manner of function while the Church has a non-coercive and persuasive one. People attend worship services freely and voluntarily, but pay their taxes compulsively and involuntarily. In the Church ‘you ought to’ is the motive, but in the State it is ‘you must’. This is why any compelling ‘must’ commands issued by the State over ecclesiastical affairs are an alien intrusion into the nature of the Church and contrary to how it functions. The government may appeal to Churches to temporarily cease congregating, but they cannot order them to do so.
4. When the State believes that the welfare of its citizens is somehow compromised by their congregating together, it does not have the right to override the autonomy of the Church and temporarily confiscated its keys. Since the Church is made up of citizens, the State may command her citizens in matters of state affairs but it may not command them in matters of religious affairs. Since our government did not criminalize the sexual choices of its individuals to prevent the transmission of HIV Aids, I believe they should not criminalize the religious freedoms of its citizens in order to prevent the transmission of Covid19. Yes, a citizen may be mandated by the State to wear a mask, but they cannot be criminalized for going to Church.
5. We must reaffirm that the primary social unit of our society is the family and that it precedes both the State and the Church in history and human experience. It is a domain that is also autonomous and should not be controlled by the State or the Church. The freedom of the family unit to choose its own language, number of children, values, beliefs etc., should be upheld by all citizens and Churches. Recognising these autonomous realms means that the State can no more dictate to Churches how they should conduct their own affairs than they can dictate to our children who they should marry or what their vocations should be. We do not accept the latter and neither should we accept the former.
6. The State in SA is increasingly encroaching upon the integrity and autonomy of both the family and the Church. Our State wants to regulate practices in nuclear families (such as child-discipline, sexual values etc.) and coerce the family to comply with its ideologies. The temporary legal banning of Church gatherings is characteristic of this trend of the State to overreach into realms not under its authority. There is much to convince us that our Government considers itself sovereign in regulating the behavior of its citizens and there is little to gainsay the conclusion that it is fast moving in the direction of state absolutism.
7. Many statutory principles and laws of the SA government give Christians every reason to question its morality and integrity, including the science it bases its practices on. If we consider our government’s policies on the beginning of human life, natural gender identity, the nature of marriage and its views on sexual ethics, the Christian in SA finds the values of its government opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ. Biblical Churches believe that our State’s position on these basic and fundamental matters is destructive to human society and reveals an ignorance in knowing what is actually good for its citizens. The position of our government on these matters makes any form of State interference in ecclesiastical matters all the more alarming.
8. In the Covid19 pandemic, the downgrading of Church and Christian ministry is evident when the State designates them as ‘non-essential services’. Yet throughout most of human history, societies have responded to crises of far larger proportions with calls to prayer in Church buildings and have attended to the channels of communication with the Creator. Regardless of the issues of viral transmission and the wise application of ways to interrupt transmission, the temporary ban on religious gatherings imposes a secular humanistic ideology on a population of which many still believe that God can be trusted more than pharmaceutical companies. In such a critical hour the ministry of the Church is a ‘most-essential-service’ in serving the people of our land.
9. The current Government distinction between casinos, gyms, restaurants, Malls, cinemas etc. and religious gatherings is blatantly discriminatory. Gatherings unrelated to economic matters have received harsher treatment and their assemblies have been disallowed. Does not this discrimination and marginalization of the Church reveal the economic motive of many of the current regulations imposed on citizens in SA? Permitting Churches to use their own discretion and keep their doors open for ‘whosoever will’ could have persuaded us of the integrity and impartiality of these recent policies.
10. Lastly, it is to be sadly noted that too many Christians consider public Sunday gatherings a non-essential for their faith, and have been quite willing to exchange public Sunday gatherings for the more comfortable internet options at home. Cultural conveniences and the privatization of Christianity have made Christians soft and compliant to the State's advances. Too many Churches have handed over their keys to the State, even though it’s only for two weeks (or three...). But a precedent has been set and a border line has been crossed. The State now believes it has a right to those keys under circumstances it unilaterally determines. Should not such Church compliance with this ongoing State overreach be of greater concern than the overreach itself? Have the soldiers of Christ fallen asleep? Do they know that there is a border to guard and country to defend? “For the hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber” (Apostle Paul, Romans 13:11)
Dr Paul Hartwig (03/01/ 2021)
How closely God is now connected to our bodies!
God has revealed himself in history and Scripture as the triune God. This revelation has commonly been expressed by all Christians in the idea of the Trinity: there is only one God who eternally exists in the three distinct persons of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Now given this glorious and mysterious revelation of the true God, consider how closely this God has connected himself to human nature. It is so close that the majority of the holy divine Society of the Godhead are now very closely (even integrally) related to it:
So, at this Christmas season, consider afresh how closely the true God is related to human nature and human bodies through Jesus Christ. May it change the way you think about God and help you respond to those hopeful words of the Bible: 'Draw near to God and he will draw near to you'.
One of the most astounding thoughts to enter the mind of God-belittling and law-transgressing human beings is the idea of unconditional election. The idea that God would select such a person for himself because of nothing in themselves but in his goodness alone has the power to radically transform any person and free them to serve God with greater joy and liberty. To believe that we know Christ through no worth or work or will of our own but solely through his sovereign design is a revealed mystery that waits to go to work and effect a glorious transformation. If you really ponder what it is to be unconditionally chosen by God you will prove the apostle Paul true when he said that ‘continual transformation happens through the renewal of your mind’ (Romans 12:2). Here is the truth God has revealed relating to the ultimate ‘reason why’ someone is his child. When speaking of why Jacob was chosen above Esau, God says:
for though the twins were not yet born and had not yet done anything good or bad, in order that the purpose of God according to election would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her ‘the older will serve the younger’ (Romans 9:11-12).
We would automatically think that the reason why Jacob ended up as the Jacob of Scripture and Esau as Esau was because of something each individual did, some good or bad thing in them that caused their lives to look like it did. But no, it was nothing in them that God took into account. This Scripture makes it clear that it was the pre-birth unconditional purpose of God that caused their lives to be as they were. The reason for the distinction was ‘because of Him who calls’. Paul repeated this idea a few verses later when he said: ‘so then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs but on God who has mercy’ (Rom 9:16).
I think that there are three types of reactions to this teaching. I mention them here and I would like you to think where you are classified. The three are:
So I want to make a way for this truth – unconditional election - to come into your soul with fresh power. I want the citadel of human spiritual pride to fall – which can still stand in the hearts of those most zealous for God – and for grace to reign through this truth. Ponder the word ‘unconditional’ until it changes your outlook on your life. It means that all your past and present and future successes and failures are overlooked and in spite of yourself God set his everlasting love upon you in Christ Jesus. It means also that your family and friends who you think could never come to Christ and who are so hardened against the truth can be brought to him in spite of themselves. It means that human ‘good’ and human ‘evil’ is not the criteria that God uses in his operations. Unconditional election turns the tables upside down on the head of these things, and God alone gets the glory. Oh, it is such a superior truth and needs to reign in our hearts. We should all agree with the Charles Spurgeon who said: ‘I’m so glad that God chose me before I was born because he certainly would not have afterwards’. What a precious thing not only to agree with this this but to feel it changing us deep down and renewing the way we think about our lives.
Glory to God in the Highest for his Amazing Grace!
P.S., I must answer the common question: how do I know if I am unconditionally chosen? The right answer has always been: look to Christ and place your hope in Him and His Cross. If you do, you are ‘chosen in Christ from before the foundation of the world’ (Ephesians 1:4). Don’t ask ‘Am I elect or not’. Ask, ‘Will I come to Christ’. If you do, you will know the answer to such speculations.
Pursue your highest fulfilment at all time and for all time!
Every single human being, everyone who has lived and everyone yet to be born, shares with every other human being one thing in common: all seek their own fulfilment. Every descendant of Adam and Eve is born with an internal desire to want to be fulfilled. It's the reason why we do what we do. It’s the reason I have come to Malelane, and it's the reason the Church called us. It's the reason why you married who you did or whom you want to marry. It's the reason why you work where you do, and why you wear the clothes that you do. It's the reason why every car drives on the N4. All people in the world affirm that choices based on this criterion are good, right and acceptable choices. All know that it’s not right for parents to insist that their children go into careers that they don't want to do. Every film made and all entertainment is an invitation to personal fulfilment. The world praises this motive; it’s what makes it tick! It's also the reason given for sexual 'freedom', why people protest at how they are being treated, why people purchase on credit, and, above all, what justifies the philosophy of our day of being 'true to yourself'. Pursing personal fulfilment is, has been and will be the way every single human being will live their lives and the rudder that steers their little life-boat.
I think that one of the most important discoveries anyone can make is that God himself does not ask you to repent of this ambition. He does not want you to do things that are not good for you. Did you know that? For some people being a Christian is all about doing the exact opposite: not doing things you want to do, saying 'No' to things of the world so you can put God first in your life. Let me call you to consider the great fact that God does not want you to do things that are not good for you. The great divide between wickedness and righteousness, between good and evil is not rejecting the pursuit of your personal fulfilment but in the type of fulfilment you seek and the place where you seek it. The quest for personal meaning and happiness is from Him and is affirmed, not rebuked in the Bible.
But there is a very important qualification which in the midst this motive common of every human being creates a wide and deep gulf between them, a Great Divide. It is this. Some people seek shallow and temporary fulfilment, whilst others seek the deepest and most lasting fulfilment. On the one side of the Great Divide go people who place their fulfilment in created things, and on the other go those who place their fulfilment in the Creator himself. Both groups seek personal fulfilment but they are worlds apart when it comes to the type of fulfilment and the source of that fulfilment they pursue. This is the Great Divide and why people are on one side and not the other.
Listen to God's own testimony on this matter:
"People exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator" (Romans 1:25)
"By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward" (Hebrew 11:24-26).
"I have come that they [the sheep] may have life and have it in abundance" (Jesus, in Jn 10:10)
These Scriptures assume that people are motivated to seek what's good for them- this is what makes these words appealing - but the great difference is the source (creature or Creator) and quality (fleeting or eternal) of this good. And Christ, as the Infinite God who Created all things, stands as the rallying point to those on the one side, calling us to 'everlasting pleasures' which are found only in his pierced hands (Psalm 16:11) and 'life in abundance' that he feeds his sheep with. The Bible presents him as the fulfilment of the quest for human fulfilment, something everyone proves true when they have come to him hungering and thirsting for what nothing else can give. To reject him is therefore both suicidal and the most terrible thing to do.
John Newton, the ex-slave trader who wrote Amazing Grace, expressed this wonderful truth in the last two lines of his hymn Glorious Things of Thee are Spoken:
Saviour, if in Zion's city
I, through grace, a member am,
Let the world deride or pity,
I will glory in Thy name:
Fading is the sinner's pleasure,
All his boasted pomp and show;
Solid joys and lasting treasure
None but Zion's children know.
So, I appeal to you, take that natural and common motive for your own fulfilment and resolve to satisfy your fleeting life on the HIGHTEST things ('solid joys') and the MOST ENDURING things ('lasting treasures'). This is the great dividing line that has always and ever will pass between people living on this planet.
Which side of that Great Divide are you on?