What if? What if what all this is about is the ultimate, dismal refusal and failure to truly investigate Barack Hussein Obama, his roots, his history, his past, and his religious affiliation? What if the undocumented worker in the White House is actually a blood brother to ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood? What if? Is it worth asking and investigating this at this point? There is plenty of information out there about Obama’s Muslim connections, though this is not reported on in the mainstream propaganda media. Surely, there are those in other governments and in other nations, who do not have the requirement to be politically correct who can look at Obama and truly decide who and what he is and what he is doing. We are in the same situation as when Hitler came to power. There were people who understood what was going on, but the majority did not listen, would not listen.
The time for name calling of birthers and truthers is over. The question facing the world is this: if the person occupying the White House does not have allegiance to the United States and its Constitution, as has been repeatedly shown that he does not, then what implications are there not only for the United States, but also for the world, if he is actively, behind the scenes, serving the side of evil, of the Muslim Brotherhood, and of ISIS? What if he is bound to protect ISIS as a fellow Muslim? These are necessary questions, not only necessary, but obvious questions to ask at this point.
Is there no one in the military and intelligence agencies around the world asking these questions? No one? No one?
In the story of the Emperor’s New Clothes, the only person who could see the truth was the little boy who was not one of the king’s men. Are all the intelligence agencies and all the militaries and all the bankers and all the governments around the world so colluded in corruption that they cannot see the obvious? Are the churches so bound by the 501(c)3′s that they cannot discuss obvious questions as well?
To solve a problem you have to go to the root and one of the root problems of the day as far as churches and Christians are concerned, and this extends to Christian politicians and Christian-oriented governments as well, is the modern, and faulty, interpretation of Romans 13.
Right now I am so stoked against what is going on that I am just going to write it out without the references. You can look them up yourself if you care to…this is not difficult.
Romans 13 talks about submitting to higher powers. However, it does talk about government being an instrument for good. In other words, if government is being used as an instrument for evil, it is not true government. It is the same idea as if a government official swears an oath of allegiance to the Constitution or other body of law and then disregards and breaks the oath every chance he gets. Does this constitute legitimate government? No.
In many fields…health, law, real estate, finance, and others, there are professional standards. In order to be licensed to practice, people are trained, tested, and upheld to these standards, or they lose their license and can no longer practice. One of the glaring exceptions to this rule is in government. When it is obvious to all that a government official is behaving badly, contrary to the law, contrary to their oath of office, the person is given a pass….they are not removed like a mere peon lawyer, accountant, doctor, real estate agent, or financial planner would be removed. No, the government official keeps the title, keeps the pay, gets to do what he or she wants, and nothing happens. And most important of all, these government officials who are now lawless and no longer follow any allegiance to the Constitution remain like termites to destroy the fabric of the nation from within. They are permitted to do what no doctor, attorney, accountant, real estate agent, financial planner or anyone else could no longer do if they were found in the same default of oath. If another government official attempts to stand against inner corruption within the government ranks, and actually stands for the law as Governor Rick Perry has, he is fought by the corrupt establishment of government. It is time for that to stop. But I digress, but not really, this is all connected to Romans 13, as Rick Perry recognized the principle that those in government themselves must uphold the law and be examples of righteousness. He stood against corruption and those who were guilty want to throw him behind bars as a reward. He is right, they are wrong.
Back to Romans 13. If a government is not standing for good, and for righteousness, by default, it is not true government. The Bible says this over and over and it is quite simple to prove. If you read through the Old Testament, you can see the testimony of God against corrupt rulers, how over and over he would remove them or liberate those enslaved by them. If God wanted everyone to just submit to evil rulers, then He wouldn’t have stood against them over and over in the Old Testament.
Another example. At the time of Moses, the Pharoah commanded the midwives to kill the baby boys. They did not submit. And it says that God blessed the midwives. If God only blesses submission to evil rulers, why would he bless the midwives? Plus, why would God allow Moses, who should have been killed by the Pharoah’s edict, not only rise to pre-eminence in Pharoah’s house, but also become the liberator of the Hebrew people? If God wanted submission to evil orders by Pharoah, why would he allow such flagrant disregard by the midwives to result in the ultimate salvation of an entire nation? It doesn’t make sense and jive with the argument that everyone should just do what government says, no matter what.
Let’s go to the time of Jesus. Jesus had been born. Herod wanted to kill all the babies two years old and younger, as he had ascertained from the Wise Men, for he, Herod, considered that the baby Jesus might one day be competition for Herod’s throne. An angel appears to Joseph, tells him to take Mary and Jesus to Egypt, and Joseph obeys. If God wanted everyone just to do what government says, why in the world did he warn Joseph to leave? Seems like God would have just let Jesus suffer the fate of everyone else if God were wanting evil orders from evil dictators to stand? But God is not like that. He does not side with evil. The Bible is full of admonitions to seek justice, and a lot of that justice starts with getting unjust rulers out of power.
The church is bound by the 501c(3) IRS rulings that tells them to shut about about politics or they lose their tax free status. So the church is not going to speak out against corrupt rulers. But all politicians, especially Christian politicians and governments, should not be afraid to stand up against and speak out against evil, as God himself shows over and over in the Bible that God himself, the Lord, is not for evil. Jesus died for the sins of the world, why would the Lord back up evil if it cost such a great price to provide the way of escape from it?
And let’s just make one other comment. If people really, really, really truly believe that it is good to obey government when it is evil, and when it backs evil, then why in the world was WW II fought? Everyone should have just sat back and said…well, God wants us to just submit to evil, so let’s all let Hitler take over and murder the Jews and others…why fight it? God forbid, but if people are going to take the position that Romans 13 means to unilaterally submit to government, no matter what, then that is the only obvious conclusion and side that they can take when it comes to evil.
It means that they should not fight Hitlers, or Pol Pots, or Mao Tse Tungs, or Stalins, or child sex traffickers or anyone in government doing anything wrong because the cop-out, lazy, complacent, do nothing, don’t bother me to do anything, wormy excuse is Romans 13 told me to do it. God forbid.