To Obey or Not to Obey

1. The fault here is with believers and leader ship who compromise biblical truth over a hundred years ago . That is post modernism they believed you could teach people into heaven . By changing thier environment ie!; bring them to church and following GOD will rub off on them . Well you own it now live with it you made it . Remember this quote “don’t feed your pearls to a pig ” they will eat them and you .ie false converts changing the truth from leadership down .

2. I would like to respond to a somewhat convincing and yet I believe damaging argument a caller made at approximately the 21-24 minute mark (her name was Angella). I know the caller was being sincere, but the thing is the argument she raised is probably one of the hardest ones to combat, and I’ve heard a number of Christians use it before, which is why I am responding to it.

   In a nutshell, they are arguing that we divide our lives right down the middle when it comes to how we act and live in the public square. There is merit to say that of course we don’t force others to accept Christianity. But it is very dangerous to take this argument to where we are being told to remove our salt and light from THE WORLD.

   So below I transcribed some of her words, with some of my responses. Thanks

3. [21:30] Unfortunately sometimes we have to do things that THE LAW HAS BEEN ISSUED [my emphasis] and we are as Christians … you have to obey authority.

   – “you have to obey authority” – We do not obey Nebuchadnezzar or any other governmental authority when it tells us to bow down to a golden image (see Daniel 3:16-18), or when today’s humanistic society tells us we need to condone and put our seal of approval on perverted life-styles. This isn’t even to mention the trampling of religious liberty and protections, which by the way, has everything to do with one’s everyday life and work.

   – It is not true that “the law has been issued,” as this was a law-less (without legal right) usurpation of power by a court which had NO authority to proclaim such things. We the people, the congress, have never issued such a law, at this time at least.

   – IN FACT, a majority of states (even California!) DID rule against this! But this evil court took authority it does not have. We now live in a very lawless nation, the laws that hold this country together are being trampled by federal institutions.

   – But even if congress did make such a law, neither of them have the authority to make such a decision on a matter they have no authority over. Jesus said to Pilate: “You would have no authority against me if it were not given to you from above. For this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” (John 19:11) God gave LIMITED authority to kings and governments. We do not obey them in places where they are outside of their jurisdiction. Do people in New Zealand need to obey laws that the state of Arkansas makes detailing speed limits on certain roads in New Zealand?! Such things are of course completely outside of the authority and jurisdiction of the courts and the congress house in Arkansas! So too, the amount of authority these governing human authorities have over marriage is equal to the time they all spent originally designing the DNA and the X and Y chromosomes of man and woman. That is exactly equivalent to the AUTHORITY they have on this issue, which is zilch, nada, nothing. They have no authority on this issue, and only hubris and arrogance would cause one to forget this. So when you say: “you have to obey authority,” interestingly, that issue of ‘authority’ is quite instructive on this issue.

4. [22:00] My job, what I’ve learned to do, is not to be judgmental, of other people. I let God do the judging, but I let my *life* be the standpoint.
   [22:17] I don’t try to push, or enforce, my belief system on other people, I just let my life do the leading for me.

   ‘Belief system’ is a very broad thing. Of course we are not enforcing converts to Christianity. But there are basic morality issues that cross the line. In this case we are talking about arbitrarily redefining the Creator’s division of mankind into a two-fold division: male and female, not to mention the animal world as well. To destroy and pervert such a foundation is to devastate the creation itself. So if our country has a stance saying it’s totally okay to litter all over the place (to pick one of the least of things, but something that deals with the created order, in this case man’s stewardship of the earth), should Christians in such a case not be salt and light and unashamedly teach the world that we must care for the earth God has given man? That is picking one of the least of cases, how much more so is the same true when the core division of humanity – into male and female – is being perverted and overthrown?

   Jesus said: YOU are the salt of the EARTH. Note he did not say: “You are the salt of your church services.” Or of your own little private meetings.

   Importantly, Jesus then continued:

   But if the salt has become tasteless, how can it become salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be trampled underfoot by men.

   I feel this advice or counsel that many Christians are speaking today — that we should demarcate or divide our lives down the middle, one into the spiritual (into the private), the other into the public where we mostly acquiesce to the world — is devastating advise. Following this way will lead to our destruction: It is no longer good for anything, except to be trampled underfoot by men. What do you think Jesus meant when he said that last part, ‘except to be trampled under foot by man’?

   So we will either be the salt and the light OF THE WORLD on these truths, or else we will increasingly be trampled by the world.

5. [22:35] In this particular case, it’s her job. It’s her job as to what she does. As the gentleman said, she’s not officiating, she’s just handing out the licences for it. If she feels like it’s a moral standpoint for her [beg to pardon?!] or whatever the case may be, then she probably should resign.

   NO it is not her job to agree with an evil decision that has no founding in the laws of Congress. It’s never been her job to issue marriage licences to entities that don’t qualify as ‘marriage.’ But even if Congress did this, it’s foundationally opposed to God’s created order to even talk about a man and a man as being unified in holy matrimony, so to put her stamp of approval on this and condone it as “marriage” is to agree with the act, which is sin. God made man and woman to perfectly match and fit each other, and the union of the two not only brings forth fruit, but that fruit is the only reason all of society, each and every person living at this very moment on planet earth (including of course every self-identifying gay person) is alive at this very moment. If you are reading this and you are breathing, think about it: your MOM and your DAD produced you, not your dad and your dad, or your mom and your mom. That is not marriage. But what is even worse, by taking this stand, this caller is not recognizing what it means to redefine the word marriage to apply to a man and a man or a woman and a woman. It means those two people can then adopt children, which is an abomination multiplied many times over as our society starts forcing orphans into this perverted situation. It also means she has her name on their union ‘marriage’ license, which is what allowed that orphan to be adopted into this perverted non-family situation. It means if that “couple” goes and evangelizes same-sex ‘marriage’ in the schools, which is where the public schools are quickly going, then she again has her stamp of approval on this since they were recognized as “married” by her own seal of approval. Christians should never agree to do such things. We must be the Light of the world.

6. Lastly:

   [23:18] So again, I have a livelihood, I work for a five-star company, so I do understand that I serve the public. But however I cannot bring my spiritual beliefs into that if I want to keep a job, and maintain and do what I have to do. Unless it’s something that’s detrimental, that’s [going to] terribly you know mess me up with my relationship with God that’s different. I think she’s protesting a little to strongly. 27 years [having worked in this office], maybe resign. Find something else to do, maybe be a greeter at WalMart.

   First, it’s hard to believe those final words were spoken. I mean no disrespect to this fellow sister in the Lord, but … you might consider quitting your own five star job first and being a greeter at WalMart before you have the audacity to suggest that towards another.

   “But however I cannot bring my spiritual beliefs into that if I want to keep a job”

   It seems to me an assumption is being made that our nation is already nothing but an atheist state, as if Christianity has no place influencing this nation. Well, it only needs to be that way if us Christians hide our light under a bushel and keep our salt to ourselves. This is related to the “separation of church and state” mantra. Well, there is no doubt that we are heading increasingly into atheism, and increasingly into restrictions and persecution of Christianity, but we must fight this direction! Because the end of such a development will be unspeakable oppression, such as the Russian people knew for 70 years. By all means, we Christians had BETTER be the light of the WORLD and of our nations so this does not happen! That starts by not accepting this devilish agenda to say Christians must live a divided life and keep their salt and light at home, instead of SPREADING it abroad where it is really needed: out in the open air of our nations.

   A city on a great hill cannot be hidden. Neither do men light a lamp and hide it under a bushel, but they put it on its stand, and it gives it’s light to ALL those in the house.

7. This is such a relevant topic and I think I need ( or we need clarification.) My question is it is also who can not perform. Can a medical person not perform services? Can a grocery clerk not perform a transaction? Who should not perform? I agree with the marriage clerk- but how is that line drawn? It is a difficult question.

8. Good question Jon, I appreciate the opportunity to clarify those points.

   Absolutely, under no uncertain terms, those cases are different. In fact, to not give medical service to a self-identifying gay person, just as to not help him or her who has been hurt who is laying on the road, to not help would be against everything Jesus represents (see the good neighbor parable of the Samaritan). To act like this would be despisable.

   Do we sell a birthday cake? Absolutely. If it doesn’t require somehow explicitly agreeing with their lifestyle, then we’re fine, and in those cases we may rejoice in the opportunity to interact with these individuals to show them love (not to mention just show regular human courtesy).

   “Can a grocery clerk not perform a transaction?” – Why would they not? Selling items does not require AGREEING with a wrong lifestyle (no, we are not criticizing personal items people buy). The thing with WEDDING cakes is this often requires intricate involvement on custom making the cake for the wedding. The person would have to custom set up two men figurines, not to mention put a message like “Joe loves Steve” for instance on the cake. It’s not like we’re saying to refuse birthday cakes! Even for that matter, if a gay couple was to buy a simple pre-made cake at the store, then there is nothing wrong with selling that. It’s about wedding cakes or things that require a Christian to be part of agreeing or putting our stamp of approval on this ‘marriage.’ For instance, holding the reception party afterwards means to directly be part of the wedding event. But otherwise, of course we serve those who are in this sin.

   I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. — 1 Corinthians 5:9-13

9. Here’s some things miss Kim has no problem signing her name too: certificates of divorce, birth certificates of children born out of wedlock, marriage certificates to couples living together, imminent domain seizures of land by the county. Be consistent. Under this thinking, no Christian should be in the military. Paul wrote; slaves obey your masters, since the terminology has changed, today he would say, employees obey your employer.

10. Thank you for the clarification Nicolas, and frankly John, your stance is clear. This is a good moral line to be drawn. We all John, have things to ask for forgiveness and change- Yeshua changes us if we will ask to be changed. John where is your moral line? Is there a moral line, or do you just hurl rocks?

11. John (with an ‘h’), none of your examples represent a Christian having to condone an unnatural thing that inherently and fundamentally goes against the creator’s distinctions. Even with divorce, there is a place for it even according to Jesus.

    [birth certificates of children born out of wedlock]
    Getting silly now. Of course we do recognize these children, but it should be noted this came about by the coming together of a male and a female, which IS according to God’s design, even though that union came outside of the proper timing or commitment.

    [marriage certificates to couples living together]
    In God’s eyes they already were married if living together (to leave the other would be to commit adultery, just as in marriage), so this is good they make that commitment that God requires. Their union still is in align with Nature, i.e. God’s created design.

12. John,

    1Co 7:21 Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.
    22 For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant.
    23 Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men.

    Paul also said if we can get our freedom we should get it so that we can be YHWH’s slave. When we sign on to work for someone, we agree to certain terms. We give up our freedom for a price. When the rules have changed from what we signed on for, we have the right to not obey. We may lose our job, but we do not have to do what we have not agreed to do. Signing on to a job, whether or not it is the military or a county clerk or a professional football player is giving up our freedom to do as we please…at least while we are on the job and the contract can stipulate things beyond the work place.

    I see no way that a believer can sign up for anything that puts them into the place of breaking YHWH’s commandments. It is serving mammon to do so.

    Those that become believers after they have signed on to something that is sin should seek to gain their freedom for the sake of serving YHWH. Believers that have had the rules changed on them should also.

    If we are slaves that cannot get our freedom (there are very few of this type these days, at least in America) then we can obey our master knowing that he will stand in the judgment for the sins that he makes us do. The slave will be exempt from judgment in such a case if he is forced to do what he thinks is wrong, esp. if he has communicated this to his master.

    I see no way that a believer can sign on for the military or for professional football and now for county clerk. For we will be agreeing to sin if asked to. If we are forced into the military against our will, then we are slaves against our choice and can do our job and let the eternal judgment fall upon our masters.

    This said, we should do everything short of insubordination, to appeal to our masters not to made to sin. We should do it for their sake, since they will stand in judgment for it. In the case of things like being commanded to commit cold blooded murder, we always have the option to disobey and be court-martialed or even executed. Very few of us have been forced to serve in the military.

    1Ti 6:1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.
    2 And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort.
    3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
    4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
    5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
    6 But godliness with contentment is great gain.
    7 For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out.
    8 And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.
    9 But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.
    10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

    Heb 13:5 Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

    An employer is not exactly a master. For consciences sake, and because of our covenant with YHWH, we should quit any job that requires us to sin and trust YHWH for another that would provide food and raiment. If we stay at a job that causes us to sin because it would be detrimental to our lifestyle, we are serving mammon and not YHWH. If we are not content with only food and covering, we are covetous and thus idolaters.

    Col 3:5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:

    Shalom

13. Nicholas,

    Ex 22:16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.
    17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.

    They are not already married in YHWH’s eyes if they are living together. Only if the father of the woman has agreed to give her to him are they married in YHWH’s eyes. If she was not a virgin when he went into her, she is a harlot. (Deut. 22) Also divorce, according to Messiah, and Moses for that matter, must happen before the consummation of the marriage…during the betrothal period. Once they are one flesh…man may not put them asunder. Our divorce papers do not line up with scripture and do not free the man and wife to be with another scripturally. If they remarry, they are actually in adultery in most cases.

    Lu 16:18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

    1Co 7:10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
    11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife…
    39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

    Ro 7:3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

    Shalom

14. Gentlemen, by signing your name on a document, you, on behalf of the governing body, you are condoning what you sign. You condone: divorce, seizure of property, marriage of people who have been divorced multiple times, Christians marrying Muslims, issue liquor license, permits for nude bars, permits for porn studios, permits for abortion clinics, and on. There’s no throwing stones, just wondering where the consistency is? Christians keep fighting the minors; you don’t want to bake a cake, you don’t want to give a license, ect. You put baking a cake is as much as an atrocity as slavery. You think not signing a marriage license is the same as preaching the gospel and overthrowing Judaism? Such outburst on the minors portray a certain younger child syndrome. One who gets hit by an acorn and screams for 4 hours like your going to die. Let’s show some common sense.

15. john

    I signed a document (a witness statement) that said that I saw something happen. This does not mean that I condoned what happened…only that I witnessed something. If the county clerk is only signing that two people came in and were who they said they were, that they were of legal age, and that they agreed to enter a contract (whether of supposed state sanctioned marriage or something else), the clerk or the notary is not condoning the marriage or the business partnership. They are passing along the government’s stamp of approval and testifying that the couple meets the state guidelines.

    If the government official or the nurse or the doctor signs a birth certificate, they are not condoning the rightness of how the woman got pregnant. They are just witnessing that a child was born on such and such a time to such and such a person at such and such a place.

    The same goes for a liquor license or the other things you mentioned.

    An ambassador represents the government and agrees to things in the name of the country that he represents. He does not necessarily condone anything personally by a signature, for his signature is only there as a witness to the agreement between the two governments.

    A police officer gives a ticket in the name of the government. He does not condone the traffic laws. He is just a witness as to the violation of those laws and has the authority of the government behind him to give a summons to appear before the court and be judged according to those laws. If the police officer gives a false statement or beats someone up for going over the speed limit, he steps outside of his authority and is not representing the government at that time even though he is still wearing the uniform and signing a government document. In this instance he is insubordinate and out from under authority.

    When someone asks or speaks something in the name of “Jesus,” they are supposed to be representing him. Only the authority behind what is spoken is responsible if what is spoken is authorized. If we say, “in the name of Jesus,” but he does not approve of what we have said, we are speaking in our own authority and we are responsible for what we have said. Messiah answers every request that is truly in His name and He takes full responsibility for the outcome. If the one representing Him takes the credit for His power and authority, he steps outside his place.

    In all this, it behooves us to not remain in a position where we are damaging our consciences if we can get out of it (no matter what it costs us). It behooves us to be careful to know what we are getting into before signing on.

    The person that performs the homosexual marriage, condones it. The judges and lawmakers that make it possible condone it. The town board or the congress or the president or the judge that signs laws and pseudo-laws into effect, are condoning the things that you speak of. The ones that vote for them are also responsible for their representatives actions and share in what they condone. By voting you give power of attorney. Be very careful not to join a multitude to do evil. Lay hands on no man suddenly.

    For a clerk to refuse to sign something that was not in their job description when they were hired is fine. For them to refuse to do so after taking the job, knowing that it was part of what they might have to do, is wrong of them…because they signed on to sign such things.

    Shalom

16. I believe a grocery clerk can refuse to sell some groceries depending on the situation. If someone informs the clerk, for example, that they are buying this potato in order to fulfill their desire to plug the exhaust pipe of another’s car in hopes they will asphyxiate, then it seems to me the clerk can refuse to sell the potato.

    Hopefully if something like that would happen, that if it ever went before a judge that he would understand that it wasn’t about the ethnicity, creed, age, height, weight, or anything else about the person, but that it was only about what they were told by the person as to what they planned on doing with the item they wished to purchase, if indeed this is what it really was about.

    Refusing to provide a wedding cake to someone that makes it known that it’s for a homosexual “marriage”, and it’s because a Christian refused on a moral basis, such that by doing so, they would be tainted by sin before their savior, then it isn’t about sexual orientation, it’s about what someone was planning to do with something purchased, something that would have a business’s name on it, and would require an employee to do something that may be against their relationship to God also.

    Are we really to believe that if a heterosexual man came into a bakery and asked for a wedding cake for a homosexual “marriage”, that the same bakery that would refuse such service to a homosexual, would provide the same service for a heterosexual?

    It’s not about sexual orientation. That is simply a false front.

17. Isn’t it a judges job to decide if someone was treated fairly? I do not believe this clerk has been treated fairly. People do have religious freedom which is to be protected by law and judges as well.

18. You know, when one walks this thing through, and thinks about it, one will come to the conclusion that homosexual “marriage” really wasn’t a constitutional right after all, for what if every clerk in the entire nation refused to issue such things for conscience sake? It seems to me that some would want to go to the judge with, “But your honor, you told us this was a constitutional right.” and the judge would need to say, “Well, sorry ’bout that.”

19. When I think about Roe v Wade, I wonder how the father of the baby that was in the womb was treated fairly.

    Suppose he left his laptop in her car. Would it now be hers and hers alone to do with it whatever she pleased?

    I wonder how big a pile 55 million laptops would be.

    Does thinking like this make us woman haters or is it because we love judgment, justice, fairness, and equity?

20. The caller named Angella is the problem with Christianity in America–to put it nicely. She really shouldn’t bother being a minister because obedience to the Lord GOD Almighty isn’t in her heart. She’s a part-time Christian and an all day fraud. You don’t divide your faith or throw it away for an employer that’s not Christianity at all. Don’t expect to be raptured when you aren’t willing to stand on the truth of GOD’s Holy Word. Its time to confront Satan (the government).

Comments are closed.