(THE GOVERNMENT OF GODLY MEN)
(THE GOD OF UNGODLY MEN)
Throughout history, there has been what might appear to be a conflict between Government and God. If such a conflict does exist, its nature must rest in a conflict for position, or more precisely, one of possession. Through possession, government is able to claim the right of dominion or, as it is sometimes called, jurisdiction or authority. When is that authority of God?
“Possession is, as it were, the position of the foot.”
It has been said that, “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights… That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” On the other hand, governments are not endowed by their creators with unalienable rights and, therefore, all governments are obviously not created equal. Rights shall differ from one governmental authority to another. For a government’s authority to be just, must it be by consent alone?
“The origin of a thing ought to be inquired into.”
To understand to what extent a government’s authority has grown, we must look first at its origins. The origin of a thing begins by intent, default, or accident. The latter of these three is not really a valid source, because, “To the sensible man there is no such thing as chance.” “Chance is a word void of sense; nothing can exist without a cause.” “Things do not happen in this world; they are brought about.” And since, “The cause of events are ever more interesting than the events themselves,” then “Happy is he who has been able to know the reason for things.”
“And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marveled at him.” (Mark 12:17)
The question asked should be, “What is Caesar’s, and what is God’s?” How did the emperors and governments obtain their right to govern? Is it by force alone that the empires and governments of the world have grown in size and authority?
“What is mine cannot be taken away without consent.”
“As banker James Warburg, the son of Council on Foreign Relations’ founder Paul Warburg, confidently told the United States Senate on February 17, 1950: ‘We shall have world government whether or not we like it. The question is, whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent.’”
Is there a third alternative to conquest or consent?
It might be said that the first government, other than the Creator Himself, was the first procreators. In other words, the first government was the first family and the first king was the first father. It should be clear that a father does not rule by the consent of his children, yet, his right to rule is real.
“He is not presumed to consent who obeys the orders of his father or his master.”
The practice of the leaders of government and rulers of a nation being called father was a common everyday occurrence in the days of Augustus, Tiberius, and Jesus. The Emperor was called Patronus (our Father) and Senators called Patres (father) or Conscripti Patres, the Conscripted Fathers.
“Patronus (Lat.) In Roman Law. A modification of the Latin word Pater, father. A denomination applied by Romulus to the first senators of Rome, and which they afterwards bore.”
“A person who stood in the relation of protector to another who was called his ‘client.’”
“Excise (tribute), in its origin, is the patrimonial right of emperors and kings.”
Even the right to tax was tied to the right of a father’s authority over his children. We have heard of the free bread and circuses of Rome that fed the apathy of the mob and seduced the people into moral decay. Like over-indulgent fathers, the Roman emperors led their children into corruption and iniquity, but also subjection.
If, “A person shall not be allowed to enrich himself unjustly at the expense of another,” then it should also be true that any bounties, donations, or benefits, that are not owed but accepted, will create an obligation to the benefactor on the part of the recipient.
“Who breaks no law is subject to no king.”
In the original American Republics, citizenship of the individual freeman depended upon his ownership of land in fee-simple as an estate, but “in the United States ‘it is a political obligation’ depending not on ownership of land, but on the enjoyment of the protection of government; and it ‘binds the citizen to the observance of all laws’ of his sovereign.”
“Protection draws to it subjection; subjection protection”
Those who are born naturally in America, but choose to be born again in that political society known as the United States, create an obligation and allegiance to that political body and its allies.
Some may assume that the United States of America and the original Republic are one and the same, but you have to look no farther than April 3, 1918, when the new American Creed was read in Congress beginning with the words, “I believe in the United States of America as a government… whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed: a democracy in a republic.” In other words, the U.S. Federal democracy is a corporate political society that exists within the Republic, a republic that predates the United States’ Constitution.
When the United States Federal Government was first created, it had little authority and influence over the lives of individual Americans. People commonly owned land in feesimple as an estate. Today, no one owns their own land in the United States, having settled for mere legal titles that grant no beneficial interest in the land and subjects that land to an excise or tribute tax. The same can be said for most American workers who labor or serve an average of half the year for the government as members of a vast system of statutory labor and marked by their Employee Identification Number to prove it.
Many benefits are offered and provided by government to those people who wish to grant an authority and dominion to government. An authority, once enjoyed by our earthly father and heavenly Father alone, has become the right of another. These benefits of protection from famine, flood, disease, poverty, or the abuses and usurpation of others have always been the price for our true subjection and obligation to the Caesars of the world. Whether those governmental authorities be individual kings and dictators or the collectively common society and democratic body politic, their position between man and God remains the same.
“Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of parental care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengths the bonds of a common brotherhood.”
The governments, at least in America, knowing that they had no just power except by consent, began their expansion and growth by offering services and benefits to individuals that wished membership in their political and legal society. Seemingly free services have always come with a price in a myriad of subtle ways.
“By this provision we plainly said to each citizen substantially as follows: ‘If you are not willing to pay your proportion of the expenses of this government, you cannot sue in our courts or vote at our elections, but you must remain an outlaw. If you can do without our assistance, we certainly can do without yours.’ Before this the expenses of government were defrayed by voluntary subscriptions of individuals with the provision, ‘That in all cases each individual subscriber may at any time withdraw his name from said subscription, upon paying up all arrearages and notifying the treasurer of the colony of such desire to withdraw.’
“When thou sittest to eat with a ruler, consider diligently what [is] before thee: And put a knife to thy throat, if thou [be] a man given to appetite. Be not desirous of his dainties: for they [are] deceitful meat.” (Proverbs 23:1, 3)
“Constantly bearing in mind that entering into society individuals must give up a share of liberty…”
“Quid pro quo?” What for what?
“The expedient adopted by the Oregon legislative committee in 1844 took the form of a section of the revenue law which read: ‘That any person refusing to pay tax, as in this act required, shall have no benefit of the laws of Oregon, and shall be disqualified from voting at any election in this country.’
Something for something, one thing for another, nothing is for free. Those gifts and gratuities and benefits that we have learned to call “entitlements” carry with them an equal and balanced obligation of repayment and reimbursement. Whether it is the education, health, or welfare of our children or protection from lawless brutes, famine, poverty, or acts of God, it does not matter. Whatever we receive without having paid, infers a debt and obligation of a reciprocating nature.
“The real destroyers of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations, and benefits.” For, “No one is obliged to accept a benefit against his consent. But if he does not dissent, he will be considered as assenting.” Because, “Every man is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his own voluntary acts.”
It is not only by overt consent that a just and actual authority is established by governments and assented by individuals, but also by application for or the acceptance of benefits and privileges not owed.
“Membership in a political society, implying a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of society.”
State: “That quality which belongs to a person in society, and which secures to and imposes upon him different rights and duties in consequence of the difference of that quality.”
“Although all men come from the hands of nature upon an equality, yet there are among them marked differences…”
“Three sorts of different qualities which form the state or condition of men may, then, be distinguished: those which are purely natural, those purely civil, and those which are composed of natural and civil or municipal law.”
“He was a mighty hunter before theLORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the hunter before theLORD.” (Genesis 10:9)
In Genesis 10:9, the word “hunter” is from the Hebrew word tsayid, which is more often translated provision, food, food-supply, or victuals. The word paniym is translated “before” in the sense of face or in the face of, before or in front of. So, it could be said that Nimrod was a mighty provider before theLORD or in front of the Lord.
Yet, we find God has said, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3). The words “gods” and “God” are translated from the single word ‘elohiym in the plural. ‘Elohiym is defined “rulers, judges” and “occasionally applied as deference to magistrates”, while in the New Testament, the word “God” is translated from the Greek word theos, which figuratively means “a magistrate.”
God goes on to expound upon this command that, “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth:” (Exodus 20:4) The words “graven image” come from pecel meaning “idol, carved (graven) image”, while “likeness” is translated from temunah', meaning “form, image, likeness, representation, semblance.”
“Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:” (Exodus 20:5)
The words ‘bow down’ are translated from shachah, meaning “bow (self) down, … humbly beseech, do (make) obeisance …worship.” “Serve” is translated from `abad meaning “to work (in any sense); by implication to serve, till, (cause.) enslave, etc.: - x be, keep in bondage …
It could be said that God doesn’t want His people to have any ruler instead of Himself or to make anything with our own hands a ruler over ourselves other than Him. And He doesn’t want you to beseech or appeal to that creation of our hands or put ourselves in bondage to it, serving it with our labor, for we belong to Him.
Why did God, meaning “Ruler and Judge”, make these conditions and commands for His people to remain free to serve Him only? Is it because we become like that to which we pay attention?
“I [am] the LORD thy Ruler, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thow shalt have no other rulers before Me… for I the LORD thy Ruler [am] a jealous Ruler, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me; (Exodus 20:1,5)
In Egypt, the people had been delivered into bondage to a governing body under the leadership of the Pharaoh, but God, ‘elohiym, brought the people out from under that ruler and became their Ruler or Lord God, Jehovah, ‘elohiym, “Ruler” “the self-Existant or Eternal”.
“The gods are the creation of the created. They are not emanations of The Eternal. They are made by the adoration of their worshipers.”
Based upon a common consensus of opinion, we should remain in subjection to worldly governments. This opinion is fostered and promoted and hand-fed to the populous of the world by governments and their incorporated institutions. If that was the message of Christ, why was the governments of His day so adamant about His execution? Why did God take man out of Egypt just to return to it in another time?
“But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous [are they], self-willed, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.” (2 Peter 2:10)
The word “government” is translated from the word kuriotes, meaning “dominion, power, lordship, in the New Testament: one who posses dominion.” It is from the word kurios, which is normally translated “Lord” and means, “he to whom a person or thing belongs…”; or as further defined, “the possessor and disposer of a thing, the owner; one who has control of the person, the master; in the state: the sovereign, prince, chief, the Roman emperor.” It was “a title of honour expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants salute their master.” In the Bible, this title was “given to: God, the Messiah.” Peter is not warning those that despise government, but rather those that despise any dominion over themselves and choose selfish rule over God’s dominion, by ruling your fellow man. Many governments are merely organized systems of self-rule outside of God’s plan.
“He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.” (Jn 1:10)
In today’s society, when someone says the word “world,” we might picture a blue planetary globe hanging marble-like in the blackness of space, as photographed from the moon, but when the Gospel was preached, the perceptions and viewpoints of men had not reached such astronomical heights. There are at least four different words in the New Testament that are translated into the single English word “world”. The first, from which we get the word “eon”, is aion, which means an unbroken age and is far more often translated into variations of the word “age”.
Another Greek word used is oikoumene, which originally meant “the portion of the earth inhabited by the Greeks, in distinction from the lands of the barbarians,” but, at the time of Christ, because of the conquest of the Greek city-states and the rise of the Roman Empire just prior to Jesus’ birth, it had come to mean “inhabited places”.
In John 1:10, the word “world” is translated from the word kosmos, which means “an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government.” It probably came from the word komizo, meaning “to care for, take care of, provide for” or “carry off what is one’s own,”
“He [Augustus first emperor of Rome who called for the census that brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem] was now, to quote his own words ‘master of all things,’ and the Roman world looked to him for some permanent settlement of the distracted Empire. His first task was the re-establishment of a regular and constitutional government, such as had not existed since Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon 20 years before.’... At home it was understood that he would year by year be elected consul, and enjoy the powers and pre-eminence attached to the chief magistrate [god] of the Roman state. Thus the republic was restored under the presidency and patronage of its 'first citizen' (princeps civitatis)."
Of course there was no more harmonious arrangement than the world government that Adam and Eve found themselves living in when the LORD was their ruler, but when they decided to make their own rules, things changed. Cain later shed his brother’s blood in the ultimate usurpation of authority over a brother and began the first city-state. Nimrod began his city as a mighty provider, instead of the Lord offering his own “harmonious arrangement”. Moreover, the son’s of Jacob were themselves delivered into bondage to a civil power. They had turned their backs on God and sold their own brother, Joseph, into bondage. God brought them into bondage by withholding his providing hand, allowing famine into the land. Had Joseph remained with his brothers, they would have prepared for the famine, instead of Pharaoh preparing Egypt for the famine.
Later, the LORD God brought them out of their bondage and became again their ruler, sovereign, and provider, bestowing upon them Laws on stone, manna from heaven, and water flowing from a rock, as well as protection from Kings, cutthroats, and snakes.
Rome provided free bread and circuses and the protection of its Pax Romana and, in return, faithful allegiance. A reciprocating tithing or tax was due the Soter of Rome.
“If you have not your own rations, you must feed out of your tribe's hands, with all that implies.”
If kosmos in the New Testament is referring to the harmonious and constitutional government which dominated the world at the beginning of the Gospels, then why would John say, “and the world was made by him” or “and though the world through him began to exist”
Let us look again at another notable moment in the history of man’s turning to rulers other than the LORD Ruler:
“…now make us a king to judge us like all the nations. But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD. And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them.” (1 Sa. 8:5,7 )
It was the voice of the people that called for a man to be ruler over them. This was not a new problem for theLORD, for He said, “According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.” Turning from God to other gods is the antitheses of repentance.
In those days, they sought the wisdom of the prophets to choose their rulers and they were warned that these rulers would take their sons to serve them. The prophet went on to warn that these rulers would create a vast chain of command or bureaucracy, that they would take their lands and livestock, and the first and best of what they produce to maintain that bureaucracy. Those rulers would also take the daughters of their citizenry to serve their own purposes and they would even withhold the first portion produced by those who were employed in the service of their citizens.
“And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and theLORD will not hear you in that day.” (1Sa 8:18)
But they said, “We will have a ruler over us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may be lawgiver for us, and a commander in chief, and fight our battles [paraphrased].
Today, men do not seek the wisdom of the prophets, for they are wise in their own eyes.
“Woe unto [them that are] wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!” (Isaiah 5:21)
“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.” (1Co 3:19)
TheLORD God did not choose to make the government of Saul and David, but through Him that government began to exist because the voice of the people cried out for a new ruler, so that they could be like the other nations and because they had forsaken the Lord as their Ruler.
“ While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, [The Son] of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, TheLORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any [man] from that day forth ask him any more.” (Mt. 22:41,46)
The word kosmo is also found combined with kosmokrator, which means “lord of the world, prince of this age: the devil and demons are called this.” It is derived from krateo, meaning “to lay hold on” and from kratos, meaning “dominion”.
“Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high [places].” (Ephesians 6:11,12)
Consider the words of George Washington, who was called the father of our country, when he said, “Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” Such a radical statement by a man, who played such an important part in the establishment of the United States Federal Government, should lead a reasonable man to realize that only the most limited authority was intended to be invested in government.
“For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things.” (Lu 12:30)
“I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes to much upon constitutions, upon laws and courts. These are false hopes, believe me; these are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no Constitution, no law, no court can save it.” Yet, in America, the people have steadily turned over the power and authority to make and pass law to the government of the United States, in order to obtain the benefits of that government. And that government, in order to provide the justice and order expected of it, has set about revising, editing, and adding to the legal system with an overwhelming zeal. Has this system gone astray or was it fundamentally flawed?
It should be commonly understood that, “The custom of fixing and refixing (making and annulling) laws is most dangerous,” yet, citizens still cling to the regulated freedom of an arbitrary legal system.
Tacitus warned that, “In the most corrupt state, the most laws.” Yet, we often think that the myriad of laws that overwhelms this codified legal system are a sign of man’s love for law, when it is a sign of a general lack of law in the hearts of men.
“Society in every state is a blessing, but a government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” “All who have ever written on government are unanimous, that among people generally corrupt, liberty cannot long exist.” “Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks, no form of government can render us secure.” If rights are responsibilities, is the delegation of a right a dereliction of responsibility?
The Latin word pater means “father” and, as we have seen, the word was used everyday as a title of address in reference to the Senators of Rome and, of course, the Emperor and ,before him, the pro council was referred to as “the father of the senate” and, therefore, the Empire. Also, in the Greek text of the Bible, we find Pater meaning “father”. So, we can assume that, when the people of the day heard the word pater, they thought of one of several ideas. Either they were talking about their genetic father, their fathers in Rome, or their Father in heaven.
“And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. “(Mtt. 23:9)
To make such a statement shocked those who thought man’s governments and the Roman political and judicial system, was good for society, as well as business. It would be like saying, “Call no man on earth president.” The Emperor was loved, even in Judea. He was the Father of the Nation.
“…Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, .... Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.” (Mtt 6:9,13)
The US presidency today, once elected, sets foreign relations and makes treaties, he is the commander in chief of the military and naval forces, he appoints the supreme court including the chief justice and federal judges in much the same way as they did in Rome.
The emperors were often referred to as “gods” using the words Apo Theos. This was not because any one believed that they created heaven and earth, but because they were the chief magistracy and ruler of the people, appointing judges throughout the empire.
Most government leaders today are not called pater, or “father,” with the words of the mouth, although they offer us new covenants and contracts, and those who wrote the Constitution for the United States are referred to as The Founding Fathers” and we are often applying for benefits and praying to them for justice.
It is not so strange to think of the Roman Emperors as gods when you realize that George Washington himself was deified in the ceiling of the Capital Dome in Washington, DC: “Across the Dome’s eye, 180 feet above the floor, spreads a gigantic allegorical painting by the Italian artist Constantino Brumidi. The painting depicts the ‘Apotheosis,’ or glorification, of George Washington. Surrounding Washington is sweeping circles are delicately colored figures -- some 15 feet tall. They include gods and goddesses [among them Ceres, Vulcan, Mercury, Neptune, Minerva and 13 State godesses] pictured as protectors of American ideals and progress.”
Did God ordain (i.e., dictate, decree, impose) the United States Federal Democracy or any other government? Or was it ordained by false gods of man’s vain imagination?
“If we will not be governed by God, then we will be ruled by tyrants.” William Penn.
As God allowed Samuel to choose a king for His people, because they had already turned from God, so also He allows man to choose his own rulers if he does not choose to be ruled by God. In the hearts and minds and souls there is a turning away from The God, for other gods. Everyday, men make other men their father through application, service, and adoption. Instead of their Father, the LORD God, Eternal Ruler in the Kingdom of Heaven on earth, they turn to other rulers, being reborn to new fathers.
“And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ. How be it then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?” (Gal 4:6,9)
We often hear Christians say they believe and they are followers of the Word of God. Are they true to His word? Do they follow in His ways or are they like the rulers of the gentiles who exercise authority?
“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.” (Mt.7:21)
Are we choosing a new father? Are we denying the Father of us all, being born into that new father’s jurisdiction, that kingdom, that government? Or do we seek the kingdom of Heaven?
“If we cut the world’s population by 90%, there won’t be enough people left to do ecological damage.” Sam Keen at the State of the World Forum, September 27, 1995
“Love not the world, neither the things [that are] in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” (1 John 2:15)
When it was said to “not love the world,” John was not speaking of the planet created by God the Father, but the world as made by men who were creating their own world order.
“The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.” (Joh 12:19)
Have we gone after Him or after the men who are making the world after the discord of their own foul hearts? “And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.” (Ga 4:6)
Jesus said that the Kingdom was at hand. Was it at hand? Was Jesus kidding? Was he wrong? Was he misleading the people who believed the kingdom was at hand?
The Kings of the East knew Jesus was born a King (Matthew 2:1). He called the people to repent because his Kingdom was truly at hand. He told the people to seek His kingdom first( Matthew 6:33). He told them to apply to the Father in Heaven (Luke 11:2). The people proclaimed Him as king (Matthew 21:9). Jesus fired the porters or trustees working in the temple, which was the job of the King (John 2:15). Pilate said that He was king (Luke 23:38). Pilate defended Jesus as king (John 19:15).
In Mark 1:15, we see that while Jesus was in Galilee, He is preaching a kingdom saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the good news.” The apostates, like the Sadducees and Pharisees before them, still deny His kingdom, while, Rome officially proclaimed Jesus to be the King of the Judea (Luke 23:38).
Jesus told the apostles that the kingdom would come when we do the will of the Father (Mt. 6:10). And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. (Luke 24:43-49).
Jesus was taking the people to the next step. He knew they would have to learn to stand on their own. This meant that He had to leave (John 16:7). Judea was the remnant of the kingdom of God: “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (Mt. 21:43). Jesus appointed a kingdom to his followers to take care of and serve, not to rule over men like the nations, nor to be ruled over. “… And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;” (Luke 22:29). “Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom (Luke 12:32).
Jesus explained to them how not to operate that kingdom in Luke 22:25-27: “And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye [shall] not [be] so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether [is] greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? [is] not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.”
The kingdom of Heaven operates on the perfect law of liberty. No one runs the kingdom of God. The Bible is telling you how to follow God’s plan and what happens if you do not. But who is preaching his plan?
“Are men the property of the state? Or are they free souls under God? This same battle continues throughout the world.”