A Voice in the
Recently one of the subscribers who writes to me regularly sharing things he learns about the new "apostle/prophet" movement, has also been mentioning the word "militia"... along with being a victim of having his things broken into and his computer being "checked out" by those breaking in (but not stealing), and hearing his phone line being "tapped" when he's talking with people.
Not far from where I live, just across the border into Idaho, is an Aryan Nations compound with "white supremacists"; Richard Butler at its head. At various times 20/20, 60-Minutes, etc. have TV segments on various para-military organizations. Who can forget the matter at Waco a few years ago, which is still being 'investigated'. The Oklahoma City bombing, carried out by one of these people. Some of these groups amass weaponry and train in guerrilla warfare. Some have organized compounds. Some are more rag-tag. Many often rob banks in order to finance their agenda.
There are several philosophies that seem to 'ring' similarly, with variations, within all these groups. One primary commonality amongst them all is a distrust of the government, and the government's militancy in systematically outlawing weapons being owned by private citizenry. Another, not as universal, is "race". A good percentage of them are "whites only"; many with neo-nazi leanings. And finally, many of them are Bible "thumpers".
The American Constitution guarantees the "right to bear arms". And today a big debate rages over what that means. Every time another public shooting takes place, the liberal administration, with the help of the leftist media, continue the bandwagon that "guns are dangerous"; that guns should be "outlawed". And, of all things, the activists go about suing gun makers, because guns are "bad". Uh...let's see...those -guns- just got up, by themselves, and shot those people... Right? We need to 'punish' the -guns-. The activists want to outlaw "automatic assault rifles", because the Constitution doesn't guarantee rights about "military weapons"; they say.
Or... does it? The PURPOSE for the amendment of "right to bear arms" was for safe-guarding the citizenry against a government gone awry; so they could protect themselves, specifically, -against- such a government. If assault rifles had existed back in the 1700's, no doubt it would have been worded differently, to include "military weaponry of all sorts". The leftists know this; but as with any country before the government subjugated its citizens, one of the first steps was the confiscation of privately-owned weapons.
By the way, Switzerland, with a constitutional national "citizen militia" (every home is required, by law, to own a gun.. 'military weapon'), has the lowest murder-by-gun rate in the world. And, even as tiny as they are, they've never been invaded. And... the highest per-capita murder rate is in S.Africa... committed with machetes. (Has anybody heard whether or not their government is proposing legislation to outlaw the manufacture and sale of machetes??) The problem with shootings is obviously -NOT- the "guns". It's "people" and "sin".
OK... enough on "politics". VW is not about politics. But Christians live in a 'political' world. How do Christians address these kinds of issues? One local leftist PSA on TV closes with words similar to, "It's OK to voice your opinion, but it's not OK to overthrow the government." Where do we, as Christians, draw the line in terms of our involvement in politics and activism? Is it wrong for Christians to become involved? How far do we go?
First of all, Paul exhorts, "Let every soul be subject to higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, but the existing authorities have been ordained by God." (Rom13:1) Even of godless Pharaoh God says, "for this reason I have made you stand, in order to cause you to see My power, and in order to declare My name in all the land. (Ex9:16) And the 'heathen' king Nebuchadnezzar God calls him, "My servant" (Jer25:9,27:6) as God used him to discipline Israel. However treacherous an administration may be, God's purposes are fulfilled. Always remember that, while God allows evil rulers to rule for a season and we may not understand "why", God says, "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, says Jehovah. For as the heavens are high from the earth, so My ways are high from your ways, and My thoughts from your thoughts." (Is55:8-9)
Thus, whatever authority we find ourselves under, we submit to it. If we "resist authority" (vs2) we actually "oppose the ordinance of God" and are due judgment. Therefore we pay taxes. (vs6) And we show proper respect to the office they hold. (vs7) If we find ourselves visiting at the White House while a lying philandering traitor holds the office, we respectfully call him, "Mr. President." When Paul was informed that he had just 'bad-mouthed' the high priest, he apologized, "I did not know that he is high priest; for it has been written, "You shall not speak evil" "of a ruler of your people." (Acts23:5,Ex22:28) If we stand before a judge in a court of law, we address him, respectfully, "Your honor"; even if we know that in personal life he is a scoundrel.
So, what about being politically 'active'? Paul writes, "Were you called as a slave? It does not matter to you. But if you are able to be free, rather use it." (1Cor7:21) Truly, what a blessing it has been to Believers around the world that America has been a "free" nation. This freedom has made it possible for thousands of missionaries to go into all parts of the world to preach the Gospel. And many have smuggled God's Word into countries with repressive regimes. How did America's freedom come about? It was a citizen militia army that won our "independence", along with help from the French. While we may detest "war" and the killing of people, that happens to be the way-of-life on this presently sinful world. Unfortunately, -war- is how freedoms are won from repressive regimes. So, there -could- (I emphasize the word "could") be legitimate reason for Christians to be part of militias; just as they are part of a nation's armed forces, and perform their duty with dispatch.
But, what is the militia's agenda? Is it to promote some sense of "racial purity"? Just what -is- such a thing? Genesis 10 lists off how the descendants of Noah split off into the various national entities, and where these groups of people migrated. God had said, "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth." (Gen9:1) And when man refuse, He gave them all the different languages to enforce the issue. But notice that, while there are the "boundaries of their dwelling", all nationalities are "men of one blood." (Acts17:26) And when it comes to faith in Christ, race and nationality makes no difference to God, we all can come to Him, equally. "where there is no Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, foreigner, Scythian, slave or freeman, but Christ is all things and in all.(Col3:11)
And then, what of "christian militias"? Some of these groups want to take over the government and then force everybody to be "christian". Get "christians" elected to public office. Pass "christian" laws. And their leaders thump their Bibles to proclaim their ideologies. And some, even, go way off the deep end, and their leaders foist a "messiah" complex about themselves, and require their followers to obey them. Many of the ethnic-oriented groups claim Scriptural support for their bigotry by using terminology that people should "stick with THEIR OWN KIND." (Gen1:21,etc) Obviously -not- understanding that God meant "genus" by that word "kind". That's why we are called "manKIND". People of all races and nationality are of one "kind", called "man".(Gen1:27)
Does God call Believers to be active with "christian militias"? While we are in this world as "humans", and we certainly participate in matters of human government along with our fellow-humans; the Christian's "citizenship is in heaven". (Phil3:20) We do not fight for the "kingdom of heaven" with earthly means (guns, grenades, robbing banks); "for the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful to God in order to pull down strongholds" (2Cor10:4) If we were supposed to be thus-engaged, Jesus would have begun the 'revolution', Himself. But He said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would have fought that I might not be delivered up to the Jews. But now My kingdom is not from here." (Jn18:36) And when Peter pulled out his sword, Jesus told him, "Put your sword into the sheath." (Jn18:11) When Jesus comes to conquer the world He will do so with the "sword of His mouth". (Rev1:16,2:16,19:15,19:21) And He won't require our 'help', certainly!
These apostolic/prophetic utterances that are being "revealed" lately, however, are promoting activism; supposedly in the "name of Christ". They are using terminology like "violence". They speak of "violent" warfare to root out the evil and promote their new "emerging divine order" and "emerging gospel" which we spoke of recently. Such terminology takes us back to the days of the Crusades, where Rome was conquering for the kingdom, with the "sign of the cross."
Humanity will not "claim the world back for Christ". He is going to do that Himself. Jesus did not call Christians to shoot people and rob banks. He commanded, "disciple all nations...teaching them to observe all things, whatever I commanded you." (Mt28:19-20) And the -message- He commanded to be proclaimed, "..the Christ must suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day. And repentance and remission of sins must be preached on His name to all the nations..." (Lk24:46-47)