Back to the cross, the root, the word @
The Radical Pilgrim

~ Pro Bible ~ Pro Apologetics ~ Pro Kingdom ~

All scripture quotations from the Authorized Bible, without apologies.  Placed accents mine.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

War, Revolution and The Remnant

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood

Intro

On one occasion the unregenerate, carnally minded disciples of Jesus wanted to destroy those who would not go along with them, using aerial weapons of destruction the Old Testament way, with God's approval.  However, Jesus rebuked them for their spirit and spoke about a better way (read Luke 9: 54-56):

"For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them."

Striving against sin or man?

War, revolution, and the remnant ...  How do the three connect?  Or do they connect?  Considering all the warring factions caused by Protestantism (the daughters of the Mother of harlots) over the last few centuries in the name of "biblical" reformation!  Can it be scripturally validated as a move of the Holy Ghost?  Was Jesus only speaking figuratively when He said His servants do not fight?

This article could easy be renamed "The Two Gospels".  Which basically means, beyond the Babel of 'many' gospels being propagated today, in the end, everything narrows down to two ...  one is born from above, where there are no short-cuts attached, and only Christ is glorified ...   and the other is invented by man as a substitute for Hebrews 12:4:

"Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin."

One gospel is a bloodless gospel called in many circles the Gospel of Reconstructionism (also known as Dominionism) where the price to pay for a heavenly kingdom is avoidable in establishing Christ's rule (under man) on earth opposed to the one referred to as not being of this world.  It is not a resistance unto blood for Christ's sake, but a political, or social, even militant or military "resistance" against one regime to replace it with a so-called "Christian" regime, using God as an excuse, or legitimacy, or a justification for its cause.  The other gospel is to do with striving against sin, and is nothing to do with striving against man or his regime.  It is to do with dealing with the enemy within, not the enemy without, and seeing the enemy as a spiritual foe and not a flesh and blood foe as "Christians" crusading a political agenda don't.  Here we go again (take it figuratively or literally) ... Ephesians 6:12:

"For we wrestle (fight, struggle, make war against) 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."

Figuratively??  God's word says the following, which cancels out Bible believers taking up arms or resisting those who God has put in authority (whether good or froward) as all authority is divinely ordained (whether just, evil or dictatorial):

Romans 13:1.  "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."
Romans 13:5.  "Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake."
Titus 3:1.  "Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work"
1 Peter 2:18.  "Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward."

How can you get around the above verses if you say you are born from above and follow the Bible?  Those who celebrate the 4th of July do, or train to kill someone your government has labelled an enemy because of ideology differences.

Reconstructionism says it is okay for Christians to be political, or get involved in politics.  In fact, to be validated as "Christian" a new form of politics has to be invented which can only be termed with the oxymoron of "Christian Politics"!  Which in turn means "Christian" politicians, which in turn means the emergence of a "Christian" political party; taking on or competing with so-called "secular" or "humanistic" political parties.  The reasoning is that the "Christian" political party has to be right and therefore more relevant for society than its secular counterparts, because it is more biblical or based on so-called "Christian" morals or principles.  Or has supposedly more godly men running the show.  Yeah, right!!

Then there is the teaching that Christians are to infiltrate the system in order to change it (please view "The Gatecrashers").  Hence, the unscriptural reasoning from one of its prominent adherents:

"The moral obligation of Christians to recapture every institution for Jesus Christ."

However, Jesus calls His disciples away from the system and its affairs, as He did in all the four Gospels reiterated by Paul in 2 Tim. 2:4:

"No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier."

With the Reconstructionist viewpoint the Old Testament is used to justify the opposite of what both Jesus and Paul commanded, as the stories of Joseph or Moses, f'instance, are taken out of context (with no backup found in the New Testament) with the idea that God raised up certain Hebrews to govern a foreign nation like Egypt.  However, one must take into consideration that these men were in no way ambitious men for power, nor were they looking for civil or political prominence let alone belonging to a political party or movement of their era.  These men were raised up by God for His will and purpose only, and were only exulted by Him on the credentials they were God fearing, had been through His school of hardship, and through the baptism of humility and mortification.

Is. 48:10.  "Behold, I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction."

Want to be a man of God?  Want to have a ministry like Paul?  Want to be as charismatic as Stephen?  Want to be exulted like Joseph?  Then are you ready for the furnace of affliction?

Resisting even unto blood, even unto death, for something heavenly, is regarded as foolishness to the world (1 Cor. 1:18 & 25) and its religious established order.  As opposed to suffering for your country, your rights, your cause or your party and even your pride or self-preservation.  Anything that is tangible, external, or palpable, even "honourable"; but never something unseen ("please!?")!  It is considered an honour to sweat, or bleed, or draw blood, or kill, or be killed, for your country whereas a true Bible believer only lives and dies for Christ.  If a Christian intervenes in a dangerous situation to plead or look after the needs of the innocent helpless party, it is because the love of God compels him.  Knowing there may not be a visible reward.

To build on the simple message of what I am conveying I have taken the liberty to use two recently released movies I recommend (but warning you of graphic war scenes and bad language) and will use them as illustrations.  Both movies are more than just factual accounts but are true stories in their own sense.

Let's take a look at the first movie which I have only just viewed.  It is simply called "Uprising", and is a story of the Jewish uprising in the Warsaw ghetto during WW2.  It is also a perfect example when "innocence" is brutally and systematically illuminated by a Monster Machine (namely the Third Reich).  In a situation like this, what is the oppressed and subjugated to do when the enemy makes no allowance for the elderly, women and children, or the helpless, starving, and dying?  Of course, without Christ in the picture, revolt and resistance can be deemed a necessity.  Read on!

For the Jew

With logic on the side of the insurrection it was true the Jewish Council in Warsaw were being manipulated and under the illusion they could make deals with their Nazi oppressors in order to save lives and allow their people more comfort, and eventually a safe haven away from the grey, barb wired, walls of the Ghetto  The Nazis of course were only interested in compliance from the Council so the ghetto of 360,000 Jews could be orderly and thoroughly emptied over time, without fuss, and the gas chambers awaiting the deportees at the camps could be used to maximum effect, on a daily basis of eradicating every last Jew.  This would allow the Germans to get on with their Aryan domination campaign, with the notion they were doing Europe an apparent "favour".

"Humanly" speaking, if you were aware of the true plan behind the scheme, it would be foolish and plain stupid to be led as sheep to the slaughter, appeasing your enemies along the way.  The only rational alternative would be to go down fighting, making it hard for your enemy, and at least, maybe giving yourself a glimmer of hope that you could hold out until a miracle of help arrived, or fight your way out against all odds.

And this is exactly what happened when there were only 60,000 Jews left in Warsaw and the grim picture of what was really happening finally settled in.  While it took the might of the German army only a month to crush the whole of Poland, it took the Germans longer to crush this small, confined, ill equipped, desperate Jewish resistance, with even some Jews escaping through the sewers to the countryside to fight on, and fortunately to survive the war and tell their story.

In a worldly sense, this can be justified and celebrated outside of Christ, but Jesus said to His followers (who, at the time, were Jews only ) that His servants did not fight and were not to take up the sword.  John the Baptist, preparing this new way, even told the inquiring soldiers to "do no violence to no man".  Why, because another kingdom had arrived, and the criterion to enter this kingdom was through the door of repentance towards God and the miracle of a new heart.  There was no other alternative.

Well into the movie, after the reality had set in that the whole programme of deportation was one of delusion, where the Jews were being led blindly to the slaughter; resistance was demanded from the resistance committees, and the remaining occupants urged to fight with every bit of strength and energy they could muster.  During one of the exhortations, from one of the resistance leaders, the whole point of this message was summed up, and is found in the following incredible statement (emphasis mine):

"What do we do in the face of this horror?  Do we sit on our hands and wait for the next humiliation?  Maybe we lift our hands to God and wait for the Messiah to come?...  I don't think He's coming.  So what do we do?"

Ultimately, the only (human) alternative was given ...

"What do we do"? ...  The crux of the matter!

What did God in the flesh say 2,000 years ago?  Was it not, "Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand"?  "Don't fight ...  this is not my servants way!"  "Be mindfiul of another kingdom you now belong to!"  "You are to now avoid recompence and love your enemies!"

Messiah had come and gone and Paul (the Jewish convert) had written under the inspiration of the Holy spirit, "blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in"!

Because the Jews had rejected their Messiah and were not prepared to "look on him whom they pierced" due to their spiritual blindness, they had no choice but to fight.  This is why they still fight when they find themselves in perilous situations.  They are still hoping for a political Messiah and not a spiritual one, who belongs to a kingdom not made with hands.  They would still compromise Caesar as King in place of the true one sent from God:

John 19:15 ...  "We have no king but Caesar."

"What do we do?" said the Jewish resistance leader echoing the words of many throughout time!  The Messiah had already come and one of His Jewish converts (in remembrance of one of the prophets of old) had said what to do (Rom. 10:13) fulfilling the words of Joel 2:32:

 ...  "that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered"!

Until they call out to their one and only true Deliverer the Jews will continue to suffer, fight, and be found in a dilemma.  However, the true remnant (both Jewish and Gentile believers who have received Jesus) do not fight, they have been bought with a price and belong to a kingdom which is not after this world.  In the words of Jesus, John 18:36:

"My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight".

For the Gentile

In contrast the previous movie just mentioned and worth viewing, is another recently released one about Gentile soldiers caught up in the same war with similar horrors, but under different captors; the Japanese this time.  The movie is called (probably due to lack of a better title) "To End All Wars".

How many times has this delusion (for that is what it is - history has proved it) ...  a final 'war to end all wars' being fought?  Or the notion of one final necessary war being fought to rid an "evil" foe out of existence, and convert man's thinking that war is futile and does not do good for anyone!  Unless it is a war which can prove itself, and be so "righteous" and decisive, that man will learn to finally bury the hatchet of folly and enmity towards his fellow man, and pursue eternal peace with his neighbour.

However, the good news is there was a war fought and won conclusively at a time when Israel was under another Tyrant, brutally ruling them from a heathen land, that has brought an end to all wars, which was fought in the spiritual realm 2000 years ago.  To conquer once and for all the root condition for all evil and war ...  sin.  The reason behind every war since the beginning of time, manufactured in the heart of every man, because of His disobedience to His word:

James 4:1.  "From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?"

On the cross Jesus uttered these beautiful words ...  it is finished!  Enmity between man was finally destroyed, because sin was cancelled out once and for all, ruling out war and making it obsolete once and for all.

Eph. 2:15 -16.  "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;  And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby".

The cross is where our sin ends, which is the product of pride, greed, and enmity between each other.  From the cross, we, the elect know that the power of death, the Devil, and enmity, has been destroyed forever:

Heb. 2:14.  "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil".

1 John 3:8.  "He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.  For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."

Along with the devil and his works being destroyed at the cross, death was abolished also:

2 Tim. 1:10.  "But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death".

Along with the devil and death being destroyed, the body of sin (the flesh) was destroyed:

Rom. 6:6.  "Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."

Calvary (the works, the meaning, and the reality of the cross) was complete and finished!  Nothing more could or can be added!  While the believers are in (but not of) this fallen world as lights, which is ruled by its prince (the Devil) we know we are overcomers in Him and therefore do not need to conform to this world (to its standards, morals, politics, wars, etc.) but are born again and conformed to the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

We are different (even peculiar to them who are without), having the mind of Christ, and walking a different road.  When we sin, or stumble, or make mistakes, or may yield to the Devil or the flesh momentarily, we know we have an advocate who is willing to forgive and restore, on the condition of repentance toward God.  There is much opposition in this, "for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time".  However, in Christ the victory is complete and a present reality:

Rom. 8:37.  "Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us."

Do I have an amen??

To "End All Wars" is a graphic depiction of the horrors of the death camps and forced slave labour, where the Allied POW's (and many more Asian captives) are forced to build the infamous railroad through the Burmese jungle.  Thousands of men who originally were going to be worked and starved to death are now required to build a railroad which will enable the Japanese access to India ... their last invasion for their conquest of South East Asia.  Among the men a resistance is brewing, as the thought is entertained, "Why be worked to death for no profit but for the enemy, when we could resist and fight back, and delay or hinder the Japanese advance?"  Or, "At least get even!"

However, to the resistance committee there was one major obstacle in the way, which happened to be a Bible believing Christian, who was bringing a conflicting message to the troops, contradicting the resistance's message.  The believer's message was from of a book he possessed in the camp called the Holy Bible.  In this book it says:

Eph. 6:5.  "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ."

Somewhat a direct contradiction to mans thinking, would you not agree?

1 Pet. 2:18.  "Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward."

"But also to the froward" certainly eliminates any justification for 'getting even' or retribution of any sort I would of thought!

Rom. 12:20 - 21.  "Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.  Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good."

There is certainly and unequivocally no recompence or retribution in this way of thinking ...  surely!

Verse 17.  "Recompense to no man evil for evil."

Here's more anti-heroic and unpatriotic "rhetoric":

Matt. 5:44.  "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you".

Of course this was diametrically opposed to those who were instigating rebellion and resistance, and was having an effect as men were being converted to this gospel by the example shown by the Bible man with the aid of the secret meeting place in the jungle, where the philosophical, free thinkers, and Bible students met; called the "church without walls".

After initially being betrayed, beaten and having their meetings and books (including the Bible) removed from them, it was not long before the Japanese captors saw some logic in the gospel which was being demonstrated, as these prisoners showed some eagerness to serve the captors well, aiding the railway's programme deadline.  Due to the officers seeing the benefits of Christian love and forgiveness being exercised by the Christians within the camp, the conditions and rations were soon improved for the POWs, and brutality subsided to a degree.

In the spirit of Barabbas the resistance struck one night during a concert the POWs hosted for both the captives and enemy captors.  They murdered some guards and plundered the store stealing firearms.  We must take into consideration here, Barabbas was considered a murderer because he took up the sword and killed either Roman authorities or Jewish authorities collaborating with the occupation, or both.  There is no mention anywhere in scripture that he was a murderer because he killed someone outside of political motivation.  We know through scripture he was an insurrectionist (Mark 15:7).  Scripture reveals nothing else other than he was also tried as a thief; more than likely to do with plunder in the insurrection, akin to the men in this POW story taking the firearms.

However, like Barabbas' rebellion, this rebellion was quashed, and the men responsible put on trial and sentenced to death.  Furthermore, just like the Gospel account, the man's life was spared who instigated the rebellion, when, like Jesus, the Bible believing prisoner offered up his life instead, and was brutally nailed to a cross and abruptly staked up in front of the whole camp.

This is the true gospel my friend, in harmony with scripture ...  "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."  Moreover, it takes a worldly motion picture to depict this gospel graphically, where you will never get it in its true form in today's apostate churches.  The Lord said to the religious leaders in His day, "I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out."  If the true gospel was preached in these churches, then these churches would cease to exist.

What fruit came from the resistance?  Answer:

Harsher penalties and much tougher living and working conditions for the inmates!

What fruit came from the labour of the gospel in this Asian hell-hole?  Answer:

Slightly better conditions, and less harassment in sharing with the other POWs, with the re establishment of the "church without walls".
Men laying down their lives for others.
Many of the POWs were living lights unto their oppressors.
When the wounded sadistic Japanese guards were shot up and bombed by the allies advance, and rejected by their fellow Japanese who just wanted to flee, the weak and feeble POWs bandaged and nurtured their captors back to health, instead of taking advantage of the situation and fleeing to the advancing allies.

Yes, living epistles!!!  Scripture and verse: 2 Cor. 3:2 ... "known and read of ALL men"!

An additional blessing from this horrific experience was the conversion of Captain Ernest Gordon, who survived the ordeal and became a lay preacher, and was able to write books reaching the world on his experiences from a Christian view point.

The American Revolution

Brother, then are you saying that the American War of Independence was not justified or a mistake?

Depends on which kingdom you are in!  The common settler/colonist would no doubt have had his reasons for his rebellion like in many other similar conflicts throughout history ...  just like the Confederate soldier having his case to fight the Union soldier, and vice versa, during the American Civil War.  However, this war (like all other wars) was not the true believer's war, and looking at it in light of scripture, it was rebellion and disobeying scripture nevertheless, if the true elect were going to take up the sword and be party to the revolution.  What does scripture say in rebelling against the king or authority ordained by God, irrespective of how good or evil the system or monarchy was, or is:

1 Pet. 2:13.  "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme".

There it is in black and white!  Rebellion after all is as the sin of  witchcraft as scripture clearly reveals.  And Free Masonry is witchcraft, which the US of A was built on.

1 Pet. 2:17.  "Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king."

Jesus said to the carnally minded disciples who wanted to take out their "opposition" with 'firepower' ...  "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of."  As already mentioned ...  Bible believers may be in the world but they are not of the world, and do things God's way, which is higher than mans.

Just recently a brother in Christ wrote to me (portions of his reply in blue) in protest against my views on the elect illegitimately going to war, followed by my comments in defence of scripture (note: the odd word or phrase has been changed to make the reading flow without changing the meaning):

This is true about Satan (about him being defeated at the cross). However, it is not true about his work in the world.

The cross was total!  Everything God does, is!  Although the Devil is a defeated foe, in the meantime he is only allowed control of his domain (the world) as a part of God's plan, until Jesus, in His time, at His choosing, will come back and rightfully take what is already His.  During this time period, blood bought saints are still in this fallen world as living lights, but belong to another kingdom, and are citizens of heaven.  We obey our governors, respect the common laws for all, pay our way (taxes etc.) and are to be lambs among wolves, innocent as doves, not conforming to the world, but pointing folk back to their Maker through Jesus.

 If it were (about the Devil's work in the world being defeated at the cross), there would be no Hitlers, no Stalins, etc.

What about the Roman occupiers under a tyrant called Tiberius Caesar?  Or Nero Caesar?  What should the believers have done in his day?  Why did not Jesus support Barabbas' campaign which was to shake off the "unlawful" Tyrant and his oppressive army?  Was this not a righteous cause?  After all, the Romans were the invaders!  Was it not a justified campaign?  After all, a pagan Emperor was "unlawfully" occupying "the Holy Land", and oppressing the "chosen people"!

 To decide to do nothing (not fight or resist)

What did  Jesus do when they came to arrest Him?  What did Peter do when they came to arrest him?  What did Paul do when they came to arrest him?  Their captors were the Judaisers and their armed combatants, who did not allow so-called "freedom of worship", but arrested true believers.

when these types of men come to power is to simply allow them to do their atrocities unchecked.

In Jesus' day the streets outside Jerusalem were lined with hundreds of crosses bearing hanged, tortured, political dissenters and criminals over periods of time.  The outside of Rome had literally thousands rotting on crosses at times, when revolts were put down as a spectacle of what would happen to anyone else, as in Spartacus' case.  What about the forced blood sports using human puppets etc.?  And gross brutal slavery?  Why did not Jesus or his followers rise up or even speak out against these Dictators of Rome let alone their "inhumane" methods?  In fact, Jesus, and many of His followers met the same fate. So where are your scriptures to back your claims?  Did not Jesus say that servants were to be obedient to their masters?  Why has the so-called church now changed the rules?  God's word hasn't changed though, as you say later!

In the case of Hitler, we would all be goosesteppers now and our flag would be the swastika.

No, not Jesus little flock my friend!  In the first century Christians ran into a problem.  When two Roman citizens come across each other the first thing they greeted each other with was with a raised right arm (like a nazi salute) saying "Hail Caesar" (Caesar is Lord, in other words - the maximum authority!).  A Christian could not do this, as to him, Jesus was the maximum authority in the universe. This would put him at logger heads with the State right away.

  To believe that these men will go away if nothing is done to prevent their evil is to live in a fantasy world.

Who said they will go away?  I certainly don't.  The Bible says the opposite ...  "But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse"!  Know your scriptures Man!!  God raises up one kingdom against another, as He does with kings, and brings down kings and kingdoms, whom He chooses for His plan. Every earthly kingdom, from Babel to the US will not last, and will be brought down, and is all to do with God's choosing!

 And, although we live by the new covenant, I do not recall being told in the new to rip the old out of my Bible.

Who on earth said to do this?  The Old is a shadow of the New with types and examples, as well as a record, and is just as important.  The shadow always points to the reality (its fulfilment) which is Christ.  We need and use both the Old and New Testament (the complete Holy Bible) for revelation, correction, and final authority.

The same Jesus who said " Before Abraham was, I am " is also the Jesus who is the same yesterday, today, and forever.  God said, "I change not."  His salvation plan for man did not change, it reached its perfection through the cross.  The Bible is not an excuse for pacifism.

I think you are talking about 'military' pacifism here, are you not?  Christians are certainly not to be pacifists (spiritually anyway) as we are in the midst of a very crucial war, for the hearts and minds of every person on this earth, and it is a spiritual conflict or the way, not military or political.  That's why the weapons of our warfare are not carnal (using guns and grenades and enormous bombs) but spiritual in Him.  We are not to take up the sword as Jesus said, nor do violence to no man, as the last OT prophet said ushering in the New.  Jesus made it clear that His servants don't fight.  Even an elder was not to be a striker under the New.

The Bible is the tool to live by and to win the lost.

Of course, but you endorse taking the Bible with you in one hand and a gun in the other hand, as a method of conversion, which is a contradiction.  This also does not make you any different from the methods Islam use, or the Roman Catholic Crusades in the Middle Ages.  How can I blow a person apart (or his family in the cross-fire) then try and pick up the pieces by witnessing the love of God to the physically wounded and disabled sinner?  Peter chopped off the soldiers ear when they came to take Jesus' life.  But Jesus said it is not the way His servants do things!  How could the arrestor be arrested with God's love and shown forgiveness doing it Peters way ...  the way of a warrior, or a soldier, or the military?

John 18:36.  "Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight".

To try to bend its verses for pacifism

As already explained, your use of the word pacifism is a Strawman, and has no bearing in my case. Nor under the rules for engagement in the New Testament for that matter!

would be no different than teaching that we must speak in tongues, the women must wear veils in worship, we must greet one another with a holy kiss, churches must not have kitchens, we cannot be wealthy and be Christians, we should all be snake handlers, we should all be able to drink deadly poison and live, we should all be able to heal the sick and raise the dead, etc. We are told to rightly divide the Word of God.

This is my whole point Bro (although I can't see what you are getting at before making this statement?)!

That is why we do not do some of those things. That which is Caesar's does not apply to war but rather to taxes.

Then why support your breakaway colonies for not paying taxes to the King in blatant rebellion against the King, instead of obeying the King and scripture?  A contradiction here!

Not at all.  Many people have the mistaken idea that America was founded due to a desire in the hearts of the founders not to pay British taxes.  This is a myth.  I have in my library many volumes written by Jefferson, Washington, Hamilton, William Bradford on Plymouth, etc.

The pilgrims who landed in Plymouth my friend had nothing to do with the leaders you are mentioning, or the leadership you are under today.  Many of the leaders who rebelled against the Crown were steeped in Freemasonry.  The whole "War of Independence" was steeped in Freemasonry, until the present.  It does not biblically justify rebellion against the Crown for true Bible believers.  What religious and political settlers and colonists do is their business.  But it is certainly not the business of the remnant church, the Body of Christ, who are commanded to obey their earthly king by the way, even earthly leaders who are froward.

These people came to these shores for religious freedom.  They did not want to be told who, when, and where they were to worship and what they were to believe.  This is all well documented.

This has got nothing to do with the founding of an earthly institution.  They merely went to somewhere isolated, to escape persecution from the established churches back in Europe and the harassment of their families, and to convert the natives.  These early settlers would not even celebrate Xmas knowing it was a pagan festival.  Or allow Roman Catholics into their midst to practice their religion. Would they tolerate Free Masons infiltrating their midst?  Sorry Bro, but these folk had nothing to do with the colonists rebelling a century and a half later (when they weren't around), no matter how much you try to connect them.

This is what scripture say as Rom. 13:2:

 "Whosoever therefore resisteth the power (those in authority), resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."

Just as Jesus said to call no man on earth, " father " (in the spiritual sense), does that mean we can call a man " King"?

Know your scriptures Brother!  Jesus was telling us (His followers) not to give men religious titles.  Today 'Reverend' and even 'Pastor' (capital P) would come into this.  The scripture you are misquoting had nothing to do with civil government.  That's why New Testament scripture is very clear as these following scriptures are undeniably referring to civil government on this occasion:

1 Pet. 2:13.  "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme"

1 Pet. 2:17.  "Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king."

You are taking one scripture out of context namely Matthew 23:9, using this scripture where Jesus was referring to religious clergy of His day, and using it against civil government to justify insurrection and rebellion. The early rebellious colonists must have done the same because they were only "Christian" in the nominal sense.  They were not New Testament in their application, but going against scripture and rebelling against their King.

The rebellion you speak of was rebellion against the world (as embodied in the king ).

What a lot of nonsense Brother!  It was against the King of England!  One break away country of colonies against its God ordained king (as in all civil and monarch authorities)! Why did the US look for support from Roman Catholic France?  If it was against the world (as you claim) they would have fought the French and every other country as well.  Over thirty years later, in 1812, the US invaded Canada, a sovereign nation, to annex it, but failed.  If they had of annexed it (like they did later with Texas and California - taken from Mexico a sovereign state) could this have been justified in the biblical sense, if true Christians were the instigators?  However, there is not one scripture to support their campaign or your claims!  But if (hypothetically) it was one nominal Christian country defeating another nominal Christian country (like the War of Independence) it would have just been another course of history and nothing else.  Just like the "Christian" North would not allow the "Christian" South to retract prior to the Civil War (even though the Confederate States had joined the Union voluntarily) and brutally subdued it in the end.  Another act of history?  Yes, but no doubt a part of God's time table and plan, outside the affairs of man.  But never justified as Christians winning their "biblical" cause whatever "Christian" side came out the victor.

The world view was that the colonists must worship as the king told them to worship and where the king told them to worship.

This is always the world's view.  Caesar says to worship him as God.  It has not changed, but only become more subtle in a lot of cases.  This can be done very subtly today when a nation can be worshipped by having a "Christian/righteous" facade.  Caesar only puts on a different mask.  In some cases a "Christian" mask.  Why put a nation on a pedestal when we seek the heavenly one above? Moreover, all nations are under the rule of the prince of this world anyway (the Devil himself).  If the country you live in happens to be sounder, stable, "God fearing", peaceful, and pleasant to live in than one across the border or ocean, then it's something to be grateful to our Maker for, and not proud about.  That's why we are to pray in the will of God as 1 Tim 2:

1  I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
2  For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
3  For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour

There's no mention here about breaking away from a naughty, froward king, who happens to be unfair.  Nor taking up arms, or rebelling against, or resisting any authority, "Christian" or secular!  Just the complete and utter opposite, which you will not allow yourself to see because it would be inconvenient for you, and may also hurt your pride.

There was no such thing as freedom of worship, or religious freedom as many call it. Jesus became violently angry and cleansed the temple.

What's this got to do with justifying Christians going to war?

I didn't say it did.  I used that to prove a point about the Lord's anger, not about war. Many people have the mistaken view that Jesus never became angry.  He became angry, yet did not sin.  Do you think that cleansing the temple was a good example of turning the other cheek?   If you believe we must turn the other cheek or be in sin, then you are saying that Jesus was in sin since he cleansed the temple instead of turning the other cheek.  The apostles did not always turn the other cheek in the way you have in mind.  Look at Paul's open rebellion in appealing to Caesar, and his words to Felix and King Agrippa.  No, he did not blow them away.  But he did not quietly submit to the governance either.

I think you have got a little off the track here Brother!  Let's get back to the issue and back to Jesus with the whip in His hand, shall we:

Jesus as God, was rightfully executing judgement on how His temple was polluted.  It is what a believer does when he sees God's temple, the Body of Christ being polluted with apostates and false teachers.  We simply mark them, avoid them, or take to them with cords if need be (spiritually speaking - not physically) to guard the true flock of God.  It's got nothing to do with our attitude to civil government, but everything to do with purging out the leaven and keeping out false doctrine, in order for the Body of Christ to remain the Bridegroom's pure Bride.  What non Christians do with those in authority, whether brutal or fair, is nothing to do with the underground church, as they are judged already.

To believe that Christians are in sin for going to war, is to place a badge that says, "Deputy God" on your chest because you are making a judgement that only God can make.  Christians are to judge righteously using the examples of such that we are given. But we are not to judge as the Pharisees and Scribes did in a self righteous way.  Hence the words of Jesus when he said, " judge not that ye be not judged."

Here we go again!  The old "judge not" syndrome!  I am not judging anyone, I am merely pointing out that a blood washed, born again believer, cannot justify taking up arms against and killing a person overseas he has never met before, because he wears a different uniform, and has been told to by a politician.  I am also pointing out that the USA is not a Christian country in the biblical sense, only in the nominal sense.  As Bible believers, we are only to know the biblical!  That's all!  In addition to this ...  I make no apologies!  Also, I am not biased against your country, because I would say exactly the same about my country!

Being brought up in military surroundings, participating as an army cadet at college, an airforce territorial, and all my rubbing shoulders with veterans of  the Second World War (my Dad being one) Korea, Vietnam and the Malaysian Conflict (which your country was not involved with), I have meet many sincere men, who went to war with right motives, and were men of honour without sadistic intentions.  At parades I have heard the speeches and seen the tears of ex POWs who cannot understand why their captives were so brutal to them.  However, as a Bible believer, I know from scripture it is not for the remnant to go and fight worldly conflicts.  We can go to the theatre or to the front to help both sides in their needs of despair, but we do not kill as a profession or duty.  Leave that to the world who do not realize or understand that the cross has put an end to all conflict and enmity between each other.

But even if you carefully read the stories, you will find that when the soldiers and Centurion came to Jesus for help, He did not tell them to leave the military to follow him.

Lot's of Christians work in the military. Not long ago I played in the Air force band and was an official member of the forces with a rank.  Who's to say one of my son's might not join the military?  A brother in our town served the military as a medic in the Pacific during WW2.  When they were close to the Japs the whole medical unit (about 50 if I remember rightly) were ordered to take up arms. Everyone of them refused and none of them were court-martialled.  May be the Lord honoured them for their uncompromising stand?

Good for them!  Their commanding officer was in the wrong for expecting them to pick up guns since medics are not required to do so.  However,  how different might the outcome have been if every soldier had refused to pick up a gun?  Hitler would have won the war.  Look at Neville Chamberlain.  He favoured the idea of giving Hitler what he wanted in the belief that by doing so, then Hitler would be happy and go on his way.  That is how Hitler took Czechoslovakia.  It was given to him.  Did he go away?  Did Neville Chamberlain's "turning the other cheek" work out?  Even in the case of Hussein, the.U.S. allowed him to live after the first Gulf war.  For 12 years we turned the other cheek to him.  Did that work?  No, it did not.  We are told to turn the other cheek, not the other, then the other, then the other.

Back to cleansing the temple. I do not believe war is ever the best answer, but is sometimes necessary because of man's sinful nature.

As I said before war has been done away with at the cross.

No - Satan's hold over man was abolished at the cross.  War was not abolished at the cross. We do not live in Utopia, nor Paradise here on earth.  If war had been done away with at the cross, there would be peace in the mid-east, there would be world wide peace,

Nonsense Brother!  I have already said the Devil has temporal reigned in his domain (the world) only because the Lord has allowed it.  This does not rule out everything being fulfilled at the cross.  War has been abolished for the blood bought saint.  He no longer has anything earthly to fight for.  Everything that remains is reserved for the fire anyway.  We are to fight the good fight ...  Christ's cause, which is nothing to do with fighting for earthly kingdoms.  If we went to war we could be killing a misguided brother in Christ on the other side, who too believes he is fighting for a righteous cause, who maybe prohibiting us from ransacking his home, even harming his own family.

Instead of taking out our enemies are we now commanded to love our enemies, turning the cheek, and forgiving those who hate us.  We can't say we love them holding the Bible in one hand and a grenade in the other.  The word is our sword, not the arm of flesh.

How long do you think the world would be at war with one another if true Christians did their job?

Jesus said the poor will always be with us.  Scripture says this also in regards to the deceived and those deceiving.  Also, that there would be wars and rumours of wars, until the end.  Christians doing their job is not the issue.  The issue is what Paul said, that he would only know Christ and Him crucified!  That's all we are to know!  The cross is the issue.  Always has been, since Calvary, and until Jesus comes back.

Do you think it would be over quickly?  But as you can see by the world and its condition, the Christians are NOT doing their job.

No, they are caught up in denominationalism, sectarianism, politics, and trying to christianize nations, and defending their own non biblical patch.  Jesus never said to reform the system.  It's awaiting the fire.  But we are to snatch out of the fire those who are called.

You said ...  A Bible in one hand and a grenade in the other?

Let me pose this to you:  how long do you think you would possess your Bible, and how long do you think you would be free to write things like this if tyrants like Hussein took world power?

He would probably kill me, if God allowed him to.  Just like they did with all of the apostles and a great number of the early church.  This is a part of our calling isn't it, according to scripture?

Matt. 24:9. "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations (this includes the USA and my NZ) for my name's sake."
Mark 13:13.  "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."
Luke 21:12.  "But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers (who they don't take up arms against) for my name's sake."
Luke 21:17.  "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake."
John 15:21.  "But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me."
John 16:2.  "They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service."

If you believe in your Bible Brother, it sure looks like the odds are stacked against us, does it not?  In this life any way!

Why not ask the surviving Jews and Christians of the holocaust.

Yes, they will kill you!

Why not ask them about the power of tyrants going away if we stand and do nothing?

Yes, they will kill you!

I would like to hear what they say to you.  I will not give you their reply.  I have asked a few that I have known in my lifetime. You need to do the same.  After all, is it right for a Christian to see evil triumph and do nothing?  Is this not sin?

No, it is sin to overcome evil in the flesh my friend.  That's why the weapons of our warfare are not carnal!

The end does not justify the means!  We can not do things the world's way even if the end result looks good, if we are in Christ and He is in us.

At this point, I need to ask for my own benefit what church you attend.  I have heard the word, "remnant" used by a couple of groups here in the U.S.  One of those groups is the Seventh Day Adventists.  Is this your church?

No, every denomination would try to make out they are the remnant in justifying them being the true church.  A true believer should only mention the remnant biblically as the Bride of Christ, those who are following Jesus only, not Jesus plus a "church" or sect, or a human "personality".  That's why we need to get out of everything religious and manmade when it comes to representing Him.  And political!

God, and our Savior are not permitted in the public arenas, but any other god you can name is welcomed with open arms.

What do you expect?  Jesus said if the world hated Him, it will hate us.  Unless we get real through the scriptures and separate ourselves from the world, the world will continue to accept us.

I do not argue the idea that just as the world hated Jesus, the world will hate Christians.  But I am not ready to abdicate my responsibilities to spread the good news freely.

You should!  We have been told to ...  Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

To throw up my arms and say a pious "que sera sera" would be to do just that.  The apostles continued to disobey the governing rulers by continuing to preach the name of Jesus after they had been beaten and told not to do it again.  Now, exercising your logic, they were in sin.  The governing rulers said not to do it, and they continued to do it.

As you said before, we are to rightly divide the word of truth. .From scripture it is obvious we obey governments and rulers, only to the point the rulers do not muzzle us from preaching the gospel.  If they get funny about it then like the disciples in Acts 5:29 we say:

"We ought to obey God rather than men."

The command is to go into all the world with the good news.  This is that Great Commission many speak about, which is priority above the laws of the land.  That's why Paul said, "woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!"

They not only continued to do it, but did it more and more.  Separation from the world is a different concept than recognizing that we are to be in the world, but not of the world.

I don't think so Brother!  You have just made another silly statement without giving it much thought and without using scripture as your basis.

Rejection is not always an indication of separation.  If this were the case, a Christian could not be President of the U.S. nor a Senator,  nor a Congressman.  But they have been.  You need to do a word studies on several words "evil ", " worldly ", " separation ", and " rejection."  I am not sure you are in full grasp of what these words really mean.

You have to say this to justify your nation being a Christian nation, which is not one biblically, but only nominally, which I stated before.

As we write, work is being done to remove "In God We Trust " as our motto, and "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance.

It would be less hypocritical.  Our national anthem is called "God Defend New Zealand".  Why should He?  We don't honour Him as a nation!

In the U.S., as I am sure you are aware, the phrase of choice is " God bless America."

Yes, and why should He?

Irving Berlin even wrote a very famous song expressing that sentiment. Well, in this same America, babies are aborted, violently ripped out at various stages of development; drugs are rampant, pornography is rampant, STDs are now in record numbers, the living God is rejected from the public arena and then Americans have the nerve to ask God to bless America. It does not work that way.

I am glad we agree on something.  However, at the same time see your statement as contradictory.
....................................................................................................................................................................................................

If a person in the military comes to the Lord should they leave the service and get out of uniform?

The scriptures say in 1 Cor. 7:20:  "Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called."  Irrespective of whether he was circumcised or uncircumcised, a servant or free, was in uniform or out of uniform.  The command from the NT is, "Do violence to no man!" Here the reply was given to inquiring soldiers from the military in the day the kingdom of God was being introduced (Luke 3:14).  Nothing has changed over the last two millennia, as we take Peter's wise counsel (a man that use to be handy with the sword), 2 Pet. 13 -14:

"Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.  Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless."

A reminder that all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. .From reading the well documented book "The Pilgrim Church" we learn this is just what happened to every biblical nonconformist group which popped up throughout history, and then took up the sword to protect themselves from the authorities when the authorities came down on them for practising their faith.

What about independent struggles like protecting children from a maniac or pedophile, or the supposed case of the civilians tackling the hijackers in the Boeing that was going to be flown into a possible large human target during 911?

These men weren't doing it because they were trained to kill, but trying to overcome the hijackers to save lives.  During a moral dilemma (like a Christian policeman doing his duty) the Lord would look at the heart.  If one or some of the men on the Boeing were born again believers then it would not have hindered them from being ushered into the presence of the Lord. Corrie ten Boon (author of "The Hiding Place") lied to the Gestapo in order to protect the Jews she was hiding, and as a result their lives were saved.  I am not saying this gives licence to lying, and like the reader, I do not have all the answers, but the scriptures do.  We must rightly divide the scriptures and not take them out of context to suit our blind patriotism or justify our denomination as scriptural, or for political or monetary gain.  Our call is to refocus our fight from without onto the enemy within; namely religiosity, our love affair with tradition, "spiritual" competition, and self-preservation; and deal with these things in our lives.

Then pursue what is above.  For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them.