Each year millions of peoples submit tax returns, along with a check, as their "tithe" or "tribute" to the state. On each of these tax forms and checks, these same people will identify themselves with a IRD Number. Many, perhaps most, will also "claim" their children for a tax deduction; done by their supplying a unique serialisation number which has been assigned to the children. This number will also be dutifully inscribed upon the state forms.

Most of these "tax payers" will also claim a "rebate" from the state for the monies they have paid to their tax-exempt churches, monies they call their "tithe to God."

How do these actions comport with God's Word?

The tax number is the link which identifies associates tax payers with the amount of treasure each has lain up over the years in the "state's System."

Does God honour these actions? What does the Bible really teach about paying taxes and "tribute" to Caesar (the state)? More particularly, what did Jesus teach on these subjects?

Jesus spoke in parables for a reason; so that only "those with ears to hear" would understand what He was really saying. Those with "ears to hear" can discern what Jesus truly taught about the payment of taxes.

Perhaps the best starting point, towards acquiring understanding, is the following passage:

"Then the whole assembly rose and led him off to Pilate. And they began to accuse him, saying, 'We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ, a king.'"

Few people know where in the Bible the preceding passage is found. It is, of course, Luke, 23:1-2. This is where Jesus is "charged" with committing crimes against the State (Caesar).

Could it be that a proper understanding of this passage, when properly understood, conflicts with the "state approved" doctrine (i.e., the doctrine with which all tax-exempt churches must comply)? What if Jesus really did teach against paying taxes (tribute) to an ungodly state, claiming itself
to be god? Could tax exempt churches get away with teaching this "truth" and still continue to enjoy their tax-exempt status? Of course not.

According to the above passage from Luke, Jesus was charged specifically with two things: (1) opposing payment of taxes to Caesar; and, (2) claiming to be Christ, a king. Are these two charges true? Did Jesus teach against paying taxes AND claim to be king?

Luke 23:3 goes on to tell us:

"So Pilate asked Jesus, 'Are you the king of the Jews?' 'Yes, it is as you say,' Jesus replied."

Unfortunately, many churches arbitrarily teach that ONE of the two charges is TRUE, (i.e., that Jesus IS the King of Kings as charged), but reject the other accusation (that Jesus taught against paying taxes to Caesar) as a "false charge". This clearly an arbitrary division-for-convenience which is simply not borne out in Scripture.

The immediate question then becomes: Did Jesus teach against paying taxes to Caesar as charged? The Bible tells us:

"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven ... . For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. ... 'No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. (Matt 6:19-24)

The IRD and tax System represent worship of mammon (money) as described above. The "System" becomes a substitute for faith (that God will provide for all our needs). Simply put, people get numbers for themselves and their children because failing to do so will cost them money and put them in disfavour with the state.

There is a false teaching that numbering God's children is "good stewardship ," when in fact doing so is an abomination to God.

God's People are admonished to refuse to be numbered by government. Perhaps the best such example involves that of King David who wanted to "know the number of the People" under his authority. (2 Samuel 24:2). As the Bible notes, Satan caused David to number all the people of Israel. (1 Chronicles 21:1). God's Word further states that David's command "was evil in the sight of God." (1 Chronicles 21:7). And because the people acquiesced to the enumeration plan, God sent a plague upon them, the people (1 Chronicles 21:14).

There are also other references in the Bible to "numbering" people, but an important distinction must be made in the different types of numbering discussed. For example, soldiers were counted (numbered), but they were accounted for "by their name" (Numbers 1:19-23). And, there were censuses taken (numbering) of the non-citizen (alien) population for the purpose of establishing the amount of tax to be levied upon them (2 Chronicles 2:17).

These examples do not represent "numbering" or "registering" of God's People (the citizens) contrasted with the forbidden "numbering" described in 1 Chronicles 21:1 and 2 Samuel 24:2 which resulted in God's punishment being brought upon the people.

The "People" once again face new demands from the modern-day "kings" to be numbered and registered. Again, it is the responsibility and duty of the People to resist -- regardless of how powerful or "godly" the contemporaneous ruling authority claims or appears to be, and regardless of the apparent sincerity of their justifications. For it is God’s People who will be held accountable if they do not comply with God's Word.

Now, as before, Satan has deceived and mislead political leaders and has provided them with ample causes, excuses, and justifications for numbering the citizens. Having believed the lie, these present-day leaders now promote their new numbering schemes; which, they assure us, will collectively "cure all the world's problems," including everything from health care, to unemployment, to retirement, to housing, to education, to clothing, to nourishment, and on and on.

Satan plans and intends to number ALL people of the world. His "plan" is revealed in the Book of Revelation at chapter 13 where we are instructed that at the time of the "end of the world" there will be a "Beast" which will do great wonders and will cause all to receive a "mark" or a "number" symbolising their respect, fear or worship of the "Beast." According to Daniel, this "beast" is a "king," which in our modern-day world is a government system or a world dictator (Daniel 7:17-23, Rev. 19:19).
Therefore, it will be a government "authority" which will cause all to receive the "mark" or "number" which the people must have in order to buy or sell (Rev. 13:16-18). However, acceptance of the "mark" will constitute "worship" of the beast and will signify fear and respect owing to the issuer of the "mark" –- i.e., the Beast and his System. This Beast System will be accomplished through great deception. The only ones who will escape are those who, in adherence to God's Word, steadfastly refuse to be numbered.

The most stern warning in all the Bible is found in Revelation 14, and it is directed TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO ACCEPT THE MARK OF THE BEAST, OR THE BEAST’S NUMBER, AND CONSEQUENTLY "WORSHIP" HIS IMAGE:

"And another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a great voice, If any man worshippeth the beast and his image, and receiveth a mark on his forehead, or upon his hand, "he also shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is prepared unmixed in the cup of his anger; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: ... "and the smoke of their torment goeth up for ever and ever; and they have no rest day and night, they that worship the beast and his image, and whoso receiveth the mark of his name." (Rev. 14:9-11).

The Bible tells us that those who worship the beast -- and his image WILL receive the "mark of the beast. No one will be forced to receive the mark; those who receive it will do so willingly. This is not unlike "voluntary" tax-filing and reporting.

Revelation 13 says the beast "requires" all to receive his identifying mark.
Those who DO NOT willingly take it will be outcasts from society, they will not be able to "buy or sell," nor participate in all other normal societal activity. Accepting the "mark" IS evidence of one's worshiping of the "beast system" and of his image. Accepting the mark is, therefore, evidence of one's beast (system) worship. The "mark" identifies the recipient as one who honours the beast and fears it more than God. Those who accept it fear the issuer (state) more than they fear God. These are the ones who look to the issuer (beast/state) to provide for all of their needs (welfare state) and protection (police state). These will find good favor with the beast (state) in the form of such things as tax rebates and credits. Today, the majority of society wants the state to take care of them -- they worship the state more than God; even to the extent of numbering their children in clear violation of God's Word! They try to honour two masters!

A point of interest, in the US, Title 42 of the United States Code, at section 666 requires that no one may be allowed to obtain any license to drive, operate a business, engage in any professional licensed occupation, hunt or fish, engage in licensed recreational activity, get married, get divorced, or even die (all of these are found in 42USC666) unless they identify themselves with the Welfare System by using their SSN. Display of this single little number is the condition upon which all of these licensed activities and functions are conditioned.

Another law requires every employer in every state to report the name, address, salary (or wage) -- and social security number -- of every newly hired employee to a central database called the Federal Registry of Newhires. Eventually, under this federal program, no company will be allowed to hire a new worker until they first receive "approval" from the government. This level of control is again accomplished by use of Social Security numbers.

Under these currently-in-place laws we have three options: a) identify ourself with the number whenever it's requested and function normally in society; (b) don't identify with the number and don't do any of the above; or c) don't identify with the number and engage in those activities in violation of section 666 and other laws.

The abominable Government System also includes the promise of "security" in association with compliance and participation. The System promises future returns for the beneficiary's present "sacrifices." Few realize the true extent of the "sacrifice" they are making. Can we have both, a future "heavenly reward" for our godly stewardship and an "earthly reward" provided to us by the earthly king, the state? No. For, where your treasure is, there your heart will be also!

Consider Jesus' words in light of the truth that we cannot serve two masters:

"'Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?' But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, 'You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax.' They brought him a denarius, and he
asked them, 'Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?' 'Caesar's,' they replied. Then he said to them, 'Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.' When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away." (Matt 22:17-22)

The same account is also recorded in Luke:

"The teachers of the law and the chief priests looked for a way to arrest him immediately, because they knew he had spoken this parable against them. But they were afraid of the people. Keeping a close watch on him, they sent spies, who pretended to be honest. They hoped to catch Jesus in something he said so that they might hand
him over to the power and authority of the governor. So the spies questioned him: 'Teacher, we know that you speak and teach what is right, and that you do not show partiality but teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it right for us to pay taxes to Caesar or not?' He saw through their duplicity and said to them, 'Show me a denarius. Whose portrait and inscription are on it?' 'Caesar's,' they replied. He said to them, 'Then give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.' They were unable to trap him in what he had said there in public. And astonished by his answer, they became silent." (Luke 20:19-26)

Jesus had just finished speaking AGAINST the "teachers of the law, the chief priests, and the Pharisees!" Realizing this, they CONSPIRED and devised A PLAN TO ENTRAP JESUS so that He could be arrested. They knew what He had been teaching, even though Jesus spoken in parables specifically so they could not fully understand and therefore could not accusse Him outright for speaking against the state. The "authorities" clearly anticipated that Jesus would respond that, under God's Law, citizens do not owe taxes to the state (Caesar). Isn't that the CLEAR (and only) implication that can be drawn from the above scenario? What else could the "spies" have intended?

Jesus' response, in essence, was presented in the same kind of language as were His parables, so that only those with ears to hear would understand. In essence Jesus' reply was: You cannot serve two masters. Pay tribute to the one you honour, i.e., YOUR god.

What if Caesar "claimed" ownership of all that is God's alone? Would Christians be expected to give "ALL" over to Caesar? Of course not. The simple answer is: If Caesar is your god then pay tribute to Caesar. If God is your God then pay your tribute to Him. You can only serve one master.

After all, to whom do the things of the earth ultimately belong? "To the LORD your God belong the heavens, even the highest heavens, the earth and everything in it." (Deut 10:14) What does this leave for "Caesar?" Nothing.

Now consider this other most well known encounter between Jesus and tax collectors:

"After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma tax came to Peter and asked, 'Doesn't your teacher pay the temple tax?' 'Yes, he does,' he replied. When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. 'What do you think, Simon?' he asked. 'From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes -- from their own sons or from others?' 'From others,' Peter answered. 'Then the sons are exempt,' Jesus said to him. (Matt 17:24-26)

You've probably never heard this portion of the event preached in any church. When the tax-exempt pastors teach on this subject they only cite the passage where we are told that Jesus agreed to pay the tax. These tax-exempt churches must teach the tax paying part or else they'll lose their tax-exempt status.

(On a side note, it is irrelevant here as to what "form" of tax was being collected, i.e. state tax or "temple" tax. Jesus' comment was: "From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes...?" This implies state tax.)

Why do you suppose the question was posed to Peter in a negative tone? -- "Doesn't your teacher pay the temple tax?" Obviously, it was anticipated that Peter's response would be: "No, He doesn't pay the tax." Read again what Jesus said in response to the question about payment of the tax, "the sons are exempt."

However, we are told that Jesus went ahead and paid this tax which He had just said He and Peter did not owe. Why would He do this?

The Bible does not tell us exactly why Jesus paid the tax, except to say that it was so that the tax collectors would not be "offended." We know that Peter told the tax collectors the tax would be paid. Was he then to go back on his word? Christ's responce was a clear rebuke directed at Peter and then ... "Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them" -- Was it the "offence" that caused Christ to tell him to get that money out of the fish's mouth to give it to the tax collectors and not because it was required? Is it possible that both would have been arrested had they not paid the tax? Could it be that it simply was not time for Jesus to be arrested and taken into custody? Would Jesus "avoid" being arrested in such situation? We may not have definitive answers to these questions, but we do have clues in that we are told that Jesus and the disciples did avoid arrest on more than one occasion.

Look back at the earlier excerpt where Jesus was asked about the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar. He said to His inquisitors: "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me?" We told that, when they heard His response, "they were amazed and they left Him and went away" -- even though their intent had been to arrest Him! Jesus did not just come right out with the response they obviously anticipated! He "saw through their duplicity" and "knowing their evil intent" He answered in a way that avoided confrontation. Yet, at the same time, He was profoundly accurate in what He said.

The answer is that those who WILLINGLY and VOLUNTARIALLY pay tribute to Caesar (the state), in doing so, show their true allegiance by their actions.

There are other examples where Jesus avoided being arrested as well:

"'After this, Jesus went around in Galilee, purposely staying away from Judea because the Jews there were waiting to take his life. But when the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was near, Jesus' brothers said to him, "You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do.
No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world.' For even his own brothers did not believe in him. Therefore Jesus told them, 'The right time for me has not yet come; for you any time is right. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that what it does is evil. You go to the Feast. I am not yet going up to this Feast, because for me the right time has not yet come.' Having said this, he stayed in Galilee. However, after his brothers had left for the Feast, he went also, not publicly, but in secret." (John 7:1-10)

We are also told:

"But the Pharisees went out and plotted how they might kill Jesus. Aware of this, Jesus withdrew from that place." (Matt 12:14)

And:

"Then the Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus. Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the lake, and a large crowd from Galilee followed. (Mark 3:6-7)

And later, Paul tells of his experience in which he avoided arrest:

"In Damascus the governor under King Aretas had the city of the Damascenes guarded in order to arrest me. But I was lowered in a basket from a window in the wall and slipped through his hands." (2 Cor 11:32-33) See also: Josh 2:3-6, Josh 2:14-15, Josh 6:17, James 2:25.

So, we do not know for certain why Jesus paid the tax in Matthew 17 after He said that He and Peter did not owe it. We only know that, in that situation, to pay it would avoid "offending" them. What would the consequence of that "offence" have been? Arrest? Is it possible that it was done in that particular situation to avoid being arrested? Why do you suppose Jesus said that citizens do not owe taxes? Is there one single other example of Jesus paying any tax? Whatever conclusion we draw, they must comport with the
rest of the teachings in the Bible.

TAX COLLECTORS AND SINNERS

Why does the Bible, in every instance, equate "tax collectors" with "sinners" or prostitutes?

The disciples were asked why Jesus dined with "tax collectors and sinners." Jesus overheard the inquiry and responded: "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the SICK." See also Matt 9:10, 11:19, 18:17, 21:31-32, Mark 2:15-16, Luke 5:29-30, Luke 7:34, Luke 15:1.

The key in understanding why tax collectors were drawn to Jesus is found in Luke 7:29-30, where we are told:

"All the people, even the tax collectors, when they heard Jesus' words, acknowledged that God's way was right, because they had been baptised by John. But the Pharisees and experts in the law rejected God's purpose for themselves, because they had not been baptized by John."

The tax collectors realized that they were sinners because of their profession and they repented. See also Matt 21:31-32.

BEING SUBJECT TO THE HIGHER AUTHORITIES

When would it be appropriate to pay taxes? Only when the authorities are acting in accordance with God's Law. Who ARE the legitimate "authorities" under God's Law? Only those officials who devote themselves to _administering_ God's Law. There are no other authorities, and there is no other law except that which is in accordance with God's Word and His Law. Therefore, there is no other circumstance under which we must pay taxes except when the authorities act in accordance with God's Word.

"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God." (Rom 13:1)

Does this mean that EVERY claimed "authority" which exists is established by God? No! Simply stated, if it is not established according to God's Law, it simply is not a legitimate authority.

"Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free
from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. (Rom 13:2-3)

If you are _not_ violating God's Law, the "authorities" are to leave you alone -- period.

"For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." (Rom 13:4)

How many government figures also function as "God's servant?" If they do not, they have no legitimate authority.

"Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing." (Rom 13:5-6)

Now we see when it is appropriate to pay taxes. It is when public officials act as God's servants! Then taxes serve to further God's Law and His Word. Are our modern day public officials really "God's servants," giving their full time to administering God's Law? If not, then we are not to reward them with our offerings in the form of taxes.

Is there any Biblical principle instructing us to number our children so that we can claim them as tax-tribute deductions? Where is it in the Bible? Of course it does not exist. There is, however, teaching that this is an abomination to God.

Is it honourable to God to give a "tithe," then take back a portion in the form of a state-granted rebate? How ridiculous. If it is "good stewardship" to get a rebate back from the state for that which we give in the most holy act of tithing, then why don't we just tithe to the state exclusively and let them be the benevolent stewards of ALL our money and let the state decide what portion should be allocated to the churches?

How do your "renderings to God" compare with the treasures you have lain up in the state's (Caesar's) Social Security system? Placed side-by-side, how would the two accounts balance? How about after you consider what you get back from the state after the tithe "rebate?"

All of these violate God's Law for they are merely attempts to lay up treasure with the state for future security. It is, in effect, an attempt to serve two masters -- which, under God's Law, cannot be done. Whom do you fear more?

One of the most basic Biblical principles is this: We, as Christians must obey God rather than man. This is why Jesus was arrested and hung on the cross: He violated MAN's law. Look also at all the other examples of true followers of God violating man's ungodly laws: Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego; Rahab; Moses' parents; Paul and the apostles -- and the list goes on and on. After all, it is believed that a substantial portion of the New
Testament was written from JAIL! The Book of Revelation was written by John while he was in exile on the Island of Patmos.

Here are just a few example of Godly men and women obeying God's Law rather than man's in which God honoured their actions:

[1] Midwives/Moses' mother disobey king (civil authority)

"The king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, whose names were Shiphrah and Puah, 'When you help the Hebrew women in childbirth and observe them on the delivery stool, if it is a boy, kill him; but if it is a girl, let her live.' The midwives, however, feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt had told them to do; they let the boys live. Then the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and asked them, 'Why have you done this? Why have you let the boys live?' The midwives answered Pharaoh, 'Hebrew women are not like Egyptian women; they are vigorous and give birth before the midwives arrive.' So God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous. And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own. Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: "Every boy that is born you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live."

Now a man of the house of Levi married a Levite woman, and she became pregnant and gave birth to a son. When she saw that he was a fine child, she hid him for three months. But when she could hide him no longer, she got a papyrus basket for him and coated it with tar and pitch. Then she placed the child in it and put it among the reeds along the bank of the Nile. (Exod 1:15-23)

[2] Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego disobey the king (civil authority)

"'But there are some Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon -- Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego -- who pay no attention to you, O king. They neither serve your gods nor worship the image of gold you have set up.' Furious with rage, Nebuchadnezzar summoned Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. So these men were brought before the king, and Nebuchadnezzar said to them, 'Is it true, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, that you do not serve my gods or worship the image of gold I have set up?'" (Dan 3:12-14)

[3] Rahab lies to civil authorities, God honours her deed

"So the king of Jericho sent this message to Rahab: 'Bring out the men who came to you and entered your house, because they have come to spy out the whole land.' But the woman had taken the two men and hidden them. She said, "Yes, the men came to me, but I did not know where they had come from. (Josh 2:3-4)

[4] Apostles disobey civil authorities

"Having brought the apostles, they made them appear before the Sanhedrin to be questioned by the high priest. 'We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name," he said. "Yet you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and are determined to make us guilty of this man's blood.' Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men!'" (Acts 5:27-29)

WHAT HIGHER POWERS?

Romans 13:1-7: "Let every soul..." Whatever this passage means, there is no doubt that it applies to every one's soul. "...be subject..." Means to obey. "... unto the Higher powers."

There is no doubt this is the key to the passage.

Most commentators and theologians contend that the higher powers here were Caesar, or the government of Rome. Then they say in principle, this refers to the governing authorities of our nation, therefore, we must do whatever our government says. Is that what you were taught?

I strongly object to this interpretation! God has ordained a chain of authority and every person is subject to it. The Greek word higher is, in this verse, huperecho meaning supreme. The Greek word power is, in this verse, exousia meaning authority. This
word is used in two ways.

First, the word power is used in conjunction with supreme (absolute) authority. This is always used in reference to God alone. The same word is used in reference to man with delegated authority to the highest supreme (absolute) authority, which is God alone. Therefore, the verse tells us, every soul is to be subject to the highest or supreme authority. Therefore, if a Christian wishes to follow God, he must reject any authority that is in opposition to God and His word.

This agrees with Paul's actions in Acts 17:7, where it states that Paul, and all Christians, "do contrary to the decrees (laws) of Caesar"

This interpretation also agrees with Matthew 28:18 where Jesus Christ said, "All power (authority) (exousia) is given unto me in heaven and in earth" Does Jesus have "All power"? If Jesus has it all, then judges, legislators, and public servants have none, except in the delegated areas.

This is carefully outlined in Romans 13:3-4, "for rulers (of God) are not a terror to good works" (good works as defined by God's terms in God's Word), but to the evil (works).

"For he is the minister of God to thee (to the good deed doer) for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword (of execution and revenge) in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger (for God) to execute (carry out) (God's) wrath upon him that doeth evil" (breaks God's Laws).

The word 'he' in verse 4 does not refer to civil or government leaders or laws, but refers to "God's arrangement of authority." If this passage referred to rulers as ministers of God, then they must in every instance work for good and against evil. We would be delighted to find this true, but it just isn't so. Please notice that the verse gives no leeway for the 'he' to be more good than bad, or mostly good, but EVERY TIME must be FOR good and AGAINST evil. Human rulers are just not that way.

Second, the word power (exousia) also means jurisdiction. God has carefully outlined the jurisdiction (area of authority) for civil authorities. Their jobs are simply to protect (the lives and property of) good doers (those who obey God's Laws) and punish those who are evil doers (those who violate God's Laws). This means that government is primarily in the business of punishing crime (this being the breaking of God's Law). Welfare, social security, government supported abortion including partial birth abortion,
land control, zoning, and a myriad of other functions now performed or sanctioned by government were never intended, nor granted by God. Our government, using the irs, forces citizens to pay for these violations through confiscatory income taxes.

Therefore, if not granted by God, then any activity by government in any of these areas of ungranted authority is unlawful and government officials become the evil doers. To obey such rulers is to surrender the sovereignty of God, abolish any attempt to worship, and makes you a co-conspirator in crime in rebellion against God.

Romans 13:5 says, "Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake."

Subject to what? The Christian is to subject himself to every authority that is NOT in opposition to God's arrangement of authority. Things will get out of order if we go our own way of evil. Over and over again the Apostle Paul reminds us that God has leveled judgment on the nations because they have forsaken His plan for their own. It is wise to follow God's plan.

Romans 13:6 says, "For this cause pay ye tribute also.."

For what cause? God's plan of authority in verse 4 and the fact that this plan was instituted by God to be a minister of God to us for good. For the cause of punishing evil and blessing good workers. There is no command to pay taxes for the wicked deeds of wicked rulers. Try to convince Daniel that all government workers work and rule in harmony with God's plan when he was thrown in the lion's den. Our government does God's work and serves the individual citizen? Nothing could be further from the truth. Because of God's plan of authority, you pay tribute to those servants of God who are
devoting themselves continually to His plan.

Romans 13:7 says, "Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour."

We must remember there is no allusion to government workers in this passage.
It refers to AUTHORITIES; any time the concept of government is added, it shifts the idea from God's arrangement of authority to man's plan of human government, which was never intended. Neither does the verse teach that Christians are to give to everyone who asks. Individual giving as a personal matter may turn to a curse if the individual gives to an agency, church or organization that's promoting unrighteousness. Nothing is due anyone who is working in opposition to God and his arrangement of authority. Every decision to give should be determined by whether the recipients is upholding God's plan.

Even the will of the people or public policy cannot force any unlawful obligation on one who is subject to the higher power of the jurisdiction of our Sovereign King Lord Jesus Christ.

The same rules of interpretation apply to I Peter 2. Some are troubled by Peter's statement in verse 13: "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man." If this means we are to obey every law of man, then Peter violated his own words. In Acts 5:29 Peter states: "We ought to obey God rather than men."

The word submit in Scripture does not always mean obey. The word ordinance in this verse means institution, not law. I may have to submit to the institution of jail, torture or death, but I don't have to obey all their laws and regulations.

Before you call me an anarchist, you had better look up the definition of anarchist. The word means having no law or a law unto yourself. A man who is obedient to God's Law is not a man having no law, or a law unto himself. In fact, a state that enforces law (sic) and violates God's Law, and the man who obeys the state law, is in violation of God's Law; therefore they are the real lawless ones, or the anti-Christs.

I personally have no fear of people who are allowed to live unregulated by the state and live by their interpretation of Bible Law, as long as:

Every citisen agrees to live by Bible Law and,

Every citisen is taught that the violation of another's life and property is unscriptural and will be punished for such violation by Biblical parameters of justice.

This means drunks who cause accidents will pay the damages. If life is taken, murder or manslaughter is the charge, with appropriate punishment for the guilty.

Now lets take I Peter 2: 13-17 all encompassing. "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake; whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king".

Peter says here that the civil authority is to be honoured and that God is to be feared. The state, as he defines it, is to punish those who do wrong and commend those who do right. If this is not so, then the whole structure falls apart. Clearly, the state is to be a ministry of justice. But what is to be done when the state does that which violates its legitimate function? The early Christians died because they would not obey the state in a civil matter.

Following this, God gives a command to the Christians that should catch the attention of each of us, especially those of us who live in a country that is more free than many.

Referring to v.16, the Christian is free to ignore evil, protest it, resist it, or concur with it. But God specifically tells us not to use our freedom as a covering for evil. Because we have been wrongly taught that we are to obey authorities whether they are good or not, instead of being "the salt of the earth," we have allowed disgrace to flourish in our country. God has been cast aside, and secular humanism has become the order of the day. Render Unto Caesar ...

Many people, in order to try to force Christians to bow to ungodly laws of government, quote "Surrender unto Caesar..." This is an attempt to quote the Scripture found in Matthew 22:21 where Jesus said: Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's." There are several things wrong with trying to quote this Scripture as a hammer over the head of some supposedly recalcitrant Christian, who won't bow at the feet of some bureaucrat.

First of all, Caesar is dead. You cannot apply the government of Caesar to the government of our nation. Also, it must be remembered that Jesus Christ, according to Matthew 17:24-27, was accused of refusing to pay taxes to Caesar. I do not believe that is a false charge, as some people have assumed. Caesar was a dictator; he was ungodly. But he did have absolute rule in his territory. He not only had absolute rule, he demanded worship as a sovereign, because obedience and acknowledgement of his licensing power was required before you could worship any other god. Sound familiar: IRD charitable status for churches to operate. Any church with this license will not teach you the evils of government and will not teach you how to stop this evil.

That is not the form of government God so graciously gave us in this nation. In this nation, there is no law over the people, except the Law of God. Our elected officials are not in authority over the people of the this nation, nor are they rulers. They are administrators of justice, which can be defined by no other criteria than the Law of God. Therefore, to accuse a Christian brother or sister of disobeying God because they refuse to obey Caesar, is a hyperbole, a show of ignorance, a show of audacity and rebellion against God Himself.

It would appear what Jesus was really saying was, if God be your God, render to Him; if Caesar be your god, render to Caesar. It appears to me that the application would be more appropriately made today, if government be your god, then obey it; if God be your God, then obey Him.

There are many persons in this nation who are by law required to pay income tax, but the individual who is a free sovereign individual is not required to pay income tax. That is most likely you.

God is sovereign over all, including Caesar. Therefore, to say that Caesar has a certain realm of obedience and God has another realm of obedience, is totally false. Caesar must come in line with God. As our Patriot forefathers said, "Only one King: Jesus." Remember, it was the unsaved Jews who said, "... no king but Caesar.".

I am a free sovereign individual. I took a stand against the unjust authorities. I can not and will not obey our authorities when it means to surrender the lordship of Jesus. I am ready to defend myself in court and I am ready to go to jail if necessary for my convictions. After all, I would be in pretty good company since much of the New Testament was penned in prison!

That is good advice for all of us Christians, especially for preachers. We are obligated to obey the Bible regardless of the consequences. It is time to stop fearing what man can do and realize that God's judgment can be more intense than anything man can do. It is time to tell authorities that we will not obey them when obedience to them results in disobedience to Bible principles.

1st - Exodus 23 vs. 2, 24, 25, 32 and 33

2nd - Rise up and make Jesus Christ "LORD".

3rd - Recognize the problem. What's the problem? The bureaucratic leaders in our nation today no longer recognize God above them.

4th - Gladly serve on the jury and teach others to do the same. The jury system was established in our country to protect the people from tyrannical government. A juror has more power than the law or the judge and every Christian should stand for God and righteousness. STAND FOR GOD NO MATTER WHAT THE COST.

Now that you've read the page above do you still have a problem with refusing to comply with every law the government throws up ... try reading the following.

I believe that while I was in the HIGH COURT that I was sober and that I was NOT on drugs. To the best of my recollection and that of my 2 friends in the court I believe that the following was said by one of the 2 judges during my appearance .

1) PARLIAMENT IS SUPREME

2) THAT THE MAGNA CARTA (1297) AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS (1688) ARE ONLY POLITICAL STATEMENTS AND HAVE NEVER HAD FORCE IN LAW

3) THAT IF THE PARLIAMENT WANT TO MAKE A LAW KILLING ALL BLUE EYED BABIES THEY ARE LEGALLY ABLE TO DO SO.

Question here "PARLIAMENT IS SUPREME" Just what does "Supreme" mean?

Definitions of SUPREME follow:

Bouvier Law Dictionary: SUPREME. That which is superior to all other things; as the supreme power of the state, which is an authority over all others ...

The Collins English Dictionary: SUPREME. of highest status or power, ... of highest quality, importance, ... greatest in degree.

Let's look at the Word of God again. Isaiah 14:12-16

12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

Where does that leave God? Has "Parliament" (in the words of this judge) not taken the place of God? Is this not what is clearly noted and documented as "Anti-christ" and "The beast" in the Bible? and the worship or serving of this beast is the acceptance of the 666 system?