God over government? (part 1)
Romans 13 and covid 19
Dear Church Leaders
This is the first part of a two-part article relating to the question of how Christians apply passages such as Romans 13, particularly in the context of the covid era, aspects of which have been discussed in other recent posts:
I will outline some context, including some of what I wrote in November and December 2021, and share some further reflections. I realise that this letter is relatively long compared to other posts, which is partly why I have divided it into two parts. But I think the issues raised merit the length, not least in relation to the importance of considering such matters in preparation for what might happen in the next few years.
A consideration of the context
What I wrote in 2021
[What follows here should be considered in the context of the twenty covid-related questions (with supporting evidence) that I shared with you in October 2021, not least the first question: “Why has the risk from covid been exaggerated?”]
While I have written to you on numerous occasions, not least in the absence of opportunities to speak in person, I have not often referenced Scripture. This has been deliberate. I think that what I have been saying stands to reason on its own, and I am well aware of the pitfalls of proof-texting.
But while [others in the congregation with a scientific background] consider the material I sent through last week, I thought it would be useful to share brief reflections on two passages of Scripture:
[1] Romans 13:1-5:
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities… They are God’s servants… it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.
I think I understand the case for submission to authorities. Two questions spring to mind:
(i) Are there exceptions, and, if so, what are they?
(ii) In the context of submission to authorities, to what extent should believers make clear their reservations?
My concern here is mainly with (ii). Do you think it would be fair to say that our church appears to endorse uncritically the approach of the authorities to Covid? If not, I would be glad to see evidence to the contrary.
As a nation, our collective submission to the authorities re Covid — sometimes going well beyond what is actually required — has come with a very high price. For example:
60,000+ excess non-Covid deaths (UK) in the context of lockdowns and restrictions (and still rising); in dealing with such numbers, it is easy to overlook the fact that these are 60,000+ real people — mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, many of whom would likely otherwise still be alive today [see also this recent post and the data for 2020-2021 in the table of excess deaths excluding deaths with covid as the underlying cause]
Many of our children being injected with a gene-based vaccine that (i) is still in clinical trials, with no long-term safety data, and (ii) is linked with serious short-term heart problems; and this for a disease from which children are at close to zero risk, and for which there are safe and effective treatments such as ivermectin that are being deliberately suppressed
The potential rollout of “vaccine passports” which would (i) violate the Nuremberg Code, (ii) cause division and strife, and (iii) constitute a grave threat to basic freedoms
Would it be unreasonable for a believer to have reservations about being a member of a church that appeared to endorse uncritically policies which helped bring about the above outcomes (among others)? How do you think such believers should express their concerns?
[2] Hebrews 2:14-15:
[Jesus] shared in their humanity so that by his death he might… free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.
I trust that we can agree that the past couple of years have seen an unprecedented and relentless level of fearmongering from the authorities. And also that we want to liberate people from the “fear of death”.
Should I thus not find it disconcerting that the fear of death now appears more palpable at church than anywhere else I go?! The messaging — “Please wear a face mask”, “Please keep your distance” — may be well-intentioned. But surely the underlying message is: “We are in danger!” “Stay scared!” Why would any outsider not conclude that the church — more than most — is "held in slavery by [its] fear of death"? Do people not see that the very act of wearing a face mask is itself symbolic of slavery, and has historically been routinely used as a tool of subjugation and oppression?! (see particularly this link). And do you think that the behavioural psychologists advising the government do not know this...?
The irony is that there is arguably much to fear right now — not least the creeping authoritarianism against which so many people have been protesting. But covid itself...? And whatever the risk, how much difference do any of the measures actually make? We were (rightly) advised against wearing masks [see the first link here, reloading if necessary] in Spring 2020, when excess deaths were at their peak! Why can people not see that we are being played?
[from December 2021]
Re Romans 13, it occurs to me that there are plenty of situations that are not morally black and white, and that there is sometimes an unpalatable choice between a small “wrong” and a much larger wrong.
In Joshua 2 for example, Rahab does not submit to the authorities, i.e. the king of Jericho and his messenger(s). She defies the authorities and brazenly lies to them about what she has done (for the greater good). As a consequence, God spares Rahab and her family and others (Joshua 6:24-25).
And the New Testament verdict on Rahab is, as far as I can see, wholly positive. Rahab is one of the women mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy (Matthew 1:5).
She is one of only two women commended in the “hall of faith” in Hebrews 11 (Hebrews 11:31):
And she is "considered righteous” for what she did re the spies (James 2:25):
How many Old Testament characters get a better verdict in the New Testament?!
Surely any application of Romans 13 (and similar passages) needs at least to take the above into account.
The height of the covid tyranny
I wrote the above at what might be described as the height of the covid tyranny. In the covid hysteria, and the government-sponsored campaign of weaponised behavioural psychology, most people lost sight of basic medical ethics and properly informed consent. Including many doctors.
In 2021, people were being coerced into taking “covid vaccines” — gene-based injections with no long-term safety data and plainly evident short-term harms — so that they could work, or go to university, or even attend school. This (obviously) included young people, who were at close-to-zero risk from covid. But also those who had had covid and who had thus acquired natural immunity.
In some parts of Europe, a “covid pass” (or “freedom pass”) was required in order merely to buy food:
As former Telegraph cartoonist Bob Moran observed, it was an odd sort of freedom being offered:
Mercifully, the tyranny was eventually reversed, not least due to massive protests around the world, including in London.
If you haven’t seen this six-minute film, I recommend watching at least some of it:
The most influential protest was perhaps the Freedom Convoy (30 minute video) of Canadian truckers (4 minute song):
A recent update and summary of the situation in Canada can be found here:
If you haven’t previously heard or read much about the above, please can I urge you to pause and consider why that might be. And to think about what else we might not be hearing or reading about. And to ponder the extent to which the mainstream media tells the truth generally. Including “fact-checkers”. And including widely trusted sites like Wikipedia (see e.g. interview with co-founder Larry Sanger from 58:10 here).
Some further reflections on Romans 13
The book Romans 13 and Covid 19 by J L Fuller is written from a North American perspective at the height of the covid tyranny in 2021.
It is in the context of that tyranny — and also that of the broader picture, some of which will be covered in part 2 of this article — that Fuller contends (p56):
The Church must resist rules being imposed on her by the State in the name of “peace and safety”... (lockdown restrictions, masks, virus testing, vaccinations) since adherence is aiding and abetting deceptive lies, is a dangerous misapplication of Romans 13 and granting authority that belongs to the Living God only; thereby partaking in State idolatry.
The New Testament Greek words translated “submit” and “obey”
Fuller discusses Romans 13 at some length. And in the context of a consideration of Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 (p56-60) he draws attention to two similar Greek words — hupotassó and hupakouó — used by the writers of the original New Testament documents:
He comments:
…what if our authorities and governments are not acting as ministers of God for our good, but are acting for evil instead? Are we always to obey them? It is interesting that Paul uses the Greek word “hupotassó”, meaning ‘to subject’ or ‘be subject to’, in Romans 13:1. There’s another word, “hupakouó”, which literally means ‘to obey a command’ or ‘to conform’. Peter and Paul could have used this stronger, more black-and-white word, ‘obey’, but they chose not to. Hupakouó is used 21 times in the New Testament and always denotes a hierarchical context, as in the relationship between children and or slaves and their parents or masters (Ephesians 6:1 and 6:5).
He gives other examples of hupotassó (limited subjection), including (emphasis added):
Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. (Ephesians 5:21)
Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. (Colossians 3:18)
In the same way, you who are younger, submit yourselves to your elders. All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, “God opposes the proud but shows favour to the humble. (1 Peter 5:5)
And examples of hupakouó (unconditional obedience to a command), including:
[In the context of Jesus calming a storm] They were terrified and asked each other, ‘Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!’ (Mark 4:41)
Take special note of anyone who does not obey our instruction in this letter. Do not associate with them, in order that they may feel ashamed. (2 Thessalonians 3:14)
By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. (Hebrews 11:8)
And he concludes:
We can see then, from the New Testament Greek, that to submit does not always mean to obey. They are two separate actions or postures. Thus, Romans 13 does not prescribe unlimited obedience to the authorities. In fact, it’s a great and clear statement on the limits set on civil government, which is not at liberty to make up its own power structures, void of God.
Resistance to tyranny
Much later in Romans 13 and Covid 19 (p215-217), Fuller discusses various other Bible passages — including Psalm 2, Proverbs 24:10-12, Judges 2:10-16 and Hebrews 11 — and makes the case that:
We are the best of citizens when we obey authorities — and when we do so willingly and joyfully and because our consciences are clear before God and governments. Equally, we are the best citizens when we disobey authorities because the laws are so woefully evil that prayerfully, humbly and reverently we make a bold statement for Christ by our civil disobedience. We are being salt and light in the world to preserve and illuminate, we are calling leaders to recalibrate and reassess their judgements and repent in line with God’s Word. Resistance to tyranny is not the same as resistance to the established civil order — there is a clear distinction between the two.
And:
This is not a radical position we’re taking here; it’s rational, Biblical and in-context. The same Apostle Paul who wrote Romans 13 would have been a hypocrite if he meant that we are to obey our governments in all things, since he disobeyed and ignored various laws which caused him to be punished, imprisoned, persecuted and beheaded. [cf. e.g. Acts 22:22-29, 2 Corinthians 11:16-33]
He challenges believers (p212):
My question to you, and one which every Christian must consider, is this: At what point are we going to resist tyranny? What is it going to take for our Churches to say, “No, we are not submitting to this?” Or will we submit to anything and everything that our secular governments impose on us — clinging onto a misapplication of Romans 13:1 for dear life as a justification for flabby faith, wilful deception facilitated by our television screens, and cowardice?
And adds:
I have presented enough clear and unequivocal evidence [earlier in the book] to show that partaking in the tyrannical covid rules cannot be justified under the pretences of “loving your neighbour”, or “we just want to focus on Jesus” [or presumably “we just want to focus on preaching the gospel”]. They are more about appearing to love your neighbour by condoning and going along with spurious mandates: merely tokenism, groupthink and virtue signalling. “The Lord says: ‘These people come near to me with their mouth and honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is based on merely human rules they have been taught’” (Isaiah 29:13).
Why can we not put the covid era behind us and move on?
You may well be wondering why, in 2024, I am writing so extensively about events that happened several years ago. I appreciate that some might ask, perhaps for any of various reasons, “Why can we not put the covid era behind us and move on?”
But for many people, “putting the covid era behind us and moving on” is something that is rather easier said than done. Not least for those whose relatives died behind closed doors in the context of dubious healthcare protocols. And those who lost loved ones who died as a result of taking a so-called safe and effective covid vaccine. And those who suffered the consequences of a life-changing vaccine injury. And those who were deeply affected by the consequences of lockdowns. For them at least, this sort of sentiment is surely understandable:
There is thus a strong case to be made that those responsible for pushing draconian covid policies, however well-intentioned they were, need to be held accountable.
But perhaps the main reason why we should not “put the covid era behind us and move on” is that those who profited (in many cases literally) from covid are already preparing the ground for even more draconian policies in the future.
The World Health Organisation pandemic proposals
The authorities, having learned from what happened during the covid era, are making no secret of the fact that they are preparing in earnest for “the next pandemic”:
In summary, the World Health Organisation (WHO) is currently developing two international legal instruments intended to increase significantly its authority in managing public health emergencies, including pandemics:
Amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (the IHR amendments)
A pandemic treaty (the WHO Pandemic Agreement)
If passed in May 2024, the change would mean the WHO could enforce border closures, quarantine measures, and vaccine passports on all member countries, including the UK. It would do this in response to the threat of a pandemic, or the emergence of one, or some other public health crisis which the WHO would identify and define.
You may recall headlines such as these re the WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus in 2020:
This recent letter, challenging Dr Ghebreyesus after he appeared “repeatedly to have misdirected or misled the press and the public” is worth reading:
If the WHO proposals are approved, it is this same Dr Ghebreyesus who would be in charge of the response to any future “pandemic”. And the bar for declaring a pandemic is not high. The definition was changed in 2009 (see e.g. p25-26 here).
(NB according to Wikipedia, Dr Ghebreyesus — or “Dr Tedros” — is not a medical doctor as such, but has a PhD in community health from the University of Nottingham awarded in 2000 for research on the effects of dams on malaria transmission in the Tigray region of Ethiopia.)
There has been some pushback in the UK, e.g. in Parliament, and in at least one national newspaper. But both of those links are now a year or so old, and the May 2024 deadline is almost upon us.
Elsewhere, the largest protest of which I am aware happened in Japan this week:
But relatively few people are aware of what is going on and what is at stake. And if the current WHO proposals fail, or are watered down, it would be surprising if other approaches were not tried to achieve something similar. Consider, for example, this recent US government document.
And, lest we forget, in 2020 the draconian covid policies were implemented without such a treaty. So maintaining the status quo is hardly desirable either.
Moreover, the very notion that pandemics are dangerous to modern societies is based on a lie.
Updates
[To skip this section and go to the final part of the post, click here]
Here is a link to a podcast with Prof Carl Heneghan and Dr Tom Jefferson of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine discussing some of the issues:
The “largest global protest against WHO” is planned for later this month in Japan:
And in Europe a “Road to Geneva” convoy is planned:
It appears that the UK government is set to deny Parliament a vote on the WHO Pandemic Treaty:
Summaries of recent developments can be found here:
And here:
And here in this segment re “The Road to Geneva” convoy (shorter 4-minute version here):
[June 2024: Following the pushback, it appears that the WHO pandemic treaty has been shelved (at least for now), and the proposed IHR amendments watered down]
[August 2024: A concise summary of the issues can be found here:]
Some broader context re the WHO
Here is some broader context from Dr David Bell, a former WHO senior medical officer:
…the WHO is not an organisation that is trying to take over the world… it’s being used by people who want to do that for their own benefit…
NB while Bill Gates’ involvement in the WHO is substantial, the largest funder of the WHO is actually Germany:
Which is not so surprising given that the so-called “Pfizer vaccine” is in fact owned by the German company BioNTech which earns far more from global sales of the vaccine than Pfizer:
And that it was T-Systems, a subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom, that the WHO chose as an “industry partner” to “make it easier for its member states to introduce digital vaccination certificates in the future”. (Deutsche Telekom is not merely “German-based”, but partly owned by the German government.)
And that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the main partner in the German-Chinese virology network:
Further discussion re the WHO can be found here:
And this two-part article, from a medical whistleblower writing under a pseudonym, offers some further insights into what might actually be going on:
In part 2 of this article, I will discuss some aspects of the broader historical context.
When I chose the title “God over Government?” for this article, I was reminded of the 4-minute video below. The context is the covid tyranny of 2021 from an American perspective. I have included the YouTube link here not least for the lyrics — featured in the video — and for more of the images of the unprecedented protests around the world that the mainstream media chose largely to ignore. While I do not necessarily agree with every sentiment expressed, I can certainly identify with:
“And we just don't understand, how they put their faith in man…”
“…so parents please protect your sons and daughters”
Dear Church Leaders Archive; some posts can also be found on Unexpected Turns
The Big Reveal — Christianity carefully considered