Monday, December 24, 2012

Emmanuel, God Is With Us

Here is a video I made afew years ago of the Casting Crown's song Emmanuel, God Is With Us.

Saturday, December 22, 2012

I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day

My heart has been so heavy these last few days. I did not really know how to grieve children and adults I had never met. This is a video that I made as a tribute to the victims of Sandy Hook Elementary. Feel free to share this.  I pray it gives healing to others, but most of all I pray it leads others to pray for the families of the victims.
 

Written by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, and music by Casting Crowns, I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day is not a Christmas Carol.  It is a song of grief and loss.  Longfellow's son fought and died in the Civil War shortly before he was to come home.  Longfellow had hoped to repair the rift that had come between them by his enlistment in the Union army. His wife then died in an accidental fire. The double loss was too much for him, and about to end it all, he heard the bells on Christmas day took up his pen instead.
   
Then pealed the bells more loud and deep
God is not dead nor does He sleep
The wrong shall fail, the right prevail
With peace on Earth, good will to men.


 

Wednesday, November 14, 2012

The Biblical Basis for Civil Disobedience


Ken wrote a paper for one of his seminary classes this summer and I thought the topic was very appropriate to the current situation in our country.  This paper is entitled:
The Biblical Basis for Civil Disobedience
The practice of civil disobedience is morally acceptable, and even prescribed in the Bible, when religious liberties are under attack by an oppressive government. The Scriptures have much to say about the practice of civil disobedience, its justification, limits, and practice. The recent law passed in our nation regarding the requirements for the provision, or payment for the provision, of abortifacient medical treatments by faith-based organizations has created a firestorm of indignation over the diminution of religious freedoms, with many religious leaders urging open defiance of the new law.  This paper will explore the biblical teaching on civil disobedience using relevant biblical texts as well as scholarly sources from within Christian thought. Examples of proper biblical civil disobedience will be examined from both the Old and New Testaments, with particular attention paid to the God-ordained role of earthly governments.

 

The Meaning of Civil Disobedience

If disobedience in general is the failure to follow a command or observe a prohibition, then civil disobedience is the same failure with regard to the law as codified by the state.[1]  Civil disobedience, however, is not to be equated with lawlessness, or mere refusal to submit to legal jurisdiction.  On the contrary, the practitioner of civil disobedience voluntarily submits himself to the proper punishment accorded his acts as a show of fidelity to the rule of law. In civil disobedience the resistance is not against the rule of law, but rather against laws in particular, laws that are deemed unjust.  Thomas Aquinas argued in his Summa Theologiae that all law is derived from eternal law.  He believed that unjust laws are not laws at all because they were not rooted in eternal law and natural law, writing “in temporal law nothing is just and legitimate which men have not derived from eternal law.” [2] William Blackstone, a renowned eighteenth-century English jurist, wrote “The law of nature is dictated by God himself…is binding in all countries and at all times…No human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force and all their authority mediately or immediately, from this original.” [3]

The purpose of civil disobedience is to achieve justness in law. The Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary defines it as “refusal to obey governmental demands or commands especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing concessions from the government.” [4] According to Duane Heffelbower, for a Christian, civil disobedience is the “purposeful, nonviolent action, or refusal to act, by a Christian who believes such action or inaction is required of him or her in order to be faithful to God, and which he or she knows will be treated by the governing authorities as a violation of law.” [5] 

Martin Luther King, Jr. recounted the origins of civil disobedience as dating back to Old Testament times – to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who disobeyed the law of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar for the sake of their conscience. He wrote of Martin Luther, his namesake, who declared to the authorities “Here I stand; I can do no other.  God help me.”

He also wrote of John Bunyan, who suffered lengthy imprisonment for his beliefs vowing “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience.” [6] And King spent time in jail himself for his beliefs, using the occasion to pen a letter to area pastors appealing to their consciences for support in his quest for racial justice.[7]

As successful as King’s crusade would later prove to be, the principle upon which it was founded was just as important, for this principal of eternal law was the basis upon which our United States government was founded. Decades after its founding, the greatest moral struggle of its history – the campaign to end slavery – turned on this same principle.[8] 

 

The Role of Government as Ordained by God

As Christians we walk among two kingdoms, possessing full citizenship in both.  We are, of course, citizens of a nation-state here on earth that is governed by some form of civil government; and whether that government is free or not is immaterial.  We are also by adoption through the blood of Christ citizens of the eternal Kingdom of God.  As Christians we have the hope and assurance that in time we will be subject to the Kingdom of God alone, but while on earth we cannot deny our earthly citizenship and the responsibilities that come with that citizenship.  Along with enjoying the rights and privileges of such a membership, we also must live up to the responsibilities and obligations that both demand. As dual citizens of two very different realms of governance, it would seem apparent that at times one will be at odds with the other. In those moments we are faced with the question of whether or not it is proper to hold one kingdom in deference to another with regard to the obedience of the laws which prevail and at times contradict each other. Both the Old and the New Testaments have made it very clear that God has ordained civil government for the proper order and justice of the human race. As soon as sin made its appearance on earth, restraint of evil became necessary.  The Bible records the first “crime” against another human being in Genesis 4, wherein Cain murders his brother Abel, bringing upon himself the penalty of death, his life for Abel’s.  However, it is not until Genesis 9:6 that the actual establishment of the means and institution for carrying out such justice is given to Noah, and henceforth, the institution of civil government.  The power to wield the sword in meting out justice and providing for the protection and civil order of all citizens was from this point on placed in the hands of government representatives, where the actual form of government was not a determining factor, but was deemed as the ruling authority over its citizenry.

When the question of submission to civil authority was put forth to Jesus by Jewish religious leaders in an attempt to trap Him into saying something seditious against the government regarding the paying of taxes, He responded with the words “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” [9]  When Jesus was arrested and asked by the Roman governor Pilate to give an account for His words and deeds, Jesus answered “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not of the world.” [10]

Ryrie posits that a failure to distinguish the civil government from the religious hierarchy of the day caused many to actually see Jesus as an example of civil disobedience, but a more studied approach to this pericope makes it quite evident that Jesus had no aspirations of making civil change, only spiritual revolution.[11]

In the New Testament, the apostles spoke extensively on the importance of obeying the civil rulers, as they have been placed in their positions by God’s sovereignty and His will.  Romans 13 opens with “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” [12] Paul warns that whoever fails to obey government is in effect resisting God. Here again, there is no mention of obedience based on the form or quality of the governing system.  Even after years of persecution, including beatings and imprisonment for preaching Christ, Paul did not waver in his convictions on this matter. In a letter to Titus, he instructs him to remind Christians to “be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work…” [13]

The apostle Peter was not quiet on this topic either. In I Peter, he wrote “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.” [14]

Both Peter and Paul wrote their teachings while living under the despotic rule of the Roman Emperor Nero, who delighted in persecuting Christians and defiling all that is right and good in society.  Nevertheless, these servants of Christ never relented in their firm convictions on the necessity of submitting to the ruling authorities.  Paul even reminded us that “supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in

every way.” [15] In summary, the entire Bible is consistent in teaching complete civil obedience to government by Christians with no exceptions in principle.[16]

 

Prevailing Views on What the Bible Says Regarding Civil Disobedience

            There are three basic views on the interpretation of the Scriptures with regard to the issue of civil disobedience for the Christian church.  One stance is similar to the radical patriotism associated with the issue of war. The government, being ordained and established by God, must be obeyed in all instances and in all ways.  To the radical patriot it is never acceptable to wage resistance against a government de facto, even one that governs unjustly and brutally.  Their example to be followed is that of Peter, Paul, and the other disciples, especially those martyred for their faith.  As Nero was burning Christians to light the streets at night, those same Christians were being admonished not to resist, even unto the point of death.[17]

            Contemporary notable proponents of this view are scarce in number.  Few influential theologians and leaders within the Christian church continue to hold to this view within evangelical circles, and that is especially so within the United States.  The situation in America is unique in that it is born of a cultural inclination towards freedom, democracy, and self-determination.  The individualism and sense of self-governance characteristic of American culture dominates thinking in this area, as witnessed by the appeal to higher law in justifying forceful liberation of peoples around the world through military and coercive diplomatic actions on the part of our government.

            A second view of biblical interpretations of civil disobedience, albeit one this writer considers irrational and self-destructive, is the idea that government must be resisted in all instances wherein one’s rights and conscience are threatened.  This view espouses the disobedience and resistance of any law or action of the government that does not square with one’s Christian beliefs. This view borders on revolution, as it reserves the right to outright reject the authority of the government. Some believe Henry David Thoreau’s essay, “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience,” professed the belief that he was for a complete refutation of the authority of government.  Thoreau wanted government to “treat him as a neighbor” and to see the individual person as a “higher and independent power.”[18] Secular philosopher and author Carl Cohen writes that “Thoreau’s act may have been noble but in seeking to place himself above the law, or outside its jurisdiction, he acted as a rebel and strictly did not engage in civil disobedience.” [19]

            The third view, dubbed Biblical Submissionism in Christian Ethics, by Norman Geisler, argues that disobedience to governmental authorities is permitted, and even obligatory, given certain conditions and motives. As Frank Stagg describes it, Paul instructed all believers to willfully and obediently submit to governmental authorities and to do so out of conscience.  That same conscience, in a different scenario, compelled John the Revelator to refuse submission to the state and to disengage from the civil religion which gave its stamp of imprimatur to the beastliness of the state. Under Nazi totalitarianism, Niemöller, Barth, and Bonhoeffer had to make the same calls.[20]

 

Examples of Acceptable and Required Civil Disobedience in the Bible

            In Scripture, as early as Exodus, the Bible illustrates an example involving the refusal to kill male babies of the Israelites by the Hebrew midwives Shiphrah and Puah as ordered by Pharaoh.  The midwives were said to have “feared God and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live.” [21]

            After the exodus of the Israelites, and their subsequent wanderings in the wilderness, they arrived at the point of entering the Promised Land and readied an attack on the fortress city of Jericho. The Israelite spies in Jericho found a harlot named Rahab to take them in and hid them from the king of Jericho, a clearly treasonous act on her part. Joshua 2 records that she feared the Hebrew God more than the king, and chose to act on that authority above her own civil government.[22]

            In Daniel 3 the story is told of the three young Israelite captives who would not bow to Nebuchadnezzar’s golden image, resulting in being thrown into a fiery furnace for their disobedience.[23] God delivered them as a testimony of His saving power and approval of their actions in obedience to Him.

            In the New Testament, Acts 4 recounts the arrest of Peter and John for preaching the gospel in Jerusalem.  The religious leaders, though they did not represent civil government, had the power to arrest and prosecute Peter and John.  They demanded that the men cease and desist at once this seditious teaching and submit their authority.  Peter and John replied “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.” [24]

            Also in the Bible, in reference to the end times to come, Revelation records in John’s vision the scene where believers will refuse to worship the antichrist at the pain of death. The 12th chapter of Revelation foretells that they “conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death.” [25]

 

Criteria for the Biblical Practice of Civil Disobedience

Theologian Norman Geisler qualifies civil disobedience as being acceptable and incumbent upon a believer only when the government usurps God’s authority. Geisler lists a set of circumstances for qualified civil disobedience against the government that includes seven points:

1.      When it does not allow worship of God.

2.      When it commands believers to kill innocent lives.

3.      When it commands that God’s servants be killed.

4.      When it commands believers to worship idols.

5.      When it commands believers to pray only to a man.

6.      When it forbids believers to propagate the gospel.

7.      When it commands believers to worship a man.

 

Geisler sees a commonality in these seven circumstances: They all involve government taking the place of God versus taking its place under God.  Governments can enact laws permitting evil, but cannot command citizens to commit that evil.  While it is acceptable to engage in civil disobedience under the above criteria, it is not acceptable to do so simply in response to injustice.  The Bible gives us no sanction for acquitting ourselves of the responsibilities as earthly citizens.[26]

            Additionally, it is helpful to delineate between laws that sanction injustice and/or evil, and laws that mandate injustice and/or evil. It is one thing to be subject to the allowance of these things, but the compulsion to submit to them must be resisted. Geisler is careful to word his criteria in such a way as to avoid the tacit approval of civil disobedience for the former.

            The passage in the beginning of Exodus 5 provides an excellent example of the first criterion; not allowing one to worship God.   In this pericope, Pharaoh forbids the Israelites from going into the wilderness for a time of special worship of God. It is important to note here who the combatants in this confrontation were.  Rather than viewing this as a personal and political conflict between Moses and Pharaoh, it should be seen as a clash between the God of the Israelites and Egypt’s gods.  As Pharaoh, the Egyptian leader was considered a god himself, and thus part of the Egyptian pantheon.[27]

Pharaoh’s reply to Moses was: But Pharaoh said, “Who is the Lord, that I should obey his voice and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord, and moreover, I will not let Israel go.” [28] Pharaoh’s determination and rash response was indicative of this spiritual conflict.  As a consequence of Moses’ persistence, Pharaoh increases the workload of the Israelites and demands that they make the bricks for his building projects without the benefit of straw.

            In the above example involving the Egyptian midwives in Exodus, a clear command was given to kill innocent lives by the “king of Egypt.”  This was a violation of the second criterion, and rightfully should have been disobeyed.  This conviction is further affirmed in verse 21, wherein it states that because they feared God, He gave them families as well.

            The midwives had a sense of who God was, and they feared Him sufficiently to risk the consequences of disobeying the king’s order to kill the male children born of the Hebrew women. They were not, it seems by verse 19, highly religious, however.  They had no problem lying to and deceiving the king as well.[29]

            In 1 Kings 18, an example of the third criterion can be found.  Obadiah, a servant of King Ahab, and a God-fearing man, upon learning of the killing of God’s prophets by the queen Jezebel, took and his 100 prophets in and hid them in caves.  He provided for their food and water as well, in order to spare their lives from certain annihilation. It is apparent in verse 4 that Jezebel was determined to exterminate the worship of Jehovah, and sought to carry out this plan by executing the prophets of the true God.

As a Jew, it is interesting that King Ahab, who by now worshiped foreign gods, would keep an adherent to the old religion in his court.  It was for Obadiah’s faith, a faith that assured Ahab of his faithfulness and trustworthiness that he was allowed to continue to administer for the king.  This trust was built on many years of faithful obedience and observance of the prevailing government.  Without this earned credibility and favor of the king it is highly doubtful that Obadiah would have been in such a place to save the prophets.[30]

The first commandment given to Moses and God’s people on Mount Sinai was that “You shall have no other gods before me.” [31] It is made very clear that we are not to worship any God but Jehovah.  Herein lies the basis for the fourth criterion; a command to worship idols.  In the third chapter of Daniel three young Hebrew men, captives in Babylon since the conquest of their homeland by Nebuchadnezzar, defied an order by the king to bow in deference and worship before a huge golden image. It is not clear if this image was of the king himself, or one of their gods. Also, they were not explicitly asked to deny their God, only to bow before the king’s image. Nevertheless, the purpose became clear once the herald made the proclamation that anyone who did not bow would immediately be cast in to a fiery furnace. Bowing before the image was a display of total allegiance to the king, and that they could not in good conscience do.[32]

 Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, privileged as they were among the remnant of Israel, would not submit to this decree.  However, they did willingly submit to, without trying to flee, the punishment set for them.  Death was better than betraying their God. When given one more chance to comply they bravely stood their ground, placing all confidence in the one true God, whether or not He chose to rescue them.  Their story could have ended there, but God chose to spare them for His glory.

This fifth criterion empowering a believer to operate in civil disobedience is when one is commanded to pray only to a man. In a conspiracy to destroy Daniel and his influence with King Darius, certain government officials advised the king to sign a decree disallowing anyone to make an appeal to any god but Him for thirty days.  It was seen as a sign of adoration to the king and the officials appealed to his own pride and arrogance in making this proposal.

            But Daniel did not alter his prayer practices, and continued to call out to God from his upper chambers with the windows thrown open. The conspirators, of course, knew this would be the case and caught him in the act. Though it pained the king greatly, the punishment of being thrown into a den of lions was carried out.  Here again, it could have ended there, with a martyred Daniel remaining faithful to God.  Once again, though, God saved him for His own glory, and Daniel’s enemies, along with their entire families, perished in their own trap.  Darius then issued an official statement praising Daniel’s God as the sovereign Lord of the universe, who miraculously delivers His servants.[33]

            In Acts 4, Peter and John are hauled before the Sadducees by the “temple police” and forbidden to preach the gospel of Jesus and His resurrection from the dead.  When a court was gathered to try them for their religious crimes, they replied with a forceful testimony of the gospel that astonished the learned group, as they knew that these men were not educated and had no experience addressing such an august audience.  Furthermore, once they had testified of Christ, they responded to the command to cease preaching by saying “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.” [34]

            This example in Scripture of the sixth criterion for biblical civil disobedience is perhaps the most quoted justification for resistance to government authority in the Bible today; albeit the officials persecuting Peter and John were not government representatives per se, but rather enforcers of a highly legalistic form of Judaism. The Sanhedrin were attempting to prevent the apostles from propagating the gospel by forbidding any speech regarding the resurrection of Jesus, the resurrection being a belief not held by the Sadducees in general, and specifically with regard to Jesus.  In Peter and John’s reply to this sham of a court, they boldly make their appeal to the highest authority, one that governs both the members of the Sanhedrin as well as the apostles. They appeal to God, challenging the court to examine its verdict to see whether it conforms to God’s law. [35]

            Lastly, the seventh criterion, when a believer is compelled to worship a man, can be seen in Revelation 13.  In verses 7 and 8, the Antichrist is pictured as one who seeks to imitate Christ, who purchased his people from every tribe, language, people, and nation.  This person will receive the adulation of all the people on the earth, except the saints. John clearly divides humanity into those who worship the beast and those whose names are recorded in the book of life. [36]

            Those whose names have been recorded in the Lamb’s Book of Life will resist this Antichrist, will be persecuted severely, and many will die defending their faith.  However, they will win in the end, having been faithful even unto death.

 

Conclusion

            Following the above guidelines of Geisler, it is interesting to examine past events in our own history to determine whether or not these criteria were met. Would the American Revolution or the lunch counter sit-ins of the Civil Rights Movement pass muster? Would the Civil War, insofar as it was fueled by the anti-slavery struggle, be justified by these stringent qualifiers?

Throughout history civil disobedience has been practiced in some form or another.  For the Christian, it is of utmost importance to be able to discern righteous and justifiable civil disobedience from that which the Word of God labels as no more than rebellion and a bad witness to the world.  Though Scripture lays out clear criteria for practicing civil disobedience in keeping with our Christian mandate to obey the governing authorities as servants of God, it is this author’s opinion that the majority of acts labeled civil disobedience down through history did not meet those qualifications. A careful analysis of Scripture reveals a much higher bar than has historically been accepted among believers.

            It is incumbent upon us as disciples of Christ, and charged with the spread of the gospel, to act in obedience and humility before our earthly leaders, so that our witness will not be compromised.  This discernment will be especially important as we see the signs of the times approaching, and the reign once again of injustice and governmental challenges to the authority of God and his eternal law.


 

Bibliography

Blackstone, William. Commentaries on the Laws of England, vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

 

Chisholm, Robert B. "The Major Prophets", in Holman Concise Bible Commentary: Simple, Straightforward Commentary on Every Book of the Bible, ed. David S. Dockery. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1998.

 

Cohen, Carl. “Civil Disobedience and the Law.” Rutgers Law Review 21, no. 1 (Fall 1966).

 

Colson, Charles. How Now Shall We Live? Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1999.

Davis, Nancy J. “Rejoinder to Hunter: Religious Orthodoxy – An Army without Foot Soldiers?” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 35 (Fall 1996): 249-251.

Ferguson, Everett. "Early Christian Martyrdom and Civil Disobedience." Journal of Early Christian Studies 1 (Spring 1993): 73-83.

Franklin, Robert Michael. “An Ethic of Hope: The Moral Thought of Martin Luther King, Jr.” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 40 no. 4 (Fall 1986): 41-51.

Gamble, Richard C. “The Christian and the Tyrant: Beza and Knox on Political Resistance Theory.” Westminster Theological Journal 46, no. 1 (Spring 1984): 125-139.

Geisler, Norman L. “A Premillennial View of Law and Government.” Bibliotheca Sacra 142, no. 567 (September 1985): 250-266.

Halsall, Paul. “Internet History Sourcebooks Project.” Fordham University.

            www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/aquinas2.asp (accessed  May 9, 2012).

 

Heffelbower, Duane. “The Christian and Civil Disobedience.” Direction 15, no. 1 (Spring 1986): 23-30.

Keil, Carl Friedrich and Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, 1 Ki 18:1–19 Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002.

 

King, Martin Luther, Jr., Letter from a Birmingham Jail, University of Pennsylvania African Studies Center, http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html.

King, Martin Luther, Jr. Why We Can’t Wait. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

 

Kistemaker, Simon J. and William Hendriksen, vol. 17, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-2001.

 

Lederach, Paul M. Daniel, Believers Church Bible Commentary, Scottsdale, PA.: Herald Press, 1994.

 

Lovin, Robin W. “The Christian and the Authority of the State: Bonhoeffer’s Reluctant Revisions.” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 34 (March 1981): 32-48.

Merriam-Webster, Inc., Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. 11th ed. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003.

 

Ryrie, Charles C. “The Christian and Civil Disobedience.” Bibliotheca Sacra 127, no. 5 (April 1970): 153-162.

Spence-Jones, H.D.M., ed. The Pulpit Commentary: Exodus Vol. I Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2004.

 

Stagg, Frank. “Rendering to God What Belongs to God: Christian Disengagement from the World.” Journal of Church and State 18, no. 1 (January 1976): 217-232.

Stuart, Douglas K. Vol. 2, Exodus. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2006.

 

Thoreau, Henry David. On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, in Walden and Other Writings of Henry David Thoreau, Edited by Brooks Atkinson. New York: Random House, 1992).

 

Vos, Johannes G. “Christian Missions and the Civil Magistrate in the Far East.” Westminster Theological Journal 3, no. 1 (November 1940): 1-24.

Yoder, William. “Do “Iron Curtains” Happen More than Once?” Religion in Eastern Europe XXXI, no. 4 (November 2011): 24-31.

 



[1] Charles C. Ryrie, “The Christian and Civil Disobedience,” Bibliotheca Sacra 127, no. 5 (April 1970): 153.
[2] Paul Halsall, “Internet History Sourcebooks Project,” Fordham University, www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/aquinas2.asp (accessed  May 9, 2012).
[3] William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, vol. 1 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 41.
[4] Merriam-Webster, Inc., Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary., 11th ed. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).
[5] Duane Heffelbower, “The Christian and Civil Disobedience.” Direction 15, no. 1 (Spring 1986): 23.
 
[6] Martin Luther King, Jr., Why We Can’t Wait (New York: Harper & Row, 1964), 84-85.
[7] Martin Luther King, Jr., Letter from a Birmingham Jail, University of Pennsylvania African Studies Center, http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html (accesses May 10, 2012).
[8] Charles Colson, How Now Shall We Live? (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1999), 383-384.
[9] Mark 12:17 (ESV).
[10] John 18:36 (ESV).
[11] Charles C. Ryrie, “The Christian and Civil Disobedience,” Bibliotheca Sacra 127, no. 5 (April 1970): 159.
[12] Romans 13:1 (ESV).
[13] Titus 3:1 (ESV).
[14] 1 Peter 2:1317 (ESV).
[15] 1 Timothy 2:1-2 (ESV).
[16] Charles C. Ryrie, “The Christian and Civil Disobedience,” Bibliotheca Sacra 127, no. 5 (April 1970): 158.
[17] Ryrie, 159.
 
[18] Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience, in Walden and Other Writings of Henry David Thoreau, ed. Brooks Atkinson (New York: Random House, 1992), 665.
[19] Carl Cohen, “Civil Disobedience and the Law,” Rutgers Law Review 21, no. 1 (Fall 1966): 4.
[20] Frank Stagg, “Rendering to God What Belongs to God: Christian Disengagement from the World,” Journal of Church and State 18, no. 1 (1976): 222.
[21] Exodus 1:15-21 (ESV).
[22] Joshua 2:1-21 (ESV).
[23] Daniel 3 (ESV).
[24] Acts 4:1-20 (ESV).
[25] Revelation 12:11 (ESV).
[26] Norman L. Geisler, “A Premillennial View of Law and Government,” Bibliotheca Sacra 142, no. 567 (1985): 262.
[27] Stuart, Douglas K. Vol. 2, Exodus. The New American Commentary, (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2006), 164.
[28] Exodus 5:2 (ESV)
[29] The Pulpit Commentary: Exodus Vol. I, ed. H. D. M. Spence-Jones, (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2004), 17.
[30] Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, 1 Ki 18:1–19 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002).
[31] Exodus 20: 3 (ESV)
[32] Paul M. Lederach, Daniel, Believers Church Bible Commentary, (Scottsdale, PA.: Herald Press, 1994) 80-81.
 
[33] Robert B. Chisholm, "The Major Prophets", in Holman Concise Bible Commentary: Simple, Straightforward Commentary on Every Book of the Bible, ed. David S. Dockery, (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1998), 336.
[34] Acts 4: 19-20 (ESV).
[35] Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, vol. 17, New Testament Commentary : Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Commentary, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-2001), 161.
[36] Ibid, 384.