Some conservatives—for example, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, a professing evangelical—are suggesting that people not fill out the Census coming in the mail, or at least not to answer certain questions (e.g., on your race). Others are suggesting that some answers be falsified (e.g., checking “Native American” because you were born in America).
The reason is that the government will use racial information for purposes of reapportioning congressional seats as a result (which is true).
But even if you don’t like how this information will be used, Christians in particular should remember that it’s a violation of federal law to leave answers blank or to provide false answers. Even if you think the law is crummy, it does not require you to break any Scriptural laws, and therefore it would be a violation of Scripture to break this law.
On the law, attorney Hans A. von Spakovsky reminds us:
In Article I, Section 2, the Constitution says that an “Enumeration” must be conducted every ten years “in such Manner as [Congress] shall by Law direct.” Congress has directed through a federal law that anyone who “refuses or willfully neglects…to answer, to the best of his knowledge, any of the questions” on the Census form can be fined $100 (18 U.S.C. § 221). If you deliberately give a false answer, you can be fined up to $500.
It sounds as if you could actually be fined $5,000 if you refuse or deliberately falsify all the questions.
Upshot:
Everyone should realize that if you don’t complete a Census form, you are violating federal law. The chances of actual prosecution may be remote, but it could happen. The only real answer to this problem is for Congress to prohibit the Census Bureau from collecting such information and to make all government programs (and the reapportionment process) explicitly race-neutral.
Sorry, I will not answer the census! Team Obama is using it for political reasons.
And God (whose ways are above our ways) has put Team Obama in authority for now. I’m no fan of Obama, either, but by resisting the authorities God has put in place, we resist God. See Romans 13. Consider also Jesus’ instruction to “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s.” It goes beyond mere taxes.
As JT pointed out, the census doesn’t violate any of God’s commands in Scripture, but refusing to fill it out does violate God’s command to respect earthly authorities.
“GOD has put Team Obama in authority for now”???? What kind of idiot are you???? Your kind of people were probably saying the same thing about Hitler in Germany leading upto and including WWII. GOD had allowed Hitler to have authority then as he is allowing Obama to have authority now. We still have a choice on whether we agree with the administration of Obama’s policies or not and to voice our opinions especially when we know in our hearts those policies are morally wrong. We have a moral obligation to dissent. For example, Obama is pro-abortion, as in the killing of unborn babies for whatever reason. Do you believe GOD wants us to sit on our hands and do nothing because “Obama’s in charge”??? You make me sick!!!
For the rest of you sensible people, I know my example is extreme and it is in no way a comparasion between the two people themselves. I used the example to illustrate my point of blind followship.
As for the census, I am planning to follow the Constitution and list the number of occupants in my home. I will be marking my race as “OTHER” and filling in “AMERICAN” because I am an American and it shouldn’t make a damn bit of difference whether I am White, Black, American Indian, Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Native Hawaiian, Guamanian, Samoan, or other Asian or Pacific Islander.
And incredible comment.
“An”
As I understand it, administrations do not have direct access to census data. It is a violation of federal law for the data to be used by anyone but the US Census Office. The collated data gets distributed to various agencies and such, but no one but the Census folks get the raw data.
Of course the administration has access to census data. Since when has the government been concerned with obeying federal law? Our government used census data to place ‘Japanese-Americans’ in internment camps during WWII.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-03-30-census-role_N.htm
Most government programs in place today violate federal law and are unconstitutional: The FDA, TSA, the Department of Education, social/welfare programs, to name just a few.
Now don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-government. God designed government to function in a certain way, mainly to restrain the effects of sin. When governments overstep the boundaries laid by God and go against their design, especially when they deify themselves and arrogantly claim to be the solution to sin, God will not be mocked and they will be cut down. Look at every empire in world history – they all collapse because they begin to violate God’s design.
God designed the church to perform many of the functions which our government has decided to perform instead: mercy, caring for widows & orphans & the poor, education, discipleship, and many more. The government will fail because this is not what it was designed to do.
Let us (the church) continue doing the work that God designed for us to do. Let us guard ourselves from taking false comfort in thinking that the call for us to love our neighbors is already fulfilled by some government program.
Who are you kidding? Of course they have the information. The Bible DOES NOT INSTRUCT us to take leave of our senses. Indeed, it teaches us NOT to follow blindly. I applaud Marks’ comments.
Bro, Team Obama is required to do it by law, just as any other president would be during this year. You conspiratorialists see a bogeyman around every corner.
The Census gives picture of America that helps the government determine where new infrastructure is required- like the roads you drive on everyday.
Get a clue.
In this situation, isn’t it such that a Christian would have to show that they are requiring us do what is forbidden in Scripture or they are forbidding us to perform that which Scripture commands?
Or one could argue that those wielding the sword are an illegitimate authority–they (Congress) are not rightly elected stewards of the republic.
Bill, be sure that you understand the Bible has more authority on your life than political parties. “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.”- Romans 13:1
Pray for those in authority and obey the law. God will have his way, trust in him, not in government.
If you lie, it will be exposed. Maybe not for 70 years, but it will become public data. Census data is a treasure trove of data for those doing genealogy research.
Even more important, if you lie, GOD WILL KNOW.
“Provide things honest in the sight of all men”
“Or one could argue that those wielding the sword are an illegitimate authority–they (Congress) are not rightly elected stewards of the republic.”
I don’t thing being “rightly elected” is a biblical standard for legitimacy of authority. Roman emperor’s weren’t elected, but Paul tells us to submit to them because God is sovereign and put them in power. Christian submission isn’t based on republican government or the rule of the people.
@Eric, fine adjustment. Rather that “rightly elected” (I was thinking only of America’s Republic) it should be broadened. Good catch.
The U.S. Congress only has the right to legislate (create and alter law) in areas where the U.S. Federal Government has been granted jurisdiction by the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution, as illustrated in one of your quotes above, only grants Congress the authority to count (“enumerate”) the citizens of these United States. Congress is granted the leeway to decide how best to go about counting citizens, but this does not grant them the authority to ask questions unrelated to the number of citizens itself.
I will gladly fulfill my lawful obligation. I’ll even tell y’all here: “5.” Beyond that (the number of citizens in residence at this property), there is no law requiring me to answer any of the questions contained in the 2010 Census forms.
A federal law that cannot find its basis in the U.S. Constitution is an unconstitutional law, and thus null and void.
“The Congress shall have Power – To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”
Yes, you can drive a truck through that clause, and yes, the anti-federalists complained. But that’s what we’re under in any case.
By law, congress regulates interstate commerce. Say, by building roads. It is “necessary and proper” to know how many roads to build by knowing how many people are driving around.
You should read that again: Congress has been granted power to make the laws they need to make to fulfill their (or other Federal agencies’) Constitutionally-appointed duties.
“interstate commerce”. Pretty broad.
Even growing pot or soybeans for your own use affects the commerce among the states. If they can’t regulate that, then they can’t regulate effectively. Thus it is “necessary”
Our constitution has a fatal flaw, I agree, but I agree that the flaw is there.
Thankfully, the Court realized that guns outside of schools and women getting slapped around weren’t really commerce.
But pot and soybeans surely are articles of commerce. And so are federal highways, etc.
wait, maybe I’m out of the loop here, but why wouldn’t I want to fill out the census? Is there something I’m not aware of about what they’re doing with my information?
Travis said: “A federal law that cannot find its basis in the U.S. Constitution is an unconstitutional law, and thus null and void.”
That word “basis” is where the wiggle room comes in, right? I see your point, but at the point of the sword, the Dept. of the Census says they have the basis to count citizens, non-citizens, and to otherwise categorize them (in a fashion that irritates me!) “based” on Article 1, Section 2.
Until you and I can show that “enumeration” is the simplest form of counting one can imagine, or until “enumeration” is limited by Congress to simple numbers in the household, I think we are stuck. Even if it may be seen by Constitutionalists like you and me as having no “basis” in the Constitution.
BTW, it was never only ‘citizens’. Its “the whole Number of free Persons” and in addition to counting slaves and Indians differently.
So the clause already assumes some kind of categorization. They’d have to ask you if you are a ‘free person’, “bound for no more than 10 years”, or an “Indian not taxed”. And now we ask a few more things, to administrate other laws, lawfully passed.
Travis,
Your response strikes me as terribly unwise in light of JT’s post. Is what JT said true? If it is, then the law requires you to fill this out. You are not the arbiter of constitutional law, are you? Your advice could get people into trouble, and possibly even fined, just because you say it is “unconstitutional” for the government to ask you questions beyond number five. Have your claims been validated by any court? Question number 6 has been asked since 1790. Any chance you can demonstrate that it has ever been ruled unconsitutional?
“You are not the arbiter of constitutional law, are you?”
The only alternative is the Nuremberg Defense.
In bringing Scriptural truths to bear on a particular matter, one needs to apply discernment. For example, in the United States of America, there is no direct correlation between the various pastors who live in your town, and the religious leaders Jesus spoke of in Matthew 23 (“who sit in Moses’ seat”). So when discerning how we are to apply the principle Jesus was communicating in this scripture, we cannot simply make an a=b presumption. Such an approach would simply lead to absurdity — especially in towns with both Roman Catholic and Primitive Baptist congregations. ;)
In the same way, we need to examine both the similarities and the differences between political governments. The United States of America is a constitutional, representative republic. Our “authority” is not a man, but a constitution. All elected and appointed representatives are granted “ruling” power and authority through that constitution, and they have that power and authority only insofar as they comport their ruling activity to those powers and authorities granted them by that constitution.
Contrast this with Paul’s audience when writing Romans 13. The chief “ruler” among them was the princeps civitatis a.k.a. Caesar (a title, not a surname) — who was literally an elected dictator. There was an expectation that these Caesars would willingly surrender their authority after a period of two years; Julius simply chose not to, and became dictator perpetuo (“dictator in perpetuity”).
However, there is a key similarity: the Caesar’s position and powers were granted to him by the Roman constitution.
To put it another way: while acting as Caesar, a man was granted the authority to make (or repeal) any law he so desired. And he was granted this power through the Constitution of the Roman Republic.
This is the authority to which Paul referred in Romans 13, and to which Jesus referred in Matthew 23. Neither scripture can properly be construed to mean anything other than “a person granted certain authority through man’s choices was ultimately granted that authority by God.”
While this does mean that Caesar had no authority to command a married woman to sleep with him, it is not because such a command would be in conflict with Scriptures commanding the opposite. Rather, it is by such clear commands in scripture that we can plainly see those limits God never intended certain authorities to cross.
The matter of these extraneous census questions is one where there are no clear Biblical commands against answering the questions, but there is also no legitimate authority on the part of the governing entity to mandate that anyone answer the questions.
In other words: the United States Census Bureau has just as much right to demand your telephone number (one of the questions on the 2010 form) as does the person working the cash register at your nearest gas station. You’re certainly free to choose to divulge that information, but they have no God-given authority to demand it.
Travis,
Your many words do not change the fact that it is within the bounds of the authority of the United States granted by the Constitution to ask you for your phone number. You are pointificating about the legality of one question that has been used since 1790. And you cannot produce one single judgement of a single appointed authority that has ever overthrown the right of the government to ask that question. Am I right?
Brad, I can state with 100% certainty that if the 1790 census required that people list their phone numbers, it was ignored by the entire populace. ;)
Point granted. I was unclear. I was speaking of question #6, but I re-read my comment and was unclear.
Can you produce a ruling of any court that has demonstrated any of these questions unconstitutional? Are you willing to take your conviction to the courts? If you lost, would you fill it out?
“Unless I can be instructed and convinced with evidence from the Holy Scriptures or with open, clear and distinct grounds and reasoning—and my conscience is captive to the Word of God—then I cannot and will not recant, because it is neither safe nor wise to act against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. So help me God.”
Beautifully put, Travis. I wholeheartedly agree with you.
Hey Justin, wouldn’t providing a false answer be lying? Even IF the government said “hey, say anything you want, and we’ll give a prize for the best fake answers” it would be lying.
Rush Limbaugh has advocated checking the “Other” category for race and filling in “American”. I don’t believe that this would be falsifying, since I am indeed an American and, especially given some of the crazy categories of race/ethnicity that I’ve heard will make its way onto this census, I would say that this is how I want to be referred to for my race. I don’t think this would violate the law of the land and thus I could do so with a clean conscience. Am I off-base on this?
There is only one race: the Human Race – the race of Adam. We are all sons and daughters of Adam. Our culture may say there are multiple races, but the Bible says there is only one. We are all descended through Noah (Gen 10:1-32). I would be lying if I said my race was ‘American’ or ‘White’ or ‘Caucasian’. I may be an American citizen with a level of melanin in my skin that causes it to appear light in color, but that does not determine my identity. The questions on the census regarding race are built upon racist preconditioning. We have been bathed in racism for so long we don’t even realize it just like a fish doesn’t know he’s wet.
We are one in Adam, one in Noah, one in Christ
We are one people, one church, one race.
Fellow Gospel Coalition contributor Voddie Baucham has much to say on this subject. Listen to his sermon (or read the transcript) ‘The Table of Nations: Are there many races or one?’
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=525091133123
Gary,
Gary,
Would you prefer the Census use the term ethnicity? If it did, would you then answer the question? The Bible clearly refers to ethnicities lasting on into eternity (Rev. 7). If this change would be acceptable to you, then you are merely quibbling over words because nowhere does the Census require you to adopt racial polygenism. If this change would not acceptable to you, then you are being selectively “color-blind” because i seriously doubt that you fastidiously avoid describing human beings by their ethnicity. “Did you notice the race of the burglar?” “Why yes, officer, he was human.”
“Did you notice the race of the burglar?” Haha – yes I would say ‘human’ unless he was an elf or an orc or something.
I would prefer the term ethnicity here if it is used as a means of indicating your ancestory or tribe (back to a certain number of generations, since if you go back far enough…)
However, if the word ‘race’ was changed to ‘ethnicity’ on the census form I would still object to divulging that information on the grounds that I believe any questions on the census beyond a headcount to be unconstitutional.
I will state the number of people that live in my household (while keeping in mind that Herod wanted to count everyone to arrogantly display his power), but nothing more, as the law according to the constitution requires nothing more of me.
I am happy to voluntarily give certain information to certain individuals under certain circumstances, but I will become reluctant when coercion and threats of fines/imprisonment are used to forcibly extract that information from me.
Much of my thinking on the issue of race has been shaped by Voddie’s sermon I linked to above – I highly recommend it. I would have had no problems with the term ‘race’ before listening to it.
You don’t believe in the “necessary and proper” clause then?
Justin,
Your post illicits (but ignores) two important questions. First, was Jesus commanding submission to the legal authority that ceasar had to tax, or was he commanding submission to whatever authority (legal or otherwise) the king chose to demand? That is, do we have the responsibility to submit to authorities who are attempting to excercise their authority outside of the law? Second, is there a place for civil disobedience in the life of a Christian? To make the question a bit sharper, was Rev. M. L. King wrong to promote sit-ins and the like in protest of legal authorities, and how might his actions act as a template for our own in reference to the census?
Mitch
King claimed that discrimination was against the natural law. And he was willing to suffer jailtime to protest.
Is asking you if you’re ancestors were European against natural law? And are you willing to go to jail for it? And shouldn’t you turn yourself in, if you really want to make a point about it?
OK, so maybe civil disobedience doesn’t apply here (could you make the case that reapportionment by race violates natural law?). But what about when the Government attempts to exercise authority it does not legally have? Do we as Christians submit, or resist?
I’m happy with Calvin’s doctrine of the lesser magistrate. I don’t have the right to resist, but if the Governor of PA wants to enlist me in the State militia and overthrown some Federal tyranny, I have a case to follow him.
So far Ed Rendell hasn’t indicated he needs me for that.
Determining anything by ‘race’ as our culture understands it violates natural law. There is only one race: the human race. We are all sons of Adam and daughters of Eve. See my post above (March 12, 2010 at 12:25 pm )
I’m not trying to stir the pot any more but this brings up an interesting perspective on the American Revolutionary War. Was the rebellion against Great Britain a rebellion against God, since he established Britain as the government of the American colonies?
Mitch wrote: ” That is, do we have the responsibility to submit to authorities who are attempting to exercise their authority outside of the law? Second, is there a place for civil disobedience in the life of a Christian?”
This is an excellent point, Mitch. During the time of the Caesars, Caesars were the law. (I know some arguments could be made about the Roman Senate). But the fact of the matter is, the Caesars were the de facto law – ultimate authority.
Contrary to what some might believe, President Obama is not the ultimate authority. Neither is the US Supreme Court. You raise a very interesting question. Does submitting authority include submitting to those authorities who exercise their authority outside of the law? The Supreme Court numerous times exercised authority outside of the law. For example, during the Bush administration, when Congress limited the federal courts jurisdiction when it passed the Detainee Act of legal challenges except for final military tribunal decisions. The Supreme Court said, screw you.
During the time of the Caesars, Caesars were the law, but that is not the case in our country. But many people blindly seem to accept that Obama, Reid and Pelosi are the law.
CR,
Are you suggesting that each individual American is to act as their own personal Supreme Court? And that each person is to be bound only by their own private interpretation of the laws?
I struggle with knowing what to do. The question in my mind is “Whatever the state asks for, are we as Christians obligated by the words of Jesus to ‘render unto Caesar?'”
The Bible says a lot more than “render unto Caesar.”
Romans 13:1-7 gives us a blanket command to “be subject to governing authorities.” In fact, “whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.”
Some of you here sound like grumpy old men sitting in a rocking chair on your front porch with a shotgun. The only place we are to disobey the government is when they tell us to do something contrary to what God commands (ie. they disallow proclamation of the gospel). But filling out a census? That’s a silly thing to grumble about.
I realize the US Government is full or flaws. Every government is. But the fact is that God ordained that Obama be our President and He has His sovereign purposes for everything. So stop resisting the authority that God has put over you.
Gabriel wrote: “I realize the US Government is full or flaws. Every government is. But the fact is that God ordained that Obama be our President and He has His sovereign purposes for everything. So stop resisting the authority that God has put over you.”
My response: Gabriel, I would remind that while Obama is President, he is not a king or an emperor or a caesar. He is not my king and I am not his subject. We are not under a monarchy. My only King is King Jesus. I noticed that you left out other forms of authority. We have a 3 branch form of government. Executive, legislative and judicial (700 federal judges).
The authority in our system of government is actually the US Constitution and it was the people who established it. Contrary to what some people might believe, the government or the state is not Obama, Pelosi or Reid. Each of these three branches have a great deal of power, but they each derive their power from the US Constitution.
I plan on answering and filling out the Census completely, but many have reservations about the Constitutionality of what the census has become. I respect their reservations.
“I would remind that while Obama is President, he is not a king or an emperor or a caesar.”
Seriously? Did Jesus need to use the word “President”? Go back to Romans 13. It does not say that we must only obey the documents which are the foundation of our government. It says “governing authorities” (plural), meaning, the people who are governing, regardless of whether we think they are doing it right or not.
Of course in our system we have recourse if our government is breaking the law, so we can take advantage of that when necessary, but unless the government is forcing us to break God’s law, we should submit.
Jesus did not use the word, President, because a constitutional republic form of government was not in existence at the time. As I stated in my response to Mitch’s excellent point, Caesar did not have a higher earthly authority. The President, Congress and the Judicial branch does have a earthly authority and that is the US Constitution.
And when they violate that authority, there is a good question as to whether we have to submit to them when they do.
If I’m a child and my parent says, billy, don’t put on your seatbelt, my parent is not forcing to not preach the gospel, but if the law of the land is for me to put the seatbelt, then I should put on the seatbelt. Similarly, if our political leaders and judges overreach in their exercise of authority (which liberals do all the time), in other words, they go beyond the US Constitution, does that mean the people must submit to that authority? I think not.
“Jesus did not use the word, President, because a constitutional republic form of government was not in existence at the time.”
Not true. The Roman Constitution granted the princeps senatus / princeps civitatis (the “principal” — or “presiding” — senator/citizen, commonly referred to as “Caesar”) dictatorial powers.
Caesar was constrained by the Roman Constitution (through which his authority was granted). Even though it didn’t technically place any constraints upon him, he could only rule as Caesar because it said he could.
Key operative phrase, Travis, Caesars had “dictorial powers.” That’s what I meant.
CR is right on. We have no king over us. We are governed by a document, the Constitution. That is why when the President takes his oath his job is to DEFEND AND PROTECT the Constitution. He is not above the Constitution. When he or others seek to force us to do things which are not mandated to do under the Constitution, I feel we are in no biblical obligation to obey.
An illustration perhaps: Police officers are given authority. We are to obey police officers! If a police officer knocks on your door and says I am going to search your house, he must have a warrant to do so. If he does not have a warrant you are under no obligation to do let him in even though he is in “authority over you.”
When our government in any branch oversteps its constitutional bounds, we are bound biblically, to not obey them, but to obey the constitution. For it is the CONSTITUTION that is the “higher power” or the “King.”
I am thankful that God has so graciously allowed me to live in a land of freedom. I take that freedom seriously, for me and my children!
Michael,
“force us to do things which are not mandated to do under the Constitution, I feel we are in no biblical obligation to obey.”
Aren’t traffic laws unconstitutional then? Does the consitution say we must drive 60MPH on the highway? What’s the point of the legislative branch if not to create laws that aren’t in the constitution? We don’t only obey the constitution, we obey the law that our government has established regardless of whether they are in the constitution.
No, because whatever power is not granted to the federal government is reserved to the states or the people. Speed limits are set by the local/state jurisdictions. See the tenth amendment Gabriel.
The constitution says In Article 1, Section 2:
[An] Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.
An “enumeration” – that’s it! I perhaps can understand how you can be confused on my intent. I meant when the Constitution itself states something specific and then something in addition to that is enforced, that is when we do not have to obey.
I agree with your illustration of the 60MPH. The constitution does not mention speed limits at all. But if it did and it said can go 60MPH and then those who are to defend and protect it said you can’t go over 55MPH, you can obey.
A real example is the bogus antigun laws that were in DC. They were totally denying the constitutional right to bear arms! DC residents, I feel, were under no biblical obligation to obey that DC law. The reason is they are indeed obeying the higher authority in that case, the Constitution. (Which has since been shown to be the case by the Supreme Court.)
I would say we obey laws “that our government has established regardless of whether they are in the constitution” AS LONG AS THEY DO NOT EXCEED WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SPECIFICALLY ALREADY STATES!
I think it would help if we properly orient the biblical argument.
The issue is not “when should we obey government”, but rather the issue is “when should we disobey government.”
The answer is we should only disobey when the government forbids us to obey God’s commands to us as Christians. Period, end of biblical argument.
Gabriel wrote: “What’s the point of the legislative branch if not to create laws that aren’t in the constitution? We don’t only obey the constitution, we obey the law that our government has established regardless of whether they are in the constitution.”
I know this may be news to many, but contrary to popular belief, Congress does not have carte blanch authority to pass any laws. Read the enumerated powers in Article I Section 8. Congress may exercise only those powers that are granted to it by the Constitution. In other words, it can pass laws that it needs to exercise its Constitutional authority. For example, fines for not doing a census.
Your statement that we obey laws regardless whether it’s in the Constitution or not, is a fundamental misunderstanding of the limited powers of Congress. I would really encourage you to read Article I of our US Constitution.
Bravo.
Gabriel wrote: “The answer is we should only disobey when the government forbids us to obey God’s commands to us as Christians. Period, end of biblical argument.”
My response: And when our political leaders ask us to submit to something which overreaches US Constitution, than that is grounds for disobedience. When political leaders and judges pass/intrepret laws not enumerated or in the Constitution, they are disobeying God.
Again, when a parent says to his child don’t put on your seatbelt, the child would not be sinful in disobeying his parent just as the people would not be sinful disobeying its government when it overreaches its authority.
Just as long as you understand you’ve gone beyond Scripture and cannot appeal to Scripture to support your opinion.
“And when our political leaders ask us to submit to something which overreaches US Constitution, than that is grounds for disobedience.”
Close — I would instead say that in such a case, their lack of authority means it is not disobedience to ignore such a mandate.
Travis wrote: “Close — I would instead say that in such a case, their lack of authority means it is not disobedience to ignore such a mandate.”
My response: I like it and I’m saving this quote.
What if the ‘authority’ wants to sleep with your wife? What if the ‘authority’ forces you (by penalty of fine/imprisonment) to send your children to their schools and bring them up with their secular humanist worldview that denies that Jesus Christ is the sovereign king of the universe? What if the ‘authority’ wants to enlist you or your children into their military to support their empire building and carry out acts of genocide?
Gary, of course this means authority that isn’t in contrast to the Bible.
Exactly. What I (and many others) are claiming here is that there are many more actions where we are called to obey God rather than Caesar other than illegally proclaiming the Gospel.
Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.
We need to clearly understand what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God. It seems like our sinful hearts tend to think most things belong to Caesar (to man) and only a few things belong to God.
Kyle, just to be clear, I’m not saying that you sound like a grumpy old man… I’m talking about others who have commented.
I want my actions to reflect the truth of Scripture interpreted in view of its entirety. Romans 13 (and again in 1 Peter 2:13-14) tells us that God has instituted the sphere of the state. Having instituted it, He also maintains ultimate authority over it. But those passages also prescribe how the state is to function (i.e. to punish evil and condone good). Our governing authorities are to pursue righteousness. We see in Scripture what happened when the state did not pursue righteousness. God sent prophet after prophet exhorting them to do what is right in the eyes of the Lord. We also are to appeal to the state in the same manner. But when our appeals are ignored (or downright portrayed as “evil”) we have an obligation to obey God and our consciences.
In this case, the census has exceeded the bounds of the law establishing it, resulting in evil (though possibly unintended) consequences. Our ultimate authority is God’s revealed will in Scripture. Living in America, our ultimate civil authority is the Constitution, not the dictates of Congress, the President, or the judicial system. We should be prepared for judgment from the state, but it is better to obey God rather than men.
P.S. Thanks for saying I’m not a grumpy, old man (although it wouldn’t be the first time for that comparision). :)
I think you are mixing up Scripture a bit. There is only one government that God explicitly developed fully, and that is the government of Israel under the Mosaic covenant. That was a theocracy.
Romans 13 does not dictate how every government should be set up, it only describes the general purposes for government. God sent His prophets only to Israel. Not the Amalekites, the Hittites, the Jebusites, the Romans, or anyone else. The prophets were sent only to Israel because Israel broke the covenant, not because they didn’t govern properly (though that was the case as well).
To state the obvious, Romans 13 was written when Rome was in power, and it is clear that Rome wasn’t exactly a good government. So in the midst of a corrupt government, Paul wrote that the believers should submit to the authorities over them. The entire purpose of the Legislature is to CREATE laws beyond the constitution. Traffic laws go beyond the consitution. Are we allowed to disregard those?
A sit in (in the historical sense) is a far cry from a census that might be used for political reasons. When are they not? I find it poor logic to say that because “my” party isn’t in power, I’m going to sit this census out. A census is legal and completely within reason.
Jesus was saying: paying the tax is commanded by both Ceaser and God, who appointed Ceaser in the first place.
Seems pretty clear cut.
This is just another example of selective “color-blindness” by evangelical conservatives.
Whitney said:
“A census is legal and completely within reason.”
Me:
Segregation was also legal and, for the segregationists, completely within reason.
Yes, but segregation pretty clearly violates Scripture.
As does a census that assumes that multiple races exist and forces me to lie and pretend they do. We are all sons and daughters of Adam – one race. See my previous posts above which explain in more detail.
christopher said:
“This is just another example of selective “color-blindness” by evangelical conservatives.”
Me:
I’ll bet the segregationists said that about MLK.
It is unfortunate that if we had a republican president, many of us would answer the census without a second thought.
Where is our allegiance – a party or to Christ?
NOT TRUE!
Saint and Sinner,
i doubt it. The evangelical conservatives WERE the segregationists.
Most of the segregationists were DEMOCRATS!
christopher said:
“i doubt it. The evangelical conservatives WERE the segregationists.”
Me:
Which misses the point. The segregationists probably used the same argument against MLK that you just made: MLK was selective about which commands of Scripture to obey.
Two things:
1) MLK rejected Sola Scriptura and Solus Christus, and its debatable whether he was actually saved, or merely a nominal “Social Gospel” proponent, so I’m not sure he’s the best example.
2) Besides, segregation clearly violates Scripture.
So this analogy really goes nowhere.
“2) Besides, segregation clearly violates Scripture.”
So did Roman slavery. Did that give Christians the right to rebel against Caesar?
[BTW: I agree that segregation violates Scripture.]
Also, checking “Other” and writing in “American” is legally accepted.
Interestingly, there have actually been surveys done and it turns out the vast majority of people who self-identify as “American” on previous censuses were actually Scots-Irish by descent.
Maybe the title on here should be changed to “Christians, do not underwithhold on Form W4″, since owing a balance on April 15th will mean that you will likely owe penalty and interest on your tax bill. A fine is a fine. Those willing to pay the fine are released from guilt under the law. $100 is a cheap price to pay, amortized over the next ten years.
And for those who think this has anything to do with Obama, why would privacy be any less private if McCain were in office?
Lets start from America’s beginning. Who is the authority? I believe it says “we the people”, we are the ones that give the constitutuion its power, and the constitution gives our public servants their power. What king (which all U.S. citizens are) would allow a servant to tell them what to do, just because they wanted something done a certain way.
I swear you ” they are the government they have authority types” would have been quiet in nazi germany. You would have let them take and kill your jewish neighbors, the same with slavery and the what happened with the Native Americans. You would have gone along to get along.
Dont you understand that those big crimes could only take place if the much smaller crimes were allowed first. America is like the frog in the progressively heating pot. They are slowly cooking us so we dont jump out. Your’e helping them. We are to be christ’s sheep not the governments.
Maybe God is treating team Obama as he treated pharaoh – let him fully indulge in their hubris, only to bring them down all that much harder.
No political parties can never be ‘perfect’ and must stand below Faith, but the fact is, that the democrats are generally the party of less righteousness and more expediency, of silver tongues and hidden agendas.
The GOP is bumbling, stumbling, looks cold and greedy compared to the nicey-nice propaganda of the left, has made and will make lots of bad decisions etc., but it’s never been as rotten at the core as the dems.
Wow. I scanned this early this morning and thought “Well, this is going to be fun!”, but 65 comments before lunch (PST)??? That’s impressive.
It seems that this issue is a collision of hermeneutical approaches to both the Bible and the Constitution. Justin, do you happen to know anyone who’s a solid expert on both? Does one even exist? In moments like these I wish D.A.Carson wasn’t a Canadian. :)
It seems like one’s interpretation of the Constitution could make this either an issue of law or liberty. And I say that as one born here, but raised in Australia, so my expertise in these things isn’t far beyond my third-grader. I don’t want to be ignorant, I want to be obedient to the Lord, but this one really seems tough.
I agree with your take on this, Justin. Thanks for the blog.
I agree with JT that the Christian should not violate federal law that in no way contradicts Scripture (even if it violates the snot out of the Constitution). That said, I have a few questions about the race question (the first two are slightly tongue-in-cheek):
1) Is it lying if you answer truthfully and the gov’t is stupid enough to misinterpret your answer (e.g. checking “Native American” if you were born in America)?
2) Personally, I find the hyphenated-American stuff nauseating. But since the form is going to accommodate it, shouldn’t I be culturally sensitive, check Other, and then write in “Western-European-American” since the majority of my ancestry comes from Scotland and Ireland?
3) Isn’t the question of race inherently bigoted, since it assumes that your parents weren’t of different races? Didn’t we get rid of such asinine segregation a long time ago?
No, seriously. One of my friends is decidedly white. His wife is even more decidedly black. What does he put for the “race” of his kids? Does he diss himself or his wife?
Brendt wrote: “No, seriously. One of my friends is decidedly white. His wife is even more decidedly black. What does he put for the “race” of his kids? Does he diss himself or his wife?”
My response: they put what is on the children’s birth certificates.
As I don’t have kids, and haven’t had call to look at a birth certificate for quite a while, I was not aware that the bigotry extended to birth certificates, too.
My initial 2 questions for #3 still stand, then. Just apply it to the birth certificate instead of the census form.
Although, to be honest, is a birth certificate a federal form or state/local? If the latter, I can understand bigotry among us yokels in the fly-over states (clinging to our guns and religion). But the vaunted, enlightened federal government? ;-)
I’m in awe of these comments and I’m from Texas! Like someone said above, a lot of you DO sound like grumpy old men with shotguns. You like people under the Romans had it any easier? Their peers were killed and taxed way more than we ever were. And yet they were told to live peaceably with ALL men and to submit. Radical Christianity, indeed.
“Their peers were killed and taxed way more than we ever were.”
Tax rates under the Roman empire:
“In the earliest days of the Republic Rome’s taxes were quite modest, consisting mainly of a wealth tax on all forms of property, including land, houses, slaves, animals, money and personal effects. The basic rate was just .01 percent, although occasionally rising to .03 percent. It was assessed principally to pay the army during war. In fact, afterwards the tax was often rebated (Jones 1974: 161). It was levied directly on individuals, who were counted at periodic censuses.”
Source: http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cjv14n2-7.html
Federal Income Tax Rates in the US range between 10% and 35%. This doesn’t even take into account state income tax, sales tax, tariffs on imports (the increased cost of which is passed on to the consumer) among many others.
I take it as compliment that I sound like a grumpy old man with a shotgun!
Better to be grumpy and protective about losing your freedom and clinging to my shotgun than being a subject of the govt, being mandated that I must have health care, what car to drive (that I can only drive a “stupid” (play on smart) cars), what light bulb I can use, I have to recycle, how I can educate my kids, how I can protect my family and my possessions, how I raise my kids, what I can say about “sin”, what I can write, what I can read, what I have to tell them about my family. I can go on and on. It’s none of their business! They work for us! If you want to give up your freedoms, fine. But I will not! Men and women paid too much for our freedom and it is wrong to just lay down and give it up!
I see radical Christianity as one seeking to preserve freedom, esp of religion, rather than being so willing to watch it be taken away!
If that is your view of radical Christianity then I think you’re reading a different Bible. Do you have some Scripture to back up your position?
Rom. 13. I already explained this. The Constitution is where the powers are derived! If God set up our nation, instead of a king, He allowed us to be ruled by a document, not a King. It is my duty, biblically, to submit to the highest authority in the land – The Constitution. The “leaders” are under the Constitution, not above it. Thus when they direct us to do something the Constitution forbids, it is our duty to submit to the Constitution, not to the “authority.”
If President Obama asks the Sec. of Defense to go to my hometown and forbid anyone to speak against him, though he is the leader of the land and the SOD boss, the Sec of Defense cannot do that. He is bound to do things allowable only by the constitution and not in direct contradiction to it.
God allowed us to be under a rule of a document, the Constitution, which gives freedoms! If you do not defend those freedoms, you are not following the “authority God has placed over you” but rather you are following ones who seek to override what God has ordained.
Gabriel, what Scriptural support do you use to back up allowing the God ordained Constitution (our king) to be ignored and disregarded?
First, explain how Romans 13 tells us as Christians to “preserve freedom, esp of religion, rather than being so willing to watch it be taken away!”
Rom 13:1-2 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. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
God appointed our govt by rule of the Constitution. I must defend and obey what it says. It says we have “freedoms” – Example you wanted me to defend: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
What you just read, Gabriel, is THE “governing authority.” To not subject myself to it and defend it is to “resist that authority” as Rom 13 states, so as to allow people to replace it.
Christians were not to support someone overthrowing the King (a Person – the governing authority). In America, Christians are not to support someone (congress or whoever) overthrowing America’s “king” (Document Constitution – the governing authority).
If you support people and allow people to disregard the Constitution of the United States of America, you are not obeying Rom 13 in direct violation of it!
Is it your job to determine when the government oversteps the constitution? I thought that was the judicial branch’s job.
You are promoting a view that makes the individual citizen’s interpretation of the constitution the law of the land. That just doesn’t work. The actual people who are elected and appointed are the ones we obey. Even if we disagree with them.
The constitution is not our king. The constitution is our king, the president is our king, the Supreme Court is our king, the state government is our king, the city government is our king, etc., etc.
When Paul wrote Romans 13 he did not have in mind the documents that establish a form of government, he had in mind the people that run the government.
You cannot use Romans 13 as a basis for disobedience, no matter how corrupt the government is. At best you can work to defend our rights by voting, running for office, etc. But disobeying God’s ordained authority is not defending your rights; it is resisting God.
I disagree! I could never say the 3 branches are “king.” No! Because they all must operate in and under the CONSTITUTION!!! It is king! We are a people ruled by a constitution! The governing people answer to the Constitution! That’s why liberals do not like the Constitution, it limits what the authority they have! They want to be king. Sorry, we are ruled by a Constitution, not a person (or people!)
Oh I see, so when you go to court it’s the constitution that sits in a chair making a judgment. It’s the constitution that cuffs you when you’re guilty. It’s the constitution that executes punishment.
That’s just silly. The governing authorities (remember the plural noun in Romans 13), are the people who lead the government.
The constitution does not govern us. It is the law. The people in government are the governing authorities. They are responsible before God to abide by the law just as much as we are, but we are to submit to them.
Those who carry out the law are not the king though, they are subject to what the Constitution says. You cannot have cruel or unusual punishments OR excessive bail. Those who make the judgments or cuff you are bound to do so within the limits of the Constitution. They are not the kings! The Constitution does not answer to them, they answer to the Constitution!
“For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”
Gabriel: “When Paul wrote Romans 13 he did not have in mind the documents that establish a form of government, he had in mind the people that run the government.”
Gabriel, if Paul did not have such things in mind when writing, then how exactly does God go about instituting authority?
Oh it’s quite simple. He ordains the people who govern. God did not write the constitution, people did. The Constitution is not God’s idea, it is man’s idea. It only has as much authority as the governing authorities (people) give it.
God put in authority those who wrote the constitution just like he put in authority those today. God puts people into power, not documents. Man decides which documents to use or not use in governing.
…and how do people identify those authorities whom God has ordained, and in what capacity they have been ordained? And do all “authorities” in whatever sphere have the same power and authority over others? And if not, who decides this and how do they go about deciding it?
“It only has as much authority as the governing authorities give it.”
You really have no idea what the U.S. Federal Government is, do you?
The Constitution was ratified by delegates from the 13 original colonies. It was (and remains) the authority of the States which limits the Federal Government to only those powers and authorities enumerated in the Constitution.
The elected and appointed officials within the Federal Government are delegated very specific authority through the U.S. Constitution by the governments of the (currently 50) States of the Union. The reach of these Federal agents cannot exceed their Constitutionally-bound grasp because they are the “lesser magistrate” underneath the governance of the united States. (It was more obvious during the Articles of Confederation period, but legally speaking, it is still the case today.)
I currently live in Florida. If the state of Florida were to conduct such a census, I would have an entirely different approach to the matter. But the Federal Government has not been granted permission (by the State of Florida, nor by any of the other 49) to require the residents of these states to divulge such information. They are attempting to usurp authority which belongs to another (in my case, Florida) and I will not be party to their insurrection.
“You really have no idea what the U.S. Federal Government is, do you?”
The constitution has no inherent authority. It only has authority because men give it authority. Man made it, man can change it, man can destroy it, and man can ignore it. We can be thankful that our governing authorities (people in political power) abide by it by and large.
What will you do when religious persecution happens? Will you rebel against government or will you submit as God calls you to? I don’t mean submit by not preaching the gospel, I mean submit by accepting the consequences of being a Christian (jail, execution, etc.).
If we want a government to abide by the law, we must elect them to do it, and throw them out when they don’t. But we must submit to the people that are in power.
“The constitution has no inherent authority. It only has authority because men give it authority.”
Which men?
“What will you do when religious persecution happens?”
It depends. Sometimes God let Paul to escape in a basket; sometimes he led him to be imprisoned.
It boggles my mind that you ask “Which men?” Isn’t it obvious who holds political office? Isn’t it obvious that we must submit to those who are elected and appointed to positions of authority?
You don’t submit to them because of their inherent authority, you submit because of the authority of their positions, whether it be the President all the way down to the “meter maid”.
“It boggles my mind that you ask ‘Which men?'”
I can tell. ;)
Here, let me help: which men (among those who hold political office)?
The President does not give the Constitution authority, because the Constitution is a contract between him and his superiors (the governments of the 50 states). Those men (and some women) embue the Constitution with its authority, and bind to it the agents of the Federal Government.
So are you implying that we submit to some elected officials, but not others? I don’t get it.
Look, it doesn’t matter how the government is set up and who is given authority by whom, or who embues authority to what. What matters is that it is patently clear who has authority in our government. And of course when we submit to them, we’re not submitting to them personally, but to the decisions, policies, laws, etc. that they make.
“I don’t get it.”
I’m not implying anything. I’m very explicitly telling you that the Federal Government has limited authority — not because of the Constitution itself, but because through it the greater human authority in this case (state rulers) says they’re limited by it.
“What matters is that it is patently clear who has authority in our government.”
And what’s being said is that they don’t have the authority to do what they’re trying to do. That is patently clear.
You’re saying we ought to disobey the greater authority in an effort to obey the lesser authority.
Travis wrote: “You’re saying we ought to disobey the greater authority in an effort to obey the lesser authority.”
Another excellent point, Travis.
I’m not saying we disobey anyone. If, as you say, the state governments have authority over the federal government, then it is the state’s role to determine whether what the federal government is doing is right. It is not your role to do that. If the states indeed have more authority, and the state told you to disobey the federal government, then fine. But the state is not telling you to disobey. You’re just wanting to act like a self-proclaimed judge of what you will and will not obey.
I’ll bring it back to my point from a while ago which you ignored. The only point at which Scripture permits disobedience is when the authorities contradict God’s explicit commands (like evangelism). Otherwise we must submit to those who are over us.
Gabe, buddy, you keep trying to make me repeat myself. I already addressed most of this earlier today.
So it’s not my role to attempt to discern what is Caesar’s (so I can obey Jesus’ command), but it’s your role to insist that I conform my life to your particular interpretation of the law and the Scriptures?
Well, if you can show me from Scripture where it gives us exceptions so that we can disobey any authority over us under any circumstances, my ears are open! So I’m open to hearing your interpretation of where Scriptures allow us to disobey any government authority for any reason.
Show me, from Scripture, were we can resist authority and not be resisting God at the same time.
It probably got picked up by a spam filter and will show up later (because I linked it for you), but in the meantime:
2 Corinthians 11:32-33
So just because Paul did it that makes it right?
Regardless, that passage doesn’t teach us anything. All it does is tell us is that Paul escaped capture. It doesn’t say under what cirumstances we can disobey government.
Here Paul was refusing to submit to the rulers and authorities — and he’s boasting to the church in Corinth about it.
This would be the same Paul who told the Romans to always submit to the rulers and authorities.
And he wrote both epistles around the same time.
and your point is…? What does that tell us about the circumstances under which we should obey the government? Remember Paul was experiencing persecution.
I stand corrected on the taxes part. Sorry about that. My point was about the corrupt, secular, killing government.
I totally agree with you on that Whitney. Christians under the Roman empire faced far more physical persecution than we Americans do today.
Make no mistake though – we have a corrupt, secular, killing government just as they did, although today it may take different forms. As many others have mentioned above though, our government is not merely one person, but a large collection of people whose authority and specific powers have been delegated to them by the constitution under the sovereign will of God. We get the government we deserve, but most of the time, because of God’s grace we get one that is less corrupt and more merciful and compassionate than it otherwise would be if sin ran wild without restraint.
Gary, that was brilliant. Thank you for stating it so well.
The public voice of evangelical Christianity is exhausting.
Does it ever run out of things to be AGAINST and OUTRAGED about?
I find myself putting more and more distance between that label and me.
Who is John Galt?
Good grief! 91 (make that 92) comments on this?
I am thankful for and encouraged by this level of interest on this topic.
There are many people (hopefully, including you) that, now redeemed and transformed by Christ, desire to live consistent lives, taking every thought captive, and allowing the Gospel to transform EVERY single area of their thinking. The census raises extremely important questions which challenge us to examine ourselves and determine how we should respond in light of our desire to be true to God’s word.
After 100 comments, I think I’ve gone cross-eyed. Now I am more confused then before I started reading.
+1 for Justin
-∞ for the Paranoid Senator
“Paranoid”, I don’t know, Senator, she is not. She is a Congresswoman.
+1 for CR
-∞ for Josh S.’s civics teachers
;)
OMG did I really make a typo?!?
128 comments on a post about the census………what are the census enumerators asking Christians if they are Calvinist or Arminians?
129 comments and the very first one hit the nail on the head….pure and simple for most this is a just another attempt to paint team Obama as something to be feared, dress it up any way you want but I suspect there was not a lot of hue and cry about the 2000 Census. The sad fact is this. If you choose not to complete the Census form you are only hurting yourself because you will not be represented in the count and decisions will be made based on that under representation. So if you want to increase the influence of Native Americans when it comes to how Federal spending is done (for example) and I sure Native Americans will be quite happy!
I was 17 when the 2000 Census was taken.
…just another attempt to paint team Obama as something to be feared
Isn’t that just terrible?
Next, people will be painting grizzly bears as big, bitey-rippy-killy things!
Not terrible if you have that fear….just don’t hide behind not completing the Census to express that fear.
People who want to blur their census responses for fear of the anti-Christian, totalitarian designs of Obama and his ilk, have very good reason to do so.
Just not sufficient reason — as I currently see it.
Indeed, there was a lot of hue and cry during the 2000 census. And with the 99 census, even though the internet wasn’t the noisy place it is now. Sampling, ultimate uses, privacy, gerrymandering, and race-based governance have been the (legitimate) concerns every time.
Travis did you sign up for Selective Service?
As a Christian I will fill out the census because it doesn’t really matter if I do or not. I am a citizen of God’s kingdom before I am a citizen of America. I enjoy America but God is first.
Us Christians really need to get our priorities straight. Whom do we serve first? Our country or our Lord?
David: God disagrees; to violate a federal law that does not require evil is to violate God’s Word.
Justin I am not sure what you are talking about. I am saying as a Christian I will fill out the census. I will do so because ultimately it doesn’t matter if Obama has an agenda or not. I will fill out the census and continue to serve God. God is the one who has control over my destiny, not agendas or census forms.
I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying. I apologize if I didn’t make it clear.
One more thing. Though I do believe you misunderstood what I said I would like to respond to what you said.
Every single person has at one time or another violated God’s Word. If we did not then we wouldn’t need God’s saving grace. I think people should fill out the census form. I also think people should love their neighbor as much as they love themselves. We fail on that latter one a daily basis but thank God that He gives us His grace and gives us new chances to love others everyday.
No worries, the government can get as much information it needs from your Facebook accounts.
It is a little distressing that much of your argument for filling out the census is also found on the Unreasonable Faith website. Did they pull it from you? If not where did you get your information as much is directly quoted on that site.