What exists now is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing truly new on earth. Is there anything about which someone can say, “Look at this! It is new!”? It was already done long ago, before our time.
(Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 [NET])
Whatever exists now has already been, and whatever will be has already been; for God will seek to do again what has occurred in the past. (Ecclesiastes 3:15 [NET])
One of the greater signs that a nation has turned away from the word of God is by making a universal decree or mandate that forces the individual to violate his /her conscience. This is often done in the name of the ‘greater good’ for the nation. It is such that persecution is clothed in so-called reasonable arguments. Does it matter if a few die to protect the greater majority? It is the same reason the wily Caiaphas gave in condemning Christ.
“And one of them, [named] Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not”.
(John 11:49-50 [KJV])
Let us look at the argument for ‘the greater good’, and what is the Christian duty.
In a previous article we looked at Rome against Christianity. We will review some of that article to clearly show the fallacy of the above mentioned argument.
Jesus Christ came into the world to set men free, and to plant in their souls the genuine principle of liberty, — liberty actuated by love, liberty too honorable to allow itself to be used as an occasion to the flesh or for a cloak of maliciousness, liberty led by a conscience enlightened by the Spirit of God, liberty in which man may be free from all men, yet made so gentle by love that he would willingly become the servant of all, in order to bring them to the enjoyment of this same liberty. This is freedom indeed. This is the freedom which Christ gave to man; for “whom the Son makes free is free indeed.” {1898 ATJ, Great Empires of Prophecy (GEP) 346.1}
In giving to men this freedom, such an infinite gift could have no other result than that which Christ intended; namely, to bind them in everlasting, unquestioning, unswerving allegiance to Him as the royal benefactor of the race. He thus reveals himself to men as the highest good, and brings them to himself as the manifestation of that highest good, and to obedience to His will as the perfection of conduct. {1898 ATJ, GEP 346.2}
Providence saw fit that Christ should be born in the Roman Empire.
The Roman Empire then filled the world, — “the sublimest incarnation of power, and a monument the mightiest of greatness built by human hands, which has upon this planet been suffered to appear.” That empire, proud of its conquests, and exceedingly jealous of its claims, asserted its right to rule in all things, human and divine. In the Roman view, the State took precedence of everything. It was entirely out of respect to the State and wholly to preserve the State, that either the emperors or the laws ever forbade the exercise of the Christian religion. According to Roman principles, the State was the highest idea of good. “The idea of the State was the highest idea of ethics, and within that was included all actual realization of the highest good; hence the development of all other goods pertaining to humanity, was made dependent on this.” — Neander. 5 {1898 ATJ, GEP 346.4}
Man with all that he had was subordinated to the State; he must have no higher aim than to be a servant of the State; he must seek no higher good than that which the State could bestow. Thus every Roman citizen has a subject, and every Roman subject was a slave. “The more distinguished a Roman became, the less was he a free man. The omnipotence of the law, the despotism of the rule, drove him into a narrow circle of thought and action, and his credit and influence depended on the sad austerity of his life. The whole duty of man, with the humblest and greatest of the Romans, was to keep his house in order, and be the obedient servant of the State.” —
Mommsen. 6 {1898 ATJ, GEP 347.1}
As Christ ministered, the Pharisees and the Herodians in an attempt to trick him asked whether it was lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not? Christ answered: “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21 KJV) In this, Christ established a clear distinction between Caesar and God, and between religion and the State. He separated that which pertains to God from that which pertains to the State. Only that which was Caesar’s was to be rendered to Caesar, while that which is God’s was to be rendered solely to God.
“Therefore when Christ made this distinction between God and Caesar, separated that which pertains to God from that which pertains to Caesar, and commanded men to render to God that which is God’s, and to Caesar only that which is Caesar’s, He at once stripped Caesar — the State — of every attribute of divinity. And in doing this He declared the supremacy of the individual conscience; because it rests with the individual to decide what things they are which pertain to God”. {1898 ATJ, GEP 350.4}
What is Caesar’s?
It is abundantly clear that Caesar’s realm is not with the conscience. A man may have a dirty conscience, he may fantasize about what he wants to do with a woman or even how he would like to hurt someone, but as it is only in mind, no state can convict him of a criminal offence. The moment the thought becomes a reality by his action, he is now fully under Caesar’s grip and will face the laws of the state.
The commandment; “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart”. (Matt 5:2-287 [KJV])
Clearly, the realms of conscience belong only to God. In an attempt to force conscience, mankind and nations have stepped over the line, and your obedience must not be given.
To the Romans, “The State was everything, and the majority was in fact the State. What the majority said should be, that was the voice of the State, that was the voice of “God”, that was the expression of the highest good, that was the expression of the highest conception of right; and everybody must assent to that or be considered a traitor to the State. The individual was but a part of the State. There was therefore no such thing as the rights of the people; the right of the State only was to be considered, and that was to be considered absolute. “The first principle of their law was the paramount right of the State over the citizen. Whether as head of a family, or as proprietor, he had no natural rights of his own; his privileges were created by the law as well as defined by it. The State in the plenitude of her power delegated a portion of her own irresponsibility to the citizen, who satisfied the conditions she required in order to become the parent of her children; but at the same time she demanded of him the sacrifice of his free agency to her own rude ideas of political expediency.” — Merivale. 9 {1898 ATJ, GEP 349.1}
It is also evident that in such a system there was no such thing as the rights of conscience; because as the State was supreme also in the realm of religion, all things religious were to be subordinated to the will of the State, which was but the will of the majority. And where the majority presumes to decide in matters of religion, there is no such thing as rights of religion or conscience. Against this whole system Christianity was diametrically opposed, — {1898 ATJ, GEP 349.2}
When Christ declared, “And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength:…” (Mark 12:30 KJV)
This placed Jesus Christ above the State, and put allegiance to Him above allegiance to any State; He clearly denied the supremacy of Rome, and established this truth. “And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: (Mark 12:32 [KJV])
All this is not new. It was against this that Martin Luther stood and declared,
“…for it is unsafe for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me. Amen.” {Great Controversy (GC) 88 160.2}
“It was the desire for liberty of conscience that inspired the Pilgrims to brave the perils of the long journey across the sea, to endure the hardships and dangers of the wilderness, and with God’s blessing to lay, on the shores of America, the foundation of a mighty nation. {GC88 292.2}
“Eleven years after the planting of the first colony, Roger Williams came to the New World. Like the early Pilgrims, he came to enjoy religious freedom; but unlike them, he saw—what so few in his time had yet seen—that this freedom was the inalienable right of all, whatever might be their creed. He was an earnest seeker for truth, with Robinson holding it impossible that all the light from God’s Word had yet been received. Williams “was the first person in modern Christendom to assert, in its plenitude, the doctrine of the liberty of conscience, the equality of opinions before the law.” He declared it to be the duty of the magistrate to restrain crime, but never to control the conscience. .”
{GC88 293.1}
Making his way at last, after months of change and wandering, to the shores of Narragansett Bay, he there laid the foundation of the first State of modern times that in the fullest sense recognized the right of religious freedom. The fundamental principle of Roger Williams’ colony, was “that every man should have the right to worship God according to the light of his conscience.” His little State, Rhode Island, became the asylum of the oppressed, and it increased and prospered until its foundation principles—civil and religious liberty—became the corner-stones of the American Republic.
{GC88 294.4}
The foundation principles laid in 1636 in Rhode Island became the rock, and over one hundred forty years later the American Republic was laid on it and it prospered to reach the world’s pinnacle. Apostasy from this principle, will be the downfall of this nation.
We are nearing that moment. Destiny will be decided shortly.
One may say this is not a religious mandate, but scripture says, “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God”.
(1 Corinthians 10:31 [KJV])
Daniel understood this principle, and would not take anything into his body that would defile him or cause impure blood.
cryaloud.news 