$500 in the Boot

Sharing Options

A story is told of a fellow who was mugged in an alley by a band of thugs, and he put up a ferocious fight. After about fifteen minutes, they got him down on the ground, and found just two dollars in his wallet. “Two dollars?” one of them said. “You put up that fight for two dollars?”

“Well, no, actually. I thought you were after the $500 in my boot.”

One of the most precious possessions a government has is its moral legitimacy. When they have it, taxes are paid, for the most part, voluntarily. Any society requires force for the outliers, but is not held together at the center by force. When the ruling elites start to opt out of this societal bond — “laws are for the little people” — there is usually a time lag, but the “little people” do catch on. When they catch on, the whole thing spirals down into chaos.

One of the central techniques that is used by despots for divesting themselves of moral legitimacy is the technique of governing through arbitrary administrative law. A free people live under laws passed by legislatures in which they have freely chosen representatives. The prerogative of passing such laws may not be transferred. So if you chafe under rules and regs that spew forth from all the alphabet agencies, then you are not free. It doesn’t matter that you are currently not being harassed. No despot can torment all his slaves simultaneously.

Now when you find yourself in this situation — as we do — there are two aspects to it, represented in this situation by the two dollars in your wallet and the five hundred in your boot. When a government has lost its moral legitimacy, the fact that you actually do pay your taxes on the two dollars (which comes to three dollars) needs to be understood as principled acquiesence, and not as a statement on your part that what they are doing is legit. It is not.

At the same time, there are those who have studied these things in depth, and who have seventeen reasons for denying the legitimacy of the IRS, and nine of them are pretty good. They live in a cabin high in the mountains of western Montana, where they study Blackstone by candlelight, late into the evenings. These are the fellows who tell the thugs in single-spaced typewritten letters that they have no right to the five hundred in their boot.

Franklin was actually on to something when he said we had to hang together, or we would all hang separately.

There are more than just two options. The first option is to figure this all out by yourself, and take on the principalities and powers all by yourself. Good luck, and there is probably a legal society you can join there in Leavenworth. They might even make you chairman. The other option most often taken is simply to accept the way things are as “normal,” in which you pretend that our arbitrary administrative rulers actually care about our freedoms.

Madison described the problem this way:

“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many; and whether hereditary, self-appointed or elected – may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

And that, my friends, is what we have. We have it in spades.

But the solution is educate enough Christians to effect a coordinated response together that runs a chance of actually succeeding. Romans 13 does not say what many imagine it says.

In the next installment, I will talk about what Christians would have to learn together, and what they would have to do together.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
27 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
juan
juan
9 years ago

Post a comment

timothy
timothy
9 years ago

Gripping stuff.

Thank you.

If any on the comment board have bullet points of Pastor Wilson’s Romans 13 arguments from previous threads on this topic, could you please post them?

thx.

t

Aaron Richmond
Aaron Richmond
9 years ago

Here are 21 of ’em, Timothy: http://dougwilson.wpengine.com/s8-expository/21-principles-a-christian-citizen-must-know-in-the-age-of-obama.html

I think there was a blog post or two that tread the same ground, but that’s the link immediately available in my history and the one I’ve gone back to when I’ve felt like a refresher.

timothy
timothy
9 years ago

@Aaron.

Thank you.

Johnathan in the ‘A long winding road” thread posited a view of Romans 13 that Pastor Wilson had already exposited (?) on and I could not reply succinctly and to the point.

Hopefully I can rectify that this weekend.

cheers.

t

JohnM
JohnM
9 years ago

Is the primary objection here to:

1. What is being done? That is, all the various objectionable government polices and actions.
2. How it is being done? That is, through/by bureaucracy, regulations and non-elected officials.
3. Who is doing it? That is, the Federal government.

I realize the answer may be all of the above, but which most of all? It seems No. 2 is the mostly what Doug is talking about, yes? Is that primary for everyone else as well? I’m curious what people think.

josh
9 years ago

Doug,
Have you looked at Bitcoin, and it’s implications for Governments? Kinda interesting cat out of the bat there.. It is going to be hard to stuff that genie back in the bottle, and it has the potential to remove the government monopoly on the means of transmission of value.

The 500 in the boot becomes mathmatically ungraspable —

I would be interested to hear your take.

timothy
timothy
9 years ago

@JohnM

“What, How, Who” all flow from a source. if the Source is Christ, then “What, How and Who” will be appropriate to the Lord, the people and the times.

Switching to secular terms, our Founders–with whom I agree–saw that the trend of government was toward tyranny. Many people find the founder’s ideas foolish and constraining. I do not. The institutionalized rape of children in England abetted by their government has cemented my views in my mind.

cordially,

t

Robert
Robert
9 years ago

Dave Ramsey considers bit coin a bad investment

JohnM
JohnM
9 years ago

Timothy, I sincerely thank you for answering. Your answer does prompt further questions. Pardon me if I obstinately in my persist in my original line of questioning but am I understanding you to mean where Jesus is Lord (which of course is de facto everywhere – just not acknowledged): 1. Only good government polices and actions will exist (and ours all or mostly are not)? 2. A particular government structure (and we know what it is) will exist, and it will not include administrative law? 3. It won’t be, or not much anyway, a central/national/supreme – in our case we… Read more »

JohnM
JohnM
9 years ago

Pardon the typos.

Robert
Robert
9 years ago

One of the purposes of promoting Mexican immigration is to develop a demographic of a people who have never been free who are more likely to grant moral legitimacy to the socialist administrative state. No Spanish culture has known biblical freedom. When the Spanish colonies broke away from Spanish rule, these new countries never had a Jonathan Edwards. Everything became power plays between the rich, poor and Catholic Church

timothy
timothy
9 years ago

@JohnM

Pardon me if I obstinately in my persist in my original line of questioning

The world needs a lot more obstinate Christians; they are a breath of fresh air. (:

I am too tired to think tonight and tomorrow is The Lord’s Day on which I am loathe to post.

I will address your comment on Monday.

Cordially,

t

Barnabas
Barnabas
9 years ago

“One of the purposes of promoting Mexican immigration is to develop a demographic of a people who have never been free who are more likely to grant moral legitimacy to the socialist administrative state.”
You could see how this benefits some elite Americans, also by driving down wages, but who benefits from turning France into a Muslim country or replacing the people of Sweden and England? The only cure for white guilt and privilege is the suicide of the West.
http://thegospelcoalition.org/article/because-world-watching

Jonathan
Jonathan
9 years ago

Barnabas, that last line of yours sounds like baseless pop psychology gone insane. I’m not sure if it represents your own view or if you’re mocking someone else’s view. As the standard of living of White Westerners in nearly every country is currently increasing and has been increasing consistently for quite some number of years, “suicide” doesn’t really look demonstrable as a collective desire.

The article you linked, on the other hand, was quite good. I’d also recommend the following:

http://www.thevillagechurch.net/the-village-blog/more-on-ferguson-and-white-privilege/

http://www.christianpost.com/news/pastor-matt-chandler-speaks-up-about-white-privilege-nonsense-going-on-in-ferguson-125048/

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2014/08/14/ferguson-is-ripping-the-bandages-off-our-racial-wounds/

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/thabitianyabwile/2014/08/19/is-it-goodbye-evangelicalism-or-we-join-you-in-your-suffering/

Barnabas
Barnabas
9 years ago

OK, well first about the rising standard of living… A people that has few children and instead imports another people is committing suicide. The foreign born population of Sweden is 20% and rising rapidly, the most popular baby name in London is Muhammad (also true of the 4 largest cities in Holland), and the US southern border is open to the whole of Central and South America. I guess no one has told those immigrants that white countries are hotbeds of racism and that they are better off in the third world. One again, I am well aware of the… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
9 years ago

Barnabas, I have no idea what you think income inequality in America has to do with White people committing societal suicide. Rising income inequality has nothing to do with whether or not the standard of living is increasing, which is still true for America as a whole. And since the White population is overrepresented at the top, and underrepresented at the bottom, it’s even more true for White people in America. And immigration is not suicide. There’s nowhere even to engage those arguments – you have to actually state something first. Yes, there’s lots of immigration. And? (p.s. “Mohammed” arguments… Read more »

gettimothy
gettimothy
9 years ago

Good Morning @JohnM. Here is the follow up to your points. 1. Only good government polices and actions will exist (and ours all or mostly are not)? Fallen men are fallen men and bad things do happen and are done by even men of good intentions. However, what is the trend-line over generations? I do prefer what we have today to what the Apostles dealt with in Rome and I prefer what we have today to what I read in Dicken’s ‘A Tale of Two Cities’. 2. A particular government structure (and we know what it is) will exist, and… Read more »

JohnM
JohnM
9 years ago

Timothy, Thanks again for some further explanation. For my part, I too prefer what we have now over most of what has been over most of history. That’s why although I recognize there are things wrong with the way governing is done in contemporary America, and I want some changes, I’ve learned to be cautious of exaggerating the magnitude of the problem. It’s been worse and won’t necessarily be better. I also blame the Federal government, but, not only the Federal government, for whatever is wrong. Further, I know, and want to be quick to add I realize you know… Read more »

timothy
timothy
9 years ago

@Johnathan.

Pastor Wilson has been developing a theme on the duty of the Christian and submission to the state for several posts now.

In his post http://dougwilson.wpengine.com/s7-engaging-the-culture/on-the-lam-for-jesus.html#more-107274 He shows two examples of Apostles not submitting to government authority.

I noticed that you did not comment on that thread. You may find it helpful as background material; before we move on to the blood and guts.

cheers.

t

timothy
timothy
9 years ago

Hi @JohnM I prefer 1, 2 and 3 if the hand of God is evident (by their fruits you shall know them). What we have now is an abomination. My intellectual bias is towards decentralized loosely coupled systems as they are adaptable and fault tolerant. I recognize that my views are colored by the models I use. Had I lived in the 18’th century, I probably would have found the mechanistic models that where popular at the time serviceable. An expectation I have is that Meyer’s “Intelligent Design” interpretation of God’s universe will supplant my systems engineering model withing 100… Read more »

JohnM
JohnM
9 years ago

@Timothy, Leaving aside that some would hold that the hand of God is behind governments, period, in No. 2 of my scenarios I think the fruit would indicate the hand of God, or a least government pleasing to God, and in No. 1, not so much. So there’s no reason for you to prefer No. 1 and every reason to prefer No. 2. The point is this, I believe our dissatisfaction should be with government that produces bad results, i.e. fruit, not with a particular governmental structure per se. It seems you agree. As it happens, because we are fallen,… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
9 years ago

Timothy, I’m not sure which statement of mine you’re replying to. I think you might have meant to put your reply on a different thread.

Jonathan
Jonathan
9 years ago

Also, I’m a big fan of resisting tyrants, so I think you might have misunderstood me no matter what thread you’re responding to.

Jonathan
Jonathan
9 years ago

timothy, your link is badly misrepresenting that find. Metaspriggina was a fantastic find, but it only added to the evolutionary record, in fact even verifying several steps (such as the early transitionary phase of jaw development) that were only hypothetical before. The new research on Metaspriggina shows it to have features slightly more advanced than previously known, but not in the least unrepresentative of its time. If it were conclusively proven to be a vertebrate, it still wouldn’t even be the earliest one – Myllokunmingia is 20 million years earlier and Haikouichthys is 13 million years earlier. And Metaspriggina is… Read more »

timothy
timothy
9 years ago

@JohnM

in No. 2 of my scenarios I think the fruit would indicate the hand of God, or a least government pleasing to God, and in No. 1, not so much. So there’s no reason for you to prefer No. 1 and every reason to prefer No. 2.

You are absolutely correct. I did not read your bullet points carefully. I am slipshod that way quite often and appreciate you pointing out my errors to me.

cheers.

t

timothy
timothy
9 years ago

Hi @Johnathan. Also, I’m a big fan of resisting tyrants, so I think you might have misunderstood me no matter what thread you’re responding to. We will take it up tomorrow. This gist of the disagreement is the role of the Christian vis-a-vis Government and our proper response to it. You brought up an interpretation of Romans 13 that Pastor Wilson (in my view) thoroughly discredited in his post entitled “On The Lam For Jesus”. There are two instances of “crime” committed by the Apostles Peter and Paul. I seek your opinion on those “crimes” before engaging you on the… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
9 years ago

Timothy, I don’t know how you think my interpretation of Romans 13 would be at all at odds with Paul or Peter’s actions. I fully support what they did, and many actions like those today. I think that we absolutely should resist tyranny and oppression, and that many governments past and present do evil things and need to be called to account for it, which can involve taking quite extreme measures of love, humility, truth, faith, service, and self-sacrifice. I don’t believe that governmental resistance or overthrow ever should become the main objective of a Christian. I think that the… Read more »