Oh my. From John’s piece:
“What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tax? From their sons or from others?” And when he said, “From others,” Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. However, not to give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth you will find a shekel. Take that and give it to them for me and for yourself.” (Matthew 17:25–27)
“The sons are free.” That is, free from being controlled by any human authority. Sons obey their Father. He is their decisive authority. What they do, they do because of his will, not the will of man. The sons are free.
The King’s sons are not obliged to pay taxes to institutions created by their Father. They are obliged to obey their Father, not man. Therefore, when they pay the tax, they do so to honor their Father because he gave them the resources and the command: “Take that and give it to them” (Matthew 17:27)."
If you men read Lucas’s post from earlier today, you’ll find Calvin’s comment on this text, and once again we find Anabaptists everywhere among us Reformed. If I were talking to John, I’d ask him if he’s even aware of what Calvin says on this prooftext he abuses. My guess is he’d say “yes,” but wouldn’t actually be able to tell you what Calvin says about Anabaptists’ take on the text. Just to test him.
The thing I’ve found disconcerting about present and former and repenting Baptists is their ignorance of history where it matters in the positions they take. It’s like, being bright, they think they don’t have to deal with dead men’s objections to their positions, and so they cultivate ignorance of them. Now I know some here will object to this observation, but I’ve lived many years watching present and former Baptists be oblivious to their heritage, and when informed, deny they are oblivious while continuing to demonstrate they’re oblivious.
John’s position here is just classic Anabaptist claptrap. We’ve been warning about this tendency among Covid agitators and now we see it among Covid assimilators, also. Anabaptism will out regardless of sides you pick.
So now, in case some readers here aren’t wanting to read Calvin on John’s prooftext, here’s the money quote: “But what is the object of his discourse? Is it to exempt himself and his followers from subjection to the laws? Some explain it thus, that Christians have a right to be exempted, but that they voluntarily subject themselves to the ordinary government… [Then, after answering “no” to this Anabaptist interpretation, Calvin continues.] And therefore it is also highly foolish in the Anabaptists to torture these words for overturning political order, since it is more than certain, that Christ does not say any thing about a privilege common to believers, but only draws a comparison from the sons of kings, who, together with their domestics, are exempted.”
One final thing: John should have dealt with the issue of cell lines. It was irresponsible not to when it’s a clear moral issue known by many. Love,
PS: I never read Toby or Doug, but Lucas just told me he wrote what he did because Toby quoted this text in making the same exact argument now made by John. Anabaptists run amok, and sadly, they have no idea. Both Toby and John abusing the same precise text in opposite directions. Aaargh!
