Role of Government (Romans 13)

Introduction

Today we are going to talk politics. More specifically, we are going to talk political theology… Baptist political theology.

People used to say that the two things you’re not supposed to bring up in polite company are politics and religion. But the most interesting conversations I’ve ever had would all fit under the general category of religion. And politics is (by far) the most dominant subject of our culture these days… and that was true before the state of New York convicted the presumed Republican candidate for president of 34 felonies… in an obviously political use of the judicial system.

Most of you (at least those who know me)… you’ll know that I am allergic to the idea of bringing partisan politics into our gatherings as a church. I have never (in my role as a pastor) endorsedor opposed a particular candidate for any office… and I’m notgoing to start doing that today.

I have made (in the last several years) two personal political endorsements, one advocating for Barry Ward (by putting a sign in my yard) during his run for New Diana school board, and another inviting people (through social media) to vote for a guy that I liked for Texas State Representative of Greg County.

Both Barry and the other guy I endorsed ended up losing their respective votes, so maybe I should stop endorsing candidates… but I certainly don’t bring any of that stuff in here.

It's not because I don’t think politics matter. On the contrary, I listen to news podcasts, I read books and articles, I talk about political issues in conversations, and I vote on pretty much everything I have an opportunity to do. I want to be an informed and participatingcitizen (as much as I am able) at the various levels of my worldly citizenships (i.e., local, state, national).

But the reason I don’t bring partisan politics to church (promoting a particular candidate or repeating party talking points) is because I believe that what we are doing here is infinitely more important than anything we might do in the political arena outside. And please understand me… I’m not pitting the one against the other, but I am prioritizing the church over the world.

When we gather on Sunday mornings…

We are gathered to be reminded of the good news that God has provided for us a Savior.

Christ is our only hope in life and death, and we desperately need to know and to remember who He is and what He has done and is doing.

We are gathered to be instructed

about what to expect in the world,

about how to prepare ourselves for perseverance,

about what to do with the days and resources we have,

about how to trust God through the midst of hardship,

and about what it means to do all of this as worship to the Lord, with love for Him and for others as we do it.

We are gathered to be edified and to edify one another.

Our relationships together (formed and structured according to Christ’s commands for a local church)… these relationships are the context for our spiritual maturity, our accountability, our discipleship, our correction, and our perseverance.

Brothers and sisters, we are gathered in the name of Christ… to enjoy the benefits of being part of this particular church family… and to wield the authority delegated to us by Christ as citizens of His kingdom.

But having said that, Christ Himself teaches us that we (as Christians) are also citizens of this world… with particular benefits and responsibilities. And Christ also describes for us (in the Bible) both our obligation to civil authorities and also the purpose and power of those who rule in society.

As a matter of fact, Christianity itself is necessarily political. Since I’ve emphasized my allergy for partisanship and party talking points, let me be clear to say that I do intend to be very political every Sunday.

Every time I refer to the lordship of Christ, I am declaring that Christ is King over all mayors and judges and senators and presidents. Every time I point to some command in the Bible to do this or don’t do that, I am saying that Christ’s standards of right and wrong supersede all others.

We must obey Christ, whether our civil authorities command it or not; and we must obey Christ, even if that means (in some circumstances) disobeying our civil authorities.

Every time I describe the gospel and explain the meaning of it, I’m saying that Christ is the one who judges now, and He will be the one to judge on the last day. And some receive His blessing, while others receive His curse.

It seems to me that Christians typically land closer to one end or another on the religion and politics spectrum. You might be afraid that politics will ruin the purity of your religious experience, so you try to keep the two separate. Or you might be concerned that religion is pretty pointless if it doesn’t have any immediate and real effect in the world, so you try to draw one-to-one connections between all of your political conclusions (candidates and party affiliations) and your religious convictions.

But these two ends of the spectrum are both flawed, because they either separate religion from the real world or they merge the two together such that one can hardly tell the difference between your convictions about sin and salvation and your convictions about which candidateor policy a Christian must endorse.

In the history of Christianity, there is a wide range of political arguments. And in Baptist history in particular, there are at least two ways of arguing and two ways of defining what we ought to expectand work for with regard to our relationship with civil government.

I certainly won’t answer all the questions today, but I do hope that this sermon will provide at least some help to many of us as we try to think more biblically about the role of government. In short, I’m arguing that Baptists have different views of religious liberty, but Baptists share the beliefs (1) that civil government is a God-appointed institution, under which we are to be good citizens, and (2) that the purpose of civil authorities is to punish bad conduct in an effort to keep good societal order.

You might be interested to know that the reason we are focusing on this subject today is not because we are in a presidential election year. Anyone who knows me will know that I am quite intentional in my planning, but they will also know that I am not swayed much at all by events or holidays on the calendar.

No, we’re focusing on Baptist distinctives this year because my fellow pastors and I decided (last year) that it would be good for us as a church to revisit them during our current cultural and political moment. We live in a time in America that is marked by a great deal of uncertainty and change… and it’s all coming at us so fast that we can easily become frazzled if we aren’t well-grounded.

My aim… our aim… is to get back to the basics of what a Christian is… what a church is… and what Christians (particularly Baptists) have believed about the fundamentals of Christian living in the world.

Let’s read a common passage today on the subject of government, and let’s consider this topic together. Please stand with me as I read Romans 13:1-7.

Scripture Reading

Romans 13:1–7 (ESV)

1 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. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.

Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing.

7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

Main Idea:

Baptists have different views of religious liberty, but Baptists share the beliefs that civil government is a God-appointed institution, under which we are to be good citizens, and that the purpose of civil authorities is to punish bad conduct in an effort to keep good societal order.

Sermon

1. Divergent Views of Liberty

In the year 1612, a man named Thomas Helwys wrote what Baptist historian William Lumpkin believes was the first English Baptist confession of faith.[i] It included 27 articles (or subjects), and it was signed by all the members of a small Baptist church in London, which grew an entire Baptist denomination in England.

Most of the articles (as one might expect) are very similar to Baptists today. They believed in the Trinity, the Fall of man, the radical consequences of sin, and the exclusive grace of God in Christ. They believed that baptism is the outward manifestation of dying unto sin and walking in newness of life. And they believed that the members of every church ought to know one another so that they may perform all the duties of love, both to soul and body.

But these early Baptists also believed (in contrast to the people called Anabaptists[ii]) that the “magistracy is a holy ordinance of God” and that magistrates (or civil authorities) “may be members of the church of Christ” even as they “retain their magistracy.”[iii]

In other words, they believed that legislators, judges, and policemen could be members of a church so long as they believed the same gospel and followed the same Jesus. Their jobs (which include judgments and lethal force, by definition) do not prevent them from being good Christians in the world.

From the earliest days when Baptists came on the scene, they universally argued for religious liberty. They believed that civil government should not make any laws against churches gathering in the name of Christ, and they believed that churches (not the government) should define their own doctrine, their own membership, and their own leadership. If you want to study this topic of religious liberty more, then check out my topical sermon from last month… which you can find on our church website and on our YouTube channel.

But Baptists did not always agree on how much involvement the civil government should have in the religious beliefs and practices of its citizens.

For example, one Baptist statement from 1659 says, “[We do not] desire, in matters of religion [in our nation], that Popery should be tolerated… or any persons tolerated, that worship a false god; nor any that speak contemptuously and reproachfully of our Lord Jesus Christ; nor any that deny the holy Scriptures… to be the Word of God.”[iv] These Baptists wanted the liberty to be Baptist, but they did not want outright religious pluralism – where anyone could believe anything.

But another Baptist statement from about 40 years earlier says, “The king is a mortal man, and not God, therefore [the king] hath no power over the immortal souls of his subjects… Let them be heretics, Turks, Jews, or whatsoever, it appertains not to the earthy power to punish them.”[v] Baptists like this wanted liberty for themselves and for everyone else to believe what they like.

It seems important for us to know stuff like this today, since many Christians in America (Baptists included) are making public arguments about what is and is not religious liberty. Christians in America are making conflicting statements about the role of religion in the public square and in the political arena.

That the church is distinct from the state, and the state from the church, all Protestants agree. But there is quite a variety among Protestants (and even Baptists) about how the state and the church are to relate to one another.

It’s important for us to remember this as we engage in conversation ourselves about how to work this out. Good Christians can disagree on a whole host of topics, and the meaning of religious liberty is (I think) one of those areas where we are all (if we are historically and biblically grounded Christians)… we are all trying to apply biblical commands and principles in a cultural and political context that is not specifically addressed in the Bible.

The jurisdiction of the church is not the same as that of the state, and vice versa. But these jurisdictions overlap. And it’s in those overlapping areas that we are most likely to feel the greatest heat. Just how long can the state require churches not to gather during a pandemic? Can the state require such a thing at all? Should churches ever disobey state laws or city ordinances? If so, when?

So too, many Christians in America are either confused or ignorant about the difference between a church and an individual Christian. As the church scattered (i.e., individual Christians in the world), we have different responsibilities than we do as the church gathered (i.e., church members gathered in the name of Christ).

Much more could be said on this introductory topic, but we must move on. The point I’m trying to make with this first point of my sermon is that Baptists have differing views of religious liberty. And we ought to be patient with one another as we all look to the Bible… as we all consider the wisdom of Christians who have gone before… as we all learn from the mistakes of the past… and as we all forge ahead in the American experiment of a liberal democratic republic.

2. The Power of the State

Let’s begin to look more at our text this morning. This is a topical message, so I won’t exposit the passage (like I do when I’m preaching expositionally). And yet, even when I’m preaching topically, I still aim to be faithful to the context and meaning of each Scripture passage I cite.

Romans 13 is one section of a lengthy letter, from the Apostle Paul to the Christians in first-century Rome. The first 11 chapters are Paul’s detailed description of the gospel of Jesus Christ (how all people are sinners who’ve broken God’s law, how God worked on behalf of sinners to save them by His grace, and how God had been working out His plan of salvation – wisely and powerfully – throughout the ages of human history).

Chapter 11 concludes with Paul’s doxology or praise of God for His wisdom and power. Paul wrote, “Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! ‘For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?’ ‘Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?’ For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen” (Rom. 11:33-36).

Friends, God is the God of salvation; and He is worthy of all praise and honor for bringing about the glorious redemption He has in the Lord Jesus Christ! Whatever else I say about Christian living and the role of government this morning, I hope you’ll hear that the good news of Jesus Christ (which is made available to guilty sinners like us, on the basis of God’s sheer grace and mercy) is the most important and central reality of it all.

The commands and instructions Christians read in the Bible about how they are to live in the world all begin with this fundamental truth and command – Christ is the Savior of sinners, and all people everywhere must repent and believe in Him!

If you want to talk more about what that means or how you can repent and believe, then let’s talk as soon as the service is over.

But the gospel message and the gospel imperative (or command) both have huge and comprehensive implications for how Christians (those who believe the gospel) ought to live in the world. And that’s the turn of Romans chapter 12.

The Apostle Paul says, “I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship” (Rom. 12:1). And the rest of chapters 12 and 13 describe what that sort of sacrificial Christian living is supposed to look like.

First, Christians are to live in meaningful relationship with other Christians – “we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another” (Rom. 12:5).

Second, Christians are to live genuine love and humility in their relationships together – “Let love be genuine… Outdo one another in showing honor… If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (Rom. 12:9, 10, 18).

And third, Christians are to live as good citizens of the state – “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities… Pay [or “give”] to all what is owed to them” (Rom. 13:1, 7).

We see here that civil government is a necessary institution… one that God has “appointed” for His purpose in the world and one that God has authorized to bear a particular kind of power(Rom. 13:1-4).

The purpose of government is where we’re going in point 3, but let’s consider the authorized power of government for a moment.

I talked several weeks ago about the reality that all Christians have lived and continue to do today as a citizens of some nation or state or tribe or village. And the Bible is not silent about the reality that there are geographical and institutional boundaries for people in this world.

Sometimes Christians can talk like all government of any kind (monarchy, aristocracy, republic, etc.) is an effect of the Fall. They seem to think that if Adam and Eve had not sinned there would be no need for any societal rules or administrators to facilitate them. But I don’t think that’s right. For one, even in the resurrection, Christ will reign as King, and all believers will live in happy submission to His right rule. And, in this world, I think that even sinless people would need traffic lights and public utilities… and people to manage them.

So too, this naïve view of institutions and authority does not take into account that government is not the only institutional structure we have in society. When we were recently focusing our attention on the first letter from the Apostle Peter to Christians scattered about the Roman empire, we noted that his teaching on the topic of societal institutions included (1) government (specifically, “the emperor” and “governors… sent by him” [1 Pet. 2:13-14]) and (2) family (specifically, “wives” and “husbands” [1 Pet. 3:1-7]).

Let me quickly remind you that Christians have understood at least three basic societal institutions in the world – the family, the church, and the state. And these institutions are not evil or sinful in themselves. There are good husbands and bad ones, good wives and bad ones… There are good and bad pastors, good and bad churches, good and bad kings, judges, mayors, policemen, and presidents.

All three of these institutions – the family, the church, and the state – have their own God-authorized power or authority. And the Bible addresses them all.

For the family(especially parents), God has authorized the use of the “rod” (Prov. 13:24, 22:15, 23:13-14, 29:15; cf. Eph. 6:1-4).

For the church, God has authorized the use of the “keys” (Matt. 16:13-20, 18:15-20, 28:18-20). Many of you will know that the church exercises or uses the “keys” when the assembled body of members makes decisions about what we believe(according to Scripture) and who is in or out of membership (based on their credible profession of faith and their commitment to be a disciple alongside us).

And for the state, God has authorized the use of the “sword.” See it there in our passage this morning – “if you do wrong, be afraid, for he [i.e., the civil authority] does not bear the sword in vain” (Rom. 13:4).

This authority of the “sword” is rooted in the “dominion” mandate of creation (Gen. 1:28), and it is expressed more clearly in God’s covenant with Noah, where God said, “for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man. ‘Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image” (Gen. 9:5-6).

God’s authorization for the state or civil authorities to bear the “sword” is divine authorization to execute capital punishment. No individual is to take this authority into his or her own hands, but the societal structures of order require that wrongdoers (especially those who threaten the life of image-bearers) be punished by those with the authority they’ve been given by divine authorization.

It may surprise some of us to learn that the Bible does not command Christians to establish any particular form of government.[vi] Christians have lived and do live under all forms of government, and the Christian commission (from Christ Himself) is to live faithfully as His people and as His witnesses wherever we find ourselves.

That said, given the opportunity, Christians (especially Baptists) have drawn various principles and commands from Scripture in order to promote a free state wherein the people of Christ might be better able to live as disciples and evangelists. In large measure, this was a major effort in the founding of America. But this is not our primary mandate or hope or effort in the world.

We (as Christians) must remember that we are dual citizens. We are citizens of Christ’s kingdom; and therefore, we must live in obedience to King Jesus, followingHis rules and inviting others to participate in the benefits and obligations of life under our good King. But we are also citizens of our state or nation; and therefore, we must live “in subjection” to the “authorities” which “God has appointed” to govern both believers and unbelievers in a given society.

In twenty-first-century America, we have the ability to engage in the political system in ways that first-century Christians could have never dreamed. And I think it’s worthwhile for us to do what we can to influence our political system for the better. As citizens of this world (as members of our communities), it is right for us to care and to act for the good of our earthly societies.

We should submit to the civil authorities of our nation. We should obey unless they command us to do something God forbids. We should obey unless they forbid us to do something God commands.

We should earn a reputation for being the most industrious, the most compassionate, and the most virtuous citizens. We (as Christians) are not at war with our governing authorities. We want to promote and work for the good of our whole state and nation, not just ourselves.

In our particular nation, I think we should all vote when we can. We should aim to be informed about our options. We should think our options through with biblical principles and commands in our minds. And we should try to promote the good of our neighbors (Christian or otherwise), and not just seek our own interests.

And I think we should participate in the process as we are able. Not every Christian should write an email or a letter to a representative… but some of us could. Not every Christian should organize a petition to move public sentiment, to write legislation, or to change public policy… but some of us could. Not every Christian should run for a public office or seek appointment in a governmental agency… but some of us could.

Carl F. H. Henry (an Evangelical and public theologian in America during the twentieth century) said, “The political process [is] one key way Christians [can] express something of the justice of God [in the world]… Political power, as utilized by individuals or governments, is a ‘divine entrustment, accountable to the Deity for the preservation of justice and order.’”[vii]

Brothers and sisters, because we are citizens of the Church (citizens of Christ’s kingdom), we are to live faithfully in this world for Him. But we are also citizens of the state, and this means we are dually obligated to live in subjection to the officials and laws of our nation… so far as we can without disobeying Christ.

We have both privileges and responsibilities under our present form of government, and we would do well to participate in it… as much as we have the opportunity, the aptitude, and the ambition to do it.

3. The Purpose of the State

We’ve already covered a lot of ground today, and some of it has probably been a bit more theoretical than you’d like… But bear with me just a bit longer and listen carefully to this last point.

Romans 13 not only includes the clear imperative for Christians to submit to civil authorities (whose power has been appointed by God); it also includes some implicit information about the purpose of civil authorities.

Every mayor, judge, senator, police officer, governor, congressman, and president will give an account to Christ on the last day… just as every father and mother will do… and just as every church member will do. We will all give an account for how we used the authority or powerGod has delegated to us. And our evaluation will be based on the question: “Did we use our authority for the purpose it was given?” or “Did we use it as God intended us to do?”

It is not just inappropriate for a father to exasperate his children with unrealistic expectations… It is sin.

It is not just unhealthy for a local church to be either lazy or over-picky in their practice of admitting church members… It is sin.

And it is not just irritating or shameful for a civil authority to use their power in some other way than God has purposed… It is sin.

So, what is the God-ordained or God-appointed purpose of civil government? Let me offer 5 features of the purpose we see described in our text.

First, civil authorities ought to serve God. Second, civil authorities ought to punish bad conduct. Third, civil authorities ought to approve of good conduct. Fourth, civil authorities ought to avenge injustices. And fifth, civil authorities ought to receive respect and support from the citizens they govern.

First, civil authorities ought to serve God.

Twice in this passage, civil authorities are called God’s “servant” (v4). This the same word translated “deacon” elsewhere in the NT (1 Tim. 3:8). Our text says, “there is no authority except from God” (v1), and those who wield civil authority ought to understand their obligation to use it in service to the one who has given it.

Brothers and sisters, we ought to call upon our civil authorities to remember that they will give an account one day to the one who has authority over them. And we ought to pray that God will convict those in authority who do not submit to Him… and even that He will prevent their rebellion or remove them from office.

Second, civil authorities ought to punish bad conduct.

v3 says, “rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.” There are two important words here – “bad” and “conduct.”

Civil authorities ought not be in the business of punishing “thought” crimes or “hate” crimes… they ought to deal in the objective realm of “conduct.” And civil authorities ought to punish those who are convicted of “bad” conduct (both to deter other criminals and, if possible, to recover what was lost).

Third, civil authorities ought to approve of good conduct.

v3 calls Christians to “do what is good, [so that] you will receive his [i.e., the civil authority’s] approval” (v3). Of course, the definition of “good” and “bad” conduct comes from God’s moral law and the biblical ethic. And again, the two important words are both “good” and “conduct.” Civil authorities ought to create and maintain laws that promote good behavior according to the biblical ethic.

This does not mean that our legislators and police officers must all be Christians (not at all). But it does mean that we (as Christians) ought to be urging everyone around us (both citizens and authorities) to embrace virtue and ethical standards… as they are described in the Bible and as they are built into our own conscience.

We don’t have to say, “God says to do it like this.” We can, but we don’t have to. And we can also say, “You know as well as I do that this is right, and that is wrong.”

Fourth, civil authorities ought to avenge injustices.

The civil authority is “the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (v4). Civil authorities are supposed to be a reflection of God’s own justice, which will be meted out on the last day.

When our political and judicial representatives act justly, avenging injustices, they help us all to remember that God Himself will avenge injustices perfectly in the end. When they do not act justly, letting injustices go unpunished or even enacting laws that promote injustice, those with civil authority not only speak a false word about God, but they also become complicit in the works of injustice… and they too will bear responsibility for it.

Fifth, civil authorities ought to receive respect and support from the citizens they govern.

Our passage concludes with the command for Christians to “Pay to all what is owed to them… taxes… revenue… respect… honor” (v7). Whether we like everything about our government or not, order is better than anarchy, and we would be wise to do all that we can to support and to honor our civil authorities in an effort to maintain the order we can.

Conclusion

Brothers and sisters, civil government is a God-appointed institution, under which we are to be good citizens. May God help us to strive toward being the best citizens of our communities, our state, and our nation.

And we should also understand that God has authorized civil authorities with a specific power and purpose (to punish bad conduct in an effort to keep good societal order). May God help us participate thoughtfully and actively in our representative form of government… may God help us pray for and work for an ordered society that will benefit all who live within it… and may God help us to be faithful witnesses of Christ in the midst of whatever society we find ourselves… awaiting that coming day when Christ shall completely bring His kingdom into the world… when sin and injustice and rebellion will be no more.

Endnotes

[i] William Latane Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith, ed. Bill Leonard, Second Revised (Valley Forge, PA: Judson Press, 2011). 107. [ii] Anabaptists were radical children of the Protestant Reformation, and they believed that only believers should be baptized. Their name was a derogatory label given by their opponents, which literally means again baptizers. Many historians have made a strong effort to show connections between Anabaptists and later English Baptists, because there are some similarities in doctrine and practice. But right at the beginning (and much more obviously in the decades that followed), we see English Baptists consciously taking a positive view of the civil government in direct contrast to the widely held view among Anabaptists. By the mid and late 1600s, English Baptists were so adamant that they were not Anabaptists that they published confessions of faith with a disavowal in the title (See especially the Second London Confession of 1689). [iii] Thomas Helwys and Joseph E. Early, The Life and Writings of Thomas Helwys, 1st ed, Early English Baptist Texts (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2009). 113. [iv] John Tombs, “Declaration of Several of the People Called Anabaptists, in and about the City of London” (Livewel Chapman at the Crown in Popes-Head-Alley, 1659). [v] Timothy George citing Thomas Helwys in The Mystery of Iniquity. Timothy George, “Between Pacifism and Coercion: The English Baptist Doctrine of Religious Toleration,” Mennonite (The) Quarterly Review Goshen, Ind 58, no. 1 (1984): 30–49. 40. [vi] At the end of the day, we have three basic options for how we are going to live beside other people in this world. We can have globalism (which some are promoting today), where one global government orders all societies in the world. This is not only terrifying; it is simply not practical. The further civil authorities are from the people they govern, the less capable they are of governing. And the simple fact is that various peoples in the world have deeply divided ideas about order and law in a given society. No one is going to get everyone to comply with a global order, at least not until Christ returns to rule with His infinite power. Our second option is tribalism (which runs rampant in many parts of the world today), where strong men dominate those under their rule until a stronger man comes to dethrone him. This is what is happening in Haiti right now. One news report said that the capital of Haiti is crumbling under the relentless assaults of violent gangs. About a week ago, a missionary couple was shot and killed for no apparent reason after a church event, and there is no authority in Haiti to seek justice. Our third option for societal order is some sort of nation or state (i.e., nationalism), where recognized authorities maintain order. This is an oversimplification, but a nation can be ruled by a monarchy, a dictatorship, a parliament, or a republic. In some way there is an established civil order that governs all the citizens of that nation, and it also protects its own national interests from the threat of other nations outside. [vii] Jason Duesing and Jesse Payne quoting Carl F. H. Henry. Thomas S. Kidd, Paul D. Miller, and Andrew T. Walker, Baptist Political Theology (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2023). 384.