If you read or listen to any of the many websites, podcasts and radio broadcasts from the patriot community, you will hear the expression, “sovereigns” used frequently. The expression tends to be confusing both because governments and kings claim the term in reference to their authority over their subjects and because organized religion uses the expression as meaning the total control of God over His creation as the Sovereign Lord. The term needs clarification for the Church (i.e., the people that are born again) and the people towards their governments.
First, the patriot community rightly understands that governments are not sovereign but the people who create their governments. The American government was created “by the people, for the people” (from Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address). It is a logical conclusion that the creator is greater than the created. Thus the people who create the government are greater than the government that was created, and the people have the sovereign rights while the government has privileges granted by the people.
The Creator, Yahweh who became Y’shua, is also the Sovereign Lord who grants us our rights. Unlike humans, God can not take back that which He gives because all that He says and does is eternal. Eternal means from his unchanging nature which has no beginning nor end. Therefore His Word is immutable. So our human rights are not privileges given us from God because what He gives He can not take back (Romans 11:29).
The sovereignty of God does not mean that He controls everything, but rather, that He has authority over Himself and all that belongs to Him. Since we are made in His image, we also are made as sovereigns. This means that He gave us the right to do what we want with ourselves and all that belongs to us. Therefore, if we reject Him, He does not interfere with our rejection of Him. We suffer the consequence of our choice, of course, for those consequences belong to us. So if we reject the salvation offered to all, we own the consequence of the Lake of Fire because of our choice.
Having authority over something does not mean having control over that something. If I drive my car in the ice I have authority to drive the car because it is mine. But if I lose control over my car when I hit the ice, I have not lost my authority over the car, only the control of my car. God gave us authority over our lives which makes us sovereigns over our lives, but we do not always control our lives. We have the right to drink ourselves stinking drunk, but we will lose control of our lives as we become alcoholics. We do not lose authority over our lives, but we have lost control of our lives. Proverbs says:
He that hath no rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down, and without walls. (Prov 25:28 KJV)
This brings me to the point of my post. Since we are made in the image of God, who is sovereign and made us individually sovereign, or that is, individually responsible for our lives, He has established freedom to enter into agreements with Him and one another.
Can two walk together, except they be agreed? (Amos 3:3 KJV)
Many of the problems and difficulties we have between us and God, us and others, us and governments is due to our misunderstanding of our personal responsibilities in agreements made complicitly or implicitly. God does not do our part. He gives us responsibilities, and when we do not do them, we suffer the consequences. Grace is given by God to us so we may correct our problems with His aid if we ask for it. Grace is not His fixing our problems, although in His kindness and love He many times does so. But He is obligated only to do His part of our covenant with Him. Fortunately His parts includes many gracious promises such as He will never forsake us or leave us (Heb. 13:5), when we are faithless He remains faithful (2 Tim. 2:13), and many other such gracious promises.
It has been said by many preachers that covenants and contracts are not the same thing. They are right. A contract is an agreement for services or such things between two parties. If one party breaches the contract, the other party is no longer under obligation to fulfill the contract. Contracts can be disputed and sued in court. Covenants, however, are agreements to the death. In our covenant with God through Jesus of Nazareth, God through Jesus, first died to the Mosaic Covenant and used His blood to establish the New Covenant with all who would accept the covenant with Him, first with Israel, then to all the world.
Marriage is another covenant, not a contract. It is treated like a contract today, but not from the Lord’s point of view. It is an “until death do we part” covenant. When Yahweh made His covenant with Abraham, an animal was slaughtered and cut in half. Abraham walked between the two animal parts and so did Yahweh (Gen. 15:9-17). This act of shedding blood and passing through the flesh is the ancient means of forming a covenant. This same act is done on the honeymoon when a virgin breaks her hymen in the act of intercourse.
But our agreement with government is contractual, not a covenant. When the founding fathers set up the US constitution, it was based upon the understanding that each person was a sovereign individual of self government, or self control. As Joseph Farah had pointed out, self government does not mean representational government but each person governs themselves.
Which brings me to Christian maturity. There is a distinction made between children of God and sons of God. The Bible says:
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. (Rom 8:14 KJV)
A son is mature, and takes responsibility. A child continues in selfish pursuits. As I shared in the post, “The Difference Between a Child of God and a Son of God”, a prince, (Alexander the Great) was not considered a son of the king (Philip of Macedonia) until he became responsible enough to take over the throne. At that time he was adopted by his father, and he then became his son. Being a son of God means being a responsible sovereign who has root in one’s self.
The American government was set up on this foundation. As long as its people matured, it would remain a free nation. But if the people remained children, even though the system remained the same, the nation would fall into tyranny. The tyranny is based on the contract not being fulfilled by the people. It is a deception, but a legal deception. The responsibility to know our rights and responsibilities lies on the shoulders of the people. If the people forsake their part, then the servants of government can seize control and make themselves masters instead of servants. This is where we are today and the forsaking of responsibility by the people occurred between the end of the Civil War and the turn of the twentieth century. For the last 100 years the American people, by and large, have remained children and have not taken hold of their sovereign responsibilities. Americans have not become sons of the founding fathers.