"To keep searching for answers to life's greatest questions shows that Brand is continuing his journey of deepening his relationship with Jesus Christ, and the Bible tells us that he is not the first to wonder about this philosophical predicament either. In Acts chapter 5, the disciples encountered the exact situation where the ways of man, and religiousness, contradicted the ways of God, and Peter and the apostles answered the Sanhedrin plainly in verse 5: "We must obey God rather than men." There is much more that can be unpacked on this topic but the message is clear, when the ways of man go against the ways, design and righteousness of God, it is imperative for us to obey our Creator above all else." - Charisma News
There is nothing wrong with a new believer asking questions. I had a million. They answers however, were not found by being platformed internationally and leveraged to advance NAR narratives. The real problem is the ridiculous assertion made by Charisma that what he is asking was asked in Acts, Chapter Five. This is the second time in this article that Charisma got the verse number wrong. It is not verse 5, but rather verse 29, as we see in the key verses above. Here is the glaring problem. The premise being offered that it is ok to revolt against established secular leadership. That is what the election in November is. That is what Brand is asking. He is not speaking about rebelling against church leadership, which is exactly comparable to the Acts verses. NAR dominionist teachers always try this sleight of hand. They advocate for challenging secular leadership but offer up the disciples refusing to listen to religious leaders. Those are two completely different things. The bible implores us to test everything that is taught religiously. It says we are to judge those in the church but not those outside. Paul constantly rebuked false teachers and called them by name. The Sanhedrin was not a political party. They were the false teachers of that time. We should rebel against false teaching, absolutely. That is not however, what this article was advocating and not what Brand was confused about. The final argument here is that if there is something in the world that disagrees with what God has said, we must side with God but that is a silly oversimplification. Thankfully, we live in a country where we are free to live our personal lives as Christ has outlined. What the NAR tries to achieve is forcing the unsaved in the world to adhere to biblical mandates that they themselves probably do not obey. God has not demanded that we create a theocracy. The other obvious problem is that both political parties are in complete disobedience to God. Your choice is not righteous. Someone needs to properly disciple Brand because he is off to a start that seems lockstep to NAR theology. Instead of excusing rebellion, we need to get back to the gospel and growth in our Lord and Savior.
Reverend Anthony Wade - August 17, 2024
