The Divine Right of Resistance: Biblical Options for Opposing Tyranny

by Phillip Kayser

What would Jesus do under tyranny? Well, what did Jesus do under tyranny? In this book, you'll see how Jesus and countless heroes of the faith navigated unjust judges, illegal arrests, civil rights violations, weapons bans, street-preaching bans, being forbidden to meet together, and more. See over 200 Scriptural examples of resistance to these age-old challenges, and the saints' legacy of overcoming "by the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony" (Rev. 12:11). Discover Scripturally-based resistance tactics for individuals, churches, and magistrates. See why Romans 13 proves that tyrants are not ministers of God, and what makes a ruler a tyrant. Learn what the Great Commission says about your responsibilities to your magistrate, in good times, bad times, and everything in between. And get a peek at the Bible's grid for individualized decision making, so that you can know "when to hold and when to fold" in exercising your Divine Right of Resistance.

Genres: Theology, Politics, Philosophy, Cultural, Christian Living

86 pages, Kindle Edition

First published August 19, 2021

About the author

Phillip G. Kayser, Ph.D. is the Senior Pastor of Dominion Covenant Church in Omaha, NE. He holds a M.Div. from Westminster Theological Seminary (California) and a Ph.D. from Whitefield Theological Seminary (Florida). Phillip Kayser currently serves as president at Biblical Blueprints, a resource organization that is leveraging the impact of small ministries around the world by helping them recapture Biblical patterns of training, leadership development, and cultural renewal. He has degrees in theology and philosophy/ethics. He and his wife Kathy have 5 children.

Reviews

[Jake Litwin · Rating 5 out of 5]

A concise biblical treatment on the Regulative Principle of Government. The Divine Right of Kings view (Rex Lex) truly falls apart when harmonizing and being consistent with Scripture.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a really good, short work on resistance theology. The book is mostly a really good reminder of what the Bible has to say about resisting governing authorities. Highly recommended.

[Timothy Decker · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 actually. He had some great points and quotable statement. However, a book like this is hard to use outside of its narrow theological context of postmill theonomy. Can't get people in my church to read this without first warnings and cautions. That makes it problematic.

[Rick Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

What does the Bible say about obedience to the government and resistance to tyranny? This short, helpful resource gives clear answers. The book is succinct, biblical, and helpful. It would make for a good bible study group discussion. Kayser's constant use of biblical examples, clear explanations, and cautious distinctions make this little book a valuable resource. I'd like to see a longer treatment of the same sort with more fleshed out application.

[Brandon Miller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Basically just a concise collection of biblical references involving resistance to tyranny. Not saying that's a bad thing, though!

[Caleb Levi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty much any Christian who tried making a biblical case for anything during COVID should read this little book.

[Jeffrey · Rating 5 out of 5]

(Not a review, Jeff Notes: p.3 the Regulative Principle of Government view / Lex Rex (the law is king) says that the king can command and enforce no law other than the law of God contained in the Scriptures. p.5...there is no legitimate authority except the authority delegated from God in the pages of Scripture.
p.7...though God allows Satan to be the "ruler of this world" (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11) for a time, that does not warrant our blind subjection to Satan... Until the people impeached Saul or until Saul was providentially removed by death, David felt that he could not resist any of Saul's lawful orders. David honored the office, but did not have blind submission to the person. p.8 The word authorities should be seen as referring to the civic institutions
p.30 despite the clear right to own weapons and even form militias, Scripture never authorized private citizens to use those weapons against a civil magistrate- unless another lawfully-instituted civil magistrate had called them to war. This is one of the differences between lawful resistance and unlawful revolution: The civil magistrate alone is authorized by God to use the sword in the "ministry of vengeance" (Rom. 13:1-5).
Vengeance means the infliction of justice upon a criminal after the time of the crime. Killing a criminal in self-defense is not vengeance, whereas hunting down a criminal to kill him is. Vengeance is prohibited for the individual citizen (Lev. 19:18; Rom. 12:19) whereas it is commanded of the civil magistrate (Numb. 35:19; Rom. 13:4).

[Frode · Rating 5 out of 5]

Phillip Kayser has a book that Christians should read due to the recent intrusions on the first amendment. His book is short, a little less than 60 pages of text but with additional pages of follow-up sources. The Divine Right of Resistance deals with a Biblical response to government overreach. He begins with a good discussion of Romans 13:1-7 in light of two viewpoints, which in Latin are rex lex and lex rex. That roughly translates to the king is law or the law is king. His discussion is clear, organized, and thoughtful. He continues on in that section with some thoughts on how a Christian is to relate to his magistrate.

Of course, what most folks really want to know is if and when it is ok to resist their governing authorities and how it plays out. Those questions are posed and answered in a general fashion in the second section of the book. He explains when compliance is not an option versus when it is. Thoughtful Christian have probably figured that out already, but he makes it clear. He speaks to the issue of various types of lawful resistance and breaks it down to individuals, churches, and magistrates themselves. It is a helpful section.

In the last portion of the book, Kayser takes a specific example and works through it. He gives guidelines on what to do and not to do if the local government comes to take your guns. He uses four criteria to evaluate possibilities. First is deontology, which looks at the laws God has established in Scripture. After all, a Christian’s actions should be Biblically based. His second point is situationalism; he is careful to distance this from pragmatism, but it means to take into account the details of the situation. Next is personalism, which according to Kayser means how the decision affects the individual person and likely those under his authority. Obviously an unmarried male in his early twenties will have different options than a married man in his mid forties with children and home. His final point is teleology where he applies the Bible to the fallout of the decision, namely consequences, goals and opportunity cost.

The book is laced with Scriptural examples and references, so a careful reader will want to check out those in his or her own Bible. Mr. Kayser has obviously done his homework, and the book says he has been teaching on these ideas for decades. I believe this is a helpful book. Some folks might want more specific answers, but Kayser points out the options where the areas are gray instead of telling the reader exactly what to do. Nonetheless, the guidelines are there, and with Bible in hand the Christian needs to make his own decisions suitable for the occasion. I recommend the book.

[Will O'kelley · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unless you've been living under a rock, you probably know that Christianity isn't exactly viewed favorably in the West. Such a decline in favor means that Christians are increasingly being persecuted. Though such persecution is mild in comparison to the persecution faced by Christians in the majority of the world and throughout the majority of Christian history, it seems naive to think that persecution will not increase. In the face of such persecution, how should Christians respond? I found this book to be helpful overall. I agree with the author's main point: that Lex Rex is a more faithful reading of the entire Bible, including passages such as Romans 13. With that said, I haven't yet been convinced of the hermeneutical foundation that underlies theonomy, nor do I hold to post-mil eschatology. For those reasons, I have lots of questions about this book. This is an area of current interest for me, so my viewpoint is still very much in flux. Additionally, there were definitely some instances of weak/borderline-irresponsible exegesis in the book. For example, at one point the author quotes Jesus's words to the high priest in John 18:36, and then deduces from the passage that Jesus is saying that magistrates have the right to wage war. But Jesus is clearly contrasting himself with worldly rulers "of this world." It is widely known that "cosmos" has a wide semantic range in Johanine literature, and it seems most likely that here, John is using it in a negative light. Jesus isn't giving license to wage war here; rather, he is saying that if he were an earthly king who acted purely out of self-interest, he would defend himself, even though such a counter-factual is clearly impossible. There were other interpretations that left me scratching my head. Still...I think the book is a worthwhile read.

[Patrick S. · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of the clearest and most well laid out books on the subject of Romans 13 that I've read. Kayser does a great job of establishing two ways to read Romans 13 either The Divine Right of Kings or The Regulative Principle. He then takes a historic and logical view of both theories and shows that Romans 13 is not some all-purpose allegiance to whatever government comes around and says.

However, with that acknowledgment, he also provides the rest of the book with the proper scopes of biblical authority like the family, the church, and lesser and greater magistrates. The other two parts are when is it appropriate to resist and the ethics of biblical resistance. These are great topics to discuss within the scope of the book.

Now, with the book being about 65 pages there's not long, drawn-out coverage of everything that could be covered under these four headings. However, Kayser makes a point that this is just a starting point. He lays the gauntlet down to understand how and why the Bible is laid out in narrative fashion and that Christ-followers are to draw out from Scripture the ethical and logical needs and attitudes in biblical resistance (or non-resistance). He gives a good scenario about government weapon confiscation that is a great example for the topic at hand. However, he doesn't seem to go far enough in helping others to a conclusion in the scenario he gives.

This book comes from a presuppositional viewpoint and really hits it out of the park on the topic. It walks through the reader in a clear and concise way to make the point needed. This is definitely going to be in one of my "must recommend" on the topic of Christianity and politics and AnarchoChristianity. Final Grade - A

[Joshua Horn · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is based off of what I believe to be a faulty exegesis of Romans 13. Kayser argues that the command is not to submit to all magistrates, but only to ones who are operating Biblically. Without trying to debate this point by point, I don't think this is sustainable when looking at the wording that Paul uses, the context of when and to whom he was writing. Kayser also doesn't deal with passages like 1 Peter 2:13-17, which would seem to completely contradict his argument, since they reiterate the plain reading of Romans 13, without the opportunities to reinterpret it that he has found in Romans 13.

One thing he mentions several times is that the Puritans held to a "regulative principle of government," that the civil government only has authority in areas in which the Bible (usually in the Mosaic law) has explicitly given it jurisdiction. I would be interested in evidence that this is the case, since I believe that is a modern term, in my (admittedly limited) reading of the Puritans never seen them argue for that strict of bounds on the magistrates, and don't believe the Puritan magistrates held themselves bound by any such rules in what authority they exercised.

The later chapters of the book I thought contained some valuable information, looking at the examples of resistance in scripture, but I can't recommend them since his interpretive framework is based off of what I think is actually a dangerous misinterpretation.

To be clear, I don't believe in unlimited authority for civil magistrates, and I think there is a solid case to be made for biblical resistance to tyranny. I just don't think this is that case.

[Devin · Rating 3 out of 5]

His breakdown on Romans 13 and the responsibilities magistrates have to citizens and vice versa was very good. His argument for the "Regulative Principle of Government" and Opposing Tyranny was compelling, but I wasn't as enthused about the options. He uses narrative to pull out a lot of his points, ignoring the maxim that narrative is descriptive, not prescriptive. He addresses this approach briefly at the start of the book, but because of his extensive use of Old Testament narrative as evidence, an entire chapter (minimum) was needed in my opinion.

3.5

[Tim · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent short treatise on Christian ethics and the doctrine of the lesser magistrate. I really appreciated the case study of a weapons ban - it's not as simple as "just turn them all in" or "just shoot 'em all dead." Christian ethics requires prudence unless there is a clear command from Scripture. This book also has a great exposition and application of how Romans 13 does not preach "submit-with-some-exceptions", but rather that the only interpretation that makes sense is the regulative principle of government, or Lex Rex (as opposed to the Divine Right of Kings).

[William Corrin · Rating 1 out of 5]

While providing interesting insight, this book falls on its face as the author at first stands in favor of the view "Lex Rex" but as the work continues devolves into the opposite camp. After reading "Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos" by Junius Brutus, it became clear that "The Divine Right of Resistance" drew heavily from this earlier work and rather than build upon it with centuries of cultural advancement, stepped backwards from it into an uninfluential mess.

[Joseph Knowles · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good treatment of the topic. As some have pointed out, there seem to be some theonomist underpinnings that are not stated up front. Stateless governance (i.e., anarchism) is given a summary dismissal, but a full treatment of that topic is probably beyond the scope of a short work like this one. The practical categories for types of resistance are very helpful.

[William Schrecengost · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great little book on the Christian's response to tyranny. These days, the only options given are total submission or outright rebellion. Kayser shows neither are biblical and that there is a proper middle ground that respects authority while standing against tyranny.

His further book recommendation of Vindicae Contra Tyrannos is also excellent.

[Sam · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you've ever wondered what a Biblical Christian's role should be during oppression and anarchy, this book succinctly breaks down what the Bible directs for particular situations. A good handbook for understanding the line between self-defense and submission.

[Garrett · Rating 4 out of 5]

A brief primer on an alternative reading of Romans 13, taking it into account with the whole of the Scriptures. Kayser gives dozens of examples in Scripture of God and Jesus endorsing resistance to political oppressors for a wide variety of reasons.

I don't agree with all of his conclusions or interpretations, but it's certainly worth the read, which can be done in one or two sittings.

[Jesus Salgado · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book promotes a biblical perspective on resistance to tyrants and a proper understanding of how the civil government should rule within their jurisdiction.

[Caleb Falbo · Rating 4 out of 5]

He is one of few writers that I have seen that does not strawman the opposing dominant position. I appreciated that very much.

I also think that he lays forth a compelling positive case of his own position of Romans 13 in particular. He clearly lays out the differences between the "Divine Right of Kings" position from the "Regulative Principle of Government" position. He also gives satisfactory warrant that each hold to these particular positions.

A criticism that I would have is that some of his supporting passages seem to me to be unwarranted and based upon his own biases. I would have either liked to have seen him 1. Exclude those passages that seemed to lean toward eisegesis or 2. Explain more clearly how they were not eisegetical.

Another criticism is that he seems to me to rely too heavily upon narratives to make his peripheral (and in some cases primary) points. I will say that the cumulative cases of narratives are more compelling; however, I would still like to see him avoid using the examples of sinful man as his primary source of determining certain theological positions.

Overall, I'd recommend this book because it clearly and concisely articulates the position of the "Regulative Principle of Government," and that was my primary interest.

[Caleb Cook · Rating 2 out of 5]

A respectable exegesis of Romans 13 immediately spoiled by subsequent dubious conclusions and generalizations from carefully picked out of context verses--eventually arrives at largely the right conclusions, but in the wrong ways.