Not a Hero

Posted: September 4, 2015 in Uncategorized

Kim Davis

Well, this post may make some people a bit upset.  That is not my intent.

The more I have heard about this story, the more troubled I have become.  In case you have missed it, Kim Davis is a clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky who, due to her faith in God, feels she is taking a stand for the Lord in not issuing a marriage license to a gay couple.  As of this writing, she was arrested for her refusal.

She is a bit young in her faith and has a bit of a checkered past.  Her past marriages have been held against her by some in the media and social networks…they have been quick to label her a hypocrite.  I very much disagree with that characterization.  All of these issues took place before she found God. I firmly believe she is a new creature in Christ and Jesus has changed her.  For that, I applaud her.  In fact, I applaud her passion and her willingness to stand for the Lord.  I wish more Jesus-followers had her conviction and her zeal.

Here is my problem…I feel her zeal is misguided.  Not wrong; but, misguided. She is taking a stand; but, I believe she could do so in a much better way.

The Supreme Court, I believe incorrectly, has defined marriage to include homosexual couples.  While I disagree with their decision, that is now the law in the land.  Will I ever officiate a gay wedding?  No, I will not.  Thankfully I will not be obligated to do so. In fact, I am not obligated to officiate any wedding…heterosexual or homosexual…it’s totally my decision.  There are plenty of options for a couple to find someone to officiate their wedding.  It’s not a part of my job nor is it my responsibility to do so.

Kim Davis has a responsibility…to issue marriage licenses to couples in her county.  It’s her job.  It stinks.  If I were in her position, I would disagree with it. I would hate it.  I would pray I could somehow avoid ever being in that situation.  I don’t doubt she feels those emotions and feelings.

But, Kim…may I call you “Kim?” Guess what, Kim.  It’s your job…whether you like it or not.  This is not a sin issue for you. You’re not the one in sin here. In fact, take a look at what the Bible says:

Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God.  Romans 13:1

Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people. Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves. Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor.  I Peter 2:13-17

Our submission to authorities does not depend on whether we agree with them or not.  In fact, as I tell my church often, submission doesn’t even begin until you disagree.  When the Apostle Peter instructed his readers to “honor the emperor” do you think he was referring to a man who was friendly toward Christians?  Ever hear of Nero?

Does the Supreme Court’s definition of marriage force Kim Davis to sin?  No, it does not.  If so, that would be a whole different issue.  If she were forced to kill, if she were not allowed to read the Bible, if she were commanded to steal…I believe she would then have justification to choose God’s law over man’s.

When man’s law forces me to defy the PRACTICE of my faith, God’s law wins.  When man’s law contradicts the PRECEPTS of my faith, it appears the Scripture says I still submit to leadership…even when it is ungodly.

Knowing Kim Davis’ church affiliation, I can pretty much guarantee she is morally opposed to such things as alcoholic drinks, cigarettes, media which contains sex/violence/profanity, etc.

If she worked as a cashier at Walmart, would she refuse to scan a case of Heineken or a carton of Newports? When a housewife wanted to purchase the “Fifty Shades of Grey” novels, would Kim Davis cancel the transaction?

And, if she did, would Davis be placed on the moral platform that she has been placed on with the gay marriage issue?  Would she receive the attention…from both sides of the issue…that she is receiving this week? I doubt it.

While I agree with her belief that gay marriage is wrong, I disagree with how she has handled herself.  Walk away.  Step aside.  Find another job or elected office.

Or…do your job.  Do it well.  From what I read of Scripture, that seems to be the course of action for Kim Davis to take. Don’t try to be a hero, Kim…be a Christian.

  1. Susan says:

    The Pastor lost me at HIS CHURCH, if it is not Christ church then I am not interested in it. Never knew a church belong to a Pastor although these days it is yard to tell sometimes by the talk with it’s members weather they are worshipping God or the Pastor! Just saying!

  2. In India, same sex marriages are not legal. Let’s say Kim was a Hindu and did this, will you take the same stand with her?

    • same sex marriages if you call it a marriage is wong but those that stands has to be strong in there faith god tell us to stay strong you can not sugar coat the word of go and that is what you are doning I don’t think you are a man of god if you are you week in faith of god be no partakes of sin
      read your bible

    • mdb says:

      Is she still a government official? Then, yes, I would still agree with Mr. Anderson. That’s my problem with the whole thing — she was in government office. Kim Davis is/was a government official who took an OATH to uphold the law and the Constitution and to lawfully perform her duties as a clerk. By refusing to issue licenses, she broke that oath. That makes her a liar and an oath-breaker — both of which are sins. Is it okay to commit sins in order to stand up for your religious beliefs? I think not. Do people think that, somehow, being a liar is better than being in a homosexual relationship? As I stated in a previous comment, the ground is level at the foot of the cross. No sin is greater than another. Committing a sin to protest against sin is hypocrisy at its finest and is a very poor representation of what true Christianity is supposed to be.

      She placed her hand upon a Bible and swore to do her job. At the end of that oath, she said, “so help me God.” She violated that oath and I have zero respect for her because of it. Oh, but wait! Same-sex marriage wasn’t legal when she was sworn in. Did she have her head in the sand this whole time? Did she not see that it was inevitable? Whether it was 10 years, 10 days, or 10 minutes after she put her hand on that Bible, she PROMISED to uphold the law and perform her duties as a clerk and she failed.

      If she really wanted to stand up for her faith, she would have done it without committing further sin. She should have resigned and found another job.

      • I really respect all religions but follow none. They all have same thing to say. Respect and love every one. If a man loves a man or woman loves a woman, what’s wrong with it? Society and religion were made for humans, humans were not made for religion.

      • Smarty says:

        She swore to uphold the constitution of Kentucky, not the US Constitution. No hypocracy here.

      • Melissa says:

        Actually, the SCOTUS ruling was just that, a ruling. SCOTUS does not have the ability to sign a law into being. Only the ability to rule such laws as constitutional or unconstitutional. Only Congress can make laws. And in this case, they did not. SCOTUS was only ruling on a case, that had already been before a judge with unsatisfactory results, that had been appealed to them. Since no laws were ruled unconstitutional and since Congress did not have to re-write any such laws, Ms. Davis was upholding the oath of office that she took. KY state law does not recognize same-sex marriage and therefore she cannot be made to issue any such licenses.

      • John says:

        Smarty, can you tell me what the oath says?! Better yet, show me a link!!

  3. The author points out a significant truth that differentiates conscientious objection from forcing your theology on other people….

    “When man’s law forces me to defy the PRACTICE of my faith, God’s law wins. When man’s law contradicts the PRECEPTS of my faith, it appears the Scripture says I still submit to leadership…even when it is ungodly.”

    That is the difference between a country clerk who would have refused to deny a black person a voters registration card back in 1964 in Rowan Country Kentucky (for example) or a draftee who would have refused a weapon in basic training in 1970, and a government clerk who refuses to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple who have been together for 17 years in Rowan County in 2015.

    • Ashley Adair says:

      I believe what Kim Davis did was very powerful cause it is wrong for it to be with the same kind as that person so I give Kim Davis credit for what she did!!

      • Lorrie says:

        Who are you to say it is wrong? If they find love with each other and live good lives with each other than they are better than most heterosexual couples nowadays, who divorce or batter each other. Shame on all of you who want to pass judgement and declare what is right and what is wrong. They will be judge as we all will by the only one who has that right in the end.

  4. Preach says:

    “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.”
    ‭‭2 Timothy‬ ‭4:2-5‬ ‭KJV‬‬
    My question to Mr. Anderson is this. Do you also love truth? Jesus said if you love me, keep my commandments. He did not throw stones at the adulterous woman but He did tell her to go and sin no more.

  5. MMoynihan says:

    When you say you are not obligated to perform a wedding for a gay couple, you may find yourself being investigated by the ACLU a la a judge named Vance Day.

  6. Juan Villa says:

    Dear Blogger Phil Anderson

    I hope your apology for writing this piece’goes just as viral as your original opinion went. You should apologize to Ms. Davis, and believers everywhere that adhere to their consciences as well. You are encouraging cowardice, which is what we don’t need. She is following her conscience, the law and scripture. She’s doing her job as she promised to fulfill. Are you doing yours?

    Your points are juvenile and not rooted in love, US or KY law, scripture, or truth. Although you make some heartfelt true statements, the article is damaging.

    Take a lead from someone like Franklin Graham on this exact story.

    There are two reasons (legal and faith) she might be doing this, not one. She’s a sister in Christ. I wouldn’t want you watching my back, sir, in battle, with a blog like this on a very urgent and serious matter.

    Looking forward to your public apology and retracted story, here, on your blog pastor page.

    Gracias. Adios.

  7. Aisling says:

    I disagree with the idea that homosexuality is a sin, but respect you for beliefs (even if I think they are misguided). However, I completely agree about her doing her job.

    The whole issue about the government and marriage is caused by the government (shocking, I know). If marriage really is a religious sacrament, then the state has no business controlling it. The problem with the government controlling it is discrimination. If they offer a service or whatever, they can’t provide it to one group and not another. There are a few exceptions, but this isn’t one of them, since it’s not bound by ancestry or place of birth or other qualifiers.

    Get the state out of the marriage racket and probelms are solved. Gay couples can get married, and religious people can get married and everyone is happy.

  8. tjstoner says:

    Brother it blesses my heart to know you see this! Thank you Lord for spiritual eyes to see. When I read this it makes me so happy to see that the Lord is working and allowing others to discern what is off God and what is of God. I certainly hope she comes to repentance for this. A missed opportunity to win souls and I wonder how many people in the gay community will never step foot in a church now because a “Christian” offended them. So very sad and I pray for her and those souls.

    Thank you brother. Thank you very much.

  9. uy says:

    Atleast she shows here, that she stand firm for what she believes , every person have different conviction, even if you were in the same denomination.

    In the Book of Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (Hebrew: Hanania, Mishael and Azaria) were three young men from Jerusalem condemned to death in a fiery furnace by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, when they refused to bow down to an image of him, and worship any god but the God of Israel.
    ..but God save them.

    • Look again at the section of my post on laws that interfere with the “practice” of our faith vs laws that go against the “precepts” of our faith. If a law forces us to sin or keeps us from worshiping/serving God, God’s law always wins…just like the Bible characters you mentioned.

      • Karin says:

        They (Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego) also performed their jobs, no publicity in the marketplace…….

    • mdb says:

      Did Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego sin against God while refusing to bow down to an idol? No, they did not. Kim Davis did, though. She broke an oath, which IS a sin.

      Deuteronomy 23:21 “If you make a vow to the Lord your God, you shall not delay fulfilling it, for the Lord your God will surely require it of you, and you will be guilty of sin.”

      Kim Davis swore an oath. At the end of that oath, she said, “so help me God.’ She very likely placed her hand upon the Bible when she was sworn into office and said those very words: so help me God.

      So all of you on this message board comparing her to the great, true, heros of the Bible who stood up for their faith in God can just stop. They didn’t sin against God while standing up for their beliefs. They weren’t hypocrites — committing one sin in defiance of another — and still claiming to be true to their faith.

      • Smarty says:

        No oath broken. She did NOT swear to uphold the US Constitution. And even if she did, NOWHERE in the US Constitution is marriage defined. Your argument has ZERO merit.

      • John says:

        Smarty, she DID swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution. I don’t know if you’re just misinformed or you’re just straight up lying.

        According to Kentucky’s own government website, which can be found at

        Oath of clerk and deputies.
        Every clerk and deputy, **in addition to the oath prescribed by Section 228 of the Constitution**, shall, before entering on the duties of his office, take the following oath in presence of the Circuit Court: “I, ….., do swear that I will well and truly discharge the duties of the office of ………….. County Circuit Court clerk, according to the best of my skill and judgment, making the due entries and records of all orders, judgments, decrees, opinions and proceedings of the court, and carefully filing and preserving in my office all books and papers which come to my possession by virtue of my office; and that I will not knowingly or willingly commit any malfeasance of office, and will faithfully execute the duties of my office without favor, affection or partiality, so help me God.” The fact that the oath has been administered shall be entered on the record of the Circuit Court.

        Section 228 states the following…

        Members of the General Assembly and all officers, before they enter upon the execution of the duties of their respective offices, and all members of the bar, before they enter upon the practice of their profession, shall take the following oath or affirmation: I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully execute, to the best of my ability, the office of …. according to law; and I do further solemnly swear (or affirm) that since the adoption of the present Constitution, I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God.

        To argue your second point, it’s more complicated than just saying she’s breaking the 14th Amendment so I’m not going to dive into the details because I feel like you’re not going to accept the facts anyways. In simple form, homosexuals need to be treated fairly and given the same rights and liberties afforded to heterosexual. If two consenting heterosexual adults are allowed to marry, then two consenting homosexual adults should be allowed to marry as well. If you can’t see that, then I can’t really help you.

  10. Reblogged this on The Kinder Commentary and commented:
    I can’t say that agree with everything this Pastor has to say, such as his view of gay relationships as being sinful. However, he makes several very good points about the issue as a public servant.

  11. selah says:

    I agree with you completely..

  12. Penny Bochicchio says:

    Did you know there was a Supreme Court ruling years ago after Brady’s Law went into national affect. Two sheriffs in New Mexico (may have state wrong) challenged that ruling of the Supreme Court and won. The Feceral Law does not trump state and local laws. Ms. Davis has simply suspended giving any marriage license until this can be cleared up legally. That’s the part of the story the media is not covering. It’s very important to know all the facts before making a decision in and matter especially complicated legal matters like this.

  13. Jewl says:

    The supreme court does not make the laws of our land. Therefore, it is not a law of the land.

    • DebbieO says:

      You are correct that the Supreme Court does not make laws. What they do is determine if laws are constitutional or not. The Kentucky law that prohibited same sex marriage, along with similar laws in other states, was deemed unconstitutional due to discrimination, and struck down.

  14. Jim Brummett says:

    I disagree with your position on Kim Davis. You indicated that you would not perform gay weddings. I am assuming it is because you would consider it a sin for you to do so. How is not a sin for Kim to sign her name to the marriage license? In my opinion, the marriage license has more weighted importance than the ceremony, so I would argue that if you think Kim should have signed the marriage licenses, you should have no problem performing ceremonies for gay couples.

  15. Zach says:

    I’m gay. I grew up with Christian beliefs and values, some of which I still hold in very high regard today. I have read multiple versions of the bible multiple times and in their entirety. I am very well versed in theology. I do support same sex marriage. And all of that being said, I feel as though I would attend church and would be friends with this author! Very eloquently said and biblically defended!

  16. Gabrielle says:

    Kudos on your extraordinary and well written comments. For the sake of full disclosure, I too am clergy and I officiate at same sex marriages when asked, but as you said-no one should do so who isnt comfortable or at peace with this idea. If she cannot do her job she should find another.

  17. MJ says:

    Since when does the Supreme Court make laws??? I believe that’s what we have Congress to do.

  18. Mollie says:

    David Barton/WallBuilders
    September 6 at 12:49am ·
    Perhaps the single most important issue in the Kim Davis situation (the County Clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, who was jailed for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses) — an issue about which most observers and commentators have been completely silent — is the flagrant violation of the constitutionally-mandated separation of powers.
    By way of background, Federal Judge David Bunning ruled that Davis was in contempt of court, which a court can legitimately do. But he then ordered federal marshals enforce his decision and take her into custody, which he cannot do. Federal marshals are part of the Executive Branch, not the Judicial Branch; he has absolutely no authority to order any federal marshal to do anything.
    Significantly, the Founders — and thus the Constitution — did not give power to the Judiciary to enforce any of its decisions — they deliberately made it powerless in this regards. They made the Executive Branch alone responsible for enforcement.
    So while Judge Bunning can (and did) issue his personal opinion regarding Kim Davis, his personal opinion does not have the force of law. (By the way, check any civics book: a law must originate as a measure proposed in the House or Senate, be passed by both, and then signed by the president. Only then and by this means does anything become law.) Bunning must thus ask (not order) the Executive Branch to enforce his opinion, and if it agrees, it can order its marshals to do so, but the Judicial Branch may order no such thing.
    Sadly, not only did the Judicial Branch first take on itself the role of the Legislative Branch by issuing its ruling in the homosexual-marriage decision, but now it has assumed the role of the Executive Branch by attempting to enforce its own opinion. The Founding Fathers vehemently objected to this practice. As George Washington warned:
    “[T]hose entrusted with its [the nation’s] administration [must] confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.”
    James Madison similarly charged:
    “The preservation of a free government requires not merely that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be universally maintained but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great barrier which defends the rights of the people. The rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment exceed the commission from which they derive their authority and are tyrants. The people who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them and are slaves.”
    Samuel Adams agreed:
    “In all good governments, the Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary powers are confined within the limits of their respective departments. If therefore it should be found that . . . either of the departments aforesaid should interfere with another, it will, if continued, essentially alter the Constitution, and may, in time, . . . be productive of such convulsions as may shake the political ground upon which we now happily stand.”
    Thomas Jefferson thus admonished that we must “cleave to the salutary distribution of powers which that [i.e., the Constitution] has established” and that if we ever move away from its separation of powers that “we shall be in danger of foundering.”
    Perhaps political philosopher Charles de Montesquieu — a favorite of the Founders, and the most-cited human source in the political writings of the Founding Era — said it best when he declared:
    “There is no liberty if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers.”
    So while the Kim Davis travesty continues, perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the entire controversy is that Judge Bunning personally ordered her to jail, thus blatantly violating one of the Constitution’s most important provisions for securing the liberty of the entire people.

  19. jason morgan says:

    I read Pastor Phil Anderson’s blog. At one point not to long ago, I would have shared that same view point. However, over the past couple of year my heart has become heavy and troubled over the culture shift that has been happening in America.

    At first, I thought my heart was troubled over the decline in our Christian moral values in America and it was. But something else was there deeper under the surface. As I began to pray and ask God what this deeper issue was, I felt He began to show me.
    I believe there has been a deliberate ideological transformation taking place within our American culture over the past two decades, possible even longer.
    This ideology has been propagated throughout all aspects of American culture and has creped into the church. Many Pastors have unknowingly propagated this ideology from their pulpits to their congregations. This Ideology by design has created an identity crisis in the minds and hearts of the average American man.

    During World War 2 in prison camps the Japanese would put high amounts of florid into the prisoners drinking water. This would cause a chemical reaction within the prisoners that would cause them to become docile and passive. Which made them easier to control. In China The Chinese government would prescribe opium to its working class. which creates a docile and passive working class making them easier to control.
    Here in America this same ideology can be achieved through the use of media, TV shows and etc.
    For example how many TV shows have you seen where a child is being picked on by a bully? The parent or adult authority on the show will guide the child to just walk away. Or go get a teacher. Or just ignore them. Or you should feel sorry for that bully because he is hurting on the inside. What you don’t see anymore in these kind of shows is dad taking the son out to the garage and teaching him how to defend himself. Or dad having a heart to heart with his son explaining to him saying, “Son there are bullies out there you will have to stand up to. Not only for yourself but those who cant fight for themselves.”
    The vast majority of shows have demasculated men and feminized them for the purpose of creating a docile and more passive America. This is just one example. Once you start looking you will see this ideology everywhere. It is an ideology that creates a passive docile male.

    So what does this have to do with Pastor Phil Anderson’s blog. lol
    His opening script he uses are inline with this ideology. Because he is taking it out of context to fix his world view. Romans 13. “Everyone submit to the governing authorities.”
    1. Even though there is truth to this scripture, Paul is speaking to a certain group of people at a certain time period and also a dictatorship for a government system. I say dictatorship simply because the emperor or Caesar had the power to pass a decree or murder anyone he so willed.

    Our government is setup as a Republic By the people and For the people. We the people.
    It is not however, by the government and for the government and the government will dictate and decide what is best for the people.
    Our founding fathers declared that America was a Christian nation and had a divine purpose and destiny. They also mandated us to protect the nation from enemies foreign and domestic. . First by ratifying and if that failed by flat our out defiance.
    I would constitute changing our morale fabric of society , turning them away from God would fall under the guidelines of domestic enemies. Therefore this women would be obeying our founding fathers.
    (Just so you know nearly every one of these radical agendas that is changing the very fabric of society can be found in the communist manifesto on how to turn a nation into a socialist nation and ultimately communism.) This fundamental transformation can only happen if America is a more docile and passive people, particularly the men of America.

    2. I do not believe in blind submission and authority. This pastor, I feel is propagating blind submission. Meaning you submit no matter what, whether you agree or not. This is the true motive behind the ideology (submission}. The scriptures also teach us to test the spirits to see if they are from God. Also Jesus goes on to tell us to Occupy until He comes. That word Occupy is a military word that means to take or hold possession or control of. If we as Christians truly believe we are a nation founded on Christian values and concepts, then according to Jesus and Our founding fathers we are to hold this ground. At every level in this nation.

    Pastor Phil’s closing statement encapsulates this ideology of passivism that has been propagated in our culture. He said” This women should walk away, step aside, find another job.” In other words… Don’t rock the boat, Don’t do or say anything that might offend people. All in the name of Love! We even have a name for churches like this, its called Seeker friendly. Its not love, it is a spiritual paralyses that destroys the initiative in the heart of a Man of God.
    This new man has so excepted this new role of passivism as his identity he will use scripture to justify not making a stand. This docile man is now controllable and manageable which is the desired goal of the demonic spirit behind the ideology. That spirit is nothing more than the spirit of Antichrist, Robbing man of his True Identity which is as A Warrior Priest.

    Let me leave you with this video to inspire you in your heart to stand fight.

    • Branfon says:

      Well written. Sometimes however I start to wonder about how much these people in pastoral positions actually love Jesus and aren’t just what Paul described as wolves in sheep’s clothing

  20. docsroc says:

    I quote Jesus when questioned “render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s”. She is in a governmental position sworn to uphold the Constitution in which we also have separation of church and state. I agree with you when you say it is not her sin. She cannot impose her beliefs by breaking the law whether she agrees with it or not.

  21. Life in the Mommy Lane says:

    Just wanted you to know you’re not alone in your opinion, though I think you said it better. 🙂

  22. alathiamg says:

    Reblogged this on uniquelifeviews and commented:
    I love the way he gives examples of how working in retail would be a problem for some Christians. She is not a hero, but a very misguided woman. Hey she has the right to her beliefs, even if they land her in jail for contemp. You have to give her props for staying in jail this long when she can walk out at any time. Me personally, I’d just find a new job that didn’t bother my convictions.

  23. The problem her is that the supreme court can not make a law only congress so therefore she did not break any law. This administration on the other hand has broken the immigration law on many occasions, shouldn’t we be up in arms about that.

  24. matt says:

    Really??? And you are a Pastor??? Careful now… Maybe you should re-read the book of Acts….we are NOT to follow laws that go against God’s Word. However we must suffer and endure the punishment while praising God..such as Peter did.
    Is there a time when we, Christians, should intentionally disobey the laws of the land? The answer to that question can be found in the book of Acts, chapter 5, verses 27-29:
    “And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked them, saying, “Did we not strictly command you not to teach in this Name(Jesus Christ)? And look, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this Man’s blood on us!” But Peter and the other apostles answered and said: “We ought to obey God rather than men.”
    From this, it is clear that as long as the law of the land does not contradict the law of God, we are bound to obey the law of the land. As soon as the law of the land contradicts God’s command, then we are to disobey the law of the land and obey God’s law.

  25. James Dare says:

    When are pastors going to start addressing the rampant obesity in their congregation. When half the congregation are gluttons living in standing sin it’s time for the pastor to address the problem. Time to stop worrying about that gay speck and address that two-ton plank.

  26. Melissa says:

    Somebody has probably already said this, but it’s worth repeating: “…We ought to obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29). I don’t label Kim Davis a “hero”, myself, for different reasons from what this article states, but I still believe that she has a right to refuse to put her name on ANY marriage license (homosexual or otherwise), so that she will not fall under the wrath of God. She will probably fall under His wrath for other choices that she has made, but at least condoning gay marriage won’t be one of them.

  27. maudina williams says:


  28. susan says:

    It seems to me it is best to leave judgement of this lady or anyone else with the One who can do so fairly.

  29. Branfon says:

    I hope you take the time to read this pastor even though you probably wont. If you go against the precepts of your faith, are you not compromising. I applaud Kim and actually feel very strongly against pastors that teach otherwise. It didn’t matter I’d it’s not the only sin, that’s not an excuse, because at the end of the fast it’s still sin. And by participating in the permission process fur a marriage that God is against, are you not sinning. People think that if you go to church and play Christian your saved but Jesus said that not everyone who says lord lord I CAST OUT demons in your name will be saved he will say depart from me i never knew you. And I believe that the holy spirit speaks to us in a conscience type way, and if that’s the holy spirit talking Kim, don’t give them the license stand up for what you believe then even if you don’t see that as smart, she will still be rewarded in heaven for doing his will

  30. Faithful To The Lord says:

    You people are a joke!!! It’s people like you that will take the LORD’S world from the Bible and change the meaning to your liking. That’s sad that you call your self a pastor (Phil) I think if anyone is trying to be a hero is you. I strongly believe she did the right thing. GOD didn’t make Adam and Steve. He made Adam and Eve. It is against the LORD’S law for two man or two women to be married. The Supreme Court has gone against the LORD’S Word I believe the LORD put her in that job to stop what man has done. The LORD is trying to not judge us without trying to do everything possible. You the Lord is coming and he will judge the men and women that aloud gay marriages but you won’t be able to say well you didn’t send anyone to stop us because he he put Kim in charge of marriage license because he know what you guys would say when he judges you.

  31. John says:

    1 Corinthians 13:13

    “…Faith, Hope, and Love. But the greatest of these is love!”

    So God states that Love is more important than Faith and is more important than hope. Again, LOVE is greater and more important than FAITH.

    God would rather you LOVE than have faith (if you could only choose one). So how can true love ever be a sin? It can’t. It’s more important than having faith in God.

    As a straight, Filipino male, I see absolutely nothing wrong with homosexuality as long as it’s true love.

    Lastly, Kim Davis is not a hero. She didn’t hold true to her oath and she was punished for it. If you’re going to work in a government job, you have to follow the rules. Her job was to hand out marriage certificates to ALL ELIGIBLE PEOPLE. She failed to do her job.

    I agree 100% with the pastor.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s