This is pretty much the reality of places like Mogandishu, Somalia where the one who rules is the one who can amass the largest mob with the most firepower and your safety and sense of well-being is dependent upon which tribe you belong to and which religion you follow.
"Go ahead, punk... make my day!"
I believe it was the right stance. MacArthur is respectable to the "Powers that be" but he is not about to let them run roughshod over him! It was not about him but about the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ and the flock of God of which the CHIEF SHEPHERD has given him oversight! He was compliant but when they went too far, he pushed back and declared "We ought to obey God rather than men."
I won't argue with you on that. I especially agree with your last sentence. HOWEVER, you will find those who claim to be believers to be critical and saying he went too far. So, objectively, in a debate, who is correct? Why?
Johnny Mac is definitely correct. The Government was basically trying to shut down the Church making it non-essential and forbidding ANY SORT of congregational activity (including meeting in "Home Fellowships" and singing together congregationally). Had the Church NOT pushed back the way it did, the government would have taken things to the furthest extreme possible!
The stance of Grace Community Church was to comply with the original shutdowns in March 2020 out of caution and because people were assured it was a short-term, temporary solution to limit the spread of COVID-19. When the restrictions dragged on beyond the original stated time, the elders decided that the state was acting in bad faith and would no longer be permitted to usurp the authority of the church. They chose to obey God rather than men and defied the ongoing orders.
it was another 3 am sleepless session when i wrote that last post..... and i left out half of what i intended to write... ... sorry about that.. i also wasn;t intending to respond to your post specifically... but in general to most of them i have seen in this thread..... sorry about that too....This is obviously one of those subjects that is not able to be answered comprehensively with merely a sentence or two, and I ain't about to make one of those gargantuan-length sermons to do so <phwew, ain't ya glad). But briefly, in the areas of agreement I have with what I perceive you to be saying is that we indeed do have a different form of government whereby we are free to elect those to represent out beliefs, and by the grace and mercy of God we should do that. Intricately related to that notion is our 1st amendment rights to freedom of speech (and consequently to freely dissent). I have no problem with disagreeing with people over matters of principle, goodness knows that is part of what makes this wonderful place called the FFF so long-lasting and interesting. Where I would encourage my Christian brethren, as in this case, is to disagree charitably (to "live peaceably with all men" if you will). There's no need IMNSHO to disparage a noble profession such as the police/sheriffs/patrolmen/etc by calling them "gangs" and imply that they are, as a unified body, doing the bidding of Joe Biden and the liberal elite. Or if we were to consider the other side of the coin I don't think it appropriate to claim that the right-wing side of the spectrum is fascist for trying to enforce the laws of the land as it pertains to the lewdness of public displays of the Drag-queen Story Hour crowd. To take it to a higher level of personal sensitivity on my part, I didn't like Bush 43's use of broad powers in instituting Homeland Security, and Snowden proved that to be a dangerous over-reach. I have no problems with exercising our right to call out error, but I think we are called to speak the truth in love, not just to the lost as it pertains to the state of their eternal souls. Well, that was the short version, so I'll stop there, before being sucked back into the vortex, lol
. but anyway.... .. 
and gave in..... 
.
sorry.... but when i see a post written with entire phrases and sentences in all caps... i see someone trying to imply an amplified and raised volume in their typing "voice" to make specific points... ...as if to preach a sermon...... .... and in fact that;s exactly what i see - an online sermon or semonette being preached by someone whose congregation i am clearly not a member of... and would never be a member of, due to theological differences you have already made clear with all cap preachings in your other sermonettes here.... ....we have known each other a long time and i have always respected you... but i don;t trust your interpretations of scripture... and when you come off like a hostile church militant over an issue like this i feel you are disrespecting me..... and therefor i am not likely to trust your interpretations of the constitution either..... or even read them....
Responsible.
This…but also a number of “acts” (taxes) by King G3, and of course, the quartering of troops. To me, this must have been the ultimate kick in the pants. I’m all for supporting the military, but it doesn’t include being forced to use my house as a hotel for soldiers against my will.
Care to elaborate?
actually it does.... the third ammendment says....
Sure, but which part of the original post are you confused about? I thought I was pretty detail oriented.
We’ve been “at war” plenty (and continually, as you pointed out), but constitutionally, only Congress can declare war. The last time that was done was WW2.
technically true.... but their power is all in the wording - and in that last part which begins with the word "but"..... . ...when it comes to declarations like this..and most things that are supposed to be statements of fact - you can pretty much assume that any comments made before the word "but" are either lies,..or as in this case "conditional" truths subject to requirements of the government..... ..... it;s not uncommon in general conversion between regular people too....
... ....What is meant by Romans 13? Are you saying we should follow the governing authority? I don’t think I’ve ever really heard anyone talk much about it.
I capitalize to make emphasis upon what I am stating so that salient points do not fall by the wayside. They are my opinions and you may take them for what you will. You should really look up the matter of "Lesser Magistrates" and examine the matter for yourself as this does have a good bit to do with the thought process of many who ultimately chose to fight with the colonialists against England. This would also play into whether I personally would choose to take sides and take up arms or whatever. I am not expecting you to just "Swallow" and trust everything I am saying. No disrespect was intended and I apologize if it came across as if I was. I also do not expect you to just go along with my "Interpretation" of scripture nor do I care to argue with you unless you are the one pressing the matter but even then, I hope you would understand that I do care and that good people can agree to disagree. Yes, I am emphatic and perhaps I sound a little "Authoritative" but I tend to be that way if I believe I am right and am standing upon the authority of scripture. Sorry if you feel like I am "preaching" and perhaps I am. It should never be about "You" or "Me" though. We should both value TRUTH (emphasizing this because this point is of the utmost importance, not because I am "shouting" at you) and the truth is something we should both diligently pursue.
Romans 13 says "every soul" is subject to the "higher powers." Even the Emperor, is subject to the law of God. Paul concluded that honor should be rendered to "whom it is due."