Is resistance to authority unchristian?

Some Christians will quote Romans 13 as a reason for obeying authority -- any authority. In this piece, the Rev. Chuck Baldwin (who was the Constitution Party's candidate for President last year) explains why Romans 13 cannot be used in this manner.

After going through the Biblical arguments and noting numerous examples of men in the Bible resisting authority for Godly reasons, Rev. Baldwin makes this point:

"..If Christians (and others) had been properly obedient to the Constitution (and Romans 13), they would also have submitted to the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which recognizes the authority of the States in matters not specifically ceded to the federal government. In other words, the Constitution intended that the authority of the federal government be small and limited, with most authority residing within the States and among the people themselves.

"As submission to the Constitution and Natural Law have provided a haven of peace and prosperity in these United States, Christians (for the most part) have not had to face the painful decision to "obey God rather than men" and defy their civil authorities. However, as it is obvious that a majority of our government leaders currently have almost no fidelity to their oaths to defend the U.S. Constitution, it is becoming more and more likely that we--like our forefathers--will need to rediscover Benjamin Franklin's declaration that 'Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God.' (Of course, this effort, too, must be accomplished within the scope of law, both divine and civil.)

"The problem in America today is that we have allowed our political leaders to violate their oaths of office and to ignore, and blatantly disobey, the "supreme Law of the Land," the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, if we truly believe Romans Chapter 13, we will insist and demand that our civil magistrates submit to the U.S. Constitution."

Virtual buckeye to Frank at the Ohio Freedom Alliance.