The adamant dismissal of basic facts about the philosophical underpinnings of the American Revolution is most obvious in one of the comments from Tom Van Dyke: "That Romans 13 was unspoken in the Revolutionary era didn't mean they didn't acknowledge it implicitly in justifying their own revolution, just as the British did almost 100 years before. The arguments were well-known and well-fashioned by 1776, and the colonists followed the script.". So, the founders didn't mention Romans 13 but they were thinking about it.

However, there is a subtle flaw in his main article as well. Romans 13 when read in context does not allow for reasoned dissent or separation. Those in authority are God's servants put in power by God for your own good. The idea of "the consent of the governed" appears nowhere in this passage.

I am amazed that anyone can, with a straight face, say that men like Thomas Jefferson or Benjamin Franklin were 18th century versions of modern evangelical Christians and that what was accomplished in the American Revolution is consistent with or has any basis in Biblical teachings about government.