The Queensland government has argued that an individual Christian's belief grounded directly in the Bible does not qualify as protected religious belief under Australian law. To count, the state says, it must conform to a specific code of conduct required by a particular church. The case is Beale v State of Queensland, and most Australians still haven't heard of it — or the underhanded tactics the state government is using. Brisbane legal professional Jayden Beale objected to the COVID-19 injection mandates on the basis of 1 Corinthians 6:19-20. His conviction was that he must glorify God with his body, rather than the government, and not introduce into it substances developed or tested using cells from aborted babies. The government called this "his subjective interpretation" of Scripture. It labelled his convictions "personal grievances and opinions". In order to shrug off Beale's concerns, it treated different churches as separate "Christian religions". At a hearing in April, the government's barrister said a pastor's instruction would need to fall "within an accepted canon of code of the relevant religion as an objective test". Beale has pushed back. "If the government's argument is ultimately accepted at law, no Christian in Queensland will ever be able to object to something based upon what the Bible says," Beale said. Lutheran pastor Phil Mueller agreed, saying the state was "effectively attempting to make the government the authority over God". The state has tried six times to have the case thrown out. "Effectively, every six months throughout this case I have had to prepare and file serious legal submissions defending my right to a trial," Beale said. QCAT's published timeframe for anti-discrimination matters is roughly 80 weeks. Beale is almost four years in. The government dismissed his 13 expert witnesses, including Professor Robert Clancy and Professor Wendy Hoy, as "purported experts". On 17 June, Member Wilson dismissed the state's sixth strike-out bid and rejected its core argument. "It is difficult to see how any individual reading of and adherence to the Bible can be other than subjective," he wrote. He told the government's barrister the bid was "a wholly inappropriate way to try and pursue these arguments." Asked twice for comment by The Daily Declaration, Queensland Health repeated word for word that "mandatory COVID-19 vaccination requirements were a vital part of the state's plan to protect Queenslanders." The government body never addressed the tribunal's findings. Beale warns that if the state's argument prevails, "the practice of Christianity will therefore become subject to rules set by the government." The case is headed to trial.