Texas talking about leaving the USA

My point is that, according to your own definition of worldly government and participation therein, those Bible heroes would have been participating in antichristianity all of the time.

Your definition is not biblical, which is why we both can say that, even though they were participating in worldly government all of the time, they were not participating in antichristianity all of the time, and whenever they were pressed to do so, they did resist.

We agree on the practice of those heroes, just not on the definition of worldly government. Our agreement on the former stands in opposition to the latter. Your definition of worldly government is not consistent with your view of those heroes and is not biblical.

Anyone's personal stance on participation is another matter entirely and not in question.

 

There is no biblical support for Christians engaging in violent rebellion against their government.

We must pursue all constitutional means to challenge the fraud n this election.

If all avenues fail, we must trust God is in control. We cannot act like the world and respond with violence.

peace to you

 

Which is another reason a Biden win doesn't pass the common sense test.

 

With that, it seems you are begging the question on the belief that the "Christian thing to do" is to obey government tyrants and give up your guns??

 

Again, the personal decision to serve or participate is not in question. This would include the early Christians, unless bona fide argument is made, e.g., based on the earliest Christians, i.e., those in the NT. A doctrinal Christian view would be that of the earliest Christians, not decisions by early Christians.

The proconsul Sergius Paulus believed but there is no indication he was or would be compelled to resign accordingly. I know of no Scripture indicating that those in government positions would be so compelled. Such a doctrine is just not there. At best, it is a matter of conscience.

What is most untenable is saying that Bible heroes serving in government were yet serving God not those governments even though they were antichrist by definition, but that Christians serving in government cannot be serving God, because government is by definition antichrist. That is simply unreasonable and should only be held as a view applicable to oneself personally.

Too many Christians have suffered and died for not bowing the knee to Caesar, and too many have served God by serving in government to justify accusing those who participate in government as serving antichrists rather than God. There is a time to take a stand. For some it is by participating in government, for others it is by refraining, for some it may be both.

 

That may be true, but then there is more than one level of government, with the question as to precisely who and what entails the rightful government, which was also true in 1776. The Revolutionary War was not waged idly, many violations were endured before war finally broke out, but Christians most certainly played a very active role at every level. Some have taken oaths regarding the Constitution.

 

I see, ...so you are begging this question. No, you are quite wrong. That would be a poor interpretation of Romans 13 and one disagreed with by many Christians throughout time.

There is the question in a nut shell. Whoever resisteth the power, refers to ...they who obstinately, and for no right reason, oppose the ruler, and strive to unsettle the constitution.

Benjamin Franklin said, "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God." and he and Thomas Jefferson wanted this phrase as our Great Seal of the United States, however they settled on, "In God we Trust."

The ONLY higher authority in the passages of Rom 13 is God. These verses have nothing to do with obeying tyranny, which in effect is what some are claiming we must do, and has everything to do with obeying God’s law. Take abortion for instance, it is impossible for rules of man to be THE LAW when they defy the law of God. To call evil LAW would be to call God EVIL! ...So much for the Rom 13 interpretation by many in Christianity today.

 

Prove it

 

The earlier point must be answered. The position that OT heroes were serving both God and an antichrist government blatantly violates the maxim that one cannot serve two masters.

By your definition, they would have had to refuse to serve such government completely, even if faced with death or imprisonment. Saying that they were slaves and thus excused is untenable. They are either slaves to God or slaves to the antichrist government. They cannot be both.

 

You were doing OK until that last part. If a Christian is involved with the GOP or DNC and standing for Christ, then they are doing precisely what those OT heroes were doing. If a Christian is involved with the GOP or DNC but abandoning Christ, then they are not in line with those heroes.

I do not trust government as far as I can throw the White House, but government is nonetheless responsible for doing what is right, and there is nothing in the Bible indicating Christians shouldn't tell them what that is, and vote accordingly.

 

Do you haver a passage that says to surrender your defensive weapons to a corrupt government authority bent on tyranny?