A second century view of Christians as earthly citizens

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Come back home and be both the salt and the light to this world in which we are living. In so doing you will be a good Christian and a good American citizen. Or, on the other hand, let all that's been gained at such a high price slip away from us and our descendants. Then, perhaps, they can abide by Romans 13 under the rule of a tyranny while they dream of the liberty their forefathers had by the grace of God through the blood, sweat, and tears that were given. Romans 13, my friend, illustrates how Christians are to be subject to civil government but it does not define what is the best civil government they can enjoy nor does it limit their quest to attain it. We've already fought and won that battle - all we've got to do now is appreciate what we have, understand God gave it to us, and do our very best to keep it.

So I take you you don't have a Biblical answer to my question?

 

[Dragoon68]

[SIZE=+1]

So I take you you don't have a Biblical answer to my question?

I've been giving you one! Read both the Old and New Testaments to grasp both the principals and precepts instead of just hanging your hat on an extract from Romans 13 that addresses only a small part of our relationship to one another through civil government. The Bible has a lot to say - historical as well as instructional - about the various institutions God created for us on this earth.

If you're going to be an obedient American citizen - following the Biblical precept - then you have to do your duty to protect and defend what what has been established and that is a government by the people for the people. You should subject yourself to the law - with the Constitution being the basis of that law - but you should also not permit yourself and your fellow countrymen to be subjected to "law" that is not according to that basis. How you do that is governed by God's laws as well as man's but doing nothing is just as wrong and the consequences of the loss of liberty then rest on you for it.

The main problem I have with all this is noting that some Christians - usually more of the liberal persuasion - seem to invoke Romans 13 whenever they see another Christian - usually more of the conservative persuasion - objecting to yet another erosion of our liberty at the hands of bad leadership. I think it's misused as a tool to silence the opposition! I think, in large part, it's because they like the big government approach verses governance by the people for the people. So they attempt to misuse the scriptures to support the abuses of those "leaders" whether they are representatives, administrators, or judges acting outside the powers actually given to them by the governed. They want Christians to think that they have to "obey" whatever our "government" mandates because, after all, the early Christians had to obey the Roman government that ruled over them. I know that wasn't the intent of Romans 13 and so I'll not be fooled in being silent about the objection! I know that we are our own government. I know that God blessed our nation with this great benefit and it has granted us tremendous liberty never before enjoyed by mankind in this temporal life. I know how difficult it was to attain this gift and that it's worth keeping it.[/SIZE][SIZE=+1]

If, on the other hand, doing nothing and "obeying" the "orders" from Washington is the right thing then I suggest we shut down the political forum of the BaptistBoard because Christian citizens would only need to just sit back and wait to be told what to do by whomever takes power, makes laws, and sends our enforcers. This forum would then become only an organ by which to chasten each other to obey whatever is decided and imposed upon us. Is that what you want?[/SIZE]

 

[canadyjd]

Originally Posted by Dragoon68 Beware of those who teach that Christians must be obedient to an evil government imposed over them AND yet somehow not be loyal enough to their own nation to protect, defend, and secure the government which they designed, empowered, and are accountable for.

Sorry, I didn't address the "AND" because I was trying to be polite. Since you insist, I shall address the "AND".

Beware of those who teach that Christians must be obedient to all governments AND be loyal to their own nation to the point they are required to protect, defend and secure that government.

To "protect, defend and secure" means far more than to participate in the political process, or have your voice heard on some issue. These are words that speak of taking up arms to accomplish your purposes. Such talk is unscriptural for a Christian.

These people are adding to scripture something that isn't there.
They are polluting the teachings of Jesus Christ with worldly wisdom and secular philosophies which promote violence and death.
They are taking their minds off the things of God and focusing on the things of the world.
They are behaving like the ungodly by putting their trust in human institutions instead of trusting God and His Word.

Martin: You have done an excellent job of articulating the scriptural view of this issue.:applause:

peace to youraying:

 

[Dragoon68]

[/I]


Sorry, I didn't address the "AND" because I was trying to be polite. Since you insist, I shall address the "AND".

Beware of those who teach that Christians must be obedient to all governments AND be loyal to their own nation to the point they are required to protect, defend and secure that government.

To "protect, defend and secure" means far more than to participate in the political process, or have your voice heard on some issue. These are words that speak of taking up arms to accomplish your purposes. Such talk is unscriptural for a Christian.

These people are adding to scripture something that isn't there.
They are polluting the teachings of Jesus Christ with worldly wisdom and secular philosophies which promote violence and death.
They are taking their minds off the things of God and focusing on the things of the world.
They are behaving like the ungodly by putting their trust in human institutions instead of trusting God and His Word.

Martin: You have done an excellent job of articulating the scriptural view of this issue.:applause:

peace to youraying:

Taking up arms to protect, defend, and secure this nation is exactly what many of us have done and there's nothing un-scriptural about doing that either!

Romans 13 requires obedience to civil government because God designed it knowing mankind needed it for justice and order. Jesus did not come to establish good government and did not wish His purpose to be misunderstood as such. Protecting, defending, and securing our nation is right in line with those requirements - assertive in a positive manner instead of passive in a negative manner. We're blessed, unlike the early Christians, to have a government that is ours -one with a "contract" that protects our individual liberties by limiting what those we put "over" us can do. Romans 13 doesn't define what is or is not a good civil government. That is not the purpose of the Bible. It does not preclude Christians working to establish one as we did during our revolution nor seeking to preserve it once established. In fact, since obedience is required it is far better to have a government such as ours that is for the people and by the people.

If it did preclude Christians working to establish a better government even to the point of a justified revolution such as ours was then we'd still be under the King of England if not some Roman Emperor. Is that what you desire? Do you believe God "ordained" our present government - the one established by a rebellion against another? I do! I think he gave us a better way and I'm glad of it and intend to do all I can to keep this earthly blessing while still keeping in mind it is all temporal.

We will lose our blessing of a good government is we forget that God gave it to us! It is in God that we should trust. Christians should be both the salt and the light of the world. That means we need to understand the things of God and how they apply to everyday life on this earth. It means we need to work to restrain evil amongst us and that is a primary purpose of civil government.

By the way, I certainly have not promoted "violence and death" in anything I've written - you must be directing that to someone else! I think we're still a point in this nation's history that we can turn the course back in the right direction through the political process if more Americans will turn to God and believers don't hide their lights under their baskets because they misunderstand scripture.

 

[saturneptune]

posted in error

 

[Eric B]

I've been giving you one! Read both the Old and New Testaments to grasp both the principals and precepts instead of just hanging your hat on an extract from Romans 13 that addresses only a small part of our relationship to one another through civil government. The Bible has a lot to say - historical as well as instructional - about the various institutions God created for us on this earth.

If you're going to be an obedient American citizen - following the Biblical precept - then you have to do your duty to protect and defend what what has been established and that is a government by the people for the people. You should subject yourself to the law - with the Constitution being the basis of that law - but you should also not permit yourself and your fellow countrymen to be subjected to "law" that is not according to that basis. How you do that is governed by God's laws as well as man's but doing nothing is just as wrong and the consequences of the loss of liberty then rest on you for it.

The main problem I have with all this is noting that some Christians - usually more of the liberal persuasion - seem to invoke Romans 13 whenever they see another Christian - usually more of the conservative persuasion - objecting to yet another erosion of our liberty at the hands of bad leadership. I think it's misused as a tool to silence the opposition! I think, in large part, it's because they like the big government approach verses governance by the people for the people. So they attempt to misuse the scriptures to support the abuses of those "leaders" whether they are representatives, administrators, or judges acting outside the powers actually given to them by the governed. They want Christians to think that they have to "obey" whatever our "government" mandates because, after all, the early Christians had to obey the Roman government that ruled over them. I know that wasn't the intent of Romans 13 and so I'll not be fooled in being silent about the objection! I know that we are our own government. I know that God blessed our nation with this great benefit and it has granted us tremendous liberty never before enjoyed by mankind in this temporal life. I know how difficult it was to attain this gift and that it's worth keeping it.

If, on the other hand, doing nothing and "obeying" the "orders" from Washington is the right thing then I suggest we shut down the political forum of the BaptistBoard because Christian citizens would only need to just sit back and wait to be told what to do by whomever takes power, makes laws, and sends our enforcers. This forum would then become only an organ by which to chasten each other to obey whatever is decided and imposed upon us. Is that what you want?

That's not what anyone wants. When people cite Rom. 13, what they are saying is to put things in perspective. Not everyone in this country is a Christian, and not everyone believes in the original Constitution, or even agrees with a conservative interpretation of it. So you cannot have it all the way you think is right. It's not you defending your values most are warning against, it is you villifying the government and everyone who goes along with non-conservative principles.

So what they are saying, is if it is that bad and evil, then just remember what the Christians of NT times had to deal with, and in that context, what Paul taught on it. Treat the current US govt. as pagan Rome, then, and quit acting as if it is your own God-given personal property that someone wrongfully invaded, because Christians were never promised our own physical nation. It's every citizen's nation too, and you cannot get everyone to do what you think is right, run the govt the way you want, or follow God or the Constitution. (And remember, the same God who you claimed gave it to you for some "unknown higher purpose", can also take it away from you for that same unknown higher purpose. He has promised us a different Kingdom, and the nations of the world he has for the most part left to sinful men).

So you can defend, and make your voice heard, but that's all you can do. You seem to want more than that. You seem to want someone to hand you the nation back on a silver platter, and for all of us to rally behind you to gain that, but nobody at this point seems willing to give it back. So everyone simply doesn't agree with your approach. If a lot of us could wave our hands or offer a magic prayer to change things, we would, but this is what God is allowing. We can only be salt and light, and not berate and accuse each other and the rest of the world over it.

 

[Dragoon68]

... You seem to want more than that. You seem to want someone to hand you the nation back on a silver platter, and for all of us to rally behind you to gain that, but nobody at this point seems willing to give it back. So everyone simply doesn't agree with your approach. If a lot of us could wave our hands or offer a magic prayer to change things, we would, but this is what God is allowing. We can only be salt and light, and not berate and accuse each other and the rest of the world over it.

I don't think you know much about what I want or what I'm talking about it so how about you just stick to explaining your own ideas and leave mine to me?

 

[Revmitchell]

and not everyone believes in the original Constitution,

Finally a liberal who admits it. It is refreshing and more intellectual honesty than I have seen from liberals in a while.

or even agrees with a conservative interpretation of it.

Its interpretation is clear and unmistakable. Only those who do not believe in the original constitution try to twist it.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

You should subject yourself to the law - with the Constitution being the basis of that law - but you should also not permit yourself and your fellow countrymen to be subjected to "law" that is not according to that basis.

So in that case every man has the right to be the arbiter of what is and is not 'lawful?' Every individual determines what is and is not constitutional? Would that not lead to anarchy?

Those in authority are legally and constitutionally there. Americans have a way of dealing with that, it is called the biannual elections. Those are coming up in November. Christians in America have the right to make their voices heard at the polls. My problem comes with the attitude which leads to things like calling our elected officials childish names and casting spurious aspersions against them. We are blessed that we have the opportunity to honour our leaders, submit to their authority while they are in office, pray for them, and at the same time exercise our will at the ballot box. We don't have to lower ourselves to the level of the world in the arena of political debate. Basic principles still apply, 'let your speech be always with grace, speak evil of no man' and others comes to mind.

Back to the OP - do you think the testimony of the early Christians is one that we should not emulate in 21st century America?

 

[saturneptune]

So you can defend, and make your voice heard, but that's all you can do. You seem to want more than that. You seem to want someone to hand you the nation back on a silver platter, and for all of us to rally behind you to gain that, but nobody at this point seems willing to give it back. So everyone simply doesn't agree with your approach. If a lot of us could wave our hands or offer a magic prayer to change things, we would, but this is what God is allowing. We can only be salt and light, and not berate and accuse each other and the rest of the world over it.

Maybe the approach is wrong, and only the Lord knows. However, I do know this. The original thought of the thread was persecution of second century Christians and how we would react today under the same circumstances. Some how, that has evolved into a discussion about defending our freedom.

I also know that for those who have not served or fought, or had a close family member do so, there is no conception what some of these men and women went through to defend the rights of a lot of people on this board as they type in their uninformed opinions. Contrary to popular belief, waving a flag, singing the National Anthem, and going to a 4th of July parade do not protect our freedom. Our freedom is protected by the sacrifice and blood of those willing to serve.

How many people really think about the price? Not just those killed, or physically wounded, but those who have nightmares for decades after the war? How about those who have decades of physical problems from missing limbs or no eyesight?

Lots of people who type in opinions from their cozy offices or higher institutions of learning need a dose of cold reality. Whether it is persecution in the second century, combat, death, or the horror of rerunning memories in ones mind, if you have not experienced it, you do not have a clue what these people have been through.

I will guarantee you when these men and women were under fire, fighting for your freedom and their lives, they were not debating Romans 13 and what it really means. I doubt they have out their handy dandy Greek Hebrew translators.

Everyone should be down on their knees and thank the Lord we live in a free country. How many have really been persecuted in this country for their beliefs? NONE. Persecution does not mean oppostition. It means losing jobs, being thrown in jail, losing your family, or death. The fact that "God has been taken out of the schools" is something we need to remedy, but it is hardly persecution in the sense the thread is talking about.

 

[Bob Alkire]

Much more is seen from the OT on our loyalty to a country, I believe.
However Paul spoke of his nationality in Romans 9:3-5 as well as 11:1. The book of the Revelation 21:24, and 26 shows that people could be separated into separate nations into the eternity.

To me both the Old and New Testaments justify the existence of nations as a God ordained part of our existence. But with that said we do need to keep in mind we are pilgrims just passing through.

 

[saturneptune]

Much more is seen from the OT on our loyalty to a country, I believe.
However Paul spoke of his nationality in Romans 9:3-5 as well as 11:1. The book of the Revelation 21:24, and 26 shows that people could be separated into separate nations into the eternity.

To me both the Old and New Testaments justify the existence of nations as a God ordained part of our existence. But with that said we do need to keep in mind we are pilgrims just passing through.

Very good post. IMO there should be no conflict between serving the Lord and our nation, as long as we keep our priorities straight. The Lord put this country here and blessed it richly for some reason, and I do not believe it is so we can use Romans 13 to not serve a country that we all so much benefit from.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

V...and I do not believe it is so we can use Romans 13 to not serve a country that we all so much benefit from.

I didn't see where that was suggested, pardon me if I missed it. If anything Romans 13 would teach that if called on to serve our country we should do so.

 

[saturneptune]

I didn't see where that was suggested, pardon me if I missed it. If anything Romans 13 would teach that if called on to serve our country we should do so.

Try post 46. What I am not understanding is one, why is serving our nation have to have a chapter and verse in the Bible to be the proper thing to do, and two, why must one be called upon to serve? Doesn't anyone feel an obligation, or is the price just too high and someone else can do it?

It seems to me the quote describing the second century Christians would encourage everyone to stand up for what is right. There are lots of things wrong with our country. It is run by flawed men and women, as we all are, but it is the best in the world at this point in time. Many, many people for the last 234 years have felt it important enough to die for.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Try post 46. What I am not understanding is one, why is serving our nation have to have a chapter and verse in the Bible to be the proper thing to do, and two, why must one be called upon to serve? Doesn't anyone feel an obligation, or is the price just too high and someone else can do it?

It seems to me the quote describing the second century Christians would encourage everyone to stand up for what is right. There are lots of things wrong with our country. It is run by flawed men and women, as we all are, but it is the best in the world at this point in time. Many, many people for the last 234 years have felt it important enough to die for.

I don't get that our of post 46. I would never question the right of a Christian to serve their country, if anything Romans 13 would encourage that.

I don't understand how we are drawing a debate on serving our country from the OP. The point is that these folks served the Lord while submitting to the laws of their land. When they had to choose to follow the Lord instead fo the law they knew they would suffer the consequence.

We are different from them. We have a legal recourse to deal with authorities that we feel are unjust, we vote them out of office. We don't ignore laws we don't agree with or deride and belittle leaders that we may not like. We exercise our political right, but in the mean time we honour those in authority, we obey the law, we pray for them, and we don't speak evil of them. That's how we are the salt and light in a wicked and perverse generation.

 

[saturneptune]

I don't get that our of post 46. I would never question the right of a Christian to serve their country, if anything Romans 13 would encourage that.

I don't understand how we are drawing a debate on serving our country from the OP. The point is that these folks served the Lord while submitting to the laws of their land. When they had to choose to follow the Lord instead fo the law they knew they would suffer the consequence.

We are different from them. We have a legal recourse to deal with authorities that we feel are unjust, we vote them out of office. We don't ignore laws we don't agree with or deride and belittle leaders that we may not like. We exercise our political right, but in the mean time we honour those in authority, we obey the law, we pray for them, and we don't speak evil of them. That's how we are the salt and light in a wicked and perverse generation.

I am in total agreement with your last paragraph. The things you mention that differ us from them, voting and freedom, are gifts from God, and IMO, worth defending. I also agree that there is entirely too much Obama this and that. Most of those who never stop probably voted for McCain, which it would take a microscope to tell any difference. The fact remains, if the Lord had not wanted Obama in office, he would not be there.

 

[RAdam]

People totally miss the purpose of Romans 13. They do this because they don't consider the historical context in which it was written.

At the time Paul wrote that a large number of the Jewish people wanted to rebel against Rome. A few years later they would do just that, without any good reason, and would thus bring upon themselves swift and absolute destruction. This Roman congregation Paul is writing to is composed of both Jews and Gentiles and they are right at the heart of the empire. Paul's intention is to tell them that they are to try to live as peacably under this government as possible. Paul didn't say to sit by while great atrocities are committed. Paul didn't say we need to justify wickedness. Paul didn't say we never need to say anything about one who is over us. Remember, John the Baptist told Herod Antipas it wasn't lawful for him to have his brother's wife. According to some of you John did the wrong thing. The truth must needs always be preached. If the ruler of the land is supporting something wicked, I'll call it out for what it is. I still pray for that man, and I still respect him as president. In fact, I think many people were highly disrespectful to our previous president and I, for one, don't intend to be such a way with our current one. But I'm not going to hold my tongue. I'm also not going to try to raise insurrection against him and this government.

 

[Dragoon68]

So in that case every man has the right to be the arbiter of what is and is not 'lawful?' Every individual determines what is and is not constitutional? Would that not lead to anarchy?

Those in authority are legally and constitutionally there. Americans have a way of dealing with that, it is called the biannual elections. Those are coming up in November. Christians in America have the right to make their voices heard at the polls. My problem comes with the attitude which leads to things like calling our elected officials childish names and casting spurious aspersions against them. We are blessed that we have the opportunity to honour our leaders, submit to their authority while they are in office, pray for them, and at the same time exercise our will at the ballot box. We don't have to lower ourselves to the level of the world in the arena of political debate. Basic principles still apply, 'let your speech be always with grace, speak evil of no man' and others comes to mind.

Back to the OP - do you think the testimony of the early Christians is one that we should not emulate in 21st century America?

There are many ways in which we can effect our governance in America and they're not limited to just voting. We can communicate with our representatives to let them know what we want and what we do not want. We can participate in public demonstrations that give weight to what we want. We can challenge what we believe is not lawful in court. We can educate ourselves and our children on what's different about the American system and why it needs to remain that way. We can push our local and State governments to resist the continual rise of federalism. We can do all these things and more. We do not need to be silent and passive about the changes around us.

No where in any of this do I suggest we act in a non-Christian manner. No where in any of this do I suggest anarchy either. That, from a practical perspective, is one point of wisdom in God's word - Romans 13 - in that it encourages us to be good citizens - not rebellious, disrespectful trouble-makers.

On the other hand, at some point every government has come about through rebellion - both peaceful and violent - against a prior government. I don't think this is an individual recourse but I do think it is a communal recourse that has at times been necessary. It has been in our nation's history. Let's not encourage it by being passive to the changes around us. There is too much suffering that comes about in such times.

This is why taking action to preserve the blessing we have is so important - before it deteriorates so badly - so that there will be neither temptation nor need for the pain of tyranny, revolution, anarchy, and, all to often, nothing subsequently better. We've been blessed that in our case the result was better. Looking around the world it's clear that's often not the case. We need to protect, defend, and secure the blessing we have and that starts with understanding just how much of a blessing it really is.

Absolutely key and paramount to continuing our nation's blessing is to acknowledge from whom it came - God Almighty - and to give Him regular and sincere private and public praise and thanks for it.

 

[Dragoon68]

People totally miss the purpose of Romans 13. They do this because they don't consider the historical context in which it was written.

At the time Paul wrote that a large number of the Jewish people wanted to rebel against Rome. A few years later they would do just that, without any good reason, and would thus bring upon themselves swift and absolute destruction. This Roman congregation Paul is writing to is composed of both Jews and Gentiles and they are right at the heart of the empire. Paul's intention is to tell them that they are to try to live as peacably under this government as possible. Paul didn't say to sit by while great atrocities are committed. Paul didn't say we need to justify wickedness. Paul didn't say we never need to say anything about one who is over us. Remember, John the Baptist told Herod Antipas it wasn't lawful for him to have his brother's wife. According to some of you John did the wrong thing. The truth must needs always be preached. If the ruler of the land is supporting something wicked, I'll call it out for what it is. I still pray for that man, and I still respect him as president. In fact, I think many people were highly disrespectful to our previous president and I, for one, don't intend to be such a way with our current one. But I'm not going to hold my tongue. I'm also not going to try to raise insurrection against him and this government.

Excellent points! Excellent understanding! Excellent approach!

 

[Eric B]

I don't think you know much about what I want or what I'm talking about it so how about you just stick to explaining your own ideas and leave mine to me?

Then why don't you leave everyone else's to them, then; as you keep assigning these bad motives to anyone who disagrees with you (trying to silence the opposition because they like big govt., etc. And thus you're the one who missed my point altogether).

You obviously think others are too passive (which was the basis of what I said), but it seems to be impossible for anyone to be so without having some secret conspiracy to bring you into subjection to some big government (which was the whole point).

Finally a liberal who admits it. It is refreshing and more intellectual honesty than I have seen from liberals in a while.

I didn't say I didn't believe in the Constitution! (This is exactly what I'm talking about; always jumping to prove the worse in the other side).

Its interpretation is clear and unmistakable. Only those who do not believe in the original constitution try to twist it.

We have enough trouble coming to some kind of agreement on interpretation of divine scripture. So for a manmade document (and therefore not even infallible to begin with), there is no way you can prove your interpretation is right. You can call it "clear", but people (I didn't say "I"; I don't know what your interpretation is!) still do not see it that way.

Like "the right to bear arms" is generally understood to refer to any private use, but then, it is also said to refer only to organized militias. I'm sure the arguments on both sides will go back and forth much like the other debates here, such as the sabbath, OSAS, etc. with each side able to pull out verses that seem to favor their view.

So the point was, you can't just steamroll over other people's views (especially when it's now not even the Word of God the dispute is about) and then constantly bash the government (I didn't say you couldn't speak out at all) based on some notion that they are destroying something God gave to you, and you really are expecting it to be Godly. It's apart of the sinful world, yet it is said to still carry some God-given authority (regardless of how ungodly it is); and hence, Rom.13.