Christians resisting God?

[steaver]

¶Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. Romans 13:1-2.

How would you explain this country being formed by God (a power that be), yet, at the same time this country being formed out of Christians resisting the powers that be?

When the founding fathers (professing Christians, accept for maybe one) declared independence were they not resisting a power that be and did they recieve damnation for it?

:jesus:

 

[billwald]

Note that the verse uses "resisteth the power," 'resists' to modern Americans. It doesn't use "attempts to resist." STRANGE!

Is this a hypothetical argument or is it possible to actually resist God's power? Is this not the Reformed VS. Pelagian problem?

I claim that it was not/is not "Christian" to rebel against a Christian ruler who, by scripture, is "ordained by (of?) God" thus the American Rebellion was sinful. In 1976 I proposed we should ask the Queen to take us back but I couldn't convince anyone.

 

[steaver]

Note that the verse uses "resisteth the power," 'resists' to modern Americans. It doesn't use "attempts to resist." STRANGE!

Is this a hypothetical argument or is it possible to actually resist God's power? Is this not the Reformed VS. Pelagian problem?

I claim that it was not/is not "Christian" to rebel against a Christian ruler who, by scripture, is "ordained by (of?) God" thus the American Rebellion was sinful. In 1976 I proposed we should ask the Queen to take us back but I couldn't convince anyone.

I don't believe that it matters whether or not the power that be is Christian. Either way, it says we are not to resist. Jesus said that Pilate's power came from God and Pilate was not a believer. Neither did Jesus resist Pilate's power.

So was this country formed because Christians disobeyed Romans 13?

Yet God obviously wanted the USA formed. Why did this country need to be formed through sin, or was it not sin, and why not?

:thumbsup:

 

[Amy.G]

I don't believe that it matters whether or not the power that be is Christian. Either way, it says we are not to resist. Jesus said that Pilate's power came from God and Pilate was not a believer. Neither did Jesus resist Pilate's power.

So was this country formed because Christians disobeyed Romans 13?

Yet God obviously wanted the USA formed. Why did this country need to be formed through sin, or was it not sin, and why not?

:thumbsup:

This is an excellent question and has really gotten me to thinking. Regarding America, was this country formed through sin? What sin was committed? Is it a sin to leave a country and seek freedom from tyranny? What law did the Pilgrims resist? Is it a sin if I leave the USA and live somewhere apart from it? As long as I live in the US, I am required by God to follow its laws, but if I choose to leave and go live in the Himalayas, what law have I broken? I don't think the founders of this country resisted God or country in leaving England behind and living elsewhere apart from it's rule.

 

[Tom Butler]

We also have to resolve any apparent differences between Romans 13, and those which tell us to resist evil, resist the devil, etc.

What about the spiritual warfare in which we are supposed to be engaged?

I know, I know, Ephesians 6 tells us that we wrestle not with flesh and blood, but with with principalities and powers, etc. But if the spiritual warfare exempts the forces of Satan personified by Hitler, Stalin, and the like, where does that leave us?

 

[Johnv]

I've been a Christian for almost 25 years. I still find myself resisting God all the time.

 

[steaver]

I've been a Christian for almost 25 years. I still find myself resisting God all the time.

And it brings negative consequences everytime. I know, just like we all know.

 

[Johnv]

Yep, you're absolutely right.

 

[Alcott]

I claim that it was not/is not "Christian" to rebel against a Christian ruler who, by scripture, is "ordained by (of?) God" thus the American Rebellion was sinful. In 1976 I proposed we should ask the Queen to take us back but I couldn't convince anyone.

If you want 'the Queen' [The United Kingdom] to "take us back," did you not consider that that kingdom came to be out of many series of rebellions and interkingdominal (yeah, I just invented that, I think) transfers between the Bretons, Saxons, Danish, Normans, et al? And the lasting kingdom expanded itself by conquering other powers in other lands?...meaning, for one thing, that it resisted the confederation of 7 tribes in North America?

Besides, if the 1st century Christians were to obey the power of Rome, and Rome was established by conquest, why would the establishment of the USA not be a legitimate power? [And also, if we are conquered by another power, how would that not be so?..........]

 

[steaver]

This is an excellent question and has really gotten me to thinking. Regarding America, was this country formed through sin? What sin was committed? Is it a sin to leave a country and seek freedom from tyranny? What law did the Pilgrims resist? Is it a sin if I leave the USA and live somewhere apart from it? As long as I live in the US, I am required by God to follow its laws, but if I choose to leave and go live in the Himalayas, what law have I broken? I don't think the founders of this country resisted God or country in leaving England behind and living elsewhere apart from it's rule.

Wouldn't Romans 13 be speaking of resisting that which God has ordained as "good" for you?

Then we would have to decide from scripture if the "power that be" is disobeying God on any given subject.

If the "power that be" is found to be governing with evil, then are we not justified to resist that power?

The founding fathers believed that all men were created equal and free and the "power that be" was being unjust in the sight of God.

Thus, we could conclude that the founding fathers were not guilty of resisting God by declaring independence.

However, are we justified to fight and kill to gain that independence?

God told Moses and Joshua that the promised land was theirs, however, they had to go in and fight and kill in order to possess it.

Would this be a case of the shedding of 'innocent" blood verses "guilty" blood?

Just some thoughts..........

 

[Marcia]

This is an excellent question and has really gotten me to thinking. Regarding America, was this country formed through sin? What sin was committed? Is it a sin to leave a country and seek freedom from tyranny? What law did the Pilgrims resist? Is it a sin if I leave the USA and live somewhere apart from it? As long as I live in the US, I am required by God to follow its laws, but if I choose to leave and go live in the Himalayas, what law have I broken? I don't think the founders of this country resisted God or country in leaving England behind and living elsewhere apart from it's rule.

I've thought about this, too. They left England, but the land they went to was founded and subsidized by England's monarchy, so they were subject to the King. It is not a sin to leave a country and seek freedom, but they did go to a country subject to the King. This is what the War of Independence was all about - overthrowing the King as their ruler.

 

[billwald]

>Is it a sin to leave a country and seek freedom from tyranny?

Obviously not but a straw man argument. The sin was armed rebellion. Second, Considering the French Revolution and the wars following, living in the colonies under King George was a walk in the park.

American tyranny started in strength with Lincoln's War. Prior to Lincoln, the "states" were sovereign nations united for mutual defense and commerce, sort of like a UN of North America.

 

[steaver]

American tyranny started in strength with Lincoln's War. Prior to Lincoln, the "states" were sovereign nations united for mutual defense and commerce, sort of like a UN of North America.

"The powers that be are ordained of God". This means that the USA is ordained of God. This then means that God formed these United States and it's power.

Now, God does not cause sin. But if we call the declaration of independence a "rebellion" then that means God formed this power of the USA through sin, which cannot be.

Who gave the King the right or ok to claim America under the King's rule? When the declaration of independence was made to the King, why did the King have any God given right to deny it?

It seems the founding fathers made an attempt at a peaceful seperation by giving the King a formal notice that he no longer was needed to rule over this country. But the King out of sinful pride decided to fight it so the Americans therefore had no choice but to fight back in self defense.

Once the declaration was made, the King's armies coming into this land to conquer was now an invasion of a sovereign nation. We had the right to defend ourselves wouldn't you think?

 

[Marcia]

"The powers that be are ordained of God". This means that the USA is ordained of God. This then means that God formed these United States and it's power.

Then you have to apply this to everyone - Hitler, Stalin, tyrants who overthrow democracies, horrible leaders like those in Africa like Taylor, etc. Yes, all power is there because God allows it and uses it, but it does not make all revolutions or rebellions okay.

 

[steaver]

Then you have to apply this to everyone - Hitler, Stalin, tyrants who overthrow democracies, horrible leaders like those in Africa like Taylor, etc. Yes, all power is there because God allows it and uses it, but it does not make all revolutions or rebellions okay.

Then you would take the position that Americans sinned against God by rebelling against the King to form a new power. But God forms the powers that be. So is it God using sin that has formed all of these powers throughout history?

God told the Israelites to go in and conquer the powers that be in the promissed land. Those powers were evil. Was the King displaying evil by not letting America's independence? Is it a sin to declare independence?

Does not Romans 13 speak of the "good" that is in the powers that be and therefore if the power that be is not good but evil we have the right, or even obligation, to reject it and oppose it?
:jesus:

 

[Salty]

How many survivors were there at Custer's last stand? Many say zero - but actually hundreds of Indians survived.

Its all how you look at it; and everyone has forgotten one big situation.

The English and French fought the Indians on North America - who actually were the sovereign rulers - so by what authority did the Europeans have to overthrow the Indians
(and that 24 dollars by Pete - would have been thrown out of court :laugh

Salty

 

[JTornado1]

The Declaration of Independence states numerous reasons why the Colonists rebelled against British authority:

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

My Bible study teacher stated that the Colonists were wrong for rebelling against England. He said you should rebel only if you are not allowed to practice your religion. Most of the class disagreed with him.

 

[Marcia]

Then you would take the position that Americans sinned against God by rebelling against the King to form a new power. But God forms the powers that be. So is it God using sin that has formed all of these powers throughout history?

I lean toward that position, yes. We are not told anywhere in God's word that rebelling against a ruler or overthrowing that ruler is okay.

God told the Israelites to go in and conquer the powers that be in the promissed land. Those powers were evil. Was the King displaying evil by not letting America's independence? Is it a sin to declare independence?

Two entirely different situations. God told the Israelites to do what they did - they were being led directly by God. This did not happen with the colonies.

Does not Romans 13 speak of the "good" that is in the powers that be and therefore if the power that be is not good but evil we have the right, or even obligation, to reject it and oppose it?

No, absolutely not. I don't think Rom 13 says that we can oppose and/or overthrow a power that is not good. In fact, when Rom. 13 was written, Christians were under the rule of pagan rulers, and later rulers who persecuted and killed them. Yet they did not rebel nor try to overthrow those rulers. Their rulers were worse than what the colonies had in the King of England.

 

[Eric B]

How many survivors were there at Custer's last stand? Many say zero - but actually hundreds of Indians survived.

Its all how you look at it; and everyone has forgotten one big situation.

The English and French fought the Indians on North America - who actually were the sovereign rulers - so by what authority did the Europeans have to overthrow the Indians
(and that 24 dollars by Pete - would have been thrown out of court :laugh

Salty

My sentiments exactly!
This whole topic begs the question (most don't even think of) of why people just going and taking over other lands was once right; yet now it would be wrong if anyone did it today. Were the commandments against stealing suspended for several centuries?
People appealed to God telling the Israelites to conquer other lands, but I think most would admit that God never grantd anyone after that such instruction. But they presumed it with concepts such as "Manifest Destiny".

 

[billwald]

Why didn't the Declaration of Independence apply to the Confederate States?