submiting to ...

[agedman]

I figure the topic of this thread has probably been well hashed, but I am interested in who might have changed their views and what constitutes Scriptural support the view you hold.

1Pe 2:13 - 17
"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king."

> The king said only pray to him. Daniel disobeyed. Was he right in doing so?

> The witnesses were told to not speak about Christ anymore. They disobeyed. Were they right to do so?

> What ordinances do you consider so anti-Christ that you would not submit to them?

Can you give Scriptures to support a clear principle that can be generally taught to all believers. By this I mean that you present Scriptures that they too may look to for wisdom and instruction about this growing problem.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

When Peter was arrested by the Jewish authorities they told him to stop preaching. They were acting as a civil authority. He told them 'we have to obey God instead of man.'

To me that makes the matter very clear. We have to obey civil authorities unless in so doing we directly disobey the word of God. All of the examples of civil disobedience in scripture did just.

Even then, if we make that choice, we have to be willing to accept the punishment of the civil authorities.

 

[agedman]

When Peter was arrested by the Jewish authorities they told him to stop preaching. They were acting as a civil authority. He told them 'we have to obey God instead of man.'

To me that makes the matter very clear. We have to obey civil authorities unless in so doing we directly disobey the word of God. All of the examples of civil disobedience in scripture did just.

Even then, if we make that choice, we have to be willing to accept the punishment of the civil authorities.

We already know that Peter was a rather flawed person. Or, perhaps that happened before he had grown up enough in the wisdom of Christ and wrote 1 and 2 Peter. (sarcasm being used in those statements).

I agree with the statement, "We have to obey civil authorities unless in so doing we directly disobey the word of God."

Is this the only time that civil disobedience is not breaking Peter's statement?

 

[Aaron]

I figure the topic of this thread has probably been well hashed, but I am interested in who might have changed their views and what constitutes Scriptural support the view you hold.

1Pe 2:13 - 17
"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king."

> The king said only pray to him. Daniel disobeyed. Was he right in doing so?

> The witnesses were told to not speak about Christ anymore. They disobeyed. Were they right to do so?

> What ordinances do you consider so anti-Christ that you would not submit to them?

Can you give Scriptures to support a clear principle that can be generally taught to all believers. By this I mean that you present Scriptures that they too may look to for wisdom and instruction about this growing problem.

Children are commanded to honor their fathers and mothers, but men know by nature that parents have no authority to endanger a child's welfare. Those who do, though they fill the "office" of parent, are not truly parents. The prostitute who protected the child was deemed by Solomon to be the mother.

Rulers are not a terror to good works. Rulers simply have no authority to hinder good works. Those who do hinder good works, though they may occupy the office of magistrate, are not rulers, but are tyrants and may be justly disobeyed, and even overthrown.

 

[MB]

I figure the topic of this thread has probably been well hashed, but I am interested in who might have changed their views and what constitutes Scriptural support the view you hold.

1Pe 2:13 - 17
"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king."

> The king said only pray to him. Daniel disobeyed. Was he right in doing so?

> The witnesses were told to not speak about Christ anymore. They disobeyed. Were they right to do so?

> What ordinances do you consider so anti-Christ that you would not submit to them?

Can you give Scriptures to support a clear principle that can be generally taught to all believers. By this I mean that you present Scriptures that they too may look to for wisdom and instruction about this growing problem.

I'm convinced we should follow man's law until it reaches a point that it would be a sin for us if we did. Shadrach,Meshach, and Abednego. Daniel 1,2,&3 They didn't bow down to a false god even though it was the law of the land.
MB

 

[Aaron]

. . . and even though they faced a torturous demise.

 

[convicted1]

. . . and even though they faced a torturous demise.

AMEN!! :thumbs:

 

[agedman]

Rulers are not a terror to good works. Rulers simply have no authority to hinder good works. Those who do hinder good works, though they may occupy the office of magistrate, are not rulers, but are tyrants and may be justly disobeyed, and even overthrown.

Peter doesn't seem to make a distinction between tyrant and ruler.

Do you have anything of a Scriptural example of a person who resisted a tyrant that would not have violated Peter?