The Authorities that Exist have been established by God

Ralph, I don't see that anything you said answers the questions I asked, and it doesn't matter that they were asked to Jimmy. If there is scripture that says God sometimes sanctions rebellions, then cite it. Then show that a king's taxes and persecution of some are a justifiable reason. Then show that developing a way of life independent of the "mother country" is a justifiable reason. Then show that many involved in this rebellion never being loyal to the king in the first place is a justifiable reason.

Then show that those who did remain loyal to the king must, upon the success of the rebellion, now be subject to the new power. Finally, explain how people everywhere are not to be subject [i.e., rebellion is okay] to any 'power' they disagree with, and above all, how any government in power is not the result of God v. God-- if there is any case in the world in which a reigning government did not get there in some part by rebellion, in which His authority usurped His authority.

 

I think I have a real difference of philosophy with you Alcott. If I were to adopt your position, then the only consistent way to do so is to be a total pacifist. In other words, non-resistance by any means involving violence.

On the other hand, I note in Scripture that the Lord never commands that type of defenselessness. In the OT, Israel raised armies, overthrew invaders and usurpers, and Solomon had such a great army that no one dared stand against him (peace through strength, in the immortal words of Ronald Reagan).

In the NT, Jesus Himself said that "When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace" (Luke 11:21) and "how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house" (Matthew 12:29).

Oc course Paul encourages us, "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men" (Romans 12:18). But sometimes, it's not possible.

Consider once again the plight of the American colonists -- but look at it from their perspective. What if British soldiers broke into your house? What if they ran your family out into the night and bunked their soldiers in your families quarters? What if they took your families food, or stole your livestock to butcher it for their army? What if, when you objected, they arrested you, tossed you in a stockade, and never mentioned a trial or when you would be released? What if they were marching into your town demanding that you surrender your own personal weapons -- the only means of your self defense (and in those days, of food!)...?

I don't find in Scripture where, when those kinds of extenuating circumstances produced by tyrants are a real and present danger, that God says we must be a doormat and allow them to harm -- or even kill -- ourselves and our families. It's just not there....

If I held your position, as a "responsible" and "Biblical" American Christian, I would call for an immediate return to submission to the British Crown. If not, then we are in perpetual rebellion against God based on a violation of your interpretation of Romans 13.... Is that what you really believe? Is that what you really want?

Not I.

JDale

 

Alcott, I was not necessarily disagreeing with your post or questions posed to av1611jim.

I simply noted he may fail to respond to many of the questions posed, as this debate has been undertaken already. I was in no way slighting you and maybe should have refrained from quoting your post? As much of my statements were in regards to the former thread but in anticipation of the same arguments, in addition to being relevant to this thread.




But to answer your questions. Yes, God does in some instances sanction and bless rebellion or forms of such, as shown in the Bible and as posted. He has stated God would never sanction or bless a "rebellion" or "civil disobedience" in "any form". Which is contrary to Gods word as God has and will pass judgment on evil people, evil rulers and evil nations.

*The Apostles continued to spread the good news of our Lord, though Christianity had been outlawed with Christians being killed for sport. Not to mention that Caesar had deemed himself to be worshiped as a god. Not to mention the religious elders had told them not to preach in our Lords name. Acts4:18 "So they called them and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. 19 But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge…"(I would believe Christians who helped save many Jews and others, and destroy Hitlers Germany, were doing such with Gods blessing)

*Moses lead Gods people out of the rule of Pharaoh, though they were subjects/slaves of Pharaoh, and only after Pharaoh was shown the great destructive power of God.

*But the story of Jeraboam is one in which God sanctioned and blessed a "rebellion" as it is explicitly written.





Again the Bible says the powers which exist were established by God. We however know God will not stand for evil and thus evil people and nations will incur His eventual wrath. Though we cannot understand why such nations as Hitlers Germany comes into existence, you can bet it is for His greater purpose.


The question then is when is rebellion or civil disobedience ever acceptable? That question for us could only be found in studying the Bible. We know He says Sam 23:3 “….He who rules over men must be just, Ruling in the fear of God”.
We know the Founders, Colonists, and the English themselves did not see the King as doing such. We also know God destroyed the rule of Solomon and others because they "did not walk in my ways". We also know God allows us to protect ourselves, families, possessions, homes etc. Luke 22:36 "Then He (Jesus) said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one". Again, the Founders understood the magnitude of their undertaking and the same questions of right or wrong as found in the Bible, were debated.


Thus whether the Revolution was sanctioned, blessed, or condemned by God is simply something only our Lord knows. I do know that America took on and defeated one of the greatest Military ever with a rag tag army, twice. I do know America had/has been one of the most blessed nations ever. Though if our Nation continues to drift from God you will only see greater strife come to us.


To again clarify my stance however, God does hate rebellion or civil disobedience as it leads to great instability. However, He has on occasion sanctioned and blessed such.

Take care, In Christ.:jesus:

 

I stated no position. I just asked questions as to exactly how either of the 2 main positions is justified, as neither of them can be sola scriptura, but must involve extrabiblical human reasoning.

 

Very good. They refused to do what is contrary to what they believed God ordered them to do. But that's not the subject here. The subject is overthrowing a civil power because we don't like the way it governs (no matter to what extent this "civil" government tries to also be religious or spiritual). Niether the apostles nor those who helped Jews escape Nazi Gernany tried to overthrow the government, though it was most likely in their best interest that this be done. Literally, they "resisted the power," as prohibited by Romans 13. In this way it's a the ends justifies the means argument.

And who does scripture say is "just?" Thus who is qualified to rule over men? [Do we need to cite the verses to answer this?]

Was George Washington "just" in the eyes of God? Thomas Jefferson? Alexander Hamilton? Did they have the authority to rule? If not, did any of the colonies or individuals have the authority to rebel against them, such as the Pennsylvania farmers who refused to pay what they thought was a new unjust tax on the whiskey they were making and selling (because big-city merchants knew they were cutting into their sales)?

Honestly, I used to be of a very similar line of thought on this. Sure we have injustices today: abortions, blasphemy and filth dominates our entertainment media, states are making "legal unions" or even legal marriage between same-sex couples sanctioned. But what of the past? Slavery [even if not evil as an institution, certainly evil in beatings, rapes, death from labor and condititions], slaughter and betrayal of Indian tribes and villages, forcing children to work in mines and factories, and much more. I no longer believe God blessed this country while such things went on, and He will be more angry because of what is happening in the present. "Drift" from slavery, child labor, wholesale slaughter, to abortion, pornography, and sexual sins? I no longer go along with such idea that the blessings of 2 centuries mean all was "passable", but today's sins mean we will be taken over -- or just "greater strife," as you said. In both cases, there was plenty of strife.

As a side issue, I don't agree that we [USA] beat the world's greatest military power twice. If Britain was not long at war with France, and didn't consider us a peripheral problem, the odds would have been as in our 'Civil War' at best, with the rebels losing because of such a disadantage in personnel and means of production and trade.

 

Hello Alcott,

I guess I am somewhat missing your main question or point? Though I have attempted to answer while keeping to the main topic. Which is whether we are to submit ourselves entirely to the governing powers, as in regards to Rom 13. Irrespective of how evil, un-godly, or to the degree of un-godly(sinner) they may be.

Which would mean civil disobedience of any form and rebellion of any form would never be permissible. If you draw from the literal meaning of a few sentences, while ignoring the rest of that passage or other Scripture, for clarity in this argument it reads as such, 1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities...Then do what is right and he(authority) will commend you". The meaning here is to do what is "right" according to the governing authority. If this were taken literally many people, and throughout history, would at times or all together have to ignore Gods word and will, thus it cannot.



I do not think the literal meaning of a few sentences can be taken as such, without considering the rest of that passage or other Scripture.

Because other Scripture shows the Apostles continued to spread the word of our Lord as commanded by Jesus. Though they were told not to do so by the Religious elders, Christianity had been outlawed, and Caesar had declared himself a god. Do we say Jesus was breaking the command of the Father? No, and that would be outrageous blasphemy.

Moses lead his people away from Pharaoh though they were his subjects and slaves. This is something Pharaoh did not want to allow and only did so after being put in the fear of God. Did Moses sin or did God allow him to sin, as they stopped submitting themselves to Pharaoh? No, this was something God commanded but it should be taken into light of Rom 13.


For those who believe in the literal meaning of a few sentences in that passage Rom 13, then they would have to conclude, we are sinning to send Missionaries to Countries who object to Christianity. Or that any Christian witnessing to people, in a nation that outlaws Christianity, is sinning? This literal meaning would be contrary and in conflict with Scripture, which tells us to spread His good news throughout the world!




If you take Romans 13 into full context it also says, "3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you." God is the sole authority of what is right and wrong and we have His word and commandments as given us in the Holy Bible.
Surely we do not believe Hitler or Stalin were righteous men, who's full authority and commands were to be faithfully obeyed. Such as turning Jews or Christians over to be killed. No, they were evil people who's demise came about. By the way, many Christians and others did work to overthrow these/their regimes, by working against them from within and in conjunction with the allies. Many take this passage to mean we should simply be careful and comply with the laws but not in disavowing God.



This passage in Rom 13 however goes a long way in saying Rom 13 only applies to Godly nations and leaders -Or- leaders and nations who are acting in a Godly manner. Which would mean that passage does not necessarily apply or fully apply to un-godly or evil leaders/nations. I am not a theologian however the passage speaks strongly for itself and why context is important.
Rom13:4 "For he(authority) is God's servant to do you good".


Again, we know Hitler/Stalin and possibly the King of England were not such. There offenses to men and God are there to be seen or debated. But again, the people of England overthrew the Kings authority after the Revolutionary war as he indeed was tyrannical and demented.

America was founded on Christian principles of which is undeniable. As Supreme Courts, Supreme Court Justices, Presidents and the Federal Government itself recognizes.http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/religion.html or go here for a broad and historical overview.http://www.christianlifeandliberty.net/NoKingbutKingJesus.doc




This does not mean we are a perfect nation or without sin! We call ourselves Christian yet we do sin against God as no man born, except Jesus on Earth, was without sin. It is no different than with nations or people who make up nations.

America may not be perfect but we are a Godly nation, though drifting. To correct something in regards to slavery and Indians however, the Founders enacted the Northwest Ordinance which stated.http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/5.htm

They thought this would lead to the eventual ending of slavery as most hated it. Though it may have taken a while with slavery and conflicts with Indians, which was both sides, such blame can be laid on the sin of men. Just as a note however, our nation and leaders have often called upon God to forgive us of our national and other transgressions, and we have worked to correct many of those wrongs.



The people of God, Israel, in the Old Testament often did things against God. It is shown many times He punished them for these things but He never forgot them. These punishments also varied in degree. So we will never be a perfect nation as nor could we ever be a perfect living Christian, one without sin. We can however work hard in this manner.



God Bless America.
Take care, In Christ:wavey:

 

Well, yes. Unless you consider any action that is against a government edict to be a rebellion. Go ahead and set up speed traps on the highway and try evey speeder for treason!

I think there IS a difference between simply disobeying the civil law and attempting to overthrow the civil government. The latter is what I have been talking about (and it wasn't I who inserted that aspect into the thread here).

 

In the NT, Jesus is the "strong man." Some Christians don't trust Jesus to be sufficiently strong so they help him.