This question was posted on my friend liberty's blog, she has kindly allowed me to post it here.
"Alright, all of you readers of this blog, I need y'all to give me your beliefs on the passage of Romans 13. The question I'm posing:
(1) in every aspect, at all times
(2) only if it is in accordance with God's principles
or
(3) Neither. It is speaking of spiritual leaders.
I'd appreciate all view points!"
My original reply-
"Using just Romans 13 I don't think I can make a legitimate argument for:
“(1) in every aspect, at all times.”
I don't think you could find anything, anywhere in the Bible to support this.
“(2) only if it is in accordance with God's principles.”
This is the position I support based on the whole Bible.
“(3) Neither. It is speaking of spiritual leaders.”
In the first part of the chapter it sounds like Paul is talking about government and in the last part it sounds like spiritual church leaders etc...
Personal opinion only, well hmm, I have to go with “spiritual leaders”
One other person commented there, but I didn't ask if it was ok to post it. Liberty, do you agree with any of my answers? If so I wont have to argue the points!
64 comments:
I reckon I may as well dive head first into all of this!
Bret, on what all verses do you base #2, your stance on God and government? You stated for this chapter: "In the first part of the chapter it sounds like Paul is talking about government and in the last part it sounds like spiritual church leaders etc..." Where do you draw this line?
For all of you readers, I believe that through the first seven verses , this chapter is speaking solely of spiritual leaders. As we get a few more view points and a little action, I'll state 'why' and maybe interrogate a few of y'all as to 'why you stand where you stand'!
I'm waiting impatiently folks, so speak up! :)
Ok so here we go...
First I must make an apology, yes thats right, I was wrong! I must admit that when you first asked the question I just gave the passage just a casual glance. I put almost no thought into it, and "went with the flow" or "took the path of lest resistance." The last two sentiences I said were:
"In the first part of the chapter it sounds like Paul is talking about government and in the last part it sounds like spiritual church leaders etc...
Personal opinion only, well hmm, I have to go with “spiritual leaders”
These are totally wrong, and I take them back. (If you would be so kind as to let me do that).
Now for the record I can defend these comments if that is the direction you want this debate to go, but it is not the position I believe in.
It seems that nobody wants to jump into the real question being asked here. That question is whether or not we need to be in subjection to a human government. Again, if you want I can argue Romans 13 but for now I will use it only for the main argument.
Ok, you asked for verses, so here they are:
1Pe 2:12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.
1Pe 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
1Pe 2:14 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.
1Pe 2:15 For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
1Pe 2:16 As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.
1Pe 2:17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.
1Pe 2:18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
1Pe 2:19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.
1Pe 2:20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
1Pe 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
1Pe 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
1Pe 2:23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:
1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
Pro 17:11 An evil man seeketh only rebellion: therefore a cruel messenger shall be sent against him.
Pro 24:21 My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle not with them that are given to change:
Pro 24:22 For their calamity shall rise suddenly; and who knoweth the ruin of them both?
Mat 22:16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.
Mat 22:17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
Mat 22:18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Mat 22:19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
Mat 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
Mat 22:21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
1Ti 2:1 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
1Ti 2:2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
Tit 3:1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,
2Pe 2:9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:
2Pe 2:10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
Eph 5:21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.
Jud 1:8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
I think thats enough for now, If you want “part two” out of Romans 12 and 13 I'll be glad to give it also. But, I think you will have a hard enough time with those verses I just gave.
liberty- I will also dive right into this... so wait no further.
I do not think that in Romans 13 Paul is saying to Submit ourselves into the government and i will give you the reasons.
Romans 13:1
Let every soul be subject unto higher powers. For there is no power BUT OF GOD: the powers that be are ordained of God.
In other words, no one would have any power if God didn't give it to them.
13:8
Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth one another hath fulfilled the law.
13:10
Love worketh to ill to his neighbour: therefore love is fulfilling the law.
Have you ever known any of the government to love one another??
13:13
Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.
13:14
but put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and MAKE NOT provision to the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof.
All Calls still go to God, NOT to man. HE decides what the punishment is for disobeying HIS LAW, NOT man/mans.
The Government doesn't even obey God's Law! They don't Enforce it very well either! And God will punish them for that, under HIS circumstances.
Think of Hitler in Germany.
If you were a Christian Living in that time, What would you do??!!
Turn in Jews to be Murdered??
or disobey the law??
Isaiah 15:10
Who among you Feareth the Lord, that obeyeth the voice of his servant, that walketh in darkness, and hath no light? let him trust upon the Lord, and stay upon his God.
That will be all for now.
I will ask questions if they are asked.
We can argue about "obeying the government" all the time, part of the time, or only in certain situations, for quite a long time since no specific scenario is given.
For this reason, I'd like to quickly apply what is being discussed to a real-life situation with which we are all familiar.
Bret and Anna Joy,
I take it that since we are to obey "the laws of the government", the first American Revolution was a grave mistake, and possibly a sin, because many of our country's outstanding christian leaders of the time did not submit to King George. They boldly stole some of his territory and claimed it for their own; then killed and imprisoned the men he sent to take it back. They refused to pay the taxes he requested, irreverently boycotting the revenue-generating products, and established their own country, ironically leaving us a "christian heritage".
correct??
1Pe 2:12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.
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.
These verses are speaking of our Christian example to unbelievers, as seen in verse 12. Both 13-14 are speaking of submitting to, in our case, a constitutional government, one based on His standards. Then again in 15-16 he reminds us of our example, and not overstepping the bounds of liberty.
1 Pet. 2:17-24 doesn't really apply in anyway. Excluding verse 17, it's speaking to the servant/slave,
I see no relation between our topic and the the verses in Proverbs.
Mat 22:16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.
Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.
And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
Now we come to the tax collector's favorite verses. Let's look at these verses which the devil has used to deceive so many!
The Herodians came to him trying to trap him between two answers. (A) Pay your taxes. (B) Don't. Are you trying to tell me that Jesus Christ walked openly into their trap by giving answer A? When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way. Nay, He had avoided their trap. He did not give them a "yea" or a "nay". He left it up to us to decide what was Ceaser's.
Tit 3:1 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,
Again, we see that this applies to a "good work" government.
So, since we're agreeing yet disagreeing, let's clarify a few things. Exactly what does the government have to do before you'll stand?
O yeah, and btw, I'd like an answer to Jimmy's question.
Anna, at the beginning of your text put and at the end
that didn't work! Sorry!
Here
Amber-I think an answer to your argument will come in a future installment of the Bible v “anti government guild” debate.
Jimmy-I expected that question, as I have asked it in the past. There are two answers I will give.
(1)The King George didn't own the land and the people came from different lands other then England therefor he was just trying to steal it (just like France only they happened to lose). Like if I came to your house, took your laptop, and said it was mine cause I had in in my hand at that time. Granted the wars happened over many years and had long lulls between them. Maybe I have my American history all out of whack (like my grammar)
(2)The people were NOT obeying the Bible even tho they did what they did in the name of freedom and all that. This is the position I was leaning toward, but was not quite sure about it.
I hear the “WHAT ON EARTH”s, now you're thinking “WOW Bret's a coward.” Not so, there is a third answer that I think will come out in further debate.
I will argue any answer you want for the sake of good debate, but for now....
Liberty- I have no idea where you came up with the idea of a “constitutional government” or “good work government” There never has and never will be one of those governments. Therefor the verses cannot be talking about them (I'm talking about governments in the New Testament era). The point is that God is in control of ALL governments and He sets up who He wants running them (I wont look up the verses because I think we agree on this). It is not our job to judge those governments or go ahead of Gods judgment on their wrongs. Look at David:
1Sa 26:10 David said furthermore, As the LORD liveth, the LORD shall smite him; or his day shall come to die; or he shall descend into battle, and perish.
He even got mad at himself because he did something to Saul:
1Sa 24:5 And it came to pass afterward, that David's heart smote him, because he had cut off Saul's skirt.
1Sa 24:6 And he said unto his men, The LORD forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the LORD'S anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the LORD.
David killed the man who just said he had killed Saul:
2Sa 1:14 And David said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy the LORD'S anointed?
2Sa 1:15 And David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died.
YOU put on YOUR blog the story of the "The Emperor's Wrestlers" that would have been the “perfect” chance to “fight for freedom” etc. etc. etc. But they didn't fight.
The point is, that it is not about when I'm going to “take a stand” (this means what does BRET want) but what the LORD'S will for my life is. Way too many people want what they want, not what God wants. There are people fought the government (Samson) with the Lord's blessing and it was the His will for Samson to do that, but those people are few and far between.
If it is God's will for you to “fight” good for you, go for it, but don't tell me that I'm a coward (or whatever else LOL), because I know it is not His will for my life to fight at this time. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean I don't have opinions on our government. I can tell story after story about people who fought, and all of them have major problems in their life. Their problem is with authority, God instituted authority, so God lets them get hurt. You may continue to nit pick and I'll do my best to refute it, but my prayer for you is that you will never fight authority outside of the Lord's will.
This is the third argument.
Thanks Lydia! :)
To follow chronological order, I will respond to Anna Joy's comment first.
"during the American Revolution we were fighting for our freedom, freedom from a tyrannical ruler, freedom to be a democracy, a nation where the PEOPLE made the choices. How is that comparable to, say, someone now refusing to pay their taxes?"
As I recall, your previous comment did not specify whether or not "we" were fighting for freedom, or what kind of ruler "we" were fighting against. Does a just cause justify violating your beliefs if you believe that you are to submit to all government?
"we have the OPTION and the RIGHT to protest things we consider to be unfair or unjust peaceably. They didn't.
hmmm... "They" had neither the option nor the right to protest things they considered unjust? I must have read my history wrong then, because I thought that I recalled reading about the early colonists doing just that. (you know the boston tea party, as well as the long standing boycotts, for example) Obviously, then, they had the OPTION, and, since no government or religion can dictate what rights a man has, they had the RIGHT. Back then it just so happened that some men actually had grit, and, instead of "marching on the king's steps" to protest, they got serious and did what needed to be done.
Bret,
"The King George didn't own the land and the people came from different lands other then England therefor he was just trying to steal it"
While this may be true, you personally want to submit to all government, so if King George said that it belonged to him, you should not have argued with him about it, much less fought.
"The people were NOT obeying the Bible even tho they did what they did in the name of freedom and all that."
No, I'm not going to call you a coward or anything of the sort... you have told me what I wanted to know... If you lived in the time of the first American Revolution, you would have made a wonderfull Torry, furthering the King's sanctified cause.
With that said, I have a question for Liberty, for myself, for anyone who claims that "we" must take a stand to stem the rampant rampage of political intricacies that have paved the way to tyranny, mainly since the time of the second American Revolution.
This is a glaring question that I have had to face; a graveyard in the middle of an imagined Utopia. What does all this talk about taking a stand against the "big bad government" do? Where has it gotten us in the last couple of years, and how much will it have accomplished in the next couple of years? We call for action, but what action??? WHAT ACTION????????
Shall we go to Guyana and drink kool-aid (or flavour-aid, I think it might have been), or shall we be Kent Hovind, and not pay our income taxes, and entrust all of our assets to a bunch of frauds, and end up in prison for it? Or maybe we should all buy AK-47's and hide out in an underground bunker and talk of the brave things we will do when the feds come after us?
s-s I may not agree 100% with you...
but I do kinda like your last point there.
"based on this chapter alone I think Paul is saying to submit to those in government"
= last comment (the idea that one should submit to government)
I'm sorry, I was not clear, all 3 answers are answers that would fit my convictions. While I could use 1 or 2 to nit pick and cop-out respectively they are not the ones I take as my own. (the third is mine)
I said I would defend them (for the sake of good debate) so I will starting with:
(1) The point I made before was that just because King George (may he live forever) said it was his land does not mean it IS his. That would leave us with am obvious question, that being, where do you draw the line on what is government and what is not? Liberty thinks that the government needs to be "good" that's a great idea, but I don't think it is possible to make a "good" government. Now the only way to defend the actions of the colonists is by using answer 3 and saying that they know it was the Lords will (as I do).
OR
(2) They could be wrong...time will tell...
I will continue in following answer 3 obeying as much government as I can.
Psalm 37:23 The steps of a good man are ordered by the LORD: and he delighteth in his way.
Until I am led in a different direction.
By nit picking (on answer 1) I could say something like "well France said it was their land so whose government should I follow?" That could go on and on (and it will if you want me to keep defending #1)
I'm not going to make this real long.
"There never has and never will be one of those governments." I beg your pardon Bret Reed! Actually not, but anyway you get the point. There once was a good government! There once was a constitutional government! A government that was established by the blood my fore-fathers!!! Yes, it was the government of 1776.
Jimmy, in answer to your question (Bret, this is for you too), do you so soon forget, like so many others, that we the people rule?! Of course it can be said then, that we made America the perverse nation that it is today. But is it not our lack of perfect vigilance that has caused such a downfall? Now is the time to wake up!
The film "America: Freedom to Fascism" has accomplished what nothing else has been able to. (In the last few decades). Then what do you know? Lo and behold, here comes Ron Paul's campaign! Between Aaron Russo's film and Ron Paul's campaign, the blind fold has started to unwrap itself. An awakening has begun which has been long awaited for. Let not this awakening be in vain! I believe that if we (ok, myself and other constitutionalists)persist, throughout these next four years, to spread the truth, it will not be in vain. And by 2012, after we've had one of these dirty candidates pollute the White House, 'till it can take no more, our work will pay off and we'll be able to revolutionize the whole of America!
Though I be the only one in this world, I'll take a stand!
liberty- If you could show me where in the Bible it says that "we the people rule" I would love to see it! That may have been a "good" government by our standards, but since we are human we cannot make a perfect government. Therefor it makes your definition of that verse null and void.
Once again, it's not about what we want (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) but what God wants for our lives (that is much easier to say then to do). Of course I will vote and do legal things to hopefully get the "right" people on office. I'm just got going to "fight" government.
One other thing, according to your argument, I don't have to obey the current government. Correct? What makes you think I have to obey the "constitutional government?" Why have government at all, and why are you for one?
Question for Liberty:
What exactly constitutes a "perfect government", in your opinion, and what makes you think we ever had one? Nothing is going to be perfect until we see the Lord....good, excellent, sure. Perfect, no.
Ok. Let's rationalize a few things and get down to earth here, at least for a few minutes. :)
Is it stated anywhere in the Bible "Bret Reed is the son of Jim and Shelley Reed; brother to Andrew, Wade, James, Nathan, Janelle, Taylor, Cole, Layne and Arielle Reed"? I'll answer it for you, 'No'. Does the Bible state every given fact here on earth, 'No'. -{Period}-
Bret and Anna, nowhere did I mention the word perfect.
You don't 'have' to obey any government.
"Why have any government at all"? Duh! (That's the only appropriate answer)
Why am I for government? Without a government you would probably never hear the word 'America'. (We wouldn't exist.)
If I don't have to obey government why should I want to conform to your version of "good" government. In fact I see nothing "Biblical" about your form of good government at all. The point is you want people to use your form of "good" government, but you cant stand any little thing that you think is a restriction on YOU.
Quoting me-
"Why have government at all?"
The reason you didn't answer this (other then the lame "duh") is that if you did you would have to admit that God instituted government and that you must obey it (other then if it was His will, refer to answer #3)
Again you are getting away from what God wants and doing what you think is best.
If there is no perfect government, then what are those verses talking about, why are those verses even in the Bible? Certainly it does not mean “you must only obey a perfect government” that would be pointless. The only other obvious answer to that question, is that we are to obey government.
Sorry about all the double posting, I keep thinking up new things.
All right Liberty, I'm sorry! I went back and looked and no, you did not mention the word "perfect", therefore I was wrong. Sorry! :)
For the record, the reason I used the word "perfect" was to make sure that liberty doesn't think the verses meant "perfect government." By her answer it would appear that she does not.
SS- The Bible does not say "We the people rule".
It says "Our God Reigns".
Thank you for an honest answer.
Here is a relative verse upon that point.
John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Let me guess..."well that was talking only about Jesus." LOL!!!
Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
"If I don't have to obey government why should I want to conform to your version of "good" government. In fact I see nothing "Biblical" about your form of good government at all. The point is you want people to use your form of "good" government, but you cant stand any little thing that you think is a restriction on YOU."
My statement of "you don't 'have' to'", was in the most generic form. You don't 'have' to do anything, even if someone had a gun up side your head.
For your info, it's not *MY* version of good government. It's my founding fathers version of good government. It's what any true patriot, conservatist, constitutionalist, etc. would consider to be a good government.
If you want to become a slave under a tyrannical government, because you don't see anything 'Biblical' in a different for of gov., I'll admit "that's perfectly fine with me". Just, "don't you dare try to encourage others in such appalling behavior". I believe that our constitutional government has been blessed by God and will be blessed by God. I believe that God honors this form of government and that it is His best for His people.
No, your last sentence is not the point, at all, in ANY way. Pray, could I have a reason for why you believe this? I've already made it clear that I believe in government. With government comes restrictions, right? Therefore, it should be quite clear that I believe in laws, rules, and restrictions, as long as they do not exceed certain bounds. These bounds being the constitution.
In regards to the verses, mainly speaking of Titus 3, I admonish you to look at the context of them and who Paul was writing to. (Do a little research on the Cretes and read Titus 1)
WOW now I'm so confused. I'm going to restart my arguments because of the word "have." Of course I don't have to do anything, but I thought you meant "I don't have to obey government, according to what the Bible says"
Could I please get some straight answers?
Can we agree on these things:
(1)According to the Bible, we are to be obedient to some sort of government? If so list the Biblical standard for those governments and what verses are involved?
(2)There are no perfect governments (that exist) according to the Biblical standard?
(3)When we mean obey, fight etc. we are not talking about if we agree of don't agree with the government, but are talking about engaging in acts of civil disobedience, such as not paying taxes, etc?
I can't argue anything until we agree on some standards for debate.
1.-2. the Bible gives us no specific standards/guidelines for government.
3. I speak of taking acts to hold the government in check.
First you say this (speaking of Peter chapter 2)
"These verses are speaking of our Christian example to unbelievers, as seen in verse 12. Both 13-14 are speaking of submitting to, in our case, a constitutional government, one based on His standards. Then again in 15-16 he reminds us of our example, and not overstepping the bounds of liberty."
And now you are saying this:
"1.-2. the Bible gives us no specific standards/guidelines for government."
Pray tell what is the truth?
Are there standards or aren't there?
After you answer this I will move on to round 2 of questioning...
You all are hilarious!!! How about getting back to Romans 13? :)
Lydia, would you please explain why you believe Romans 13:1-7 pertains only to spiritual leaders?
“For all of you readers, I believe that through the first seven verses, this chapter is speaking solely of spiritual leaders.”
Now folks, the overall debate (argument) is not about Romans 13, but about if we Biblically must obey the government. Romans 13 was used to start the debate, if you wish to continue debating it, please use it in the context of this debate.
Thx
The Editor
I um... third the motion.:)
Please read my first and last comment,it's ▲ there!!! LOL!!!
Andrew and Anna, in all reality, when I suggested/asked Bret to post this question, I was hoping that it would transfer to this. This subject was my ulterior motive for asking.
Andrew, note the word, "soul". Quoting Oxford's 1604 definition, "Intellectual or spiritual power; high development of the mental faculties", it appears quite evident that it is speaking of the soul inside one; not one's being as a whole. For sake of time I wont deal with all the verses, but going on to verse four. Can an unbeliever be the "minister of God" "bearing
not the sword (Word of God) in vain"?
For verses 13-14, (I Peter 2)I'll have to take back what I said. Thank you for pointing out that error. I had just quickly looked over those without taking time to look into them.
I will try to maybe add a little more in answer to Bret's question by tomorrow or Monday.
So you’re telling me, a spiritual leader is supposed to:
(1)Be a terror to other Christians who sin.
(2) Execute wrath on those who sin.
(3) Collect tribute.
???
Andrew, you still haven't answered my question!
I'll try to respond tonight or tomorrow.
"I will try to maybe add a little more in answer to Bret's question by tomorrow or Monday."
???
There are two definitions for “soul” and the phrase “the sword.” You generally have to read the whole verse/section of scripture to know which definition is being used.
The word “soul” can also mean the body itself. And the phrase “the sword” generally means a sword.
We can argue all day long on the definitions, so let’s move on.
Romans 13:1-6 cannot be talking about spiritual leaders because of Galatians 6:1:
“Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.”
OK. Andrew. Look up the word "Soul" in the Oxford English Dictionary.
Bret, little did I know exactly *how* busy last week would be! I did think about it once or twice while I had time, but as you said that you had posted your last comment I didn't bother to.
Andrew, the soul that's spoken of in Rom. 13, in the Greek, is the one I already gave the definition of.
I hope you know your history well enough to answer me truthfully on this matter. Did the Roman government at that point in time fit the Rom. 13 definition?
NO!!!
O, I'm sorry, that comment was in regard to the people who think that this debate is about Romans 13.
"First" comment-
"It seems that nobody wants to jump into the real question being asked here. That question is whether or not we need to be in subjection to a human government."
"Last" comment-
Now folks, the overall debate (argument) is not about Romans 13, but about if we Biblically must obey the government. Romans 13 was used to start the debate, if you wish to continue debating it, please use it in the context of this debate.
NO I was not giving up the debate.
LOL, sorry!!! Yeah, I understand about being busy!!!
*Yawns*
This is getting monotonous, y'all.
O ok. :)
Well, I know I'm not going to have time to keep up on this if I go on the offensive, therefore I reckon I'll just stay put back here on the defensive. :/
Sorry for the long delay, will post my response when I get a chance.
Ok, I’ve done some studying, and here is my position on the whole thing.
It is not our job to rise up against the government that is over us, although there are exceptions. Take Ehud for an example: God raised him up to kill a wicked king. But just because a king/government is wicked, doesn’t give us the “ok” to rise up against them. Look at David. Saul was out to kill him, and yet David said:
“The Lord forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the Lord’s anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the Lord.”
So over all you’re not to rebel against government, unless God has called you to rise up. IF you think God has called you to rebel, then that’s your business and none of mine. But let me give you one word of caution, you better be 100% sure it’s what God wants you to do. If it’s not, you’re on EXTREMELY dangerous ground!!!
Was the Roman government a Romans 13 government? No, but neither was Saul.
"are we to be in subjection to a human government?"
my answer may be somewhat complicated, but I believe that this question deserves it.
ready?
Yes.
Well Jimmy, is that for all/any human government???
"Well Jimmy, is that for all/any human government???"
hmm... would I have "been in subjection" to Hitler's regime? Would I have "been in subjection" to King George? would I have "been in subjection" to the United States Government during the Civil War? (the list could go on, and on, and on...)
I think NOT.
Ok then, I have asked liberty and I have not gotten an answer yet, are there Biblical standards we must obey or aren't there?
Remind me, what did the "United States Government" do in the civil war that was against the Bible?
Good question.
I have already answered this question if you're talking of government. (refer to "April 4, 2008 9:32 PM comment")
Concerning the war of northern aggression, the 'United States Government' didn't do anything against the Bible. (If I sat down and recollected everything I could probably find something, but for the sake of y'all I'll keep this simple)
Aaahhh thank you for clearing that up.
Quoting you (liberty)
"For verses 13-14, (I Peter 2)I'll have to take back what I said. Thank you for pointing out that error. I had just quickly looked over those without taking time to look into them."
Since you are taking back what you originally said about these verses, could you tell me what they mean now? You also mentioned that Titus 3:1 was referring to a "good government," again if there are no standards what does it mean?
Jimmy-
What kind of human government are we to be in subjection to?
bret, the reason that I said that yes, we "should be in subjection to" a human government was a very simple and basic generalization, as I assume that we can agree that, so far in the history of the human race, no group of humans have ever existed without eventually "being in subjection" to some form of human government. It seems to be impossible... Why? because it is the nature of mankind. Who, in the history of man's existence, first revealed the concept of 'government'? It presumably somehow evolved from group leaders to some sort of monarchy, however, the point is that it 'just began'. It is one of those inevitable 'parts' of "you", that you can't get rid of, even if you wanted to.
Ok then...do you believe that according to the Bible we are to be in subjection some, none, or all, government? (and why?)
1 Peter 2:13-14 "them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well."
Titus 3:2 "to be ready to every good work,"
-----------
Bret, as far as I'm concerned, we'll never agree...
Obviously, I have convictions that you do not have.
I therefore, by God's grace, will try to agree to disagree agreeably.
Why did this debate have to end when I had just found a couple verses for Lydia? (During church...yeah I'm a bad person. *sniff sniff*) lol
Anna- You are still welcome to comment, but you might not get a response.
Here is my final opinion upon the matter.
Anyone who is not active in this debate would probably wonder why I'm beating down what would seem like a "good work" (standing up to government). You might think I'm pulling a Barack Obama, by beating down a "good" idea someone has, and not giving a real way to fix the problem.
Not true!
I just don't think it's Biblical to "fight" government or "take action to hold the government is check".
"Well how do you fix "bad" government?" You might ask. That is what this last comment is about. (Unless someone else wants to take up her argument, or has a question, then this will be the last comment by me)
The whole problem boils down to attitude, attitude toward God given authority.
Ruth, A "how to" book, By God. Ruth is an excellent example of perfect attitude.
This verse sums up my opinion.
2 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
Editors note, I do not claim originality for this comments contents.
Post a Comment