 |
The first time I grapple with the wickedness
of a nation demonizing another nation. |
Initially posted here: https://www.facebook.com/sing.f.lau/posts/pfbid0kVEHDqc86mMff8HiK2myrUw8Qcks9pYLz4ZRdUpShh34khxwXck7ACshE9djtZ3kl
June 18, 2020
Romans 13
1 ¶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.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power,
resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to
themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works,
but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is
good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for
good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the
sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon
him that doeth evil.
============
Comments
Reggie Lee
All powers are ordained of God for a purpose,
wether they are a dictator or a president.
Dan Samons
Romans 13 must be reconciled with Acts 5:29.
Romans does not teach unqualified submission to authority, neither does Acts
validate every act of civil disobedience.
Sing F Lau
Dan Samons There is nothing to reconcile
because there is no contradiction.
That is, both truths apply equally to
whatever forms of government we are subjected to by God's divine providence.
For example, is the government in US more
ordained of God than that in North Korea? I didn't ask which is preferable or
more agreeable.
Dan Samons
They MUST be reconciled, because taken at
face value, they are a contradiction. That process of reconciliation is right
division, which regards context and prevents contradiction.
Bottom line - obedience to civil government
is not a universal scriptural mandate.
Dan Samons
IMO, the most clarifying question on the
issue is “was the authority of those who commanded the apostles to stop
preaching in Christ’s name ordained of God?” If not, then God does not ordain
ALL authorities. If so, then, in some instances, obedience to God involves
disobedience to civil authorities. The latter is consistent with the word of
God.
Or so it seems to me.
Sing F Lau
No, the issue is not about obedience or
disobedience to civil government; the issue is whether one form of civil
government is more ordained of God than the other. That's what this thread is
about.
Saulo Saulo
One principle in hermeneutics is, "the
unity of the scripture". Every student of the word must approach the
scripture as United. In the event that one thinks that one scripture
contradicts another scripture, that only indicates that understanding of the
both is fallen short.
Dan Samons
Saulo Saulo - the application of the
"unity of scripture" principle against seemingly contradictory
statements is called right division. It is absolutely essential to a proper
understanding of the bible, because there are many statements in the word of…
See more
Dan Samons
SFL: No, the issue is not about obedience or
disobedience to civil government;
DS: Your post asks - "Is it a sin to bad
mouth or SUBVERT it?" with respect to civil government. That is most
certainly about obedience or disobedience to civil government.
SFL: the issue is whether one form of civil
government is more ordained of God than the other.
DS: I doubt that we disagree on that matter
(if at all). All authorities are ordained of God in that he has either actively
placed them in their current position of authority or has longsuffered
(permitted) it to be so. What I'm pointing out is that the ordinance of God is
not the sole ruling factor involved in a decision regarding civil compliance to
the government's commands. To draw that out more explicitly:
Q: Were the council and the high-priest who
straitly commanded Peter and the apostles to not teach in this name ordained of
God?
A: Yes. "The powers that be are ordained
of God." (Romans 13:1)
Q: Were Peter and the apostles sinning against
God when they disobeyed that authoritative command?
A: No. "We ought to obey God rather than
men." (Acts 5:29) This statement establishes that some acts of civil
disobedience are REQUIRED in order to be in obedience to God, irrespective of
the fact that all authorities are ordained of God.
SFL: That's what this thread is about.
DS: Brother, in all candor, your post raises
the question, "Is it a sin to bad mouth or SUBVERT [government]?" In
so doing, it seems unavoidable that this thread is also about the issue of
obedience or disobedience.
Dan Samons
With respect to the matter of "whether
one form of civil government is more ordained of God than the other" - I
am certain we both agree that both are ordained of God by either active
causation or permission. That said, one form of government may be more opposed
to the word of God than another. And the degree to which this difference
affects the commands they press upon their citizens relates directly to the
matter of whether or not Christians should obey their government. Do you agree?
Sing F Lau
Is it wicked of the Christians of one
country, say USA, bad-mouthing and subverting the government of another
country, say North Korea?
Dan Samons
SFL: Is it wicked of the Christians of one
country, say USA, bad-mouthing and subverting the government of another
country???
DS: That question cuts a wide berth. I don't
believe it can be answered in a single, categorical sense, either Yes or No.
That said, to the extent that John the Baptist called out the wickedness of
Herod or Amos the wickedness of other nations, it is entirely within the realm
of possibility that Christians in one country may be doing right to "bad
mouth" (speak ill of) the wickedness that exists in other countries. This
by no-means forms a blanket justification of all speech that takes the form of
"bad mouthing."
DS: Moreover, the issue of
"subverting" raises a host of other questions, that I will let alone
for now, but only call out to further underscore the represented by the breadth
of the question.
Benjamin Winslett
Honestly, Americans are so idolatrous when it
comes to politics, there's a lot of wickedness in our perspective and behavior
concerning politics.
Sing F Lau
Dan Samons Calling out the personal
wickedness of a man, and what a prophet of God (Amos) was doing so are quite
different from a nation with a different form of government bad-mouthing and
subverting the government of another nation... I would think... unless you
equate a leader of a country as a prophet of God.
Dan Samons
Benjamin C Winslett - That is certainly true.
Dan Samons
SFL: Calling out the personal wickedness of a
man, and what a prophet of God (Amos) was doing so are quite different from a
nation with a different form of government bad-mouthing and subverting the
government of another nation... I would think...
DS: Different in some respects, but certainly
not all.
SFL: unless you equate a leader of a country
as a prophet of God.
DS: I do not equate a leader of a country
with a prophet of God. But I do believe it is possible for leaders or citizens
of one country to denounce the principles or precepts of another country while
being consistent with the word of God. If you run a government (ordained by
God) that murders Christians, then your government is evil and men are at
liberty resist those murderous actions. Do you agree?
Dan Samons
SFL: Is there one right kind of civil
government?
DS: Given that we live in a fallen world,
every government is tainted by sin. As a result, to unequivocally affirm any
kind of civil government as the "right kind" in an absolute sense
would be short sighted. I've often stated that the best kind of government is a
benevolent Jewish autocracy, provided those terms are biblically defined.
