What's Your Take on Romans 13?

[KrokHead]

Let's look at the western hemisphere. Every country but Canada had a violent revolution for its freedom. All of them involved free masonry and enlightenment ideals. Only one country, ours, turned out good. The rest are a mess.

There are some countries that were given self-rule and independence gradually, but they're a mess too.

 

[Isaac Bickerstaff]

1 Samuel 8:1-22
Should give you some background as to why governments were considered instituted by God. Not exactly a glowing endorsement of government but a scathing indictment of those who would have it.

 

[erowe1]

It's Church tradition and it is heavily implied in the Gospel of John:
"I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish." (John 21:18)

What about the part about being able to resist but not resisting?

 

[erowe1]

1. The reason He gives is so that something in Scripture might be fulfilled (that being that the Son of Man is to suffer and die for sinners)

Do you think Jesus was saying the crucifixion wouldn't have happened if the disciples didn't have swords?

In fact, when Peter does use the sword later, that actually gets in the way of the fulfillment of Scripture.

2. Peter WAS NOT using a sword he purchased earlier. The disciples literally found the swords three seconds after Jesus told them to go get one.

It doesn't say that. What do you think? Two swords that belonged to someone else were just sitting there and the disciples stole them? It was their swords. And they didn't sell their cloaks for them. Notice that the phrase "he who has no sword" implies that some did have them.

Then they looked to Jesus as if to say, "Is this enough to fulfill Scripture?" and Jesus was like "it is enough."

Except that zero was also enough to fulfill scripture.

3. The Disciples then use the swords, as they misinterpreted Jesus' arrest as what Christ was foretelling and Jesus tells them not to use them, warning them with a timeless platitude that "those who live by the sword perish by the sword."

So, the reason Jesus told them not to use the sword at this point was that it wasn't what he was talking about earlier. I agree.

When he says, "permit this much," that implies that there could be other occasions to use swords when something should not be permitted.

It's like divine theater, and it is the opposite of a pro sword/gun/self defense message. It's rather the opposite.

I don't see that. Jesus tells people to arm themselves. They arm themselves. He approves.

The fact that there are occasions not to use a sword, such as when doing so would prevent the crucifixion, which was to fulfill prophecy, doesn't negate that there must be other occasions where use of the sword is proper.

 

[abacabb]

Well, God will be witness between you and I. The Scripture says what it says and one of our interpretations in wrong. I'd just have to say that in my eyes (and those eyes alone), my explanation is simpler. To interpret it otherwise lifts it entirely out of its passion context. It seems obvious that Jesus, preparing for the crucifixion, wasn't taking a brief break to inform us that the time will come for someone to overthrow some government.

I just have to say that the Bible never endorses overthrowing governments, even satanic ones, unless explicitly commanded by God (i.e. go kill those Canaanites!). That does not mean we submit to a satanic command, but there is no exception made where we can ignore the commands that are not satanic because the government it.

I'll let you have the last word. There is nothing else I can extrapulate from Scripture here.

 

[abacabb]

Ironically, the last Russian Czar (Nicholas I) freed the serfs, brought about a number of reforms, and wasn't really that cruel. Of course, he and his family were violently murdered during the Revolution.

I think serfdom ended in 1868, which was his father or grandfather, but he did instate "republican" reforms, like recognizing the Duma in 1905, I believe.

 

[erowe1]

It seems obvious that Jesus, preparing for the crucifixion, wasn't taking a brief break to inform us that the time will come for someone to overthrow some government.

I don't think it was about overthrowing a government either.

That does not mean we submit to a satanic command, but there is no exception made where we can ignore the commands that are not satanic because the government it.

Notice that Romans 13 gives no exceptions at all, including for satanic commands. We can ignore them. But we take on the risk of physical punishment by doing so.

Sometimes Jesus and the apostles willfully endured violence. But that doesn't negate the fact that other times they saved themselves from it to the chagrin of those who wanted to kill them.

 

[abacabb]

There are some countries that were given self-rule and independence gradually, but they're a mess too.

Must be St. Vincent.

 

[ChristianAnarchist]

Libertarians are "sinners".

Guilty, as charged (ok, I'm actually one of the dreaded "anarchists"). Last time I checked, the Bible is pretty clear that ALL MEN (includes women) are sinners.

 

[robert9712000]

Its amazing to me how God answers a honest question when a person seeks it.I have wondered for a while and after reading this thread today it got me rethinking what has been in the back of my mind for some time and that is "should i put any importance into politics and trying to change the injustices i see through involvement in politics" and atleast for me i got my answer tonight in a self revelation while listening to this sermon - here, https://rightstartradio.org/message/CP-1006-03 .

The revelation was that we are called to suffer, so as to be a witness to the world and silence there denial of the strength in the hope of God.Now im not talking about making myself suffer on purpose but im talking about the kind of suffering that comes by people taking advantage of your good nature, or to do a good deed and noone cares,or to be wronged and not retaliate with revenge.This also apply's to politics.We all know the problem with government.Deep down we all know if Ron Paul had become president it wouldn't have helped very much.The downward trend of America isnt just a American thing.Its a world thing and the reason is we live in a fallen world.This fallen world will not be set right again till Christ's return.

So ask yourself,all your work you do for the liberty movement,is it placing your hope in Man?The only lasting justice will not be caused by man. All we can do is attempt a temporary bit of justice which is just a shallow attempt to feel like we, by our own will, if we try hard enough can set the world right again.You know the answer.As solomon said,vanity vanity all is vanity

Ecclesiastes 1:14
I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit

So what to do then ,if our focus shouldnt be to try and fix the mess where in?That is the revelation i had tonight.We are to be a light in the darkness to catch the attention of those who can't otherwise see.

If a guy throws a punch at you and you hit him back noone will notice anything different about you.If you get hit and you calmly say i do not want to fight you and walk away you stand out.When we suffer and still walk upright, not beat down by the injustices that come at us we stand out.When people start noticing that you are not like everyone else. you can then give a witness to your hope and that will have more sway than a man flailing his fists at a world that has done him wrong.

 

[abacabb]

Its amazing to me how God answers a honest question when a person seeks it.I have wondered for a while and after reading this thread today it got me rethinking what has been in the back of my mind for some time and that is "should i put any importance into politics and trying to change the injustices i see through involvement in politics" and atleast for me i got my answer tonight in a self revelation while listening to this sermon - here, https://rightstartradio.org/message/CP-1006-03 .

The revelation was that we are called to suffer, so as to be a witness to the world and silence there denial of the strength in the hope of God.Now im not talking about making myself suffer on purpose but im talking about the kind of suffering that comes by people taking advantage of your good nature, or to do a good deed and noone cares,or to be wronged and not retaliate with revenge.This also apply's to politics.We all know the problem with government.Deep down we all know if Ron Paul had become president it wouldn't have helped very much.The downward trend of America isnt just a American thing.Its a world thing and the reason is we live in a fallen world.This fallen world will not be set right again till Christ's return.

So ask yourself,all your work you do for the liberty movement,is it placing your hope in Man?The only lasting justice will not be caused by man. All we can do is attempt a temporary bit of justice which is just a shallow attempt to feel like we, by our own will, if we try hard enough can set the world right again.You know the answer.As solomon said,vanity vanity all is vanity

Ecclesiastes 1:14
I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit

So what to do then ,if our focus shouldnt be to try and fix the mess where in?That is the revelation i had tonight.We are to be a light in the darkness to catch the attention of those who can't otherwise see.

If a guy throws a punch at you and you hit him back noone will notice anything different about you.If you get hit and you calmly say i do not want to fight you and walk away you stand out.When we suffer and still walk upright, not beat down by the injustices that come at us we stand out.When people start noticing that you are not like everyone else. you can then give a witness to your hope and that will have more sway than a man flailing his fists at a world that has done him wrong.

+rep

What endears Ron Paul to me as a man is how dignified he was being criticized in front of a room of men. God bless him.

 

[jcannon98188]

I'd have to disagree. Peter is to be crucified at a later time and he did not resist, though he would have been justified in doing so. Notice, when Peter is in prison (2 Peter) he never complains about his destiny or the injustice of his punishment.

The way I see it, it is all about what the spirit is guiding you to do. Peter knew it was his time when he was crucified. But if someone attacked him on the road before, it would not of been his time, and he could have used the sword to defend himself.

 

[abacabb]

The way I see it, it is all about what the spirit is guiding you to do. Peter knew it was his time when he was crucified. But if someone attacked him on the road before, it would not of been his time, and he could have used the sword to defend himself.

That's your presumption yes.

Christians forget Paul's patience through trials which would have caused most other men to physically defend themselves:

From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one. [SUP]25 [/SUP]Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep; [SUP]26 [/SUP]in journeys often, in perils of waters, inperils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, inperils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; [SUP]27 [/SUP]in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness— [SUP]28 [/SUP]besides the other things, what comes upon me daily: my deep concern for all the churches. [SUP]29 [/SUP]Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to stumble, and I do not burn with indignation?[SUP]30 [/SUP]If I must boast, I will boast in the things which concern my infirmity. [SUP]31 [/SUP]The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is blessed forever, knows that I am not lying. [SUP]32 [/SUP]In Damascus the governor, under Aretas the king, was guarding the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, desiring to arrest me; [SUP]33 [/SUP]but I was let down in a basket through a window in the wall, and escaped from his hands.

From 2 Corinthians 11.

 

[erowe1]

Christians forget Paul's patience through trials which would have caused most other men to physically defend themselves:

As verses 32-33 of what you just copied and pasted show, patient endurance wasn't his only modus operandi. Sometimes he not only disobeyed the authorities, but also actively avoided the punishment they would give him for doing it.

 

[ChristianAnarchist]

As verses 32-33 of what you just copied and pasted show, patient endurance wasn't his only modus operandi. Sometimes he not only disobeyed the authorities, but also actively avoided the punishment they would give him for doing it.

Paul was a fugitive. Wanted by the "authorities" and therefore Paul was simply acknowledging that they had NO authority. They have force of arms and nothing more. "Government" is always a "Might Makes Right" type of entity and should therefore always be exposed for the phonies that they are. Even when a so-called "benevolent" government is instituted and given some firm rules to restrict their violence they don't take long to start fudging on the "rules" and soon they are just as bad as the rest. There may be a few years of prosperity and freedom, but ultimately the beast always raises his ugly head and starts to oppress the "People", God's creation...

 

[fisharmor]

Ironically, the last Russian Czar (Nicholas I) freed the serfs, brought about a number of reforms, and wasn't really that cruel. Of course, he and his family were violently murdered during the Revolution.

Here's something that never factors into analysis of the unease at the time: the Russian Empire left a commodity money standard during WWI, and the place was in economic chaos along with all the other players in the war.

 

[fisharmor]

I just have to say that the Bible never endorses overthrowing governments, even satanic ones, unless explicitly commanded by God (i.e. go kill those Canaanites!).

But as I've pointed out, our own government endorses overthrowing governments. Not just in the nation-building way: in the American Revolution way. If we accept that the American Revolution was valid, then the document explaining the validity of it, which still stands, must also be valid.

 

[erowe1]

But as I've pointed out, our own government endorses overthrowing governments. Not just in the nation-building way: in the American Revolution way. If we accept that the American Revolution was valid, then the document explaining the validity of it, which still stands, must also be valid.

Where abacab is coming from is that the American Revolution was not valid.

I'm undecided about that. I'd probably rather look at it as a bunch of individual actions, some of which were right and some of which weren't.

But on the more general question of whether or not Christians are ever right to use violence in their own defense, I believe they may. And there's no special category of people out there called "the government" where different rules apply.

 

[robert68]

But as I've pointed out, our own government endorses overthrowing governments. Not just in the nation-building way: in the American Revolution way. If we accept that the American Revolution was valid, then the document explaining the validity of it, which still stands, must also be valid.

The "Civil War" suggests otherwise.

 

[abacabb]

But as I've pointed out, our own government endorses overthrowing governments. Not just in the nation-building way: in the American Revolution way. If we accept that the American Revolution was valid, then the document explaining the validity of it, which still stands, must also be valid.

Well, what was inspired by God, Romans 13 or the declaration?

We are citizens of the New Jerusalem, not of the USA.