Upcoming Election

[thrombomodulin]

Hi Robby,

Whether good or bad, christians must be in subjection to God's authority; who has given authority for man to rule over man in the various governments established on the earth.

I know that God has on certain and particular occasions authorized a man to rule over others. I am of the opinion that God has not granted this authority to anyone living in the present.

If you except the premise, God establishes ALL authority, then it's not that complicated.

Actually, I find there are a lot of complicated questions that follow from this idea. Maybe you could answer my question raised through the quote from Augustine about how I might distinguish between a gang of criminals writ large and a divinely authorized ruler. Or, consider the topic of war - when the USA invaded Iraq were the soldiers who fought for the USA doing evil by overthrowing a ruler that God appointed?

Taxes or otherwise, subject until there's a moral conflict with God's Word.

Do you believe in any limits to his power besides "a moral conflict with God's Word"? There is an old saying that time is money. Robert Nozick commented "Taking the earnings of n hours labor is like taking n hours from the person; it is like forcing the person to work n hours for another’s purpose". How much can Caesar take before there is a conflict with God's word? Are Christians morally obliged to obey him if he should demand 100% of your money, and/or 100% of your time?

[robbyyoung]

I know that God has on certain and particular occasions authorized a man to rule over others. I am of the opinion that God has not granted this authority to anyone living in the present.

Hi Pete,

That's an interesting quote from you. A worldview that would be interesting to no more about. From this statement, a discussion on Romans 13 applying to our modern world would be irrelevant. God does not sanction/ordain man to rule over man in today's world, is this your understanding? If so, there is no need to discuss two opposing worldviews without debating, and I'm not interested in debating anymore. If you don't believe Rom 13 applies today, and I do, then we will have to leave it as that. But I still would like to know more about how you came to your conclusion regarding the statement above. Thanks Pete, and I look forward to your reply.

God Bless.

[Homer]

Tough subject. A couple thoughts:

If God is sovereign, and I believe He is, then it is apparent to me that He has at least allowed every ruler in history to be in power. For example, God did not want Israel to have a king but as I recall He had a hand in Saul becoming their king. This was, I believe, to teach them something.

If God were to appoint some person to rule over others today, how would we know this?

[mattrose]

I believe that God has ordained the concept of government as a temporary mitigation of evil during this fallen era. Individual governments/leaders are ordered, by God, during this time, to reward good and punish evil. When governments fail to carry out this task, they are part of the problem and, given the extent of their power, perhaps a huge part of the problem in this fallen world (they create systemic evil).

That Christians are called to submit to government is not an endorsement of any individual government. Submission need not mean agreement. Submission to a wicked government would simply mean that we accept the penalty for disobedience (whether it be imprisonment or death itself). Submission means we accept the consequences of our prophetic rebellion against evil empires.

[robbyyoung]

I believe that God has ordained the concept of government as a temporary mitigation of evil during this fallen era. Individual governments/leaders are ordered, by God, during this time, to reward good and punish evil. When governments fail to carry out this task, they are part of the problem and, given the extent of their power, perhaps a huge part of the problem in this fallen world (they create systemic evil).

That Christians are called to submit to government is not an endorsement of any individual government. Submission need not mean agreement. Submission to a wicked government would simply mean that we accept the penalty for disobedience (whether it be imprisonment or death itself). Submission means we accept the consequences of our prophetic rebellion against evil empires.

Hi Matt,

Thank was a great response to Homer's question. "Submission need not mean agreement" is exactly right. For the Christian, God's authority over the institution, that He established, ought to be respected. Christians who choose civil disobedience within the parameters of any world government must except the consequences of their actions. Paul used his Roman and Hebrew citizenship all the time in order to work within the parameters of those governments to advance God's Word. In America, we petition our representatives concerning our grievances--as Christians, if we break the law in our efforts, we will go through a rigorous process to face justice. If we submit, we can still live peaceably and continue to petition our reps. Of course, other countries have their own processes, and Christians should not attempt to subvert their inherent government but work within them or leave altogether. Yes, this may cost them their life.

God Bless.

[Paidion]

Yes. [Government leaders are robbers on a grand scale] One person taking ownership of another persons property, without their consent, would seem to be a good place to start for a definition of robbery. Trade through voluntary exchange is not robbery because each participant is consenting to the transfer of ownership for the items sold in that exchange. Taxation would not fit this definition because it is property taken without the owners consent. Taxation is theft, and all rulers impose taxes.

Thieves use the money they receive for themselves. Good governments use most of the money they receive in taxes (probably at least 90% of it) for the good of the people (though, of course, government employees need to be paid also). Taxes provide roads on which to travel, financial relief to low income people, police and army protection of the populace, and much more.

Taxes paid to the Canadian government provides health care that is free to those that need it, education in elementary and secondary school (also free to parents), government grants, loans, and financing, income assistance, help for businesses to grow, assistance to seniors and those with disabilities, and many, many, others. Robbers don't do such things. The money they steal is used exclusively for their own benefit.

I think it would be difficult or impossible to justify the concept that government is tantamount to robbery.

Canadian Government Benefits

[thrombomodulin]

Robby,

God does not sanction/ordain man to rule over man in today's world, is this your understanding?

I am not saying that He cannot, or will not, do so. I am affirming that there are no modern cases, to the best of my knowledge, where He has explicitly done so. I do not anticipate that He will appoint a ruler in my lifetime, but if a true prophet were to arise and be lead God to anoint a king, as happened throughout OT times, then I would be willing to accept such a rulers authority.

But I still would like to know more about how you came to your conclusion regarding the statement above.

Several years ago, I would say that my view was similar to the one that you are advocating. There were two main factors that lead to me away from that perspective. First, I was unable to find a satisfactory way to reconcile the apparently inconsistent ideas that this view requires. Some of these I have mentioned in previous posts - I find the problem Augustine pointed out to be an especially difficult one to resolve. Second, the number of services which I thought it both to be justified and necessary for the State to provide began to diminish, one by one, based on other material I was reading. It took a while, but that number did eventually reached zero. I think the view I hold suffers from problems, however, they seem to me to be smaller problems than those involved in holding other views.

Pete

[thrombomodulin]

Submission need not mean agreement. Submission to a wicked government would simply mean that we accept the penalty for disobedience (whether it be imprisonment or death itself). Submission means we accept the consequences of our prophetic rebellion.

Matt,

Thank you for mentioning this, I think this perspective has a lot of merit. I would like to know if you see this kind of submission as applicable in all relationships (not just with respect to a ruler but anyone else who might unjustly harm the Christian in any way).

Thanks,
Pete

[thrombomodulin]

Thieves use the money they receive for themselves. Good governments use most of the money they receive in taxes (probably at least 90% of it) for the good of the people ...

Paidion,

Thanks for your comment. Do you hold government officials to the same, or a different standard, than everyone else? If a thief were to spend 90% of his take for the benefit of others, is he still a thief?

Pete

[Paidion]

Do you hold government officials to the same, or a different standard, than everyone else? If a thief were to spend 90% of his take for the benefit of others, is he still a thief?

If a person were elected by those others in order to benefit them, and if he taxed them in order to fulfill his obligation to them, then he wouldn't be a thief.

Now I have a question for you. If a Libertarian Government were elected, would they actually govern? Or would they simply declare that all people were on his own, to struggle along as they may, make their own roads, look after the poor (if they felt like it), pay for their own medical needs (even if it bankrupted them), etc.