Dilemma: To Believe or Not to Believe

[b***@allvantage.com]

Re: Dilemma: To Believe or Not to Believe
Dilemma: To Believe or Not to Believe
According to the Romans 13:1-2 and 1 Peter 2:13 in the Bible, one
should absolutely be obedient to the authority, or the government, or
the king.
If they convert to Christianity and believe in Jesus Christ, they
betray their respective authority and thus betray the Christian
teaching, which means they will go to Hell.

...

[The "absolutely" pushes things beyond what the authors actually said.
Romans speaks of the government's authority in administering justice.
Paul says pay them what is due them. This should be qualified by
Jesus' words and Paul's own practice: pay them what is due them, and
God what is due to God. --clh]

Hello,

Those Scriptures at Romans 13:1,2 etc that say to be in subjection to
the superior authorities, is only in a relative sense. Genuine
Christians obey God first, and the superior authorities second.

For example, in the book of Acts the apostles of Jesus were ordered not
to preach by the superior authorities. Their response? Ac 5:29,

"Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than
men!" (NIV)

So the rule of thumb to the Scripture at Ro 13:1,2 and similar ones, is
if the superior authorities tell Christians to go against the Bible,
then Christians would not have to obey them. Otherwise, they have to
obey them.


Sincerely, James


***********************************
Want a FREE home Bible study?
Have Jehovah's Witnesses questions?
Go to the authorized source:
http://www.watchtower.org
***********************************

[Matthew Johnson]

In article <RPIRg.3162$***@trndny02>, ***@allvantage.com
says...

Post by b***@allvantage.com

Re: Dilemma: To Believe or Not to Believe
Dilemma: To Believe or Not to Believe
According to the Romans 13:1-2 and 1 Peter 2:13 in the Bible, one
should absolutely be obedient to the authority, or the government,
or the king.
If they convert to Christianity and believe in Jesus Christ, they
betray their respective authority and thus betray the Christian
teaching, which means they will go to Hell.

...

[The "absolutely" pushes things beyond what the authors actually
said. Romans speaks of the government's authority in administering
justice.

It is far from clear that Romans really has this limit on it. On the
contrary: it is clear that Rom 13:1-7 expect us to obey even the
unjust commands of the legitimate authority. Authority does NOT lose
legitimacy because of an unjust command.

This point of view has lost popularity in the US ever since the War
for Independence. But it was by far the predominant view before then.

Post by b***@allvantage.com

Paul says pay them what is due them. This should be qualified by
Jesus' words and Paul's own practice: pay them what is due them, and
God what is due to God. --clh]

And Jesus's own practice included paying the temple-tax. Not only
this, but even submitting to an unjust death sentence.

Post by b***@allvantage.com
Hello,
Those Scriptures at Romans 13:1,2 etc that say to be in subjection to
the superior authorities, is only in a relative sense.

Why do people keep seeing "relative sense" in a passage where no such
qualification is mentioned?

Post by b***@allvantage.com
Genuine Christians obey God first, and the superior authorities
second.

It is not always a question of 'first' and 'second'. You need a better
principle for distinguishing than that.

Post by b***@allvantage.com
For example, in the book of Acts the apostles of Jesus were ordered
not to preach by the superior authorities. Their response? Ac 5:29,
"Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than
men!" (NIV)

This example does not work here, because Christ Himself _took away_
the authority from the Scribes and Pharisees in the verses:

Begin quote---------------
Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent
me, even so I send you." And when he had said this, he breathed on
them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the
sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they
are retained." (Joh 20:21-23 RSVA)
End quote----------------

It is the _Apostles_ who had that authority, when He told them, " As
the Father has sent me, even so I send you". Also, the authority of
forgiveness, a.k.a. "binding and loosing", is what _previously_
belonged to the Jewish priests. No longer.

Post by b***@allvantage.com
So the rule of thumb to the Scripture at Ro 13:1,2 and similar ones,
is if the superior authorities tell Christians to go against the
Bible, then Christians would not have to obey them. Otherwise, they
have to obey them.

If you follow this rule of thumb, you will be all thumbs! There are
several reasons why this does not work. The main one is that it is so
hard to _agree_ when a particular command is "telling Christians to go
against the Bible".

No, this is NOT the "rule of thumb". On the contrary: you CANNOT "be
subject to the governing authorities (Rom 13:1) if you do not _obey_
them. What kind of 'subjection' tolerates disobedience?

Any "rule of thumb" for distinguishing between when obedience is
necessary and when it is not CANNOT rely on this passage (Rom
13:1-7). It must come from outside.

In fact, anyone who wants to state an _accurate_ "rule of thumb" had
better start by comparing the teaching of this passage with several
other Bible verses where this is discussed, such as 1Co 15:24
Eph 6:5-6 1Pe 2:23 1Pe 2:18 and Pro 20:2

[zach]

Matthew Johnson wrote:
...

Post by Matthew Johnson

[The "absolutely" pushes things beyond what the authors actually
said. Romans speaks of the government's authority in administering
justice.

It is far from clear that Romans really has this limit on it. On the
contrary: it is clear that Rom 13:1-7 expect us to obey even the
unjust commands of the legitimate authority. Authority does NOT lose
legitimacy because of an unjust command.
This point of view has lost popularity in the US ever since the War
for Independence. But it was by far the predominant view before then.

If this authority causes you to sin against God and you fellow man,
then where does the greater sin lie? Do you really belive that
spreading the Gospel against the wishes of the authorities (as Jesus
did) is a sin?

Post by Matthew Johnson

Paul says pay them what is due them. This should be qualified by
Jesus' words and Paul's own practice: pay them what is due them, and
God what is due to God. --clh]

And Jesus's own practice included paying the temple-tax. Not only
this, but even submitting to an unjust death sentence.

And before this, Jesus disobeyed and certainly disrespected the very
same people to whom he submitted later. If your faith were outlawed,
would you still practice in secret, knowing that you were sinning,
certainly against your own conscience? Or would you obey the law and
deny Christ?