This Is NOT That - A Comment On Romans 13

creatr in #christianity • 11 months ago (edited)

“Governments are just small groups of people who claim the right to rule their neighbors, and The State is the mythology woven to justify this claim.”
- Jacob Tothe

What is Romans 13 talking about?

Your knee-jerk reaction is, of course, "I know what Romans 13 is about; God wants us to obey the government."

Really?

Let's take a look at the facts.

Praying in Prison (source)

This Is NOT That - A Comment On Romans 13

by Duncan Cary Palmer

For decades I've been bludgeoned from the pulpit by preachers wielding the club of Romans 13. "Obey the government!" is the universal cry.

But have you ever stopped to examine those preachers' underlying assumptions? Can Paul possibly be talking about the state?

Perhaps it takes a simple, child-like mind to see that Romans 13 can't conceivably be describing anything remotely like the governments we have known all of our lives.

We'll start by looking at what Paul actually says:

"For rulers (Greek ἄρχων) are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil."
- Romans 13:3-4, emphasis added

Now, let's compare this description to just a few clear-cut, virtually universal cases in point, examples that (for any thinking person) should dispel the myth that Paul is speaking about the governments we live under:

Surely, building a house to shelter your family is "good behavior," is it not? Do state rulers praise you for doing so? No! Instead, they make it as difficult as possible, requiring endless permits and fees. When you've completed the herculean task, they force you to pay—again and again, year after year—to remain in your house with your family, under threat of stealing it from you and selling it to someone else.
Is supporting your family good or evil behavior? When you work hard, the better you do at providing for your family, the more praise ought to be due you from the "rulers" described in Romans 13. Instead, the harder you work, the more the state takes away from you.
What about saving money for your family's future? Surely that is good behavior, is it not? What does the state do? It punishes you for saving by printing more money, inflating the money supply and making every dollar you earn worth less.

What about "the one who practices evil?" Are they punished? Consider:

Criminals at times walk free on a technicality, and even when convicted, they are rarely if ever required to pay restitution to those they have injured or robbed.
Instead, after committing a crime, these evildoers are furnished free room and board. They become guests in a "hotel" maintained and run by the state, paid for by taxing honest, hard-working citizens—including their victims.
The biggest criminals of all (politicians) pass "laws" that favor those who contribute to their campaigns. Their handsome salaries are extracted from your pockets, and they can retire after short careers with a huge net worth from insider knowledge and deals made with those who benefitted from their "legislation."

These are but a few possible examples. I'm sure you've heard of others.

What's my conclusion?

Open your eyes. The claim that Romans 13 describes existing governments flies in the face of all observable evidence. What Paul is actually talking about is good government, God's preferred form of 100% voluntary local government, the ecclesia.

Nation states and all other "governments" that do not explicitly recognize Jesus as King and Lord over the entirety of their structure and operation are illegitimate, renegade organizations that are—in all truth—anti-Christ.

God is in the process of destroying and replacing all forms of government that do not explicitly recognize Jesus as King and Lord. The sooner we recognize this, the better off we all will be.

~FIN~

This Is NOT Romans 13... (source)

NOTE: Don't miss the enlightening hyperlinks in my posts.
IMAGES are my own, open source, by permission, or fair use.

For much more from @creatr, click the library image:

I would love to hear from you; please join Hive and speak your mind below!

#politics #romans13 #scripture #government #politicians #criminals #taxation #rulers

11 months ago in #christianity by creatr

0.00 ALIVE

Sort:

Trending

[-]

jacobtothe 11 months ago

It's weird to see myself quoted, but at least it's in this kind of context! I have heard a lot of discussion of Romans 13 in Christian anarchist and libertarian circles. Taking it in context of the surrounding chapters matters. So does delving into the Greek and exploring translation disputes. Of course, merely being a Christian has been "illegal" in various places for the past 2,000 years, so we all know legality has no inherent or divinely-granted authority on that basis alone.

0.00 ALIVE

3 votes

[-]

ironshield 11 months ago

Commentary on Romans 13 by the founding fathers of these United States:

when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government

The King of England ruled under "the Divine Right of Kings", meaning his claim to authority was "established by God" and believed to be "what God instituted", language from Romans 13. But when the colonists rightfully threw off such a tyrannical government as is their duty, they did what is right, because rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. It is also their duty to establish ministers ordained of God for good, and revengers upon those who do evil.

Romans 13:9 describes the fulfilling of the Law of God, the attributes of a minister ordained of God for good - yet tyrants commit adultery, they murder, they steal, they bear false witness, they covet. And by doing these in the Name of the LORD, they blaspheme the Name of the LORD. If we are to sanctify the Name of the LORD, we will fear Him who can destroy body and soul in Gehenna and not fear the kings of the earth. We will (as Paul says) "render therefore to all their dues", we will render "fear to whom fear is due and honour to whom honour is due." Ministers ordained of God (as Paul says) are due these wages, because they fulfill the Law of God, but wicked tyrants who blaspheme the Name of the Most High God are also due their wages, the wrath of God stored up for them.

Do not rebel against the LORD
nor fear the people of the earth
for they are bread for us
their defense is departed from them
And the LORD is with us, do not fear them!

0.00 ALIVE

2 votes

[-]

creatr 11 months ago

Hey Brother,

Thanks for reading my stuff so often and taking the time to comment. You've reminded me today of this scripture:

"Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever."
- 1 John 2:15-17

Jesus is destroying the tyrants as we speak; I can only wish that more in the church would open their eyes and recognize that, rather than participating in and perpetuating the evil...

Blessings!

- @creatr

😄😇😉

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

[-]

ironshield 11 months ago

Much appreciated, I checked out some links of previous articles you have written and thoroughly enjoyed them, especially your conversation with your friend over Chinese food.

Our family is currently reading the book of Daniel, and we are coming to realize the theme of the book: that the Most High alone has the authority to set up and take down kings and kingdoms - and His servants (often heathen) are His tool to do this. But how much more then His believing servants!

In Daniel's day, God set up kings, but now with Yeshua at the right hand of the Father, currently wielding ALL authority on earth and in Heaven (only regarding the throne is God Higher), He would have to delegate power to kings for them to hold legitimate power. We have to ask then, do our current "kings" display the fingerprint of the King of kings? Are they subject to their governing authority which is from God? Do they bear the fruit of righteousness as ministers ordained by God?

A transfer of ownership will happen at the seventh (last) trump.

“The kingdom of the world has become
the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah,
and he will reign for ever and ever.”

And the resurrected saints will be the ministers ordained by God.

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years

Good and faithful servants will have authority (exousia) over cities.

And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.

0.00 ALIVE

5 votes

[-]

creatr 10 months ago

Hey Brother @ironshield ,

My apologies for having somehow overlooked answering this message of yours for over a week now... All too many distractions!

I really appreciate that you've read more of my Kingdom collection, and thank you for specifically mentioning my "lunch with a friend" episode. 😆

"In Daniel's day, God set up kings, but now with Yeshua at the right hand of the Father, currently wielding ALL authority on earth and in Heaven ... He would have to delegate power to kings for them to hold legitimate power."

Exactly!

I see in Scripture no delegation of that power to the nation-states of the world. However, just as it was in Daniel's day, I do believe God still sets up and takes down kings. Here's the thing:

Then, as now, God's expression of His sovereignty in doing so does not equate to his approval of the behavior of those governments. And, sadly, my observation is that not one ersatz "ruler" in any of the nation states is ruling in the name of and according to the law of Christ.

*"Good and faithful servants will have authority (exousia) over cities."

Here, our eschatology differs. Ephesians chapter one teaches me that God has already delegated that authority to his ecclesia. It's only a poorly developed systematic theology that has driven bad translations of Scripture that have hidden this truth from our eyes.

Thanks again for your engagement!🙏😀

0.00 ALIVE

[-]

mattclarke 11 months ago

The main point of agreement between Paul and his intended audience was their shared belief that the Roman government had just brutally, publicly executed the only sinless person in the world.
Him telling them to obey the Roman government because they only hurt bad people is ridiculous. Either he's telling them not to obey the Romans, by encoding it with shared knowledge; or he's not talking about the Roman government.

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

[-]

creatr 11 months ago

Hey Matt,

Thanks for reading and commenting.

"Either he's telling them not to obey the Romans, by encoding it with shared knowledge; or he's not talking about the Roman government."

Someone in another forum has asserted that my article exhibits two logical fallacies; "False Dilemma" and "Begging the Question." I think you may be following suit, at least with the "False Dichotomy."🤣 Having said that, and while I am still mulling over the accusation, my preliminary reaction is that neither of us bear much guilt on that count... Perhaps we've simply emphasized what in our minds are the two most probable interpretations without bothering to explicitly acknowledge there may be other options.

You and I agree on one of the possibilities; to wit, that Paul's not talking about the state. And I'm willing to concede that there are probably an infinite range of other possible interpretations rather than the one I prefer.

On my part, I've become persuaded that any positive talk about governance in the New Testament is aimed at God's ideal form of governance, which is local—at the level of cities—and is voluntary when it comes to participation. This governance structure is best embodied by the ecclesia. This is the governance I write about extensively in my Kingdom Series of articles.

"Him telling them to obey the Roman government because they only hurt bad people is ridiculous."

I could not agree more.

Blessings, Friend! And Happy New Year to you and yours.

😄😇😉

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

[-]

mattclarke 11 months ago

Either he's referring to the Roman state or he isn't. I don't see a third option.

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

[-]

creatr 11 months ago

Thanks for that additional word, as it clarifies my thinking in the larger context of an ongoing, raging debate that I seem to be in with "statists" or at least "partial statists." Let me explain:

"Either he's referring to the Roman state or he isn't. I don't see a third option."

The "third option" I see is—as your comment has brought clearly into focus for me—actually an infinitely nuanced take on "how the Roman state is viewed" in this passage. In the minds of statists, including many of my peers, I think it has become a matter of degree as to the circumstances and the amount of civil disobedience allowed by the passage. Most of them still believe the state is at some level legitimate, while I do not. I see the state as raw power.

In my own mind, I am at the far extreme; even if I were to hypothetically allow that Romans 13 might possibly be referring to the Roman state, I don't see it as morally demanding any "obedience" at all; rather, as a warning to be prepared to suffer the consequences of going against the grain.

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

[-]

mattclarke 11 months ago

Satan tempting Jesus with political power, pretty clearly presents wielding involuntary power over your fellow man as something both alluring and to be avoided.

I think it has become a matter of degree as to the circumstances and the amount of civil disobedience allowed by the passage.

This is the crux though, isn't it. Not even the most hardened statist believes this passage justified the SS guards at Auschwitz obeying Hitler and murdering Jews. So we all agree it's not a blanket endorsement of the state.

The abortion industry kills far more people than the gas chamber ever did; and here in Australia I'm systematically robbed to subsidise it. Others may not consider it murder, but that's not the point. The point is that I consider it murder; which means Romans 13 no more obliges me to obey the Australian government than it obliged the SS guards to obey Hitler.

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

[-]

creatr 11 months ago

So, Brother,

As far as I can tell, you and I are in strong agreement about these matters. And your mention of the temptation causes me to wonder, comment, and ask you a question:

I have long been persuaded that satan still "runs the show" when it comes to ALL nation-states in the world. My general sense is that Christian statists, and especially those with a theonomic perspective and those who identify as "Christian Nationalists" may believe that hegemony ended at the cross, at least opening the possibility for nation-states to become "Christianized."

My reading of Scripture and my personal observations of all of history and current events lead me to discount that possibility.

And so, here's my question for you:

Do you have any Biblical insights or can you point me to any resources that offer Scriptural and logical support for the notion that satan is still running the show when it comes to all the nation-states and "civil governments" of the world?

TIA for anything relevant.🙏😁

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

[-]

mattclarke 10 months ago (edited)

All that springs to mind is the old chestnut, Ephesians 6:12

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

I don't know if it's as cut and dried as you suggest. I believe good, well meaning people can be elected to high office.
*points tentatively at Javier Milei.
People who intend to use the state to serve their fellow man, and/or people who intend to use the state to shrink the state. If the bible straight out claimed that Satan runs every government, those good people might not run and then we'd be in real trouble.

0.00 ALIVE

3 votes

[-]

creatr 10 months ago

Thanks for the verse from Ephesians...🙏

"I believe good, well meaning people can be elected to high office."

I have no doubt that you are right. I also have no doubt that any good, well-meaning person seeking state office is seriously misguided, and ought to be applying their good, well-meaning skills in an honest occupation in a benign organization (like the ecclesia or like a private, for-profit company), that does not exist by committing crimes against humanity.

And what the state considers "high office" is in my thinking the very embodiment of anti-Christ. These "high officers" are under the delusion that they have some kind of "right" to rule over me and my fellow-man, a right that can only belong to our Creator.

0.00 ALIVE

This Is NOT That - A Comment On Romans 13

What is Romans 13 talking about?

Really?

Praying in Prison (source)

This Is NOT That - A Comment On Romans 13

by Duncan Cary Palmer

What's my conclusion?

~FIN~

This Is NOT Romans 13... (source)

NOTE: Don't miss the enlightening hyperlinks in my posts.IMAGES are my own, open source, by permission, or fair use.

NOTE: Don't miss the enlightening hyperlinks in my posts.
IMAGES are my own, open source, by permission, or fair use.