Christians resisting God? [Archive]

steaver

09-11-2009, 07:57 PM

Note that the verse uses "resisteth the power," 'resists' to modern Americans. It doesn't use "attempts to resist." STRANGE!

Is this a hypothetical argument or is it possible to actually resist God's power? Is this not the Reformed VS. Pelagian problem?

I claim that it was not/is not "Christian" to rebel against a Christian ruler who, by scripture, is "ordained by (of?) God" thus the American Rebellion was sinful. In 1976 I proposed we should ask the Queen to take us back but I couldn't convince anyone.

I don't believe that it matters whether or not the power that be is Christian. Either way, it says we are not to resist. Jesus said that Pilate's power came from God and Pilate was not a believer. Neither did Jesus resist Pilate's power.

So was this country formed because Christians disobeyed Romans 13?

Yet God obviously wanted the USA formed. Why did this country need to be formed through sin, or was it not sin, and why not?

:thumbsup:

Amy.G

09-12-2009, 09:38 AM

I don't believe that it matters whether or not the power that be is Christian. Either way, it says we are not to resist. Jesus said that Pilate's power came from God and Pilate was not a believer. Neither did Jesus resist Pilate's power.

So was this country formed because Christians disobeyed Romans 13?

Yet God obviously wanted the USA formed. Why did this country need to be formed through sin, or was it not sin, and why not?

:thumbsup:
This is an excellent question and has really gotten me to thinking. Regarding America, was this country formed through sin? What sin was committed? Is it a sin to leave a country and seek freedom from tyranny? What law did the Pilgrims resist? Is it a sin if I leave the USA and live somewhere apart from it? As long as I live in the US, I am required by God to follow its laws, but if I choose to leave and go live in the Himalayas, what law have I broken? I don't think the founders of this country resisted God or country in leaving England behind and living elsewhere apart from it's rule.

Tom Butler

09-12-2009, 10:05 AM

We also have to resolve any apparent differences between Romans 13, and those which tell us to resist evil, resist the devil, etc.

What about the spiritual warfare in which we are supposed to be engaged?

I know, I know, Ephesians 6 tells us that we wrestle not with flesh and blood, but with with principalities and powers, etc. But if the spiritual warfare exempts the forces of Satan personified by Hitler, Stalin, and the like, where does that leave us?

Johnv

09-14-2009, 07:56 AM

I've been a Christian for almost 25 years. I still find myself resisting God all the time.

steaver

09-14-2009, 06:03 PM

I've been a Christian for almost 25 years. I still find myself resisting God all the time.

And it brings negative consequences everytime. I know, just like we all know.

Johnv

09-14-2009, 06:05 PM

Yep, you're absolutely right.

Alcott

09-14-2009, 06:14 PM

I claim that it was not/is not "Christian" to rebel against a Christian ruler who, by scripture, is "ordained by (of?) God" thus the American Rebellion was sinful. In 1976 I proposed we should ask the Queen to take us back but I couldn't convince anyone.

If you want 'the Queen' [The United Kingdom] to "take us back," did you not consider that that kingdom came to be out of many series of rebellions and interkingdominal (yeah, I just invented that, I think) transfers between the Bretons, Saxons, Danish, Normans, et al? And the lasting kingdom expanded itself by conquering other powers in other lands?...meaning, for one thing, that it resisted the confederation of 7 tribes in North America?

Besides, if the 1st century Christians were to obey the power of Rome, and Rome was established by conquest, why would the establishment of the USA not be a legitimate power? [And also, if we are conquered by another power, how would that not be so?..........]

steaver

09-14-2009, 06:21 PM

This is an excellent question and has really gotten me to thinking. Regarding America, was this country formed through sin? What sin was committed? Is it a sin to leave a country and seek freedom from tyranny? What law did the Pilgrims resist? Is it a sin if I leave the USA and live somewhere apart from it? As long as I live in the US, I am required by God to follow its laws, but if I choose to leave and go live in the Himalayas, what law have I broken? I don't think the founders of this country resisted God or country in leaving England behind and living elsewhere apart from it's rule.

Wouldn't Romans 13 be speaking of resisting that which God has ordained as "good" for you?

Then we would have to decide from scripture if the "power that be" is disobeying God on any given subject.

If the "power that be" is found to be governing with evil, then are we not justified to resist that power?

The founding fathers believed that all men were created equal and free and the "power that be" was being unjust in the sight of God.

Thus, we could conclude that the founding fathers were not guilty of resisting God by declaring independence.

However, are we justified to fight and kill to gain that independence?

God told Moses and Joshua that the promised land was theirs, however, they had to go in and fight and kill in order to possess it.

Would this be a case of the shedding of 'innocent" blood verses "guilty" blood?

Just some thoughts..........

Marcia

09-14-2009, 07:49 PM

billwald

09-15-2009, 12:02 PM

>Is it a sin to leave a country and seek freedom from tyranny?

Obviously not but a straw man argument. The sin was armed rebellion. Second, Considering the French Revolution and the wars following, living in the colonies under King George was a walk in the park.

American tyranny started in strength with Lincoln's War. Prior to Lincoln, the "states" were sovereign nations united for mutual defense and commerce, sort of like a UN of North America.

steaver

09-15-2009, 02:03 PM

American tyranny started in strength with Lincoln's War. Prior to Lincoln, the "states" were sovereign nations united for mutual defense and commerce, sort of like a UN of North America.

"The powers that be are ordained of God". This means that the USA is ordained of God. This then means that God formed these United States and it's power.

Now, God does not cause sin. But if we call the declaration of independence a "rebellion" then that means God formed this power of the USA through sin, which cannot be.

Who gave the King the right or ok to claim America under the King's rule? When the declaration of independence was made to the King, why did the King have any God given right to deny it?

It seems the founding fathers made an attempt at a peaceful seperation by giving the King a formal notice that he no longer was needed to rule over this country. But the King out of sinful pride decided to fight it so the Americans therefore had no choice but to fight back in self defense.

Once the declaration was made, the King's armies coming into this land to conquer was now an invasion of a sovereign nation. We had the right to defend ourselves wouldn't you think?

Marcia

09-18-2009, 06:17 PM

"The powers that be are ordained of God". This means that the USA is ordained of God. This then means that God formed these United States and it's power.

Then you have to apply this to everyone - Hitler, Stalin, tyrants who overthrow democracies, horrible leaders like those in Africa like Taylor, etc. Yes, all power is there because God allows it and uses it, but it does not make all revolutions or rebellions okay.

steaver

09-19-2009, 06:08 PM

Then you have to apply this to everyone - Hitler, Stalin, tyrants who overthrow democracies, horrible leaders like those in Africa like Taylor, etc. Yes, all power is there because God allows it and uses it, but it does not make all revolutions or rebellions okay.

Then you would take the position that Americans sinned against God by rebelling against the King to form a new power. But God forms the powers that be. So is it God using sin that has formed all of these powers throughout history?

God told the Israelites to go in and conquer the powers that be in the promissed land. Those powers were evil. Was the King displaying evil by not letting America's independence? Is it a sin to declare independence?

Does not Romans 13 speak of the "good" that is in the powers that be and therefore if the power that be is not good but evil we have the right, or even obligation, to reject it and oppose it?
:jesus:

Salty

09-19-2009, 09:03 PM

JTornado1

09-20-2009, 12:30 PM

The Declaration of Independence states numerous reasons why the Colonists rebelled against British authority:

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

My Bible study teacher stated that the Colonists were wrong for rebelling against England. He said you should rebel only if you are not allowed to practice your religion. Most of the class disagreed with him.

Marcia

09-20-2009, 04:41 PM

Then you would take the position that Americans sinned against God by rebelling against the King to form a new power. But God forms the powers that be. So is it God using sin that has formed all of these powers throughout history?

I lean toward that position, yes. We are not told anywhere in God's word that rebelling against a ruler or overthrowing that ruler is okay.

God told the Israelites to go in and conquer the powers that be in the promissed land. Those powers were evil. Was the King displaying evil by not letting America's independence? Is it a sin to declare independence?

Two entirely different situations. God told the Israelites to do what they did - they were being led directly by God. This did not happen with the colonies.

Does not Romans 13 speak of the "good" that is in the powers that be and therefore if the power that be is not good but evil we have the right, or even obligation, to reject it and oppose it?

No, absolutely not. I don't think Rom 13 says that we can oppose and/or overthrow a power that is not good. In fact, when Rom. 13 was written, Christians were under the rule of pagan rulers, and later rulers who persecuted and killed them. Yet they did not rebel nor try to overthrow those rulers. Their rulers were worse than what the colonies had in the King of England.

Eric B

09-20-2009, 06:05 PM

How many survivors were there at Custer's last stand? Many say zero - but actually hundreds of Indians survived.

Its all how you look at it; and everyone has forgotten one big situation.

The English and French fought the Indians on North America - who actually were the sovereign rulers - so by what authority did the Europeans have to overthrow the Indians
(and that 24 dollars by Pete - would have been thrown out of court :laugh:)

Salty

My sentiments exactly!
This whole topic begs the question (most don't even think of) of why people just going and taking over other lands was once right; yet now it would be wrong if anyone did it today. Were the commandments against stealing suspended for several centuries?
People appealed to God telling the Israelites to conquer other lands, but I think most would admit that God never grantd anyone after that such instruction. But they presumed it with concepts such as "Manifest Destiny".

billwald

09-20-2009, 07:13 PM

Why didn't the Declaration of Independence apply to the Confederate States?

steaver

09-21-2009, 06:10 PM

I lean toward that position, yes. We are not told anywhere in God's word that rebelling against a ruler or overthrowing that ruler is okay.

Which takes us back to how God forms "powers that be". SINCE God formed these United States of America, then it WAS God who led the colonies to declare independence.

Two entirely different situations. God told the Israelites to do what they did - they were being led directly by God. This did not happen with the colonies.

It didn't? Who formed these United States of America? Romans 13 says God forms the powers that be.

:jesus:

Marcia

09-22-2009, 05:44 PM

Which takes us back to how God forms "powers that be". SINCE God formed these United States of America, then it WAS God who led the colonies to declare independence.

If God formed the U.S., then he also formed Hitler and Stalin's governments/tyrannies. Yes, God is in charge of all powers. That does not make them okay.

I don't see how you can make an exception for the colonies rebelling against the King. Besides, you are ignoring Rom. 13 and other passages.

It didn't? Who formed these United States of America? Romans 13 says God forms the powers that be.

You are equating God's direct revelation in forming Israel, which we are told about in God's word, with the formation of the U.S.? There is no evidence for that.

There is no evidence that just because the U.S. was formed out of a rebellion, that it was approved of by God. Otherwise, you'll have to say that God approved of Nero, Hitler, Stalin, and some horrible leaders in Africa who torture people.

billwald

09-22-2009, 07:43 PM

Job 2:10
But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.

Isaiah 31

1Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the LORD!

2Yet he also is wise, and will bring evil, and will not call back his words: but will arise against the house of the evildoers, and against the help of them that work iniquity.

Isaiah 45:6-8 (King James Version)

6That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.

7I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

8Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.

steaver

09-24-2009, 05:00 PM

If God formed the U.S., then he also formed Hitler and Stalin's governments/tyrannies. Yes, God is in charge of all powers. That does not make them okay.

I don't see how you can make an exception for the colonies rebelling against the King. Besides, you are ignoring Rom. 13 and other passages.

You are equating God's direct revelation in forming Israel, which we are told about in God's word, with the formation of the U.S.? There is no evidence for that.

There is no evidence that just because the U.S. was formed out of a rebellion, that it was approved of by God. Otherwise, you'll have to say that God approved of Nero, Hitler, Stalin, and some horrible leaders in Africa who torture people.

Jhn 19:10 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=19&v=11&t=KJV#comm/10) Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?
Jhn 19:11 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=19&v=11&t=KJV#comm/11) Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power [at all] against me, except it were given thee from above:
Rom 13:1 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=13&v=1&t=KJV#comm/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.

Yes, God ordained even the evil powers that be to accomplish His will on this earth.

:jesus:

Marcia

09-24-2009, 05:50 PM

Jhn 19:10 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=19&v=11&t=KJV#comm/10) Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?
Jhn 19:11 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=19&v=11&t=KJV#comm/11) Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power [at all] against me, except it were given thee from above:
Rom 13:1 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=13&v=1&t=KJV#comm/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.

Yes, God ordained even the evil powers that be to accomplish His will on this earth.

:jesus:

This does not make your case. There is no evidence that God led people to rebel against the King; he allowed it, just as he allowed Hitler to rule, Kadafi to rule, Stalin to rule, etc. Because a certain person or gov't is in power does not mean God approves of it or approves of the way it came about.

Amy.G

09-24-2009, 06:55 PM

This does not make your case. There is no evidence that God led people to rebel against the King; he allowed it, just as he allowed Hitler to rule, Kadafi to rule, Stalin to rule, etc. Because a certain person or gov't is in power does not mean God approves of it or approves of the way it came about.

But what about Pharaoh? God did not make him to be evil, yet God did raise him up into power in order to use him for His purposes. Pharaoh did not make himself powerful, God did. In this way God is sovereign even over those who oppose Him.

steaver

09-24-2009, 08:44 PM

But what about Pharaoh? God did not make him to be evil, yet God did raise him up into power in order to use him for His purposes. Pharaoh did not make himself powerful, God did. In this way God is sovereign even over those who oppose Him.

Hey sister :thumbsup: This was my next post.

Rom 9:17 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=9&v=1&t=KJV#comm/17) For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

The powers that be are ordained of God. For HIS purposes!

:godisgood:

steaver

09-24-2009, 08:50 PM

This does not make your case. There is no evidence that God led people to rebel against the King; he allowed it, just as he allowed Hitler to rule, Kadafi to rule, Stalin to rule, etc. Because a certain person or gov't is in power does not mean God approves of it or approves of the way it came about.

Scripture please!

I have "argued" "a" case with scripture. You have argued against it, it appears with the reasoning of the human mind.

You bring up a point. What is the difference between God "allowing" and God "causing"?

Either way, it is God who is in control and the "powers that be are ordained by God". This means that God "prepared in advance" those who would have power. Allowing....causing...whatever way you want to say it.

:godisgood:

Marcia

09-24-2009, 11:46 PM

But what about Pharaoh? God did not make him to be evil, yet God did raise him up into power in order to use him for His purposes. Pharaoh did not make himself powerful, God did. In this way God is sovereign even over those who oppose Him.

Amy, I have never said that God does not raise up rulers or that God is not sovereign. How in the world does this make Rom. 13 null and void?

Marcia

09-24-2009, 11:51 PM

Scripture please!

I have "argued" "a" case with scripture. You have argued against it, it appears with the reasoning of the human mind.

You bring up a point. What is the difference between God "allowing" and God "causing"?

Either way, it is God who is in control and the "powers that be are ordained by God". This means that God "prepared in advance" those who would have power. Allowing....causing...whatever way you want to say it.

:godisgood:

I used Romans 13. We are commanded not to go against the rulers!!!! The early Chritians were under much worse rulers than the colonies but they were told to obey and subject themselves to the rulers. The colonies did not do this; they armed themselves and rebelled.

So God is in control; I agree with that and have never disagreed.

God being in control does not mean doing wrong is okay! You still are not seeing the point, it seems. God was in control of letting Hitler rule but I doubt you would say that Hitler was a good guy or that God approved of him.

steaver

09-25-2009, 06:28 PM

I used Romans 13. We are commanded not to go against the rulers!!!! The early Chritians were under much worse rulers than the colonies but they were told to obey and subject themselves to the rulers. The colonies did not do this; they armed themselves and rebelled.

So God is in control; I agree with that and have never disagreed.

God being in control does not mean doing wrong is okay! You still are not seeing the point, it seems. God was in control of letting Hitler rule but I doubt you would say that Hitler was a good guy or that God approved of him.

God raised up Pharaoh and placed him as a "power that be". Pharaoh was an evil man and made salves of God's people. God approved of this evil upon Israel FOR THEIR OWN GOOD. That they would repent from their idolatry and see that there be only one God who can deliver and prosper them.

Now can you tell me how God ordained the USA?

Did God put it in the hearts of men to declare independence? If no, then how did God form the power of these united states? Or do you say God did not form this power but once He saw it had formed then He ordained it?

God is good, but I believe we tend to dismiss how God raises up even evil powers that be to carry out His judgments.

God Bless!

Amy.G

09-25-2009, 08:43 PM

Pharaoh was an evil man and made salves of God's people.

I knew Pharaoh was a bad dude, but making salves of God's people? :eek:

(Sorry Steaver, I couldn't resist!) :laugh:

Marcia

09-26-2009, 03:30 PM

God raised up Pharaoh and placed him as a "power that be". Pharaoh was an evil man and made salves of God's people. God approved of this evil upon Israel FOR THEIR OWN GOOD. That they would repent from their idolatry and see that there be only one God who can deliver and prosper them.

Now can you tell me how God ordained the USA?

Did God ordain the USA any differently from any other power/ruler/country? I don't get your question. I never said God ordained the U.S. but it depends on what you mean by "ordain."

Did God put it in the hearts of men to declare independence? If no, then how did God form the power of these united states? Or do you say God did not form this power but once He saw it had formed then He ordained it?

Whether God put it in the minds of people to declare independence or not, is not the point.

If He did, then that means he put it in Hitler's heart to kill Jews. Why make a distinction for the U.S.? That's the heart of our disagreement.

I never said God ordained the US, or certainly not in a way different from the way any other ruler/country comes to power. You are trying to say it was okay for the colonies to rebel, but God's word goes against that. Therefore, God does not endorse that, imo.

You are trying to make a distinction between the US and other countries and powers, but you have no basis for that.

God is good, but I believe we tend to dismiss how God raises up even evil powers that be to carry out His judgments.

I am not dismissing that.

JTornado1

09-26-2009, 05:44 PM

Did The Founding Fathers Sin by Founding America?

Check out this article:

http://www.worldviewtimes.com/print.php?&ArticleID=3544

:thumbsup::godisgood::jesus:

steaver

09-27-2009, 01:32 PM

Did God ordain the USA any differently from any other power/ruler/country? I don't get your question. I never said God ordained the U.S. but it depends on what you mean by "ordain."

Strong's; Ordained
1) to put in order, to station
a) to place in a certain order, to arrange, to assign a place, to appoint
1) to assign (appoint) a thing to one

Rom 13:1 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=13&v=1&t=KJV#comm/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.

Is the USA a "higher power" or does not this scripture pertain to the USA?

Whether God put it in the minds of people to declare independence or not, is not the point.

It is my very point for opening this thread. To decide if the founding fathers sinned by declaring independence from a higher power. And if ALL the powers that be are put in order by God, then we must conclude that God uses mankind's rebellion to form the powers that be.

So how can a good thing come from sin? Or maybe it wasn't a good thing for us to declare independence.

You are trying to say it was okay for the colonies to rebel,

Not necessarily. I put this question to the list to learn how I should view the declaration of independence. I am asking if it is "ok" to rebel when the power that be is making you do evil? Was the King making us do evil?

You are trying to make a distinction between the US and other countries and powers, but you have no basis for that.

Not at all. As you ponted out, all power, even Hitler was raised up by God, just like Pharaoh and many other evil Kings and Dictators. But wasn't there any "powers that be" formed out of good deeds? Was the declaration of independence an evil deed?

:jesus:

steaver

09-27-2009, 01:44 PM

Did The Founding Fathers Sin by Founding America?

Check out this article:

http://www.worldviewtimes.com/print.php?&ArticleID=3544

:thumbsup:

Thanks J :thumbsup:

The article makes some good points on the side of the declaration not being a sin before God.

:jesus:

ReformedBaptist

09-28-2009, 09:25 AM

Thanks J :thumbsup:

The article makes some good points on the side of the declaration not being a sin before God.

:jesus:

Agreed. I like this that is quoted in that article:

The Presbyterians, Lutherans, Baptists, Congregationalists, and most other Christian denominations during the American Revolution believed that Romans 13 meant they were not to overthrow government as an institution and live in anarchy. This passage does not mean they had to submit to every civil law. Note that in Hebrews 11, a number of those who made the cut in the "Faith Hall of Fame" as heroes of the faith were guilty of civil disobedience-including Daniel, the three Hebrew Children, the Hebrew Midwives, Moses, etc.…

If the Founding Fathers had removed themselves from underneath the authority of Great Britain because they were choosing anarchy over an established government, then that would be a violation of Romans 13. Although Romans 13 is not an endorsement of every government, it is a description of what God says is the proper role of civil government.[

ReformedBaptist

09-28-2009, 09:29 AM

Also,

In Scripture, God initiates several realms of authority in human governance: family, church, and state. These reflect the normal pattern of social interaction, and civilizations throughout history have reproduced these in some form. Simply because the presence of these institutions is normative, however, we should not expect every instance of them to be acceptable.

Fathers are the God-ordained head of the family, but those who abuse their children and wives deserve to be removed from their positions of authority. Few people disagree that a pastor or elder should be removed from leadership in the church-his God-ordained position of authority-if the leader is guilty of grave moral and ethical failures. And, as with church and family rule, God does not necessarily endorse every leader or every civil government that comes along.

That seals the point in my opinion. Especially in light of:

For 11 years, our Founders petitioned the King of Great Britain to cease his unlawful, unbiblical actions against the colonials. Although the monarch ignored their grievances, they remained under his authority until he sent 25,000 troops into the colonies for the purpose of seizing property, invading homes, and imprisoning people without trials. The king's actions violated his own British common law, the English Bill of Rights, and the centuries-old Magna Carta.

Once King George III started down the path of violent suppression, the Founders announced their intent to separate from Great Britain. They wrote at length that they were involved in self-defense, which they rightly believed was Biblically acceptable. British troops fired the first shot in every confrontation leading up to the Revolutionary War-the Massacre of 1770, the bombing of Boston in 1774, and the Lexington and Concord engagements of 1775.

Unless you are a thoroughgoing pacifist, there is no basis for saying the Founders sinned in defending themselves against King George's troops and their terrorist tactics against the colonists.

Marcia

09-28-2009, 04:40 PM

As far as this goes:
The Presbyterians, Lutherans, Baptists, Congregationalists, and most other Christian denominations during the American Revolution believed that Romans 13 meant they were not to overthrow government as an institution and live in anarchy. This passage does not mean they had to submit to every civil law. Note that in Hebrews 11, a number of those who made the cut in the "Faith Hall of Fame" as heroes of the faith were guilty of civil disobedience-including Daniel, the three Hebrew Children, the Hebrew Midwives, Moses, etc.…
If the Founding Fathers had removed themselves from underneath the authority of Great Britain because they were choosing anarchy over an established government, then that would be a violation of Romans 13. Although Romans 13 is not an endorsement of every government, it is a description of what God says is the proper role of civil government

Rom. 13 tells us to obey the government. It makes no provision for civil disobedience. The only way we can perhaps allow civil disobedience is if the gov't commands an action that violates scripture. Daniel was ordered to worship the king; therefore, he could disobey. But he did this by praying, not by trying to overthrow the king. In each case above, they were ordered to do something against God.

If what the colonies did was right, why didn't the early Christians try to overthrow Rome? They certainly were being persecuted, even taken to be killed by lions. But they did not rebel.

ReformedBaptist

09-28-2009, 05:07 PM

As far as this goes:

Rom. 13 tells us to obey the government. It makes no provision for civil disobedience. The only way we can perhaps allow civil disobedience is if the gov't commands an action that violates scripture. Daniel was ordered to worship the king; therefore, he could disobey. But he did this by praying, not by trying to overthrow the king. In each case above, they were ordered to do something against God.

If what the colonies did was right, why didn't the early Christians try to overthrow Rome? They certainly were being persecuted, even taken to be killed by lions. But they did not rebel.

They might should have. If someone comes to my home and tries to murder my family, and I can get my gun, point and shoot it, then God delivered those men into my hand.

steaver

09-28-2009, 06:59 PM

Rom. 13 tells us to obey the government... .

But does it not give a reason why? That because it is a "good" to do what is "just"? Isn't Romans 13 speaking of obeying righteous government??

If what the colonies did was right, why didn't the early Christians try to overthrow Rome? They certainly were being persecuted, even taken to be killed by lions. But they did not rebel.

Perhaps God did not lay it on their hearts to rise up! God displays His power in many forms, sometimes he asks us to die and sometimes He asks us to stand up and defend or conquer an evil.

Jesus told us to turn the other cheek. Does this mean that Christians who become soldiers and fight are sinning against God?

Alcott

09-28-2009, 07:03 PM

If what the colonies did was right, why didn't the early Christians try to overthrow Rome? They certainly were being persecuted, even taken to be killed by lions. But they did not rebel.

While I'm not checking this out just right away, I remember World History from school in which the texts said the Christians-- meaning later generations, in the 2nd and 3rd centuries-- continued to be despised and persecuted by Rome because they refused to pay taxes, refused to serve in the army, et al. That's rebelling, at least in a form. But even if this scenario is not true (or less true than those history texts said), Rome was a much stronger power before the Christians came along than after. In fact, the dividing line between rise and decline of Rome is just about when Christians first became a growing minority, in the latter 1st century. By the time Christians came to be prevalent, Rome was much weaker and headed toward downfall. It seems Christians took down a major world power, even without an organized military rebellion, in large part by rebelling non-violently, at least some methods of which were against their own teachings. But should we still bow to Rome ?

Marcia

09-29-2009, 07:25 PM

But does it not give a reason why? That because it is a "good" to do what is "just"? Isn't Romans 13 speaking of obeying ighteous government??

No, of course not. That's not what it says! You are the first person that I know who ever suggested that.

Perhaps God did not lay it on their hearts to rise up! God displays His power in many forms, sometimes he asks us to die and sometimes He asks us to stand up and defend or conquer an evil.

How do you know He led the colonists to rebel? There is no objective evidence for that. And God would not lead people to go against His word.

Jesus told us to turn the other cheek. Does this mean that Christians who become soldiers and fight are sinning against God?

Turn the other cheek related to insults, not attacks. It meant to not return insult for insult.

Anyway, this is not about war as such but rebelling against a leader.

Marcia

09-29-2009, 07:27 PM

While I'm not checking this out just right away, I remember World History from school in which the texts said the Christians-- meaning later generations, in the 2nd and 3rd centuries-- continued to be despised and persecuted by Rome because they refused to pay taxes, refused to serve in the army, et al. That's rebelling, at least in a form.

If they did not pay taxes, they were going against the Bible. Jesus told the Jews to pay the tax to the Romans, who were over them. Jesus even paid it.

But even if this scenario is not true (or less true than those history texts said), Rome was a much stronger power before the Christians came along than after. In fact, the dividing line between rise and decline of Rome is just about when Christians first became a growing minority, in the latter 1st century. By the time Christians came to be prevalent, Rome was much weaker and headed toward downfall. It seems Christians took down a major world power, even without an organized military rebellion, in large part by rebelling non-violently, at least some methods of which were against their own teachings. But should we still bow to Rome ?

So they did not disobey Rom. 13, which is my point.

I don't know what you mean by "bow to Rome."

steaver

10-02-2009, 08:12 PM

How do you know He led the colonists to rebel? There is no objective evidence for that.
.

The powers that be are created by God. How do you see God forming the USA?

And God would not lead people to go against His word.

You said God lead Israel to rebel against kingdoms to establish them as the power that be. God told them at times to kill even the children. Did God lead them against His word 'thou shall not kill'?

:jesus:

Alcott

10-02-2009, 11:27 PM

I don't know what you mean by "bow to Rome."

I mean, since Christians did some things against scripture that helped bring down the empire, should we recognize the empire as still in power, according to those who think no rebellion of any kind is godly? Or, as part of Catholic theology, that the empire has continued in the body of the Roman church, is being noncatholic ungodly by those same scriptures? [as well as that the reformation was an unscriptural rebellion?]

Marcia

10-03-2009, 06:18 PM

The powers that be are created by God. How do you see God forming the USA?

I don't think we can see how God "formed" the USA. Some of the founders claimed God but were Deists. I don't believe in a Deist God. I don't know that there is any evidence that the USA was "formed" by God more than any other country/government.

You said God lead Israel to rebel against kingdoms to establish them as the power that be. God told them at times to kill even the children. Did God lead them against His word 'thou shall not kill'?We know God led Israel against these kingdoms because it's recorded in the Bible.

No, God never leads people to go against His word. "Thou shalt not kill" means to not murder. God used Israel to execute judgment on pagan nations that had turned away from God. This is all over the OT.

23"For My angel will go before you and bring you in to the land of the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hivites and the Jebusites; and I will completely destroy them.
24"You shall not worship their gods, nor serve them, nor do according to their deeds; but you shall utterly overthrow them and break their sacred pillars in pieces." Ex 23:23-24

Marcia

10-03-2009, 06:23 PM

I mean, since Christians did some things against scripture that helped bring down the empire, should we recognize the empire as still in power, according to those who think no rebellion of any kind is godly? Or, as part of Catholic theology, that the empire has continued in the body of the Roman church, is being noncatholic ungodly by those same scriptures? [as well as that the reformation was an unscriptural rebellion?]

Should we recognize what empire in power?

The reformation, in its aspects that were not violent (I think there was fighting on both sides), was not an overthrow of a government. In fact, Luther set out to reform the Catholic Church, not depart from it.

steaver

10-03-2009, 08:31 PM

I don't think we can see how God "formed" the USA. Some of the founders claimed God but were Deists. I don't believe in a Deist God. I don't know that there is any evidence that the USA was "formed" by God more than any other country/government.

.

Col 1:16 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Col&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/16) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

The biblical "evidence" is strikingly clear. God forms the "powers that be". Thus far you have rejected all the theories I have put forth. I put them forth to seek an answer. I am not promoting them as a matter of fact. I would like to understand how God works in men to bring forth His "powers that be" so I can explain it to others who ask. Do you have any suggestions to present? Just nay saying all the attempts to reconcile the two does not help sharpen the iron.

God formed all the powers that be, this I can be certain of. This includes the evil ones as well. This country was formed through a "declaration of independence" which must have come from God. Now was the declaration a sin? This is the question I seek an answer for?

If God does the forming, as the srcipture declares, then it is God who put it in the heart of men to conquer other men or fight to break free of other men. There is plenty of "evidence" of this found in the scriptures.

I have to accept the scripture that states it is God who forms all of these powers that be, both good and evil. Does this excuse men like Hitler? No, God used an evil man to carry out His agenda, just like He did Pharaoh. God even hardened Pharaoh's heart so he could not obey Him and let the people go. Does this mean that God caused Pharaoh's disobedience and thus God caused Pharaoh to sin?

Now here is the question, do you think God seen the founding fathers as an evil or as a good for His plan to form the USA?

:jesus:

Marcia

10-05-2009, 06:44 PM

Col 1:16 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Col&c=1&v=1&t=KJV#comm/16) For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

The biblical "evidence" is strikingly clear. God forms the "powers that be". Thus far you have rejected all the theories I have put forth. I put them forth to seek an answer. I am not promoting them as a matter of fact. I would like to understand how God works in men to bring forth His "powers that be" so I can explain it to others who ask. Do you have any suggestions to present? Just nay saying all the attempts to reconcile the two does not help sharpen the iron.

Why would I or anyone have more information than what is in the Bible about how God brings forth His "powers that be?" God does not let us in on it.

God formed all the powers that be, this I can be certain of. This includes the evil ones as well. This country was formed through a "declaration of independence" which must have come from God. Now was the declaration a sin? This is the question I seek an answer for?

I think I gave my thoughts on that.

If God does the forming, as the srcipture declares, then it is God who put it in the heart of men to conquer other men or fight to break free of other men. There is plenty of "evidence" of this found in the scriptures.

You are getting into other waters here - free will, determinism, etc. Does God allow people to form governments or does He lead them into it? I do not think God leads people into sin.

Now here is the question, do you think God seen the founding fathers as an evil or as a good for His plan to form the USA?

I think you need to rephrase the question - the grammar makes it confusing for me.

steaver

10-06-2009, 05:51 PM

I do not think God leads people into sin.

.

2Ch 18:18 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/18)¶Again he said, Therefore hear the word of the LORD; I saw the LORD sitting upon his throne, and all the host of heaven standing on his right hand and [on] his left.
2Ch 18:19 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/19) And the LORD said, Who shall entice Ahab king of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one spake saying after this manner, and another saying after that manner.
2Ch 18:20 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/20) Then there came out a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will entice him. And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith?
2Ch 18:21 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/21) And he said, I will go out, and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And [the LORD] said, Thou shalt entice [him], and thou shalt also prevail: go out, and do [even] so.
2Ch 18:22 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/22) Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil against thee.

Do you see that it was the LORD who commanded the evil spirit to entice Ahab to war by placing a lying spirit in the mouths of 400 prophets?

Ahab was wicked and God wanted Ahab destroyed.

God does not use sin just on the wicked. What about Job? Job was a righteous man yet God enticed satan to bring sin upon him.

You say God does not lead people into sin. All things were created by Him and for Him, for the glory of Christ, even satan and sin brings God glory. It was satan and sin that murdered our Lord Jesus Christ. If this ultimate sin had never happened were would we be? God foreordained the sacrifice of His Son before He ever created anything.

If God is sovereign, and He is, then God is in control of everything. For His purposes and for His glory. This includes the evil, God is in control.

:jesus:

Marcia

10-06-2009, 06:23 PM

2Ch 18:18 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/18)¶Again he said, Therefore hear the word of the LORD; I saw the LORD sitting upon his throne, and all the host of heaven standing on his right hand and [on] his left.
2Ch 18:19 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/19) And the LORD said, Who shall entice Ahab king of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one spake saying after this manner, and another saying after that manner.
2Ch 18:20 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/20) Then there came out a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will entice him. And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith?
2Ch 18:21 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/21) And he said, I will go out, and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And [the LORD] said, Thou shalt entice [him], and thou shalt also prevail: go out, and do [even] so.
2Ch 18:22 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=2Ch&c=18&v=1&t=KJV#comm/22) Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil against thee.

Do you see that it was the LORD who commanded the evil spirit to entice Ahab to war by placing a lying spirit in the mouths of 400 prophets?

Ahab was wicked and God wanted Ahab destroyed.

God does not use sin just on the wicked.

You say God does not lead people into sin. All things were created by Him and for Him, for the glory of Christ, even satan and sin brings God glory. It was satan and sin that murdered our Lord Jesus Christ. If this ultimate sin had never happened were would we be? God foreordained the sacrifice of His Son before He ever created anything.

If God is sovereign, and He is, then God is in control of everything. For His purposes and for His glory. This includes the evil, God is in control.

What about James 1:13?

Let no one say when he is tempted, " I am being tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.

None of the examples above are God leading people to sin; they are judgments (punishments). God sent a lying spirit because God controls angels. But this is not making someone sin; these are judgments.

And even if you think God makes people sin, that does not make sin okay. Otherwise, God is acting against His word. He tells us not to rebel against our rulers; therefore, He will not lead us to do so. He may allow it; but that is not the same thing.

What about Job? Job was a righteous man yet God enticed satan to bring sin upon him.

God did not entice Satan - Satan challenged God about Job. Of course, God knew this would happen - he was trapping Satan in his own scheme.

steaver

10-06-2009, 06:40 PM

None of the examples above are God leading people to sin; they are judgments (punishments). God sent a lying spirit because God controls angels. But this is not making someone sin; these are judgments.

.

Are you reading the text Marcia?

God asked for a spirit to entice Ahab.

The word of the LORD states that it is God who placed the lying spirit into the prophets so they would lie.

You can't just ignore the word of God that does not sound all warm and fuzzy. It is what it is. Stating that it is a judgment does not change the truths stated in the word of God about God causing people to sin to fulfill His purposes.

God did not entice Satan - Satan challenged God about Job. Of course, God knew this would happen - he was trapping Satan in his own scheme.

I believe if you go back and re-read it you will find that it was God who enticed satan concerning Job.

Job 1:8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Job&c=1&v=8&t=KJV#8)And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that [there is] none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?

:thumbsup:

Marcia

10-06-2009, 07:43 PM

Are you reading the text Marcia?

God asked for a spirit to entice Ahab.

The word of the LORD states that it is God who placed the lying spirit into the prophets so they would lie.

You can't just ignore the word of God that does not sound all warm and fuzzy. It is what it is. Stating that it is a judgment does not change the truths stated in the word of God about God causing people to sin to fulfill His purposes.

I believe if you go back and re-read it you will find that it was God who enticed satan concerning Job.

Job 1:8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Job&c=1&v=8&t=KJV#8)And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that [there is] none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?

:thumbsup:

God sent the spirit who enticed Ahab.

God did not entice Ahab to lie. An evil spirit did. In fact, God said, "Who will entice Ahab...?" And the fallen angel said he would. Ahab was evil anyway, wasn't he? Was he a good man that God somehow made into a liar?

30 Ahab son of Omri did more evil in the eyes of the LORD than any of those before him. 31 He not only considered it trivial to commit the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, but he also married Jezebel daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and began to serve Baal and worship him. 32 He set up an altar for Baal in the temple of Baal that he built in Samaria. 33 Ahab also made an Asherah pole and did more to provoke the LORD, the God of Israel, to anger than did all the kings of Israel before him. 1 Kings 16

I see this as a judgment on an evil king.

You are ignoring James 1:13
Let no one say when he is tempted, " I am being tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.

Either God's word is contradicting itself or what you say is not true.

I maintain that you are not interpreting the texts you have posted correctly. God cannot abide sin; and God tells us that He does not tempt anyone. The fact he used a demon to entice Ahab shows this. God is righteous and hates sin. He uses evil men for his purposes, but that does not mean He condones evil.

Nothing you've posted is evidence that God caused men to disobey His word in Rom. 13.

If you want to keep believing that a holy and righteous God causes men to sin and that He goes against his word in James 1:13, no one can stop you, I guess.

steaver

10-06-2009, 09:18 PM

God sent the spirit who enticed Ahab.

God did not entice Ahab to lie. An evil spirit did. In fact, God said, "Who will entice Ahab...?" And the fallen angel said he would. Ahab was evil anyway, wasn't he? Was he a good man that God somehow made into a liar?

I see this as a judgment on an evil king.

.

The spirit, which God sent, caused the four hundred prophets to lie to Ahab. Ahab did not lie.

You are ignoring James 1:13

I am well aware of James 1:13, but it does not cause me to reject the clear word of the Lord concerning His sovereinty over sin expressed for us in the OT. We need to find harmony between the two, not dismiss one over the other. Just calling it "judgment", which some of it is, does not change the means God used for that judgment.

Either God's word is contradicting itself or what you say is not true.

I maintain that you are not interpreting the texts you have posted correctly. God cannot abide sin; and God tells us that He does not tempt anyone. The fact he used a demon to entice Ahab shows this. God is righteous and hates sin. He uses evil men for his purposes, but that does not mean He condones evil.

God is righteous, God hates sin, God uses evil for His purposes, God does not condone evil, God cannot abide in sin. AMEN!

The word of the LORD still stands. You dismiss the OT accounts of God using sin, even causing sin, by saying they are judgments. Yes, many are judgments, but this does not change the fact that God used sin to bring them and to bring Him glory.

Nothing you've posted is evidence that God caused men to disobey His word in Rom. 13.

True. But I have posted evidence that God is sovereign even in causing sin to bring about His judgments and to fulfill His purposes.

If you want to keep believing that a holy and righteous God causes men to sin and that He goes against his word in James 1:13, no one can stop you, I guess.

You need not go there my dear sister. I believe God is perfectly holy and righteous, never goes against His word and cannot sin.

So I am left with the task of making sense of the OT accounts of God causing sin and harmonizing that with James 1:13.

I cannot dismiss one for the other, Both are truth and there must be a solution. Maybe God will never reveal it to me, but I will ask and pray. I will not dismiss any of God's word that declares His full sovereinty over all things, even sin.

Do you notice how very few are willing to post on this matter? That is because it is a difficult topic and it is easier just to dismiss those OT accounts rather than truly deal with them. I know you say "judgments", however true, it does not deal with the declarations made concerning God's hand in bringing about those judgments through the use of sin.

You did not address Job. God enticed satan to engage concerning Job. What judgment would this be for? Job was a righteous man who eshewed evil.

:jesus:

Marcia

10-07-2009, 02:16 PM

The spirit, which God sent, caused the four hundred prophets to lie to Ahab. Ahab did not lie.

Yes, I mispoke on that. But it was the demon who enticed. This is not God tempting man. I never said God doesn't use the evil deeds of man.

I am well aware of James 1:13, but it does not cause me to reject the clear word of the Lord concerning His sovereinty over sin expressed for us in the OT. We need to find harmony between the two, not dismiss one over the other. Just calling it "judgment", which some of it is, does not change the means God used for that judgment.I have found the harmony - God does not go against His word. The examples you posted do not show God leading men into sin - he used evil men and let them sin. This is like hardening Pharaoh's heart; Pharoah was already rebellious before the text says God hardened his heart. God used what was there already for his purposes.

The word of the LORD still stands. You dismiss the OT accounts of God using sin, even causing sin, by saying they are judgments. Yes, many are judgments, but this does not change the fact that God used sin to bring them and to bring Him glory.
I never said God did not use sinful men. I said God does not lead people to sin. I believe he allows Satan to entice and tempt people, and that could be a test and/or it could be God allowing evil to run its course in someone for His purposes.

True. But I have posted evidence that God is sovereign even in causing sin to bring about His judgments and to fulfill His purposes.It depends on what you mean by "cause." We could get philosophical and talk about "first causes" and all that, but I am not good at it and have no time for it at all. God does not lead people into sin; he allows it or he allows sin to run its course in people.

So I am left with the task of making sense of the OT accounts of God causing sin and harmonizing that with James 1:13.

I cannot dismiss one for the other, Both are truth and there must be a solution. Maybe God will never reveal it to me, but I will ask and pray. I will not dismiss any of God's word that declares His full sovereinty over all things, even sin.Maybe your concept of sovereignty includes the belief that man cannot sin without God causing it? If so, I do not share that view.

Do you notice how very few are willing to post on this matter? That is because it is a difficult topic and it is easier just to dismiss those OT accounts rather than truly deal with them. I know you say "judgments", however true, it does not deal with the declarations made concerning God's hand in bringing about those judgments through the use of sin.I think people are not posting because the last 3 pages or so it's just been us. When I see that over 2 pages in a thread are just between 2 people, I usually don't read it. And if I'm one of the people, I end it soon, as I will here. We are getting nowhere, imo.

You did not address Job. God enticed satan to engage concerning Job. What judgment would this be for? Job was a righteous man who eshewed evil.I disagree that God enticed Satan. God does not need to entice Satan. He knew Satan wanted to challenge Job's faith and God allowed him to do it. It was a set-up from God. I never said this was a judgment -- or if I did, I did not mean it about Job.

steaver

10-08-2009, 07:41 PM

He knew Satan wanted to challenge Job's faith and God allowed him to do it. It was a set-up from God.

Where did you read this in the scriptures?

THe beggining of the account goes like this....

Job 1:8 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Job&c=1&v=8&t=KJV#8)And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that [there is] none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?

God began the conversation. Where does it say what you say?

:jesus:

steaver

10-08-2009, 10:02 PM

But it was the demon who enticed. This is not God tempting man. I never said God doesn't use the evil deeds of man.

God commands the evil angels. In fact, they cannot do any evil without God's consent. God called upon the host of heaven asking for an evil spirit to entice Ahab. The spirit that stepped up to the task told God it would entice Ahab to sin by placing a lying spirit in the mouths of 400 prophets. God then commanded the spirit to do that very thing.

I am searching for harmony between this fact about God enticing Ahab to sin and James 1:13 which states that God does not tempt any man. I'm sorry Marcia, but I don't see your pov as accomplishing this task. You seem to just dismiss the very words spoken about Ahab. I do not dismiss James and I equally cannot dismiss Chronicles.

Somehow, God can cause a person to sin, yet He Himself is totally righteous in doing so and without sin.

Rom 9:21 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=9&v=22&t=KJV#comm/21) Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Rom 9:22 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=9&v=22&t=KJV#comm/22) [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

But then James says that God tempts no man. I need to explore and pray more about this tempting James is speaking of. It appears to be a direct contradiction to Chronicles, but since that cannot be, there must be a solution God has not yet revealed to me.

Has He revealed it to anyone else who has been reading this thread?

Marcia

10-13-2009, 07:23 PM

steaver

10-16-2009, 05:10 PM

Back to the issue......God commands believers not to rebel against their rulers.

Therefore, we are to obey that. We are told to obey God throughout the Bible.

Therefore, for whatever reason people rebel against a ruler or government, it goes against Romans 13.

We have been on issue.....here is the issue;

a) Rebellion forms new governments. Without rebellion against an existing government there would never be any new governments.

b) Col 1:16 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Col&c=1&v=16&t=KJV#16)For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Did the founding fathers create the USA or did God?

Scripture states it was God. God used these men and we know that the founding fathers rebelled against the King.

Why did they rebel? Because God wanted them to so that a new power would be established. Yet God is without blame and without sin!

Rom 11:33 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=11&v=33&t=KJV#comm/33) O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable [are] his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

God's ways are always righteous, even when He commanded men to kill even the children because their parents had sinned.

:jesus:

Marcia

10-17-2009, 01:39 PM

We have been on issue.....here is the issue;

a) Rebellion forms new governments. Without rebellion against an existing government there would never be any new governments.

b) Col 1:16 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Col&c=1&v=16&t=KJV#16)For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Did the founding fathers create the USA or did God?

Scripture states it was God. God used these men and we know that the founding fathers rebelled against the King.

Why did they rebel? Because God wanted them to so that a new power would be established. Yet God is without blame and without sin!

Rom 11:33 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=11&v=33&t=KJV#comm/33) O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable [are] his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

God's ways are always righteous, even when He commanded men to kill even the children because their parents had sinned.

:jesus:

I don't think all governments come from rebellion. In fact, that is not a fact. Many leaders succeed previous leaders. Some governments are formed peacefully. Even when they come from rebellion, that is a result of sin. It does not make it okay.

I still don't think you get my point - God is behind the power of all rulers and governments but that does not mean they are from God or are godly. I don't know how to say it more clearly than that, and that is what I've been saying all along.

I do not think God incited the colonists to rebel - God allowed it and worked through it for his own purposes. That does not mean the rebellion was good. In fact, violent overthrow of rulers goes against Rom 13 so it is not good.

The cases we know of where God commanded men to kill is not a valid analogy. For one thing, we know God commanded this because it's in the Bible. We have no evidence God commanded the colonists to rebel. Secondly, God used men as a tool of punishment and judgment on the pagan nations; this is recorded so we know that is true. We have no such statement for anything like this after the OT.

I think we cannot agree because it seems you think God is the first cause of every action (that He directly causes people to do everything, including sin), which I strongly disagree with.