Romans 13, Do Americans have to submit to the president?

Pastor Larry,
Let me try this again. Here you say that Paul says to submit to the Roman government. Rom 13 says CLEARLY TO SUBMIT TO A GOOD GOVERNMENT. You took the leap, I didn't. Please show me where Paul says to submit to a wicked anti-christ government. Every time Paul says to submit it is to a good government, not to a bad one. Your position is once again inconsistent. (I am glad you said it is in black and white)
Thanks ------Bart

 

1 Pet 2:17
17 Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

Rom 13:7
7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

The words in Rom 13, "their dues:....tribute is due" are very important. A wicked King is not due my honor. Samuel did not honor Saul when he broke God's commandment. There were no recorded Baptist Preachers against the colonists in the war for independance. This is an old, timeless principle of the Doctine of the Civil Magistrate. You guys are the new boys on the block. You are not just debating with me you are debating with Issac Baachus and the like.
Let me quote from the Book, BAPTIST PATRIOTS AND THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, By William Cathcart.
Colonel Joab Houghton received news at Sunday worship of the British attack on Concord and Lexington. After the service, he addressed the people of Hopewell Baptist Church outside as they were about to disperse. Haviing told of the cowardly murder at Lexington by royal troops and the herioic counter attack that followed, he paused, then spoke with gravity: "Men of New Jersey, the red coats are murdering our brethren of New England! Who follows me to Boston?" At once, every man present shouted "I" and stepped out into line! That quiet Sabbath bore witness that there was not a single coward or traitor among the Baptist men of Hopewell. (Back Cover)
I hope you understand what you are saying.
Thanks ------Bart

 

Bart, Also, Last time I check, Ceasar was dead.
I know Paul as well as most of the apostles were killed by the roman government, even though they did not stand against the government, they knew that what they believe did not set well with them. Christians all around the world are being persecuted and killed for what they believe. Are they submitting to the government, well in a round about I guess they are, but they just don't have a choice. Just like Indianapolis Baptist Temple, Our government took it over and tore it down, for no reason, except to just show who they are. Did they submit to the government, I guess they had no choice. Was the government right, NO. If we are doing right and living right, then we should not have to fear a government that is good. When a government starts doing wrong, we do not have to submit to it. It is now the law in Mass. that sodomite marriages are "legal" and this will be all thru out the country in a year or two. Do we have to submit to the acceptance of it. NO. But it may cost us for saying NO.
You are right Bart.

 

No need to try again. Just read what I wrote above. YOu will see that the word "good" does not modify government. As I said, it is black and white. Paul never comments on the quality of the government being submitted to.

As for "tribute is due," that refers to the legitimate government. I do not owe tribute to the bully down the street. He is not a God ordained authority. On the other hand, the government is. You are reaching after straws to attempt to avoid what the text plainly says.

Whether we are new or not, we have the weight of Scripture on our side.

Christians are being persecuted for what they believe. But they are to be persecuted for doing right, not for doing wrong. God said it is his will that you submit to the authorities. When you rebel against authority, you are rebelling against God. You are advocating disobedience to God. I know that is strong, but there is no way around it. You have tried to characterize the text in a way that is convenient for you.

Read 1 Peter

Now, not several things.

Nowhere is "good government" the object of Peter's command. The standard is "every authority instituted among men" (v. 13). Notice "every" not "good" ... but "every."

Furthermore, v. 13 ties this submission to "the Lord's sake," once again as in Rom 13, an indication that our obedience to authority is ultimately our obedience to God.

Notice that it is God's will that you do this (v. 15), and you are not to use your freedom in Christ as a cover up for evil, which in context is disobeying government. Those who were disobeying government were giving a bad name to Christians and causing the gospel to be looked down on.

Notice the principle of v. 18, that the idea of only submitting to "good authority" is explicitly refuted. Now, if is true in the master/slave relationship, it is also true in teh government relationship. In other words, not only is what you teach not stated, it is explicitly refuted.

Now the choice before us is to submit to God and government, or to reject God and government. Until the government asks us to do something unbiblical, then we are to obey them. Indianapolis Baptist Temple is a prime example of a church who disobeyed God by refusing to obey the government. As a result, the gospel is no longer being preached in that place. It was sin for them to do that. They were not required to disobey God in that matter. They chose to rebel against God and government.

We who hold to the authority of Scripture should have no problem subscribing to its tenets.

And JM repeats this nonsense about gay marriage. That will not be forced on the church. If it is, I will be the first to say no. You don't have to accept gay marriages in the church. You do not have to perform them. You do not have to endorse them. You can even speak against them. But if the government tries to mandate that I must perform a gay marriage, I will say No. They don't even mandate that I have to perform any marriage.

We need to return to the days of radical biblical obedience for the sake of gospel. It is what Paul and Peter taught; it is what Christ taught; it is what you should teach.

 

Pastor Larry said:

Pastor Larry, if you are a 501c3, you will lose your status if you do not. It is the law of land. This will effect every man woman and child in this country and it will effect your church as people start accepting it more and more. I guarantee it will. The government is suppose to be for good. RIGHT. When it is wrong are we just suppose to cow down to it. Let me ask you. Your wife is suppose to submit to you, right. If you were to tell her she needs to become a hooker for Jesus and bring in a lot of money to help support the ministry, would she have to submit to you? Think about it.

 

Actually, there first has to be a law passed that pastors have to marry anyone, much less gay people. A pastor does not have to marry anyone at all. A 501c3 is no exception. However, churches are not technically 501c3 unless they apply for it. They are treated as such for certain purposes (e.g., taxes, donations, bulk mail, etc.).

But even at that, if they take away the tax exempt status, that is fine. They gave it; they can take it away. I addressed that recently in our church when we talked about this very issue. Tax exemption is a benefit that the government has extended to churches. It is not a right. It poses no problem for the church (other than financial) if it is taken away. That is the the Indianapolis thing was so stupid, and it wasn't even about church taxes.

But as it stands now, there is no requirement on the part of the church or the pastor to marry anyone.

I have asked several times in this discussion for someone to offer a law that is currently on the books that requires a believer to disobey God. No one has offered one, so there is no reason to invoke the "God rather than man" clause.

"Good" in that context has to do with common good for the people. If you read the context, you will see it is about punishing those who break the laws and protecting those who do not. It is not about righteous good. That would be foreign to the context, where Paul explains what he means.

I think the word is "kow" but bovines are nice too I suppose. But the answer is "depends." What do you mean by wrong? You mean something we don't like? Or something that is biblicaly wrong? Where it is biblically wrong, we are to obey God rather than man. Where it is merely something I don't like, I am to submit to government. Again, in the Scripture, the only grounds for disobedience to the government is when they ask you to disobey God.

I don't like the fact that the government says abortion is legal and I have to stay a certain distance away from a clinic. But I don't get to disobey that if I were one that picketed clinics (something I find rather ineffective). If on the other hand, the government required my wife to have an abortion, I would disobey that, and the abortion would only be carried out by force. The difference is that one is an express biblical command; the other is not.

Why would I think about that? That is nonsense. Of course she would not have to submit to me because I would be asking her to disobey God and "we must obey God rather than man."

I have already noted that caveat several times but you guys keep ignoring it.

 

The Bible says that your wife is to submit to you. You are correct that if you tell her to do something that violates the scriptures, then she is not required to obey. The same thing applies to government. That is why our forefathers fled from Europe, because they were being asked to do something that was wrong. Were they right to throw a "Boston Tea Party"? Had they not we would still be under England.

Now as far as laws that we can not obey. Have you studied the hate crime legislation. We are force to pay for abortions thru our taxes. We pay sodomites to represent us. We pay federal judges to rule who force us to accept those things that God calls abomination. I believe you need to study about the Indy Church situation, before you judge it improperly because if you take the government side of that issue you are coming down on the side of government that has done wrong, not good.

 

You speak wisely, but I don't think that's an accurate comparison. A husband/wife relationship is not one of one having authoritative control over the other. It's a mutual and equal covenant, and the reality is that the only head of the marriage is Jesus Christ. A government, otoh, has authoritative control over its people. However, we have the ability to change the government's control via representation and voting. However, I do agree with the point you're trying to make.

We tend to personify these events. The truth is, these events wer not right/wrong. I'm sure that, from the UK pov, the Boston Tea Party was wrong.

 

What was the biblical command that our forefathers were asked to disobey?

Hate crime laws have never caused me to disobey God.

We pay taxes to the government. The money then is theirs. I am not paying for abortions. I am paying tribute to whom tribute is due. Under the standard you use here, you could not buy anything because all the money you spend would go towards something you don't like.

I don't pay anyone to represent me. I pay taxes to a government who disburses the money.

I have never had a federal judge force me to accept anything, much less something God calls abomination. Neither have I paid any federal judge to do anything. The money is paid to the government who then disburses the money in various ways.

I read all the news articles from teh time and I lamented how bad the gospel looked because some people chose to disobey God. You didn't say which law of God they were forced to disobey.

You see, the issue is obedience to God or not. I believe we should obey God. Period.

 

In the Nashville phone book, it's listed in the blue pages under United States Government. Not happy to find it there, I might add.

Did find this link:

http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

Is this what you are talking about?

 

At the federal level, we pay taxes to the Department of the Internal Revenue, a federal government agency. Their function is to disburse the funds to the varying federal government agencies. At the state level, we pay taxes to our individual state franchise tax boards, which, in turn, disburse the funds to the varying state agencies, and pass local tax funds to the local municipalities.

The federal reserve is a government agency.

The IRS setup in Puerto Rico is slightly different, because, since they're not represented at the federal level, their tax rules aren't the same. However, that doesn't change the fact that the Dept of the Internal Revenue is a federal government agency.

Anyhoo, I found the Department of Internal Revenue listed under the White Pages US Government section.

 

No need to try again. Just read what I wrote above. YOu will see that the word "good" does not modify government. As I said, it is black and white. Paul never comments on the quality of the government being submitted to.

As for "tribute is due," that refers to the legitimate government. I do not owe tribute to the bully down the street. He is not a God ordained authority. On the other hand, the government is. You are reaching after straws to attempt to avoid what the text plainly says.

Whether we are new or not, we have the weight of Scripture on our side.

Christians are being persecuted for what they believe. But they are to be persecuted for doing right, not for doing wrong. God said it is his will that you submit to the authorities. When you rebel against authority, you are rebelling against God. You are advocating disobedience to God. I know that is strong, but there is no way around it. You have tried to characterize the text in a way that is convenient for you.

Read 1 Peter

Now, not several things.

Nowhere is "good government" the object of Peter's command. The standard is "every authority instituted among men" (v. 13). Notice "every" not "good" ... but "every."

Furthermore, v. 13 ties this submission to "the Lord's sake," once again as in Rom 13, an indication that our obedience to authority is ultimately our obedience to God.
</font>[/QUOTE]P.L.
"as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well." I Pet 2: 14 This clearly describes a King or governor who is correct in their position and office. The English King before the American Revolution was not meeting this criteria. God shows us here in His Word that the direction of rule is for the good. It is not for the bad. It is a forgone conclusion that the rule of law is being upheld by the King or governor. It is also clear that the King or governor is not a transgressor of that law. A King or governor who becomes a tyrant and a criminal is not mentioned here. Your interpretation is too broad. You include tyrants and despots and the like. God did not. The FORM of government in Rom 13 is a GOOD FORM. It is not the form of a despot or a criminal King or governor. The FORM being good qualifies the individual as the minister of God. You say Paul never comments on the quality of government to be submitted to, this shows quality. You are wrong. Can you say that Eiddie Amin (Sp) was a "minister of God" and Christians in his country were bound by scripture to obey him? It is because of my obedience to God that I will not bow to the King or governor that becomes the "bully down the street". BTW the three Hebrew children resisted the authority of the king. It took seven men to put three young men in the fire. A King that is a thief is not to be obeyed.
Thanks -------Bart

 

PL asked

While in ENgland, they were required to swear allegiance to the pope and deny Christ. In this country, they had unfair taxation along with other grieves. Just study the Declaration of independence. Our forefathers had a price put on their heads for saying NO to a government that had gone bad.

Maybe not yet, but just look north of the border and see what is going on there. It is not far off. There have aleready been some cjurches who have lost their 501c3 status because they spoke out.

Well your thoughts here looks like you have followed the current educational systems teaching. The is not "theirs" it is ours. We are the government here. We are responsible for how it is used. I pay taxes and many things I don't like, that is why I stand against wickedness and I can do it scripturally because I am the government in this country.

Yes you do. It is your money and we are responsible for how it is used or misused. If we don't then we fell in our responsiblity to ourselves, our children and to our God.

We do accept it by our lack of action and just saying that it is not our problem is like sticking you head in the sand.

Then your problem is that you read the liberal news media and Bob Gray and you never took time to call a brother in Christ and ask him what was going on. Dr. Greg Dixon is one of the most humble honest servant of Christ i have evr known. He stood up for what was right, while many brothers of Christ stood on the sideline and said nothing except criticize him. The church at Indy is going forth, but the government was wrong and we have the right and resposiblity to stand up agianst that wrong.

We can agree on this point. I am obeying God and so did Pastor Dixon as well as our forefathers who spoke out and took action against a wicked government.


A note to JohnV. You need to realize that while as husband and wife, the wife is subordinate to the husband. We are equal in Christ, but not in authority.

 

That's not true. First, houses of worship are not required to file for 501c3 status. Charitable organizations, otoh, are. Second, it is the individual pastor, not the church, that has the legal power to perform a marriage. No individual is required to perform a wedding they disagree with. For example, a minister who's a member of the KKK cannot be forced to perform a wedding between a mixed race couple.

If your assertion about 501c3 churches is correct, then that means no church is allowed to refuse a marriage between non-believers (since that is discrimination against a person's religion). But that just ain't so.

 

Bart,

YOu are still missing Scripture for your conclusion. The Scripture does not say what you say.

JM

The first may be true. If so, they should disobey. The "unfair taxation" violates no biblical command to follow Christ.

I didn't know Canada had any 501c3 status ... secondly, churches don't apply for it, though they will usuallyy receive it if they do. Thirdly, hate crimes still don't cause me to disobey God. Fourthly, if someone wants to complain about it, then let them.

As for taxes, you are simply wrong. When I give money to someone else, it is theirs. It is not mine. I can work within the government to change the spending priorities. But I am not paying for those things.

As for the Indianapolis church, I didn't read Bob Gray at all. I have no use for him. I did read the news reports. And the church was wrong. Period. They were not asked to violate any biblical command.

You do not make proper distinctions between your preference/conveniences/desires and God's word. You think thta because something violates your own preference, you yhave a right to disobey. The standard has nothing to do with that. The standard is God's word. Until you are asked to disobey God, you are required by God to obey the government. Disobedience to authority is disobedience to God.

 

BTW, you are not the government. Our governming documents consistently make a distinction between the government and the people. The government is a corporate entity made up of representatives of the people. There is no one person who is the government. And the government is not the people.

 

Actually, the wife is submissive to the husband. The husband's only authority over his wife is that os spiritual headship. He doesn't have authority to, for example, demand actions. That's a master-slave relationship, not husband-wfe relatioship. Also, the husband is also to submit to the wife (we're to submit to each other as to christ), and the wife is to love her husband (as Christ loves us). This is true even though the husband is not told to submit, and the wife is not told to love.

But, better to leave that topic alone, since it would hijack this thread. I don't want this thread to turn into a husband/wife debate. There's already enough of those.... and then there's the ones on the board.

 

Pastor Larry, You are incorrect. We the people are the government. That is what was wrong with England and our forefathers wanted us to avoid that here. We are the government and if it is functioning wrong we have a right and an obligation to change it. Just because you chose not to does not make you right. The scripture does not say what you want it to say, so we are at a stand still. I understand you view point and you understand mine.

JohnV you are right we do not need to go there agian. Your misinterpretation would need to be addressed in another thread.