[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

print-icon print-icon Americans' Stunning And Growing Dependence On Government Aid In Pictures Israel Said Planning Massive Retaliation, Likely Targets Include Oil & Gas Rigs, Nuclear Sites Grid Apocalypse Hits Carolinas: 360 Substations Down, Power Restoration Could Take "Months" Kamala Begins Making Excuses For Why She Picked Tim Walz As Her Running Mate Language Warning: Longshoreman’s Wife Speaks Out About the Port Strike 52 Scientists and Academics: Excessive DNA Contamination in mRNA Vaccines Presents Substantial Risk of Cancer Gold Overtakes Euro to Become Second-Largest Central Bank Reserve Asset Israeli forces bomb institute for orphans in Gaza Englishman Jailed for Sharing Pictures Warning Mass Migration 'Coming to a Town Near You' Democrats In Nevada Give Permit To 40ft Tall Nude Trump Next to Highway Trump launches GoFundMe for victims of Hurricane Helene, raising over $2 million in less than 24 hours OFFICIAL DETOUR I-26 and I-40 including TIME TO REMAIN CLOSED When you RUIN your CAREER and the ELECTION with One sentenceÂ… President Mulino Pledges To End Migrant Crossings Through Darien Gap Walz OUTCLASSED at debate, Iran's attack on Israel, and a port strike update [Livestream starts at 0800EST] Here We Go… CBS Hacks “Fact-Check” JD Vance — Then Won’t Let Him Speak Tampon Tim Gets Waxed in Debate RFK Jr. Mocks Kamala Harris's 'I Was Born In The Middle Class' Refrain Which Countries Are Stashing The Most Wealth Offshore? WW3 ALERT! OCTOBER SURPRISE IRAN MISSILES SLAM ISRAEL, PUTIN DEMANDS NETANYAHU LEAVE LEBANON NOW The entire Tim Walz charade destroyed in 25 seconds as the CNN panel sits in total silence. Rickards: Biggest Monetary Shock In 50 Years Alarming New Lies Emerge About Tim Walz and His Bizarre Connection to China, with RCP Hosts Americans Are Rescuing People From Helene Damage While Kamala Sleeps The Shocking Discovery That Men Like Hot Women 'Fierce' Hezbollah Resistance On Ground As Israel Says Lebanon Offensive To Last 'Weeks' Yemeni armed forces Fighting in Red Sea Trump Says Hes Working With Musk to Get Starlink to Areas Hit by Hurricane Helene Iran To 'Imminently' Launch Ballistic Missiles On Israel; White House Warns Inside the Country that KILLS Illegal Immigrants...

Editorial
See other Editorial Articles

Title: Romans 13:1-7
Source: .
URL Source: [None]
Published: May 20, 2011
Author: .
Post Date: 2011-05-20 00:13:29 by RickyJ
Keywords: None
Views: 497
Comments: 39

These are some of my thoughts on Romans 13: 1-7

If you think I am wrong about this please let me know how I am wrong. I have a sick feeling many ministers in America have on purpose been misleading their congregations into believing Christians should obey their government.

I have always thought Romans 13 could not have been talking about civil governments because to do so would contradict many other scriptures in the New Testament.

I still believe this to be the case despite the widely taught and held belief that Romans 13: 1-7 is talking about submission to secular governments. What is actually being commanded here by Paul is submission to higher authorities, most think this means secular governments, but that is not what this verse is saying.

Submission to higher authorities for a Christian would be leaders in the church, deacons, elders, and the apostles. It also of course means submission to Jesus Christ, the highest authority of them all.

It does not mean civil secular governments who have no scriptural authority over the church of Jesus Christ. The first century church did not submit to any secular government beyond paying taxes. As Jesus commanded us to render unto Ceaser the things that are Ceaser's and to God the things that are God's. Paul himself was tortured by the Roman government for disobeying them. Paul wrote this letter to Christians in Rome and they knew he was tortured and imprisoned by the Roman government for disobeying them. No one that he wrote this letter would have for a second believed he was talking about submitting to them!

Obviously the "higher authority" that Paul is referring to in Romans 13:1 is not the Roman government or any civil government on Earth.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 7.

#7. To: RickyJ, AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#0)

“It is hoped that but few will think the subject of [this sermon] an improper one to be discoursed on in the pulpit, under a notion that this is preaching politics, instead of Christ. However, to remove all prejudices of this sort, I beg it may be remembered that 'all Scripture is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.' Why, then, should not those parts of Scripture which relate to civil government be examined and explained from the desk, as well as others?”

from the Preface of Dr. Mayhew's published sermon

Jonathan Mayhew (1720-1766) received his D.D. from Harvard in 1747. Shortly thereafter Mayhew was ordained as a Congregationalist Minister and pastored the West Church in Boston until his death in 1766.

John Adams called Rev. Mayhew "the morning gun of the Revolution." Adams also dubbed him a "transcendent genius." Robert Treat Paine called Dr. Mayhew, "The Father of Civil and Religious Liberty in Massachusetts and America." No one today should underestimate the significant contribution that the Rev. Jonathan Mayhew made toward the cause of liberty and American independence.

Mayhew preached several sermons on Romans 13. The sermon below was considered so important that it was printed and widely distributed throughout the American Colonies. Mayhew was also famous for his election sermons (in Mayhew's day it was common for preachers to preach a sermon to the governor and the legislators immediately following an election).

The message of Mayhew's sermon challenging passive obedience and non-resistance to all rulers was radical and unmistakable -- the king must repent of his tyrannies or face the consequences of his subjects forcibly throwing off the chains of tyranny.

Mayhew's sermon was even sent to the king and the British parliament as a "remonstrance." Mayhew's habit of serving remonstrances on tyrants became a common practice with many other patriot preachers, as well. King George branded these "nonconformist" clergymen as the "Black Regiment" (mocking them for the black robes they wore). Mayhew's sermon resulted in the motto for the American Revolution: "Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God."

Mayhew has been characterized by many historians as a "liberal" and a "radical," and indeed he was. We should as Americans, who today enjoy the fruits of liberty, note that all of America's Founding Fathers were called liberals and radicals, by friend and foe alike. In their day, the conservatives were the king's toadies or "Tories." Pastors of that day who were loyal to the tyrant king were called "royalists" and "loyalists." They taught "unlimited submission and passive obedience" in all cases, irrespective of how wicked the ruler was, and how tyrannical his acts toward his subjects were.

In our own day, we see strong evidence that "loyalism" has returned to the pulpits of America's churches. Many pastors, rather than challenging the despotisms of corrupt government officials, and informing their congregations of the necessity of resisting tyranny, are preaching unlimited submission and passive obedience. It is a rare pastor in our day who has ever sent even one remonstrance to a government official, and particularly to a high-level official. Rather, all that an official need do to be exonerated of all his misdeeds, and never be held accountable by any pastor, is to claim, "Jesus came into my heart. Once Jesus comes into your heart it changes your life" (George W. Bush). (How's that for turning GWB's own words back onto the FedGov??)

Romans 13:1-8 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers."

. . . Let us now trace the apostle's reasoning in favor of submission to the higher powers, a little more particularly and exactly. For by this it will appear, on one hand, how good and conclusive it is, for submission to those rulers who exercise their power in a proper manner: And, on the other, how weak and trifling and unconnected it is, if it be supposed to be meant by the apostle to show the obligation and duty of obedience to tyrannical, oppressive rulers in common with others of a different character.

The apostle enters upon his subject thus--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. Here he urges the duty of obedience from this topic of argument, that civil rulers, as they are supposed to fulfill the pleasure of God, are the ordinance of God. But how is this an argument for obedience to such rulers as do not perform the pleasure of God, by doing good; but the pleasure of the devil, by doing evil; and such as are not, therefore, God's ministers, but the devil's! Whosoever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God; and they that resist, shall receive to themselves damnation. Here the apostle argues, that those who resist a reasonable and just authority, which is agreeable to the will of God, do really resist the will of God himself; and will, therefore, be punished by him. But how does this prove, that those who resist a lawless, unreasonable power, which is contrary to the will of God, do therein resist the will and ordinance of God? Is resisting those who resist God's will, the same thing with resisting God? Or shall those who do so, receive to themselves damnation! For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good; and thou shalt have praise of the same. For he is the minister of God to thee for good. Here the apostle argues more explicitly than he had before done, for revering, and submitting to, magistracy, from this consideration, that such as really performed the duty of magistrates, would be enemies only to the evil actions of men, and would befriend and encourage the good: and so be a common blessing to society. But how is this an argument, that we must honor, and submit to, such magistrates as are not enemies to the evil actions of men; but to the good: and such as are not a common blessing, but a common curse, to society! But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid: For he is the minister of God, a revenger, to execute wrath upon him that doth evil. Here the apostle argues from the nature and end of magistracy, that such as did evil, (and such only) had reason to be afraid of the higher powers; it being part of their office to punish evildoers, no less than to defend and encourage such as do well. But if magistrates are unrighteous; if they are respecters of persons; if they are partial in their administration of justice; then those who do well have as much reason to be afraid, as those that do evil: there can be no safety for the good, nor any peculiar ground of terror to the unruly and injurious. So that, in this case, the main end of civil government will be frustrated. And what reason is there for submitting to that government, which does by no means answer the design of government? Wherefore ye must needs be subject not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. Here the apostle argues the duty of a cheerful and conscientious submission to civil government, from the nature and end of magistracy as he had before laid it down, i.e. as the design of it was to punish evildoers, and to support and encourage such as do well; and as it must, if so exercised, be agreeable to the will of God. But how does what he here says, prove the duty of a cheerful and conscientious subjection to those who forfeit the character of rulers? to those who encourage the bad, and discourage the good? The argument here used no more proves it to be a sin to resist such rulers, than it does, to resist the devil, that he may flee from us. For one is as truly the minister of God as the other. For, for this cause pay you tribute also; for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Here the apostle argues the duty of paying taxes, from this consideration, that those who perform the duty of rulers, are continually attending upon the public welfare. But how does this argument conclude for paying taxes to such princes as are continually endeavoring to ruin the public? And especially when such payment would facilitate and promote this wicked design! Render therefore to all their dues; tribute, to whom tribute is due; custom, to whom custom; fear, to whom fear; honor, to whom honor. Here the apostle sums up what he had been saying concerning the duty of subjects to rulers. And his argument stands thus--“Since magistrates who execute their office well, are common benefactors to society; and may, in that respect, be properly stiled the ministers and ordinance of God; and since they are constantly employed in the service of the public; it becomes you to pay them tribute and custom; and to reverence, honor, and submit to, them in the execution of their respective offices.” This is apparently good reasoning. But does this argument conclude for the duty of paying tribute, custom, reverence, honor and obedience, to such persons as (although they bear the title of rulers) use all their power to hurt and injure the public? such as are not God's ministers, but satan's? such as do not take care of, and attend upon, the public interest, but their own, to the ruin of the public? that is, in short, to such as have no natural and just claim at all to tribute, custom, reverence, honor and obedience? It is to be hoped that those who have any regard to the apostle's character as an inspired writer, or even as a man of common understanding, will not represent him as reasoning in such a loose incoherent manner; and drawing conclusions which have not the least relation to his premises. For what can be more absurd than an argument thus framed? “Rulers are, by their office, bound to consult the public welfare and the good of society: therefore you are bound to pay them tribute, to honor, and to submit to them, even when they destroy the public welfare, and are a common pest to society, by acting in direct contradiction to the nature and end of their office.”

Thus, upon a careful review of the apostle's reasoning in this passage, it appears that his arguments to enforce submission, are of such a nature, as to conclude only in favor of submission to such rulers as he himself describes; i.e., such as rule for the good of society, which is the only end of their institution. Common tyrants, and public oppressors, are not intitled to obedience from their subjects, by virtue of any thing here laid down by the inspired apostle.

X-15  posted on  2011-05-20   13:09:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

        There are no replies to Comment # 7.

End Trace Mode for Comment # 7.

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]