Problem with Romans 13

I have a real problem with Romans 13. I must admit  that it is probably my

least favorite passage in the Bible. It has been used to coerce many into supporting mass killing (the government made me do it).

Did Jesus submit to the government of his day? Yes and no.

    If I remember correctly he blasted the Pharisees and Sadduccees. He also

said my kingdom is no part of this world. Jesus made it known that he was

in total disagreement to the "ways of the world". Yet.... he did submit to Pontius Pilate by

letting himself be crucified. He took no part in war. Would he go to war if

the government told him to? I don't think so.

     Jesus set the example. He hated the world as it existed. He vocally pointed out the evil of it all. Yet ... he did submit.

Could  we do the same?      

by Bob Gormley (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 915 comments) on Sunday, August 19, 2007 at 5:18:15 PM
 

Gromley

If you read Romans 13 carefully, you will notice the first seven verses teach about the role of the government in society. It is instituted as a terror for "wrong doers." Christian are to be law abiding folks "as far as it is possible." The government bares the sword, and God holds governments responsible to some degree as to whether or not they bear it "justly." There is inidication that God judges nations: when Assyria was so evil that God decided to destroy them if they did not change. He sent Jonah to tell them their peril. Jonah told them and they changed for a while. When Israel (the northern Ten Tribes) became more evil than their neighbors, God used this same Assyria (Nineveh) to destroy them. When Judah (the south Two Tribes) became more evil than their evil neighbors, God used Babylon to destroy them by destroying Jerusalem in 586 BCE (BC).

After Romans 13:7, we are given the responsibility of the church (every believer in Christ). The Church (the Christian) is never to bear the sword in any way at any time. The role of the government is to protect the citizens from their enemies; the role of the church is to love their enemies and do good to those who despitefully use them according to Christ own words (Matthew 5-6-7, the Sermon on the Mount).

Romans 13:1-7, the role of government.

vs. 3. "Rulers are not a terror to those who do good works, but to the criminal workers."

4. "He (the ruler) bears not the sword in vain... he is minister of God to execute wrath on those that do evil."

6. "For this cause pay your taxes..."

7. "Therefore give them all that is their respect and obedience."

Romans 13:8-10, the role of the Church (Christians),

8. "Pay your debts, and love one another. He who loves fulfills all the Law."

9. Lists at random the Ten Commandments in order to show that all of them are to be obeyed.

10. Reiterates that love fulfills all the Commandments culmimating with these words, "Love works no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the Law (Mosaic Law not secular law)."

These verses describe the different roles of the Church and Government so distinctly that many Christians believe that a Christian cannot work in any government position. The Government is a terror to enemies and the Church is to love their enemies. You cannot do both at the same time.

Many church historians and theologians have done gymnastics to allow the Christian to fight with the sword and yet obey the New Testament of the Bible. When the Emperor of Rome (Constantine) converted to Christianity, he had all the Roman armies baptized in full immersion. When the clergy baptized the soldiers, Emperor Constantine ordered that their right arm with their sword be held up out of the water, indicating that the whole body and soul belonged to God, but the right hand and the sword belong to Rome. One of every ten Romans soldiers were converted to Christ and executed by Rome because they refused to use that sword.

In 313 C.E (A.D), Constantine declared the whole Roman Empire to be the Holy Roman Empire in the Edict of Milan thus making all citizens of Rome to be Christian by fiat. All the non-Christians did was change the name of their idols to angels and saints (Peter for Jupiter, Paul for Mercury, Mary for... etc). By 550 CE (AD), the Roman church became so power through the power of the State that it dominated the west until the Reformation with Martin Luther in 1517 CE (A.D.).

Most historians said that all the Edict of Milan did was to make it tolerable for all religions in Rome to exist. Do not believe it for a minute. Constantine destroyed all religions in the Roman Empire and made Christianity the religion of the state in every way. By the Reformation (1517), a child was not conferred citizenship in any western country without first being baptized, hence infant or pedio-baptism. A non-citizen could not inherit property and was not protected under the laws of the land for anything.

When the state dominates religion it destroys both the religion and the state; when the religion dominates the state, it destroys both the religion and the state. Wherever separation of religion and state have gone, there has been the highest example of freedom: The west never prospered until it threw off Roman Catholicism; India never prospered until it threw off Hinduism; China never prospered until it threw off Buddhism; and the Near East will prosper when it throws off Islam; and the United States will cease to prosper if we allow the religious right wing to break down the wall of separation in our country that has existed since 1776.

Phil.

by pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 948 comments) on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 8:10:56 PM
 

By the Way

By the way, I get your point about "we the people" being the government.

Sometimes we forget don't we?

by Bob Gormley (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 915 comments) on Sunday, August 19, 2007 at 5:21:17 PM
 

WE the PEOPLE are the government

Crucial point.  If we understand that, no one can enslave us.

PEace, Carol

by Carol Wolman (216 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Sunday, August 19, 2007 at 6:06:35 PM
 

Wow! I never thought of it that way!

This is a first for me!

by Mikael Rudolph (50 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 78 comments) on Sunday, August 19, 2007 at 9:51:18 PM
 

The Bible has been spat upon once again.

Politicizing the gospel of Jesus Christ is a vile, disgusting act. I don't care if it comes from the right or the left. "This quote from the Bible PROVES we must impeach Bush, or Clinton, or we must vote for this candidate or that candidate, blah blah blah..." This is like a Muslim flushing the Koran down the toilet.

When Jesus told Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world," is it not possible that he was rejecting the notion of being a political messiah? Some of his disciples - most notably the Zealots - were expecting that. But Jesus blew that concept out of the water. I will reject any attempt to politicize His Gospel.

by Scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 419 comments) on Sunday, August 19, 2007 at 10:56:06 PM
 

Impeachment is not a political process

impeachment, used as it's meant to be, is not a politically partisan weapon.  It's a judicial proceeding, a bringing of charges against an official as a step toward removing him from office.  Jesus believed in justice.  Romans 13 says that whoever doesn't submit to the governing authorities- in the US, that's We the People- will bring judgment upon themselves.  That's what impeachment is- judgment. 

Peace, Carol Wolman

by Carol Wolman (216 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 99 comments) on Monday, August 20, 2007 at 12:30:32 AM
 

Nice try.

That dog won't hunt. The impeachment process is not handled by the judiciary. It is handled by representatives - and then senators, if it ever gets that far. It is a poltical process.

by Scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 419 comments) on Monday, August 20, 2007 at 12:11:01 PM
 

Good point, Carol

Thank, Carol.  Interesting interpretation.  Logical.

I'm wondering how opposed your critic is to Bush & Co. using the Bible to garner support for its murderous deeds, deeds based on lies, and motivated by greed for earthly wealth and power.  I'm wondering if your critic winces when he hears these evil doers conclude their speeches with, "God bless America".    ...talk about politicizing the gospel!

by John (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 29 comments) on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 12:15:27 AM
 

No, that's not politicizing the gospel

Because an elected official says "God bless America", that's politicizing the gospel? Nope. Anybody can say, "God bless America".

by Scott (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 419 comments) on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 at 9:13:18 PM