Were the Americans of the Revolution Breaking God's Command?

[jarrettcpr]

I'm specifically taking about, Americans of the Revolution, wanting to be detached from British rule and the monarchy. I'm NOT talking about the war itself, which we can debate in another thread is there such thing as a just war.

I am asking because I've seen on one site someone arguing that if the American fathers were, in fact, Christian that they sure didn't follow their Bible.

They quote, "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God." Romans 13:1

What do you guys think?

 

[shinbits]

Seems like you're right.

 

[ebia]

Yup. America must repent immediately by handing everything back to Queen Elizabeth II.

 

[david_x]

A nation can't be Christian, so it was never a matter of Christianity to get in the way.

 

[OllieFranz]

Yup. America must repent immediately by handing everything back to Queen Elizabeth II.

Well, if you are going to take that tack, then the barons that forced King John to sign the Magna Carta, and the Roundheads who spearheaded the English Civil War were also in rebellion and Tony Blair should hand the government of the UK back to the Crown. Also, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, India, Egypt, South Africa, and most of the Middle East, including Israel, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and Pakistan should go to the Crown.

But then, under those same rules, the Crown should not be held by the House of Windsor at all, but by the House of Wittlesbach, headed by Franz, Duke of Bavaria*, who is the legitimate heir of James, the Old Pretender and his son, Bonnie Prince Charlie.

*He is also the legitimate heir of Ludwig III, the last King of Bavaria, so most of southern Germany should also be given to him.

 

[jarrettcpr]

So, do you guys think they were breaking God's command?

"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." (Romans 13:1-2)

If so, the question we must ask is why does God set up such horrible authorities who abuse their citizens and even people not of their country?

 

[Epiphoskei]

To argue that the revelutionaries were wrong one would have to take a very strong stance that authorities are authorities simply because they posess power, and there can never be illegitmate powers which don't constitute Biblical authorities. One would have to aruge that singular autocrat opposed by every human he rules must be considered the legitimate ruler, by virtue of posessing power alone. (Obviously he wouldn't be an autocrat for long with zero support, but he'd have to be considered legitimate.) This leads to the question, what happens if there are two authorites vying for power? Who is the authority? What if both have power? What if one has power over you directly, though the other one has power over way more people?

Which leads to the question. A woman gets kidnapped by a man with a gun. According to big authority, that's illegal. But even though he's the littler authority, now he has all the power over her. If power makes authority, he's the authority now. Does the Bible mean to say don't resist him?

Romans only says submit to authorities. It doesn't say what makes someone an authority. And we shouldn't expect it to. Romans was written in the Pax Romana. There was no confusion about who the authority was for the next 150 years (except I suppose for a few months in A.D. 68), so Paul didn't adress what was a non-issue for the Romans. Legitimacy of authority isn't something the Bible ever adresses.

The revolutionaries were convinced that British rule was illegitimate. Were they wrong? There are no Biblical texts I can think of to answer that question. But if they were not wrong, they were not in violation of Romans 13, because Britain would not have been an actual authority.

 

[jarrettcpr]

To argue that the revelutionaries were wrong one would have to take a very strong stance that authorities are authorities simply because they posess power, and there can never be illegitmate powers which don't constitute Biblical authorities. One would have to aruge that singular autocrat opposed by every human he rules must be considered the legitimate ruler, by virtue of posessing power alone. (Obviously he wouldn't be an autocrat for long with zero support, but he'd have to be considered legitimate.) This leads to the question, what happens if there are two authorites vying for power? Who is the authority? What if both have power? What if one has power over you directly, though the other one has power over way more people?

Which leads to the question. A woman gets kidnapped by a man with a gun. According to big authority, that's illegal. But even though he's the littler authority, now he has all the power over her. If power makes authority, he's the authority now. Does the Bible mean to say don't resist him?

Romans only says submit to authorities. It doesn't say what makes someone an authority. And we shouldn't expect it to. Romans was written in the Pax Romana. There was no confusion about who the authority was for the next 150 years (except I suppose for a few months in A.D. 68), so Paul didn't adress what was a non-issue for the Romans. Legitimacy of authority isn't something the Bible ever adresses.

The revolutionaries were convinced that British rule was illegitimate. Were they wrong? There are no Biblical texts I can think of to answer that question. But if they were not wrong, they were not in violation of Romans 13, because Britain would not have been an actual authority.

Thanks for the response. I was quite curious when I saw that one website was trying to say many of the founding fathers were not Christians and if they were than, as this site says, were not Bible following Christians and they cited Romans 13.

I know some of the founding father were deists. I know many people like the play down the truth that many of the founding fathers were, in fact, out-spoken Christians.

I am now curious as what exactly, in the Biblical sense, does authority mean and what constitutes authority?

For example Rosa Parks, was the fact that she was not submitting to the US laws by sitting at the front of the bus... make her break God's command. I would surely hope not, but at the same time she did go against Romans 13.

I'm curious about this.

Thanks for giving me back some feedback.

 

[david_x]

They were being put in place by God.

 

[Dragons87]

YES! And to set things right, here you are, my American brothers:

To the citizens of the United States of America, in the light of your failure to competently govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately.

Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths and other territories.

Except Utah, which she does not fancy.

Your new Prime Minister (The Right Honourable Gordon Brown MP, for the 97.85% of you who have until now been unaware that there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a Minister for America without the need for further elections.

The House of Representatives and the Senate will be disbanded.

A questionnaire will be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed. To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary. Then look up "aluminium." Check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it.

The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'favour' and 'neighbour'; skipping the letter 'U' is nothing more than laziness on your part. Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters.

You will end your love affair with the letter 'Z' (pronounced 'zed' not 'zee') and the suffix "ize" will be replaced by the suffix "ise."

You will learn that the suffix 'burgh' is pronounced 'burra' e.g. Edinburgh. You are welcome to re-spell Pittsburgh as 'Pittsberg' if you can't cope with correct pronunciation.

Generally, you should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up “vocabulary." Using the same thirty seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "uhh", "like", and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication.

Look up "interspersed."

There will be no more 'bleeps' in the Jerry Springer show. If you're not old enough to cope with bad language then you shouldn't have chat shows. When you learn to develop your vocabulary, then you won't have to use bad language as often.

2. There is no such thing as "US English." We will let Microsoft know on your behalf. The Microsoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take account of the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of "-ize."

3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents. It really isn't that hard. English accents are not limited to cockney, upper-class twit or Mancunian (Daphne in Frasier).

You will also have to learn how to understand regional accents --- Scottish dramas such as "Taggart" will no longer be broadcast with subtitles.

While we're talking about regions, you must learn that there is no such place as Devonshire in England. The name of the county is "Devon." If you persist in calling it Devonshire, all American States will become "shires" e.g. Texasshire, Floridashire, Louisianashire.

4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the good guys. Hollywood will be required to cast English actors to play English characters.

British sit-coms such as "Men Behaving Badly" or "Red Dwarf" will not be re-cast and watered down for a wishy-washy American audience who can't cope with the humour of occasional political incorrectness. Popular British films such as the Italian Job and the Wicker Man should never be remade.

5. You should relearn your original national anthem, "God Save The Queen", but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you to get confused and give up half way through.

6. You should stop playing American "football." There are other types of football such as Rugby, Aussie Rules & Gaelic football. However proper football - which will no longer be known as soccer, is the best known, most loved and most popular. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good game.

The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football.

Initially, it would be best if you played with the girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football", but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like nancies).

We are hoping to get together at least a US Rugby sevens side by 2010.

You should stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the 'World Series' for a game which is not played outside of North America. Since only 2.15% of you are aware that there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable. Instead of baseball, you will be allowed to play a girls' game called "rounders," which is baseball without fancy team strip, oversized gloves, collector cards or hotdogs.

7. You will no longer be allowed to own or carry guns. You will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous in public than a vegetable peeler. Because we don't believe you are sensible enough to handle potentially dangerous items, you will require a permit if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.

8. The 4th of July is no longer a public holiday. The 2nd of November will be a new national holiday, but only in Britain. It will be called "Indecisive Day."

9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap, and it is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

All road intersections will be replaced with roundabouts. You will start driving on the left with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables. Roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.

10. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call 'French fries' are not real chips. Fries aren't even French, they are Belgian though 97.85% of you (including the guy who discovered fries while in Europe) are not aware of a country called Belgium. Those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called "crisps." Real chips are thick cut and fried in animal fat. The traditional accompaniment to chips is beer which should be served warm and flat.

Waitresses will be trained to be more aggressive with customers.

11. As a sign of penance 5 grams of sea salt per cup will be added to all tea made within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, this quantity to be doubled for tea made within the city of Boston itself.

12. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling "beer" is not actually beer at all, it is lager . From November 1st only proper British Bitter will be referred to as "beer," and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as "Lager." The substances formerly known as "American Beer" will henceforth be referred to as "Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine," with the exception of the product of the American Budweiser company whose product will be referred to as "Weak Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine." This will allow true Budweiser (as manufactured for the last 1000 years in the Czech Republic) to be sold without risk of confusion.

13. From the 10th of November the UK will harmonise petrol (or "gasoline," as you will be permitted to keep calling it until the 1st of April) prices with the former USA. The UK will harmonise its prices to those of the former USA and the Former USA will, in return, adopt UK petrol prices (roughly $10/US gallon -- get used to it).

14. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not adult enough to be independent. Guns should only be handled by adults. If you're not adult enough to sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist, then you're not grown up enough to handle a gun.

15. Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy.

16. Tax collectors from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all revenues due (backdated to 1776).

Thank you for your co-operation.
​

On a more serious note, we know that ultimately, all authority on earth comes from God:

"The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." -- Romans 13:1-2

But on the other hand, it seems that there are intermediate authorities too:

"'Do you refuse to speak to me?' Pilate said. 'Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?' Jesus answered, 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'" -- John 19:10-11

I think we can be very certain that the one who handed Jesus over to Pilate, who is guilty of a greater sin, whoever it is, is not God.

Moreover, God-ordained political authority can shift: God can retrieve His authority and pass it on to another:

"'You acted foolishly,' Samuel said. 'You have not kept the command the Lord your God gave you; if you had, he would have established your kingdom over Israel for all time. But now your kingdom will not endure; the LORD has sought out a man after his own heart and appointed him leader of his people, because you have not kept the LORD's command." -- 1 Samuel 13:13-14

In this particular case, Samuel was condemning King Saul, for Saul had overstepped his political authority by offering sacrifices as a priest. And we know that God abhors cruelty and injustice to the people, in which case He would even allow foreign invaders to wipe off the targeted political authority (e.g. Assyria and Babylon vs. Israel and Judea and Persia vs. Babylon).

Going back to Romans 13, Paul doesn't end at verse 2. He continues:

"For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." -- Romans 13:3-4

That's if rulers did the right thing. If rulers began to do what is wrong in God, God will pass the ruling authority to someone else, perhaps through election, insurrection, coup d'etats or foreign invasion. But the new ruling authority must be careful to set things right, and not abuse power themselves, because God can then pass on the ruling authority to someone else.

But then, going back to the OP, you have to decide whether the circumstances leading to the American Revolution can be seen as the British government overstepping its political authority as mandated by God. Who knows? Hard to say.

 

[jarrettcpr]

YES! And to set things right, here you are, my American brothers:





On a more serious note, we know that ultimately, all authority on earth comes from God:

"The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." -- Romans 13:1-2

But on the other hand, it seems that there are intermediate authorities too:

"'Do you refuse to speak to me?' Pilate said. 'Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?' Jesus answered, 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'" -- John 19:10-11

I think we can be very certain that the one who handed Jesus over to Pilate, who is guilty of a greater sin, whoever it is, is not God.

Moreover, God-ordained political authority can shift: God can retrieve His authority and pass it on to another:

"'You acted foolishly,' Samuel said. 'You have not kept the command the Lord your God gave you; if you had, he would have established your kingdom over Israel for all time. But now your kingdom will not endure; the LORD has sought out a man after his own heart and appointed him leader of his people, because you have not kept the LORD's command." -- 1 Samuel 13:13-14

In this particular case, Samuel was condemning King Saul, for Saul had overstepped his political authority by offering sacrifices as a priest. And we know that God abhors cruelty and injustice to the people, in which case He would even allow foreign invaders to wipe off the targeted political authority (e.g. Assyria and Babylon vs. Israel and Judea and Persia vs. Babylon).

Going back to Romans 13, Paul doesn't end at verse 2. He continues:

"For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." -- Romans 13:3-4

That's if rulers did the right thing. If rulers began to do what is wrong in God, God will pass the ruling authority to someone else, perhaps through election, insurrection, coup d'etats or foreign invasion. But the new ruling authority must be careful to set things right, and not abuse power themselves, because God can then pass on the ruling authority to someone else.

But then, going back to the OP, you have to decide whether the circumstances leading to the American Revolution can be seen as the British government overstepping its political authority as mandated by God. Who knows? Hard to say.

lol

Oh yeah, I know Europeans make fun of Americans b/c of our beer. More specifically Bud Light. Which is a popular beer over here. Mainly b/c it's cheap. Europeans say it's not beer b/c it's made out of rice and not grain. I don't know if the Brits feel that same way. Germans, especially, are strict about what they call beer.

Alright, back to the topic at hand.

Thanks for providing Scripture with a good break-down to how it applies to what I'm asking. So, really it comes down to if the ruling authorities are doing God's word, if not then it would not be sinful or breaking God's command to not submit to the ruling authority.

That's good then. I don't know if you know who Rosa Parks is, but she helped play an important role over here (US) with the civil rights movement. She was a black women who sat at the front of the bus (which back then only whites could sit). I would hope that she was not sinning for her act of bravely, by not submitting to the rules of that day.

I could give several other cases similar to that story.

Once again thanks for the feedback.

 

[Dragons87]

Thanks for providing Scripture with a good break-down to how it applies to what I'm asking. So, really it comes down to if the ruling authorities are doing God's word, if not then it would not be sinful or breaking God's command to not submit to the ruling authority.

That's good then. I don't know if you know who Rosa Parks is, but she helped play an important role over here (US) with the civil rights movement. She was a black women who sat at the front of the bus (which back then only whites could sit). I would hope that she was not sinning for her act of bravely, by not submitting to the rules of that day.

I could give several other cases similar to that story.

Once again thanks for the feedback.

No worries. Am greatly interested in politics myself, so it was an interesting question to think about.

I know who Rosa Park is. I think more foreigners know about America than Americans know about the world. Haha. But that could be bias.

Think Rahab in Joshua, who essentially betrayed her country for the Israelites. Would you say she did the right thing, betraying her country? Hmm...so difficult to say.

All states punish their traitors; but sometimes people loyal to God have to betray their state. One shouldn't let the state determine their ultimate allegiance.

 

[Archivist]

Perhaps Thomas Jefferson phrased it best:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government."

To give credit where credit is due, Jefferson and many of the leaders of the American Revolution were strongly influenced by John Locke and his theory of the Social Contract as set forth in his Two Treatises of Government, written in part to justify the Revolution of 1688 and William III's ascension to the throne.