Same topic different forum

This bombed in GA. Here's hoping it was because of the forum and not the topic.




From a biblical point of view:


How would one justify the rebellion of american colonists against the king? Especially the part about taxes being due.

Free will explains all this, but if this was a mistake (biblically speaking), then people are still living the mistake today.

Why not go back under british rule? Because it has been to much time? New systems have already been long established? Just like handing back long colonised land back to the original inhabitants would also be too troublesome.

Does this comment on the sacredness, and the relevence of the bible?




Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience' sake. 6For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God's ministers attending continually to this very thing. 7Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor

Ah well yes, but "we ought to obey God rather than men", and "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's", when "caesar" asks for what belongs to God, you tell him to go to hell.

In this world it's always one self-interest battling against another self-interest, if "Caesar" is around he decides according to his pleasure, like your father after the flesh, Heb 12...

But Christ is "in the midst" seeking an equitable settlement for BOTH sides, "look not every man on his own things, but also on the things of others" Phil 4:2, in the next verse we learn this is the "mind of Christ".

In the case of the American colonies, they did try earnestly to find the "middle ground", it was England that was all "caesar-like".

Well if Caesar can't retain his power, he isn't "caesar" any more, the new "king" is...in our case, it was the Articles...and then the Constitution...and now the tv pundits.

Yikes! If they had lost, they would have been traitors. But because they won in the end, it was a noble cause for independence against a tyranical king.

"Well if Caesar can't retain his power, he isn't "caesar" any more"

So basically, might, is right.

royboy said:

Yikes! If they had lost, they would have been traitors. But because they won in the end, it was a noble cause for independence against a tyranical king.

"Well if Caesar can't retain his power, he isn't "caesar" any more"

So basically, might, is right.

Click to expand...

Yes, as far as "the kingdom of this world" goes.

Caesar's domain. And we have to be considerate of Caesar while we are here.

But in the Real World, Grace and Truth reign supreme.

Grace and truth do not reign supreme. It was correct to absolve British rule, in fact it was a necessity. Actually this event goes against the bible, yet possibly re-affirms the teachings of Christ.

foolsparade said:

Grace and truth do not reign supreme. It was correct to absolve British rule, in fact it was a necessity. Actually this event goes against the bible, yet possibly re-affirms the teachings of Christ.

Click to expand...

yet possibly re-affirms the teachings of Christ.


How so?

I think it is important to take in the social context in which romans was written. During the this time many churches were also the government, there was no seperation, therefore, because the church was from God, so was the government.

I think this is a verse that many people use loosley nowadays, they say obey the law, as long as they have no intentions of breaking it, but then break it when they feel it suits them.

Example: Missionaries preaching in middle eastern countries where it is illegal according to their government. Secret Churches in china that go against government rulings, if these governments are established by God, then how can they be at odds with God?