Was the American Revolution a sin?

[Quid est Veritas?]

Some background:

The American Revolution occurred because Britain had had a policy of 'salutary neglect' or tacit allowance of smuggling in its North American colonies. After the Seven Years War, Britain paid four times the amount it received in revenue to defend these colonies and decided to clamp down on smuggling and collect its legal duties. Various acts such as the Stamp Act followed that the colonists highly resented as they were not used to paying these taxes.

The Colonists declared no Taxation without Representation as they considered it their inalienable right as Englishmen. This was of course based on mediaeval charters and long running practice in Britain.

Some scuffles in Boston (most memorably the Tea Party and Boston Massacre) led to Britain repealing the Massachusetts charter and installing a new Government there. This then snowballed into separate colonial congresses being called and ultimately American Independance.

Now:
George III was the anointed king of the American colonists. They had all sworn fealty to him.
All colonial charters were given by the Crown and could be repealed by the Crown as well.

When asked whether to pay taxes to Rome, Jesus said: "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's".

A refusal to pay taxes and to accept a legal change to their colonial charter on account of this, led to an act of Rebellion against their Sovereign. This directly contradicts the words of Jesus.

So I ask you, was the United States born in an act of Sin?
Can the American Revolution be justified theologically at all?

 

[Armoured]

Was the American Revolution a sin?

And a treason.

 

[Resha Caner]

Can the American Revolution be justified theologically at all?

Theologically? No, I don't see how that could be done.

So I ask you, was the United States born in an act of Sin?

It's hard to roll the entire American Revolution into a singular thing that one can declare good or bad. I've no doubts patriots committed sins during its course. There was also sin within the British government. It wouldn't be unreasonable to argue the patriots didn't submit to government authority as it is expressed in Scripture.

But, why do you ask? If this is in the vein of "The U.S. is a Christian Nation" discussions, I gave up on that idea a long time ago.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Theologically? No, I don't see how that could be done.



It's hard to roll the entire American Revolution into a singular thing that one can declare good or bad. I've no doubts patriots committed sins during its course. There was also sin within the British government. It wouldn't be unreasonable to argue the patriots didn't submit to government authority as it is expressed in Scripture.

But, why do you ask? If this is in the vein of "The U.S. is a Christian Nation" discussions, I gave up on that idea a long time ago.

It was suggested to me by one of those 'US is a Christian nation' threads as it seemed incongruous to say it was founded on Christian principles when it was born out of an unchristian act of not paying taxes. I am not an American, so I have no skin in the game as they say, but I was wondering if someone had not come up with some ingenious excuse or defence thereof.
I mean, Jesus said to turn the other cheek but I have seen, read and agree with, many good theologic defenses of Just war and against Pacifism.
It occurred to me that maybe some American had patriotically set out to show how it had been moral and Christian to revolt against the Crown and I should probably hear them out.

 

[4x4toy]

Was Moses to Egypt ?

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Was Moses to Egypt ?

Did God tell the Continental Congress to revolt against British rule?

 

[Norbert L]

Did God tell the Continental Congress to revolt against British rule?

Certainly George Washington wasn't led by a pillar of cloud by day and one of fire by night! I think the example of the Exodus, the most that can be extrapolated from it is, people have a right from being unfairly dominated by those in power.

The op question may just be something that is more determined by a person's own worldview rather than any judgment Jesus has expressed within the holy scriptures.

 

[RDKirk]

The exodus from Egypt might not be a parallel, but the actual tax revolt of the northern tribes under the rebel Jeroboam against King Rehoboam probably is. That tax revolt did not end well.

The ultimate issue here is that God explicitly said that "the king will tax you" and nowhere ever did God ever say that the king had no authority to do so, even heavily, even if you did not agree to be taxed, even if the tax was unjust.

Matthew 17 provides an example of Jesus paying an unjust tax:

After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?”

“Yes, he does,” he replied.

When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?”

“From others,” Peter answered.

“Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”

There is no scriptural relief from paying whatever tax the king levies.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Certainly George Washington wasn't led by a pillar of cloud by day and one of fire by night! I think the example of the Exodus, the most that can be extrapolated from it is, people have a right from being unfairly dominated by those in power.
.

The problem I see with the statement that 'people have a right from unfair domination' is that slavery was not outlawed in the Old Testament. Is this not unfair domination?
Also Pharoah was told to 'let my people go', ie he had legal right to do so or not and essentially God was telling him which to choose. It wasn't just God telling the people to take it in their own hands to overthrow their domination.

Likewise, Jesus recognised the authority of Rome, both by rendering unto Caesar and during His trial before Pilate. Now Rome, while being generally evenhanded in her rule, could also be quite unfair. Its dominion of Judaea was born from Jewish disputes which it was 'unfair' of them to intervene in and Pilate himself was quite a tyrannical ruler if you know your Josephus. So essentially Jesus accepted their unfair dominion over them.

As to Colonial America, the British government was essentially subsidising their defence. They were making a loss. To expect people to carry their own weight is not particularly wrong, I would think.
The fact is that the Colonists did have representation in their own colonial assemblies, but they were demanding Parliamentary representation, either in Westminster or an independent American one co-equal to it.
While debatable, I don't think we can unequivocally say that Britain unfairly ruled her colonies. There were good and bad aspects, which is why the colonials dithered before declaring independence. While tyranny is bandied about, I don't think this is justified regarding British rule.

 

[Resha Caner]

Also Pharoah was told to 'let my people go', ie he had legal right to do so or not and essentially God was telling him which to choose. It wasn't just God telling the people to take it in their own hands to overthrow their domination.

A very insightful point.

So essentially Jesus accepted their unfair dominion over them.

Yes, because freedom was not the goal - a point many seem to miss. Likewise, Joseph accepted "unfair" conditions (e.g. slavery) because freedom was not the goal. That is what Christians need to keep in mind.

As to Colonial America, the British government was essentially subsidising their defence. They were making a loss. To expect people to carry their own weight is not particularly wrong, I would think.
The fact is that the Colonists did have representation in their own colonial assemblies, but they were demanding Parliamentary representation, either in Westminster or an independent American one co-equal to it.
While debatable, I don't think we can unequivocally say that Britain unfairly ruled her colonies. There were good and bad aspects, which is why the colonials dithered before declaring independence. While tyranny is bandied about, I don't think this is justified regarding British rule.

I think that's a fair assessment. Few of the American patriots started off thinking about independence. Maybe Sam Adams, but very few. There is a sense in which the British government began to stiffen against the demands, and that helped drive them toward independence. That is an argument often used for the Reformation - that Luther was not seeking a new church, but the reaction of the papal hierarchy drove Lutherans to it because they were eventually excommunicated. Once the legal authorities brand you a rebel, well, a rebel you are.

The problem I see with the statement that 'people have a right from unfair domination' is that slavery was not outlawed in the Old Testament. Is this not unfair domination?

Slavery has become such a loaded word it's hard to discuss the Biblical instances. There are justifiable reasons for legally restricting people, and people will always chafe against those restrictions. If freedom is not the goal, then what does one see in Biblical instances of restricted freedom?

 

[4x4toy]

The problem I see with the statement that 'people have a right from unfair domination' is that slavery was not outlawed in the Old Testament. Is this not unfair domination?
Also Pharoah was told to 'let my people go', ie he had legal right to do so or not and essentially God was telling him which to choose. It wasn't just God telling the people to take it in their own hands to overthrow their domination.

Likewise, Jesus recognised the authority of Rome, both by rendering unto Caesar and during His trial before Pilate. Now Rome, while being generally evenhanded in her rule, could also be quite unfair. Its dominion of Judaea was born from Jewish disputes which it was 'unfair' of them to intervene in and Pilate himself was quite a tyrannical ruler if you know your Josephus. So essentially Jesus accepted their unfair dominion over them.

As to Colonial America, the British government was essentially subsidising their defence. They were making a loss. To expect people to carry their own weight is not particularly wrong, I would think.
The fact is that the Colonists did have representation in their own colonial assemblies, but they were demanding Parliamentary representation, either in Westminster or an independent American one co-equal to it.
While debatable, I don't think we can unequivocally say that Britain unfairly ruled her colonies. There were good and bad aspects, which is why the colonials dithered before declaring independence. While tyranny is bandied about, I don't think this is justified regarding British rule.

The Boston massacre , the quartering act , King George lll head of the Church , taxation without representation , were we represented in Parlement ?

George Washington may not have been led by cloud or fire but in my opinion he experienced many miraculous events that led to improbable victory against England .. He even Chaplained his own Army at times ... I was taught in school that he wasn't even a Christian , after researching myself I conclude he was the greatest Christian and leader of all time in America .. I also think he downplayed his denomination so that he would not influence or risk his popularity being a factor in people not choosing their own religion ..

We all have opinions and mine is that America was born to be the superpower on Earth to support Israel's return to the Land of Judea in 1948 ... Like a big strong fullback we've drug tacklers 3 yards at a time going for it in spite of opposition both internal and external .. I would love to be a pulling guard with Jesus at fullback , talk about 3 yards and a cloud of dust !!!

 

[Resha Caner]

We all have opinions and mine is that America was born to be the superpower on Earth to support Israel's return to the Land of Judea in 1948 ...

Hmm. I don't recall George Washington listing the restoration of Israel among his goals ... or any of the FF for that matter.

But, just curious, what is God's reason for restoring a political institution in Palestine?

 

[RDKirk]

We all have opinions and mine is that America was born to be the superpower on Earth to support Israel's return to the Land of Judea in 1948

Well, that job is done, so then God has not had a reason for the US to exist for over half a century.

 

[4x4toy]

Well, that job is done, so then God has not had a reason for the US to exist for over half a century.

No argument here .. Except to stand by them until we don't anymore

 

[4x4toy]

Hmm. I don't recall George Washington listing the restoration of Israel among his goals ... or any of the FF for that matter.

But, just curious, what is God's reason for restoring a political institution in Palestine?

God scattered them , God gathered them .. You can get plenty of information about it in the Bible Prophecy ..

 

[Resha Caner]

God scattered them , God gathered them .. You can get plenty of information about it in the Bible Prophecy ..

If it were readily apparent, I wouldn't have asked the question.

 

[4x4toy]

If it were readily apparent, I wouldn't have asked the question.

No problem

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

It was suggested to me by one of those 'US is a Christian nation' threads as it seemed incongruous to say it was founded on Christian principles when it was born out of an unchristian act of not paying taxes. I am not an American, so I have no skin in the game as they say, but I was wondering if someone had not come up with some ingenious excuse or defence thereof.
I mean, Jesus said to turn the other cheek but I have seen, read and agree with, many good theologic defenses of Just war and against Pacifism.
It occurred to me that maybe some American had patriotically set out to show how it had been moral and Christian to revolt against the Crown and I should probably hear them out.

Doesn't matter really, does it ? Effectively the revolution was a deception. Big business in the colonies, with headquarters in Britain, never left Britain - they continued as always to pay taxes to the queen, mostly hidden from the common people.....

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Was Moses to Egypt ?

Who else ever >>
Exodus 33:11 Parallel Verses ... New International Version The LORD would speak to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend.

 

[Resha Caner]

No problem

Oy vey.