tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post7227818437557930782..comments2024-03-28T09:59:13.754-07:00Comments on bionic mosquito: Christians and Governmentbionic mosquitohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-44192985928627109872023-07-24T06:20:56.453-07:002023-07-24T06:20:56.453-07:00Bob Murphy just had an extended show on this -- ex...Bob Murphy just had an extended show on this -- examining not only Gerard Casey's arguments but (1) the physical manuscript tradition, which did not even have a division between Romans 12 & 13 and (2) and exploration into the Greek and how Jerome translated it for the vulgate -- again showing that this was dealing with spiritual authorities, not political authorities. <br /><br />Here's Bob's direct show link: https://www.bobmurphyshow.com/episodes/ep-277-lawrence-ludlow-on-romans-13-being-spiritual-not-political/<br /><br />Here's the Youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkmdY86q1lA<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-21308679475307739622023-07-24T05:51:53.483-07:002023-07-24T05:51:53.483-07:00Economist Bob Murphy just had an extended podcast ...Economist Bob Murphy just had an extended podcast on this topic, showing that both the manuscript tradition and Greek text itself show no break between Romans 12 and 13. Until the 13th century, there were no chapter numbers, period. The chapter division has become a tool of apologists for the state, and recent English translations go along with this much more than earlier ones. <br /><br />Here's Bob's direct show link: https://www.bobmurphyshow.com/episodes/ep-277-lawrence-ludlow-on-romans-13-being-spiritual-not-political/<br /><br />Here's the Youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkmdY86q1lA Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-84991068465615990882022-12-22T15:28:25.276-08:002022-12-22T15:28:25.276-08:00In the widermess, Satan tempted Jesus by offering ...In the widermess, Satan tempted Jesus by offering him all the kingdoms of the world. Jesus did not dispute Satans right to devolve those rights onto Jesus. He denied that offer, but not because he did not accept that offer was not real. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-68343427500101875392019-05-18T18:09:43.319-07:002019-05-18T18:09:43.319-07:00~~ I've sat under and have outlived a few pas...~~ I've sat under and have outlived a few pastors, preachers, dozens of evangelists, missionaries, and message bringers from the "laity". I have heard the Apostle Paul quoted over and over. Yet not once have I ever heard anybody expound or even mention his stance against civil and religious leaders as provided us in Acts16:16-40, esp.ly vss 35-40, when the magistrates tried to sneak them out of prison and out of town, but Paul would have none of it, saying these Swamp Critters beat us Roman Citizens in public, and threw us in prison.\, and now they wanna sneak us out the back door? -- no way, let them come and finish what they illegally began.<br />AND when the magistrates heard they feared [Gr 'phobeo'-- we talk a lot about homo', islamo', and a buncha other 'phobia's, but not of the Malfunction Junction (aka: WashDC) bottom feeders fearing us Sovereign Citizens]<br />"...And they came and besought them, and brought them out, and desired them to depart out of the city..."<br />And did what ?? "besought" which is translated "beseeched, implored, exhorted, intreated, prayed"; and "desired", which translates to the same as besought, and we know repetition carries great weight.<br />AND when Paul and the others had finished the Lord's work in that city, THEN they deigned to leave the city as the leaders had humbly requested.<br />I think Paul set the tone for what should be a normal response to government "power", from Xn's or any other class of Sovereign Citizen. The Mattoids may have the "power", but their Authority & Jurisdiction is to be limited by us....<br />thanks for dialoguing -- every moment is a learning & teaching opp.ty !!....<br />--Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-1347691742976319152018-08-10T17:26:21.613-07:002018-08-10T17:26:21.613-07:00There is much I agree with here.
Is a governmen...There is much I agree with here. <br /><br />Is a government outside of God's sovereignty when it does evil? Thomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-7765130403923307512018-08-08T07:27:47.474-07:002018-08-08T07:27:47.474-07:00Glad I could help - but really, Casey did an exemp...Glad I could help - but really, Casey did an exemplary job on this.bionic mosquitohttp://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-73783206378832104862018-08-07T22:44:28.593-07:002018-08-07T22:44:28.593-07:00This is the article that I didn't realize I wa...This is the article that I didn't realize I was for. Thank you thank you thank you. Makes sense of something that has never seemrd right Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-74260338283012843652018-08-01T18:25:06.041-07:002018-08-01T18:25:06.041-07:00Part of exegesis is thinking through things in con...Part of exegesis is thinking through things in context and from multiple angles. MacArthur's statement as it is presented doesn't consider any context biblical, historical, or logical. <br /><br />As others have already said, there are multiple verses where people praised in the Bible for disobeying government. Any one of those occurrences is enough to call MacArthur's understanding into question because he treats it as an absolute rule where even the Biblical authors (i.e. the Holy Spirit) does not. <br /><br />Once we determine that obedience to government can't be absolute, as described by the Bible, the next step is to decide what disobedient actions including violence are permissible. Even Jesus did not rebuke Peter strictly for using violence in John 18. He rebuked Peter because Jesus knew it was the Father's plan for Him to die on the cross to pay for our sins.<br /><br />Another thing to think through. If Romans 13 is absolute in every case, then that means that tyrannical government is reflective of God's will and has His seal of approval. We know that can't be the case because God is holy and hates every act of sin, even more so when those in power oppress their subjects. Even more, Jesus would be in sin for conquering the armies of the kings who come against Jerusalem in Revelation. God established them right? He did actually but Him establishing a king does not mean that their actions and position of power is unchallengable.<br /><br />We have to get past this idea that a king or person in government is this higher form of human. They aren't. If someone robs you at gun point or locks you up in a room for an unjust reason, they are criminals. If a government does the same thing they aren't acting as God's servant. They are sinning against God and are criminals the same. Personal action is personal action and should be dealt with as such not as a separate category of action.RMBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-8733731936541082382018-08-01T13:25:53.424-07:002018-08-01T13:25:53.424-07:00Dave Barton quoted John MacArthur and tried to ref...Dave Barton quoted John MacArthur and tried to refute him by quoting the opinions of the Founders. I found MacArthur more convincing! I'm looking for exegesis people! <br /><br />Great articles though, Larry. I find myself still struggling. I'm nearly (if not completely) convinced to beleieve that political activity is futile. Maybe I should be off Libertarian forums!Thomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-31351769846075910392018-07-31T21:05:08.899-07:002018-07-31T21:05:08.899-07:00You're quite welcome. I look forward to readin... You're quite welcome. I look forward to reading your thoughts.<br /><br /> LarryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-33133670897566853912018-07-31T19:22:30.913-07:002018-07-31T19:22:30.913-07:00Thanks Larry. I'll chew on those as well!Thanks Larry. I'll chew on those as well!Thomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-942157619038536042018-07-31T18:15:28.939-07:002018-07-31T18:15:28.939-07:00There's also this case-study by Christian phil...There's also this case-study by Christian philosopher & theologian John Frame:<br /><br /> https://frame-poythress.org/category/civil-disobedience/?orderby=title&order=ASC<br /><br /> LarryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-91790956998448200672018-07-31T17:36:39.179-07:002018-07-31T17:36:39.179-07:00Sherlock,
It's not a scholarly work but you ... Sherlock,<br /><br /> It's not a scholarly work but you may find some value/interest in it nonetheless:<br /><br /> https://wallbuilders.com/american-revolution-act-biblical-rebellion/<br /><br /> My own view is that when a government/authorities prevents its "subjects" from fulfilling their moral obligations to God they are within their duties to revolt/rebel.<br /><br /> On the subject of why the first Christians did not rebel against Rome, I believe the reason was a practical one for the most part: To obey the Lords command to fulfill The Great Commission and spread the Gospel.<br /><br /> Larry Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-43884787051663645272018-07-31T12:44:21.716-07:002018-07-31T12:44:21.716-07:00Wonderful replies ATL and RMB. I think this is a w...Wonderful replies ATL and RMB. I think this is a worthwhile discussion.<br /><br />I agree, ATL, that the Bible and libertarianism are congruent. I see that as well. My comment about what lens I use is also more of a concern about idolatry. I don't want to place libertarianism above Christ (including and especially in my heart).<br /><br />When do we overthrow and revolt? I don't know if ever. Emperor Nero was the authority of Paul's time. We have no recording of him calling for overthrowing or actively resisting arbitrary laws that don't cause us to sin. If Paul didn't call for it with The Beast, then why would we with King George, or President Trump? <br /><br />Yes...I question the American revolt on Biblical grounds too. That's another can of worms!<br /><br />Thanks yall.Thomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-19680449003078908662018-07-31T08:30:46.899-07:002018-07-31T08:30:46.899-07:00You are asking a very tough question and probably ...You are asking a very tough question and probably a judgment call only an individual can make for himself/herself. You are right to see government as established by God. That is in Romans 13 and throughout the book of Daniel.<br /><br />However, even in Romans 13 the government is described as not causing fear for the righteous. If it does at some point it becomes illegitimate and liable to become overthrown. At what point? Who knows. I don't think there is a clear line in the sand. But in general what I think that means is if a government oppresses enough people and refuses to hear the criticism and reform, then it has sealed its own fate and those who rebel are just. But you better be careful about how you choose to act because what if you, the rebel, are wrong? It's tricky.RMBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-17989702155462709982018-07-31T07:27:17.698-07:002018-07-31T07:27:17.698-07:00Sherlock,
Not that I have any particular authorit...Sherlock,<br /><br />Not that I have any particular authority, but I would say as a Christian and a conservative an-cap, I believe it is 1.) right to follow government rules, so long as they don't cause you to break God's laws, but 2.) it is our duty to disobey government rules, if they are in discord with God's laws.<br /><br />For example:<br /><br />1.) It is lawful for me under the current government to use my vote in order to grant those in my income bracket subsidies paid by taxing others more. This, to me, is a form of indirect theft, and thus it is a violation of God's law. This is not to say I believe all voting to be immoral or contrary to God's law.<br /><br />2.) If the government were to reinstate the draft in order to fight an aggressive war (a conflict it initiated) on foreign soil, I believe it would be my duty to disobey the draft, because this would be engaging in unjustified killing or murder, which is clearly a violation of God's law.<br /><br />Things are not always so cut and dry as the two examples I chose. For instance, if my government started the war, but a foreign army showed up on our soil, I would then join the fight with the intention of killing the enemy soldiers, until they retreated. If I could do this by joining a private militia I would, but in the absence of one, I would join the government's army. <br /><br />Also if I voted for a candidate who seemed the lesser of two evils: one who campaigned on lower taxes, freer trade, less drug related incarceration, a more peaceful foreign policy, etc., and then this candidate, once elected, became worse than the prior office holder, I don't believe that I violated God's law. I chose based on the best information available that my candidate would move things closer to God's law, not further away. <br /><br />There are so many grey areas though, because the influence of the government has its tentacles in nearly everything. Generally, I believe it is not a good idea to help out the state, since it routinely and necessarily violates God's law, but it is also not a good idea to bring the state down on your head. Somewhere in there is a balance to be struck in order to live a good and long Christian life despite the presence of a jealous and aggressive monopoly of earthly authority. Being a martyr for God is the height of Christian virtue and our reverence for martyrs is just, but some of us have to live on to carry on the tradition. I think sometimes this means we must "carry the Roman gear."<br /><br />"...reading the Bible with a libertarian lens." <br /><br />I think Christianity is perfectly consistent with libertarianism, only it has a few positive obligations to God and our neighbors (no where in the bible does it say these obligations must be enforced by violence). Further, the more I read the Catholic Catechism, the more I'm convinced that libertarianism is just a good secular form of Christianity. A Texas Libertarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02980539931923054404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-23088902500027034712018-07-30T16:27:10.034-07:002018-07-30T16:27:10.034-07:00ATL,
Do you mean to say we only follow governmen...ATL, <br /><br />Do you mean to say we only follow government laws that match God's law? What of Jesus's command to carry Roman gear? What about government laws in which the Bible may be silent?<br /><br />I'm an ancap, and agree fully with the NAP; however, I want to be careful about my relationship with authority. There is an American president because God preordained that there would be one. Am I to disobey all of his orders because of the corrupt nature of the office? Or do I obey fully when God's commands for our individual behavior isn't contradicted? <br /><br />What I'm trying to avoid is reading the Bible with a libertarian lens. Thomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-52978365911974200062018-07-30T08:27:27.063-07:002018-07-30T08:27:27.063-07:00Yes, but in the same way that the monopolist of vi...Yes, but in the same way that the monopolist of violence can choose to disobey God's sovereignty and proclaim its own laws, we can choose to disobey it and recognize instead God's law. This is authorized in the "render unto Caesar..." passage. <br /><br />Isn't everything God's? As Christians can we really hold that the government owns something apart from God? I think it is clear that the state, since it is not above God, is also held to the standards of God's law, and to the extent that it violates that law, it renders itself an unjust earthly authority and validates us in disobeying its earthly commands.A Texas Libertarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02980539931923054404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-78512173888316067102018-07-30T08:17:21.299-07:002018-07-30T08:17:21.299-07:00Is it a sin to lie to a dangerous felon in order t...Is it a sin to lie to a dangerous felon in order to avoid his wrath? Is it a sin to steal from a mass murderer in order to bring him to justice? I think in both cases it is not. I agree that how you do it matters.A Texas Libertarianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02980539931923054404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-27242705721222646062018-07-30T04:20:01.407-07:002018-07-30T04:20:01.407-07:00Is a monopolist of violence "under the sovere...Is a monopolist of violence "under the sovereignty of God"?<br /><br />YesThomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-34962193322292008152018-07-29T08:47:21.064-07:002018-07-29T08:47:21.064-07:00Is a monopolist of violence "under the sovere...Is a monopolist of violence "under the sovereignty of God"? Are we to acquiesce to its demands when it only indirectly causes us to sin? Say when it uses our tax dollars to kidnap and imprison plant-smokers or bomb civilians overseas?<br /><br />The hallmark of morality is universality. If "thou shalt not steal" is good enough for us, it ought to apply as well to those who presume to rule over us. Taxation is legalized extortion. Did God carve out an exception for our civil overlords?<br /><br />I see the unlucky 13th chapter of Romans as an exhortation to prudence, not a guide to living. If I'm within my rights to resist a stick-up artist in a dark alley, why am I not likewise within my rights to resist the IRS?<br /><br />Of course, I don't want to get tossed in the hoosegow. I have a family that relies on me to provide for them. That's where prudence comes in. Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05242683448708605585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-5868594441889747422018-07-29T07:33:08.020-07:002018-07-29T07:33:08.020-07:00Correction: the emperor and pirate engage in simil...Correction: the emperor and pirate engage in similar activity, but not the same thing. One is established, the other is not.Thomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-16886971810738663262018-07-29T05:03:37.457-07:002018-07-29T05:03:37.457-07:00I don't think I am conflating the two. I am sa...I don't think I am conflating the two. I am saying both are under the sovereignty of God. <br /><br />Augustine makes a great case about the evils of government. The emperor and the pirate are the same thing, at different degrees. I don't disagree.<br /><br />But I still don't think the evil motives of the ruler exempts us from the government law. Your quote does not address this. Jesus told us to carry the Roman soldiers gear twice the distance legally required, not to resist the obviously evil law (the theft of time and freedom). I think the standard from Scripture is clear: we resist and disobey government law only when it would directly cause us to sin. Do we have a Scripture-based argument against this?Thomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-30405221795984395062018-07-29T04:55:26.535-07:002018-07-29T04:55:26.535-07:00The first two I think are fine. The WikiLeaks exa...The first two I think are fine. The WikiLeaks example required theft, didn't it? Exposing crimes by the state is hreat, but how you do it matters.Thomas Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493366024392863302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-34225244185484209342018-07-28T17:48:34.467-07:002018-07-28T17:48:34.467-07:00Government law is government law. God's comman...Government law is government law. God's commands are God's commands. I'm not saying never the twain shall meet. I'm saying don't conflate one with the other. <br /><br />"Without justice, what are kingdoms but great robber bands? What are robber bands but small kingdoms? The band is itself made up of men, is ruled by the command of a leader, and is held together by a social pact. Plunder is divided in accordance with an agreed upon law. If this evil increases by the inclusion of dissolute men to the extent that it takes over territory, establishes headquarters, occupies cities, and subdues peoples, it publicly assumes the title of kingdom!<br /><br />"A fitting and true response was once given to Alexander the Great by an apprehended pirate. When asked by the king what he thought he was doing by infesting the sea, he replied with noble insolence, 'What do you think you are doing by infesting the whole world? Because I do it with one puny boat, I am called a pirate; because you do it with a great fleet, you are called an emperor.'"<br /><br />~St. Augustine of Hippo (354 A.D - 430 A.D.)Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05242683448708605585noreply@blogger.com