9th commandment and Romans 13

[raderag]

How should a Christian behave themselves when reading juxtaposing these passages of scripture?


Ex 20:16 "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.


Romans 13:1Let every person(A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013;&version=47;#cen-ESV-28252A)) be subject to the governing authorities. For(B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013;&version=47;#cen-ESV-28252B)) there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you(C (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013;&version=47;#cen-ESV-28254C)) will receive his approval, 4for(D (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013;&version=47;#cen-ESV-28255D)) he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God,(E (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013;&version=47;#cen-ESV-28255E)) an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also(F (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013;&version=47;#cen-ESV-28256F)) for the sake of conscience. 6For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7(G (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013;&version=47;#cen-ESV-28258G)) Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.

As Christians, what do we have to learn from these verses?

I found this article (http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/nov/05/obama-administration-survival-guide/)to be helpful.

[tking]

How should a Christian behave themselves when reading juxtaposing these passages of scripture?





As Christians, what do we have to learn from these verses?

I found this article (http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/nov/05/obama-administration-survival-guide/)to be helpful.

SW and Tallen have mentioned that Romans 13 could be about the synagogue in recent posts HERE (http://www.light-after-darkness.org/forums/showthread.php?p=23301#poststop).

I've been wondering about that as well for many years.

[raderag]

SW and Tallen have mentioned that Romans 13 could be about the synagogue in recent posts HERE (http://www.light-after-darkness.org/forums/showthread.php?p=23301#poststop).

I've been wondering about that as well for many years.


While novel, that view seems to go against perspicuity, historic interpretation, and common sense.

Terry, rather than debating Romans 13, I would like to draw attention to the intent of the 9th commandment.

[tking]

While novel, that view seems to go against perspicuity, historic interpretation, and common sense.

Terry, rather than debating Romans 13, I would like to draw attention to the intent of the 9th commandment.

Well..I'm dense. I'm not getting the connection between the 9th commandment and the article about Obama or Romans 13, really. Could you elaborate just a bit?

[raderag]

Well..I'm dense. I'm not getting the connection between the 9th commandment and the article about Obama or Romans 13, really. Could you elaborate just a bit?

Sure.

There have been alot of attacks on Obama lately about him being a Muslim, not having a valid birth certificate, being a "Manchurian Candidate", etc.

I'm just wondering if the 9th commandment applies to us even when we disagree with someone. And does Romans 13 reinforce this even more with our leaders?

[Swordman53]

While novel, that view seems to go against perspicuity, historic interpretation, and common sense.

Why do you think this? btw - I would recommend Nanos' book to anyone studying Romans.

[raderag]

Why do you think this? btw - I would recommend Nanos' book to anyone studying Romans.

Well, if he is saying it negates the idea that God has put our leaders in charge of us to rule, then there are other scriptural problems. Perhaps he has something more nuanced to say, but that isn't for this particular thread.

[Tallen]

Not sure what your after here Brett.

I think we should be truthful about Obama, but I don't think we should give up our Christian convictions and citizenship in His kingdom to comfort BO and the left. God has had a hand in BO's election for sure, but He hasn't called his people to give up their convictions or pursuit of truth because of it. In fact, I don't think He has called us to participate in the election of any one that we can not support with an open heart and conviction.

[Tallen]

While novel, that view seems to go against perspicuity, historic interpretation, and common sense.

Hmmm..., I wonder why this type of statement gives me the willies. :big_teeth_2:

[raderag]

Not sure what your after here Brett.

I think we should be truthful about Obama, but I don't think we should give up our Christian convictions and citizenship in His kingdom to comfort BO and the left. God has had a hand in BO's election for sure, but He hasn't called his people to give up their convictions or pursuit of truth because of it. In fact, I don't think He has called us to participate in the election of any one that we can not support with an open heart and conviction.

Ted, I'm very disgusted right now about many on the right that wish to slander Obama for pure political gain. There has been much of that here as well as other Christian web sites.

The right wing blogs have been full of deceit and lies for the last few months (look what they did to McCain in ’04), and yet many of them claim to be Christian. There is almost no attempt from the right at accuracy, fairness, or scholarship. The 9th commandment is totally ignored, and anything proven slander is the cause for new slander rather than repentance.

What’s sad is that well meaning folks such as yourself have been dragged into the fray. I am calling for all believers to stop being hoodwinked by the right-wing slanderers out there, and for the right-wing slanderers to repent.

[tking]

Sure.

There have been alot of attacks on Obama lately about him being a Muslim, not having a valid birth certificate, being a "Manchurian Candidate", etc.

I'm just wondering if the 9th commandment applies to us even when we disagree with someone. And does Romans 13 reinforce this even more with our leaders?

Oh I see. In other words, as Christians, should we contribute to the mudslinging? The answer is no.

If we know something as fact, then I think we get into something different as related to the Romans 13 passage. It would almost seem from that passage that we're to do whatever our rulers ask, even if it goes against God because really God has put them in that position, and it is His will that we do whatever's asked even if it goes against what we know to be of Him. I have a hard time with that idea. I mean, why were the apostles persecuted even drawn and quartered if they were obeying all the rules? How many times was Paul imprisoned for speaking out for Christ?

I've always just had to go with praying for them and praying that God show me what He wants if it ever comes down to it.

There's no stipulation, that I can see, about whether or not we disagree with them when it comes to false witness. We're not to bear false witness...period.

[raderag]

Oh I see. In other words, as Christians, should we contribute to the mudslinging? The answer is no.

If we know something as fact, then I think we get into something different as related to the Romans 13 passage. It would almost seem from that passage that we're to do whatever our rulers ask, even if it goes against God because really God has put them in that position, and it is His will that we do whatever's asked even if it goes against what we know to be of Him. I have a hard time with that idea. I mean, why were the apostles persecuted even drawn and quartered if they were obeying all the rules? How many times was Paul imprisoned for speaking out for Christ?

I've always just had to go with praying for them and praying that God show me what He wants if it ever comes down to it.

There's no stipulation, that I can see, about whether or not we disagree with them when it comes to false witness. We're not to bear false witness...period.

Terri, that is my point. We should NEVER bear false witness, even against Obama.

Its ironic that those that rail on politicians for being corrupt are often more corrupt than the actual politicians. I just don't think we can know how low some of these bloggers and other fake reporters can go. We trust something that is posted on some website, and ignore the voices of all of the civil authorities. Something is amiss. If Obama is indeed a judgement on our nation, it is because of immorrality, which includes slander.

I'm very discouraged about the conservative political movement right now...

[Tallen]

What’s sad is that well meaning folks such as yourself have been dragged into the fray.

I wasn't drug into the fray, I voted for someone that wasn't even mentioned because of the fray, I remained true to my convictions.

And as far as bringing up conversation points, like what is happening with BO's birth certificate, it isn't demeaning nor slanderous toward him. The truth of the matter is that there should be fairness toward all candidates, not just Obama, and one must realize that the American political environment is not Christian. In fact Brett, your indignation shouldn't have just been aroused by the rights tactics, it should have been aroused long ago with Nixon's, Reagan', Bush Sr.'s (you old enough to remember Lee Atwater), Bush Jr.'s and even McCain's campaign within the Republican party. American politics have long been a dirty setting, since the beginning, and all Christians should have become indignate long ago. We have now lost our majority influence in politics, we have not

But it is far from being drug into the fray if one questions the legitimacy and veracity of some's credentials or claims. We shouldn't let that get us down we may end up with a Nero or Stalin if our whinning continues in the Lord's ears. Thank God we are in His Kingdom, a Kingdom not of flesh and blood.

[tking]

Terri, that is my point. We should NEVER bear false witness, even against Obama.

Its ironic that those that rail on politicians for being corrupt are often more corrupt than the actual politicians. I just don't think we can know how low some of these bloggers and other fake reporters can go. We trust something that is posted on some website, and ignore the voices of all of the civil authorities. Something is amiss. If Obama is indeed a judgement on our nation, it is because of immorrality, which includes slander.

I'm very discouraged about the conservative political movement right now...

To be truthful with you Brett, I pay very little attention to the political pundits about anything. When it comes election time, I try to listen to the candidates' own ads and read their own things that I can find...not second and third parties with agendas of their own. I've been disgusted with the entire election process for the last several elections because they are not based on what the candidate has stated he will or will not do, what his thoughts are, or what his plan is. They are trash talk that reminds me of some tabloid-type TV show or something. On top of that, as we all know, it doesn't really matter what the candidate says, once they step into the role of President, they find out quite quickly that all their ideals are subject to a multitude of obstacles, many of which won't be conquered, and not much, if any, of their campaign promises can actually be brought to fruition. This election was won by the media and the disdain for our countries circumstances at the moment. Mostly the media, though.

Something else that changed how I view voting was when I found out that no matter how many people in the state vote for a candidate, the electoral votes do NOT have to go that way. It was in Clinton's second go-round, I believe (although I'm not completely sure), that 60 someodd of the 77 counties in Oklahoma voted for the other guy, yet our electoral votes went for Clinton. In other words, our votes meant zip. I still vote, but I don't consider it much of anything anymore. Now with delegates and even super delegates, the population doesn't really have any voice at all, even though we're told we do.

Sorry...tangent there, but yes, you're right, we're not to bear false witness. I think it's important to keep in mind what false witness is as well. It isn't about just lying, it's about damaging someone due to a false witness about them or about a circumstance involving them, particularly for personal gain.

[raderag]

I wasn't drug into the fray, I voted for someone that wasn't even mentioned because of the fray, I remained true to my convictions.

And as far as bringing up conversation points, like what is happening with BO's birth certificate, it isn't demeaning nor slanderous toward him. The truth of the matter is that there should be fairness toward all candidates, not just Obama, and one must realize that the American political environment is not Christian. In fact Brett, your indignation shouldn't have just been aroused by the rights tactics, it should have been aroused long ago with Nixon's, Reagan', Bush Sr.'s (you old enough to remember Lee Atwater), Bush Jr.'s and even McCain's campaign within the Republican party. American politics have long been a dirty setting, since the beginning, and all Christians should have become indignate long ago. We have now lost our majority influence in politics, we have not

But it is far from being drug into the fray if one questions the legitimacy and veracity of some's credentials or claims. We shouldn't let that get us down we may end up with a Nero or Stalin if our whinning continues in the Lord's ears. Thank God we are in His Kingdom, a Kingdom not of flesh and blood.

Ted, I think you were drug into the fray because you quoted a story that has no documentation and very little plausibility.

[Tallen]

There have been alot of attacks on Obama lately about him being a Muslim, not having a valid birth certificate, being a "Manchurian Candidate", etc.

I'm just wondering if the 9th commandment applies to us even when we disagree with someone. And does Romans 13 reinforce this even more with our leaders?

I am sure that BO knew exactly the environment he was stepping into when he began his bid for the Presidency, he has run his own dirty campaign in the past and is not innocent himself. Questioning the unknown and asking for someone to show the veracity of their cliams is not an attack. Just because someone says they are a Christian, doesn't mean we should take that at face value nor does it mean they are lying. Just because someone claims a citizenship, doesn't mean they are telling the truth nor does it mean they are lying. The proof is found out over time, by their actions and their words, and by doing an investagation. That is the process we are in and it legitimate to question folks that are within the system.

And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; (1Th 5:12 KJV)

[raderag]

It was in Clinton's second go-round, I believe (although I'm not completely sure), that 60 someodd of the 77 counties in Oklahoma voted for the other guy, yet our electoral votes went for Clinton.


Well, the number of counties that vote for a guy doesn't matter (otherwise the Republicans would win every state), but rather the number of voters in a state dictate who the electors vote for. According to the National Archives (http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/votes/members_1996.html#n), OK votes went for Dole/Kemp.


OKLAHOMA (http://www.archives.gov/global-pages/exit.html?link=http://www.oklaosf.state.ok.us/) -- 8 electoral votes cast for Bob Dole and Jack Kemp
582,315 popular votes cast for Bob Dole and Jack Kemp
Population, 1990 census, 3,145,585 Electors
Gary W. Banz
J. Michael Brown
Dixie I. Galloway
Steven F. Garrett
Skip Healey
Leo F. Herlacher
Dale N. Switzer
Paul E. Thornbrugh

[raderag]

I am sure that BO knew exactly the environment he was stepping into when he began his bid for the Presidency, he has run his own dirty campaign in the past and is not innocent himself.

Ted, I hardly called Obama innocent, but there is no reason for tit for a tat.

Christian's are quickly destroying their witness with right-wing lunacy.

[Tallen]

Ted, I think you were drug into the fray because you quoted a story that has no documentation and very little plausibility.

I beg to differ, I don't think the story is without plausiblity and I wasn't spreading rumors but bringing this up to talk about it. I even presented BO's response and what had already been said by his camp. I thought I had treated it very fairly.

What should we do, hide everything we are not sure of under a basket and never discuss it? This issue is important, and we could never discover if it was plausibile without talking about it.

Is BO a US citizen? is not, BO is not a citizen.

[raderag]

I beg to differ, I don't think the story is without plausiblity and I wasn't spreading rumors but bringing this up to talk about it. I even presented BO's response and what had already been said by his camp. I thought I had treated it very fairly.

What should we do, hide everything we are not sure of under a basket and never discuss it? This issue is important, and we could never discover if it was plausibile without talking about it.

Is BO a US citizen? is not, BO is not a citizen.

Ted,

Where is a source for the story?

How is it plausible that Fox News, the Washington Times, the drudge report, red state, Town Hall (Heritage Foundation), have all ignored this if there is any truth to it?

There is lots of evidence that he was born in the US, and no real evidence that he wasn't, and this is plausible?

[Tallen]

Christian's are quickly destroying their witness with right-wing lunacy.

So do like I did and get out of it. The Republican party is quickly destroying itself as we see them adopting these tactics and spreading them to greater depth within the party. I am ready to find a home in a third party that I can conscientiously support, regardless of winning or not. I am thinking down the road, and realize that both parties have abandoned their constituencies for vocal radicalism.

I am not trying to go tit for tat with you, btw. But I think you are painting me unfairly and am trying to rectify what has been said.

[raderag]

So do like I did and get out of it. The Republican party is quickly destroying itself as we see them adopting these tactics and spreading them to greater depth within the party. I am ready to find a home in a third party that I can conscientiously support, regardless of winning or not. I am thinking down the road, and realize that both parties have abandoned their constituencies for vocal radicalism.

I am not trying to go tit for tat with you, btw. But I think you are painting me unfairly and am trying to rectify what has been said.

Ted, I am not saying that you are slandering Obama, at least not on purpose. The tit for a tat is not in reference to me or even you, but the idea that since Obama is slimy (and he is) that it is ethical for us to be.

OTOH, I don't think you have corrected some on this forum when they have said Obama was a Muslim. I am not trying to paint you a certain way, but I do think you are being victimized by the right-wing slander machine. It isn't the conservative press (I listed like 5 conservative media outlets that aren't reporting this fake story), but rather the right-wing Alex Jones type conspiracy people that are perputating this.

Its not the parties that have adopted radicalism, but rather the neo-John Bircher's outside of the party.

I gotta go for now...

[tking]

Well, the number of counties that vote for a guy doesn't matter (otherwise the Republicans would win every state), but rather the number of voters in a state dictate who the electors vote for. According to the National Archives (http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/votes/members_1996.html#n), OK votes went for Dole/Kemp.

Yeah but 60 something out of 77 and they all carried the other guy?? I mean surely the number of voters would be more with that kind of ratio. That must not be the right election, I really can't remember which one it was. I just remember being astounded.

[Tallen]

Ted,

Where is a source for the story?

How is it plausible that Fox News, the Washington Times, the drudge report, red state, Town Hall (Heritage Foundation), have all ignored this if there is any truth to it?

There is lots of evidence that he was born in the US, and no real evidence that he wasn't, and this is plausible?

It's plausible because we already know that his birth certificate was challenged, among other things. Just because BO has denied any of this doesn't make any of his claims true or untrue. This story was brought to LAD to discuss whether or not it has any credibility, and whether or not we should believe it. And please note I made an effort to show both sides of the story.

Just because you are offended by the extreme right or an unsubstanciated report, shouldn't limit any discussion of such things on LAD, we are trying to substanciate them. You can make a case without the attempt to cut off any conversation about such things. Not that I think you are trying to cut off the conversation, but I think you are being over sensitive about issues like this.

[Tallen]

OTOH, I don't think you have corrected some on this forum when they have said Obama was a Muslim.

On the other hand I don't think I have to correct everyone's words on LAD. If you find that they are slandering Obama by saying he is a Muslim, I think it is your obligation to object to it, not my obligation to censor every conversation. I was thinking about the conversation myself, cause I didn't know the facts of it, and coming to a decision of whether or not I think he is a Muslim. I think that if it is pointed out that such things are wrong, the average thinking person will weigh it and come to the right opinion about it.

Personally I don't think he is either a Christian or a Muslim. I think he uses such things for an agenda that he has elected for his own ambitions. If he is with a group of Muslims he becomes one, if he is with a group of Christians, he becomes one. And that is my opinion and based upon what I see coming out of his own mouth over time, his mouth is speaking the condition of his heart.

Blessing brother, I love you with the love of Christ. :bigtup:

[Swordman53]

Well, if he is saying it negates the idea that God has put our leaders in charge of us to rule, then there are other scriptural problems. Perhaps he has something more nuanced to say, but that isn't for this particular thread.
I do not think that is what Nanos is saying. What he is saying is that the rulers referenced in Romans 13 are the synagogue rulers. The ordination is the covenant.

If you recall in the book of Acts (18:2), the Jews were expelled from Rome by Claudius. When the Jews were expelled, the church would have sought patronage elsewhere, and the only other group was the Gentiles. Nero reversed that edict and allowed the Jews to come back. (Ancient Mediterranean culture functioned economically under a system of patronage. It is a much neglected aspect of our understanding of the social context of the text.)

While we do not know precisely when or how the church in Rome was founded, prior to the edict of Claudius it functioned within the synagogue structure (per Nanos, and this follows Paul's pattern in Acts of going to the synagogue first). Jews tended to group together in communities for religious and social functions. (Often, ancient cultures would group around certain guilds or other social functions. The concept of the "ghetto" developed, probably in Babylon, as a subcommunity for the purpose of retaining its purity and heritage. This community would have its own social norms.) When the Jews returned, there would naturally be some level of conflict as to who had authority in the church, the Jews of the synagogue who had previously been in control or the Gentiles who now supplied the needs of the church.

This does not negate that we are to "render to Caesar what is Caesar's," or that Christ sits enthroned above the powers. The sovereignty of God over all creation is affirmed in the Old and the New Testaments.

Rather this view places the letter back in the likely historical context in which is was delivered. We must always understand the context for right interpretation.