The easiest thing to do is to make an argument and then quote a Bible verse that seems to support your thesis. That provokes various reactions.
- A few people will see the scripture quotation and agree.
- Some Christians will discount the quotation and refuse to argue on that basis, insisting upon keep the discussion secular, whatever that means.
- Some non-Christians so discount scripture they will refuse to take scriptural quotations seriously
- Others, both Christians and non-Christians, will either cite alternative passages or offer different interpretations.
This post is about that last option, a puzzling example of that last option. It is about a series of comments Lander7 made on the following post, IN THE LAND OF THOSE WHO STAND FOR NOTHING, HOW DO WE DEFINE RELIGION?.
How did the confusion begin? With this comment.
You stated, “the Liberal Democrat house is not built with simple, harmless, playing cards; it is built with lies”
Is the Conservative Republican house built with truths?
quoted me from a comment I had made here. At first I supposed it rankled that I had express such a low opinion of Liberal Democrat ideology. Since most Liberal Democrats don’t even think they have an ideology — they are just right — many don’t take disagreement well. However, ‘s approach to this topic soon left me scratching my poor noggin. Instead of serving the usual heapings of verbal abuse, he starting quoting scripture with enough familiarity to indicate he was at least somewhat familiar with the Bible.
The liberal Democrats in power are appointed by God. Your understanding is incorrect. If you are a person who believes the bible is true when men are wrong then repent of your words and side with the bible. If you are one who believes your understanding is greater than Gods then deny these passages and continue to debate what is true.
The founders were only human and didn’t even know not to have slaves so you can stop following their flawed understandings today.
Submission to the Authorities
13 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For 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 will receive his approval, 4 for 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, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing.
Eventually, when said this, I began to realize I began to realize and I were debating very different interpretations of scripture. Then the actual debate began.
I never stated for anyone not to vote but I can understand the confusion due to the nuance of the discussion.
Let me change the way I say this a bit. I believe that God puts leaders in place per his will, so to be clear, he decides who will be in charge not man.
From this perspective we can clearly vote for anyone we want as easily as we can pray for anyone we want to be in office. There is no conflict and either voting or praying are a positive action and convey a message to God and any other witness.
The issue is after a leader is put in place. This is where I hear people complaining, sabotaging, disobeying, etc. It is at this point that I can clearly see that people are resisting God’s will since he stated that he puts them in power.
Once the leader is in place there should be no more resistance only support per what God stated. There is a time to petition God (Prayer, voting) and then there is a time to obey and support.
When I see the negative comments about Democrats or Republicans I see the evil division that is in fact “disobedience”, rather than cooperation and peace as stated in the Bible.
I also clearly stated that we are judged by God so we do have responsibility with the government. The clear fact that it is currently not working in a peaceful way is our fault.
The people do not believe God, nor do they trust him and so they continue to fight each other over leaders that God placed in power.
I also see where the two parties argue over how to help those in need while at the same time not helping them. Clearly we see as believers how the needy are neglected. We know for a fact that we are tasked by God to help the needy and yet we use the leaders as a scapegoat to ignore our duties.
Again we are responsible.
What is the answer? How should I reply to ? Should I even bother?
Does God appoint our leaders like He obviously did King Saul and King David or do we have a role in choosing them? What is the extent of our responsibility? What answers does the Bible provide?
These are not trivial questions. In fact, they should make us quite uncomfortable for today we are tearing our country apart in ways that rival and perhaps surpass the period that preceded the American Civil War. As Christians, we must each consider what our Lord wants us to about the way our nation’s government works.
- What is the role of a Christian in a constitutional republic?
- How high a priority should a Christian give his role as a citizen of a constitutional republic?
- What has our Lord called each of us to do? If a man or a woman says God has called them to serve as a politician, is it even possible for them to be telling the truth?
- How do we know when those who claim authority over us as our governmental leaders have been appointed by God?
- What is the difference between the obedience we owe to the governing authorities and the obedience we owe to God?