As always, it is important to define our terms. It is not uncommon for government leaders to use their influence to seek to win over the people to a particular behavior. The government uses airtime on the radio telling us to eat our vegetables, to not smoke, to get vaccinated. One is not, however, disobeying the government if one is an unvaccinated smoker who thinks vegetables are great things to feed food, i.e. animals. Be careful not to allow anyone to condemn you for failing to heed their counsel.
Second, to disobey is not the same thing as fomenting rebellion. It is one thing for Christians to meet together for worship against the command of the government. It is altogether another thing to grab your pitchforks, torches and Molotov cocktails and storm the Bastille. The former is disobeying the government. The latter is seeking to overthrow it.
The apostle Paul not only makes a strong case on the necessity of obeying governing authorities, but does so in writing to the Romans, those under the most vicious regime that world had yet known. Just as we are too quick when disagreeing on this theological point or another to anoint ourselves the next Martin Luther so when government annoys us we are tempted to anoint ourselves the next Paul Revere. We are to bend over backwards to obey.
There are, however, limits. The government is owed our obedience in all things, even things that are truly not their concern, unless or until they command us to do what God clearly forbids, or forbid us to do what God clearly commands. We see this principle carried out by Peter in Acts 5. Having been commanded to no longer preach in the name of Jesus Peter and the apostles ask the Sanhedrin, “Should we obey you, or God?” They continued to preach in the name of Jesus.
Two things, however, they didn’t do. They didn’t seek the overthrow of the government. Nor did they resist the government’s punishment of their behavior. Even in their disobedience they were obedient. So ought we to be. If the situation is dire enough that we have to disobey, it must be dire enough that we are willing to be jailed, punished, fed to the lions.
This question is not one that only believers in Communist or Muslim countries must wrestle with. In our own day, in our own country, we’ve had governments telling believers they must forsake the gathering together of the saints. In Canada the government has done the same. Even apart from COVID Canada has commanded believers not to proclaim those parts of the Bible that condemn sexual perversity. In 20 states in this country it is illegal to seek to help someone escape the sin of sexual perversity. In short, answering this question is no longer an academic exercise. It is likely to only get worse.
Our calling as believers is to live with our unbelieving neighbors in peace with all men, as much as it is in our power (Romans 12: 18). Which means even when we must obey, we must do so with a spirit of meekness, just like our Lord.
Uh, no R.C.
“There are, however, limits. The government is owed our obedience in all things, even things that are truly not their concern, unless or until they command us to do what God clearly forbids, or forbid us to do what God clearly commands.”
We only owe obedience for their commands that are within their jurisdiction as given to them by God, which is only justice. When the government transgresses the jurisdictions of the Church, Family or Individual, then they are in the wrong.
It may be convenient for us to obey their invalid commands sometimes, not trying to fight every battle, but we are under no moral compulsion to do so; at that point, it’s just strategy. Sometimes disobedience is a sin, sometimes it’s just not wise, and sometimes it is wise.
Interesting. How would you understand Paul’s command in Romans 13? Sure seems to me that he is saying we have a duty to obey, even when they are outside their proper sphere of authority.
“For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God”
No human authority is absolute. God has ordained limits for them (jurisdictions is one part of that). The government does have authority in the area that God has given it. It does not have authority over the area that God gave the Church, i.e. to give church discipline for sinful behavior, or the area God gave the family, like how to discipline your children, or the individual, like making the medical decisions you choose (doctrine of private judgement).
It seems one of us is inside out. I see this saying that if the government is demanding x, with the exception I’ve listed, then it is from God. You seem to hear in this verse, if the government is overstepping it’s bounds it hasn’t been instituted by God.” Is that a fair summary of our disagreement?
No. That verse shows part of it, and other parts of the Bible complete the thought.
If the government is overstepping its bounds, then it is outside of what God has given it for a jurisdiction. It was instituted by him, but for a specific purpose. A good example is in colonial America, Parliament was making rules for the colonies, but those colonies were under the jurisdiction of the King. They were under no compunction to obey the rules that Parliament implemented. All authority is bound by the jurisdictions that God gave it.
Ok. Maybe our difference is here. I absolutely concur we have no duty to submit to a government with no jurisdiction. That fits your Revolutionary War scenario. Neither do we have a duty, should the CCP command we all celebrate Chinese New Year. I would see, however, a legitimate government delving into a wrong sphere as something different. When a legitimate government tells me I must get a permit to build a shed, while such would be overstepping it’s bounds, I believe I have a duty to comply.
And I believe it would usually be wise for you to comply, but not a moral obligation. Just an example of being “wise as serpents”.
What’s most important is that we recognize where jurisdictional boundaries have been violated and work to change them back. It’s most unwise for authorities to try and command outside of their jurisdiction and only leads to bad results.
All the things on your list, however, touch on commands. The church has a duty to exercise discipline e, even if the state forbids it. I have a duty to discipline my children even if the state forbids it. I don’t have a duty to build a shed without a permit. I don’t have a duty to keep 20% of my income out of the state’s grubby hands. I don’t have a duty to keep the number of toilets in my home from gov’t census takers.
We can meet somewhat by noticing that duties are based on jurisdictional authority, i.e. the responsibilities given by delegation of authority.