Citizenship, part IV

Ahhh, here we are.
Finally!
Today we will look at the limits of submission to government.....when honoring the government violates the fear of God.
Ready?

Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor. (I Peter 2:17)

Sometimes the thorniest of questions can be answered in the simplest of ways. Sometimes. (Grin) Peter differentiates here between God and the emperor (or king, or civil authority). He says that the emperor deserves appropriate honor, but that he is NOT on the same level with God. If a human leader violates his responsibility which has been given to him by God, then believers are responsible to confront that violation. If it comes right down to it, we are to obey God, rather than men.

Let's look at some verses....not going to put words out here without the Bible to back them up!
Turn please and read this passage: Daniel 5:18-28.....you will see words here that say, "arrogant," "hardened with pride," "set yourself up before the Lord of heaven," and more.
Really do read that, OK?
We'll wait here for you....
Now let's look over in the New Testament.

But Peter and John replied, “Which is right in God’s eyes: to listen to you, or to him? You be the judges! 20 As for us, we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.” (Acts 4:19-20)

Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings! (Acts 5:29)

With this kind of courageous talk in his past, I believe that Peter is using verse 17 for a very real purpose. He is demoting the emperor and government from being absolutely sovereign. They are the creations, not the Creator. But he also gives dignity to the ruler and the government, because they are created and put into place by God, so they are worthy of our respect. That's a pretty fine line to walk, no?
Respecting men and their official positions, but not respecting them more than God. If it comes to a tug of war between God and the government, we must follow God. (I think that was kind of important, there.)
If the government forces us to disobey God, then the first thing we must do is appeal to the government if possible. If we are able, we confront the government with its wrong. But if all else fails, we disobey the government, obey God, and submit to the punishment of civil authorities.
Does that make sense?
What should we do as believers, when the government simply allows evil to happen? The thought comes to mind of abortion of babies; the government allows it to happen, does not mandate it. My thinking is that we confront the government with the evil. We also appeal to individuals not to do the legalized evil. And we also work through legal channels to overthrow that evil. There are many courageous and devoted believers who participate in Operation Rescue, but I can't see that it's the moral responsibility of every Christian to violate the laws as some pro-life protesters do. However, I strongly believe in and support the efforts to peacefully and lawfully call attention to the evil of abortion. There are many ways to protest lawfully -- there are efforts to support and lawmakers to persuade. Lots to be done!

Now, over the years, there have been many arguments about whether it is right for Christians to participate in a revolution to overthrow a government. Specifically, whether the American Revolution was the "right thing to do."  After all, the Bible is full of stories of people who fought one another and who sought to overthrow governments..... some at the command of God or through command of His prophets. It looks as if things were justified when they were for the greater good of mankind on earth, not directed toward individual, personal gain or even vengeance. Still, Romans 13 has been a huge stumbling block for some, and Satan has used arguments to divide and cause resentment among believers, who should be working toward love and unity.

In defense of my own country, I would say first that many of those who supported the Revolutionary War were deeply religious people who felt they were biblically justified in rebelling against England. They may have been wrong; they may have been right. Here are some reasons I have pulled together after studying some of their writings:
First, they saw themselves not as "anti-government" but as anti-tyranny. They were not promoting anarchy, or the casting off of all restraint. They firmly believed that Romans 13 told them to honor the institution of government, not necessarily the individuals who ruled. In this way, I see that they lined up with our verses here in I Peter.

Second, and this may have been straying from the Word, they pointed out that it was the King himself who was in violation of the Scripture. They felt that no one who behaved so wickedly could be "God's servant." And they carried it one step further and said it was their duty then, to resist. I find this line of reasoning their weakest point.

Thirdly, most of them saw the Revolution as a defensive action -- and I have to agree that they did try the timeline that we outlined above..... they confronted the government time and again with written descriptions of the wrongs to the colonists; they repeatedly made personal, face-to-face entreaties for better laws; they attempted to work through legal channels to affect change. Their efforts were rebuffed, and peaceful pleas were met with armed military force -- including violations of the British Common Law. Even after the Boston Massacre, the militia at Lexington was told, "Don't fire unless fired upon." So, they saw themselves as defending themselves from the oppressors.

Lastly, in some of their letters, they say that they feel Hebrews 11 is a justification for resisting tyrants.... Gideon, Samson, Barak, and Jepthah are all listed as heroes of the faith -- and they were all involved in overthrowing oppressive governments!
I believe my ancestors were convinced they had biblical precedent and scriptural justification for their rebellion, and I honor the memory and bravery of almost a dozen that I can trace back to, who fought in that War. I believe that they acted in good faith, in the name of Christian freedom. In the ensuing years, God had brought about much good from the freedoms that they fought for and secured for me and others in this country.

Perhaps the best way to conclude this study is to say that God expects us to honor and respect civil authority, and to witness for Him as we do. That He also expects obedience to His Word, and when civil laws cause us to disobey Him, we must not obey the civil laws. We should appeal; we should try to persuade; and then we must accept punishment if we cannot prevail in changing the law.

I hope that this has been a useful study, and I welcome discussion and feedback on the points we have raised here.