Question on obedience/submission to authority

[woundeddog]

revisited-- what I mean is that I believe its my right to drive as fast as I want-- but The government puts other regulations on that== even though I am free in Christ I can not say that speed limits conflict with the Bible

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, woundeddog said:

Maybe I missed this, but if it is a lawful judgement we should of course obey it-- but if it directly conflicts with Gods word we should not obey it-- when Paul was told to stop preaching Jesus crucified he replied should we obey man or God? But, We need to be careful when we are looking at a law and not just assume it conflicts with the Bible- when It may just conflict with our personal beliefs

Even then you are subject, and submitted sometimes. Suffering for righteousness can be of God as well.

[Willa]

I am a great believer in state's rights and small government.  But we have long ago abandoned our constitution.  We no longer have free exercise of religion.  The president now makes laws, which is forbidden.  The Supreme Court also makes and changes laws by its decisions.  We are like the Jews who created laws to avoid obeying the true Mosaic laws.  Jesus didn't obey the false interpretation of those laws.  He healed the sick on the Sabbath, for instance. 

Laws that should have been left to the states have been usurped by the Supreme Court as well as our president.  

So my answer is that we should obey the law of love first.  We should be kind and merciful to all that we can.  We should obey God first.  But as to the rest we are in a catch 22.  Obey the municipal and state laws until they are forced to be changed by the feds.  Be obedient to civil authorities.  

1Pe 2:13  WEB Therefore subject yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether to the king, as supreme;  :14  or to governors, as sent by him for vengeance on evildoers and for praise to those who do well.  :15  For this is the will of God, that by well-doing you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: 16  as free, and not using your freedom for a cloak of wickedness, but as bondservants of God.

In other words, obey the one who would come and arrest you or fine you should you disobey.  

Rom 12:14  WEB Bless those who persecute you; bless, and don’t curse.  :15  Rejoice with those who rejoice. Weep with those who weep.  16  Be of the same mind one toward another. Don’t set your mind on high things, but associate with the humble. Don’t be wise in your own conceits.   17  Repay no one evil for evil. Respect what is honorable in the sight of all men.                                18 If it is possible, as much as it is up to you, be at peace with all men.                                                                           19  Don’t seek to revenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to God’s wrath. For it is written, “Vengeance belongs to me; I will repay, says the Lord.”  20  Therefore “If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in doing so, you will heap coals of fire on his head.”   21  Don’t be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

The latter is a more general reply, but you haven't given specifics.  When a law could endanger your children, protecting them is your first consideration.  By the way, I am preaching to myself.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Willa said:

I am a great believer in state's rights and small government.  But we have long ago abandoned our constitution.  We no longer have free exercise of religion.  The president now makes laws, which is forbidden.  The Supreme Court also makes and changes laws by its decisions.  We are like the Jews who created laws to avoid obeying the true Mosaic laws.  Jesus didn't obey the false interpretation of those laws.  He healed the sick on the Sabbath, for instance. 

Laws that should have been left to the states have been usurped by the Supreme Court as well as our president.  

So my answer is that we should obey the law of love first.  We should be kind and merciful to all that we can.  We should obey God first.  But as to the rest we are in a catch 22.  Obey the municipal and state laws until they are forced to be changed by the feds.  Be obedient to civil authorities.  

1Pe 2:13  WEB Therefore subject yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether to the king, as supreme;  :14  or to governors, as sent by him for vengeance on evildoers and for praise to those who do well.  :15  For this is the will of God, that by well-doing you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: 16  as free, and not using your freedom for a cloak of wickedness, but as bondservants of God.

In other words, obey the one who would come and arrest you or fine you should you disobey.  

Rom 12:14  WEB Bless those who persecute you; bless, and don’t curse.  :15  Rejoice with those who rejoice. Weep with those who weep.  16  Be of the same mind one toward another. Don’t set your mind on high things, but associate with the humble. Don’t be wise in your own conceits.   17  Repay no one evil for evil. Respect what is honorable in the sight of all men.                                18 If it is possible, as much as it is up to you, be at peace with all men.                                                                           19  Don’t seek to revenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to God’s wrath. For it is written, “Vengeance belongs to me; I will repay, says the Lord.”  20  Therefore “If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in doing so, you will heap coals of fire on his head.”   21  Don’t be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

The latter is a more general reply, but you haven't given specifics.  When a law could endanger your children, protecting them is your first consideration.  By the way, I am preaching to myself.

You know reading this willa I was reminded of the prophets in exile. They were so respectful to their captors often times. There were also those among their people that attempted to bring hardship upon them as well. We should perhaps look to the prophets in captivity and their attitude.

[ayin jade]

On 5/11/2016 at 8:23 PM, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Suppose with me for a moment, that there were legal challenges that have gone to the supreme court. Suppose with me that the court has ruled, that:

A certain behavior cannot be restricted to an individual, and that a state cannot require licensing for that behavior, because it is a fundamental right.

Suppose also, that the court explicitly has ruled, that there can be no special requirements to engage in this practice, such as mandatory insurance, or certificates of competency, etc.

Suppose the the court has also ruled that if a state enacts statutes, which require licenses, insurance, etc. in order to lawfully engage in said activities and behavior, that the citizen may ignore the state's requirements, as unlawful.

Finally, suppose that a citizen, is a Christian, and the citizen desires to engage in an activity, which his state denies to him, but the courts have held that it is that citizen's right to engage in, and is guaranteed to said citizen as a fundamental right.

Titus 3:1 says:
 
Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed, 

Romans 13 says:

1 Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. 5 Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. 

Now, sorry for the bakground, but here is the question:

How does one apply the scriptures in the above scenario? One the one hand, a legal authority says do not do "X". A higher legal authority says that it is okay to disregard the lower legal authority. Does the Christian go with the higher legal authority, or does he/she wave their legal right, in order to be submissive to a lower, yet still legitimate, legal authority?

What do you think? BTW, such a situation exists, but I did not include those details, because I did not want people's emotional attachments to one side or the other, influence what they thought the proper application should be.

In pharmacy, when state laws pertaining to pharmacy contradict federal laws, the more stringent law applies. If the federal law in your scenario shuts down the state law, and everyone is expected to follow the federal law but not the state law, then it is not sinful to follow the federal law. If the federal law permits it but the state law is not overrridden, then I might view it the same was as pharmacy laws are applied.  But I think it might depend on the situation. God's laws override anything else lol.

[gods pilgrim]

Children obey your parents in the Lord...for this is right

[enoob57]

In the construction of authority God, unconstructed, then all else constructed answering to God yet because evil is in all places here
one must dependent upon God for guidance in the places that are in moral question... always the respect for the position of authority
but the possessor of the position may have to be denied obedience with the sorrow of the witness standing against the position...
For all authority position is from God and when we honor the position of authority we honor God ultimately!  Love, Steven

[Guest Butero]

On ‎5‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 11:23 PM, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Suppose with me for a moment, that there were legal challenges that have gone to the supreme court. Suppose with me that the court has ruled, that:

A certain behavior cannot be restricted to an individual, and that a state cannot require licensing for that behavior, because it is a fundamental right.

Suppose also, that the court explicitly has ruled, that there can be no special requirements to engage in this practice, such as mandatory insurance, or certificates of competency, etc.

Suppose the the court has also ruled that if a state enacts statutes, which require licenses, insurance, etc. in order to lawfully engage in said activities and behavior, that the citizen may ignore the state's requirements, as unlawful.

Finally, suppose that a citizen, is a Christian, and the citizen desires to engage in an activity, which his state denies to him, but the courts have held that it is that citizen's right to engage in, and is guaranteed to said citizen as a fundamental right.

Titus 3:1 says:
 
Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed, 

Romans 13 says:

1 Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. 5 Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. 

Now, sorry for the bakground, but here is the question:

How does one apply the scriptures in the above scenario? One the one hand, a legal authority says do not do "X". A higher legal authority says that it is okay to disregard the lower legal authority. Does the Christian go with the higher legal authority, or does he/she wave their legal right, in order to be submissive to a lower, yet still legitimate, legal authority?

What do you think? BTW, such a situation exists, but I did not include those details, because I did not want people's emotional attachments to one side or the other, influence what they thought the proper application should be.

It sounds to me like you have two governing bodies with two separate rulings on the same issue.  I don't see how you can be guilty of not obeying the authorities regardless of what you choose to do in such a scenario.  It would come down to a moral issue at that point and following God and his laws. 

Here is how I view things.  Our supreme governing document is the U.S. Constitution, and all those in authority have had to take an oath to protect and defend it.  If they go contrary to that document, the Constitution would prevail over them.  Even the Supreme Court has no right to go contrary to the original intent of the founding document, and in my opinion, any judge that makes up laws that are contrary are not acting in a time of good behavior and should be impeached.  So the way I look at it, I have a copy of the U.S. Constitution, and I am to obey what is written according to original intent.  I also have a Bible, and I am to obey it according to original intent.  If the two contradict each other, the Bible is higher in authority over the Constitution, and the Constitution is over the elected officials.  I didn't want to let what others said influence my answer, so I haven't read further into this thread of yet, so as of right now, I have no idea where you are going with this. 

[Guest Butero]

On ‎5‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 0:52 AM, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Well, lower legal authorities and higher, can be interesting questions. For example, in the United States, the Constitution is supposed to be the law of the land, they highest legal authority. However, the constitution enumerates rights to the citizens and limits the authority of the federal government. I am not a lawyer, a legal scholar, or any such thing. However, as I understand it, the 10th Amendment says:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

Personally, I take that to mean that if the authority is not provided to the federal government, to do something, then the federal government does not have the authority to do it. This means that "lower" governments have authority (for example state legislatures) to enact laws that the Federal Govt cannot.

Consider the 1st Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Now, here is a case where the constitution clearly states that congress cannot enact laws, which prohibit the free exercise of religion. It would seem then, that this means that the feds cannot make a law, prohibiting the teaching of the Bible, or prayer, or teaching creation, etc., because that interferes with free exercise of religion.

Going back to the 1st Ammendment, we would notice, that powers not granted to the United States, are reserved to the States an the poeple. Wouldn't that mean then, that is a state law was passed, that required a statement of faith, before a person could hold a state public office, or if a state chose to have an official religion, that it could, since congress can not forbid it, and what the feds cannot do, the state may?

That would be my take on it. So, a higher legal authority, does not mean that it has the over-riding authority in every case.

While all of this could be an interesting topic itself, what I was after, is not the question of what the Christian citizen has as choices that was already stated, what I asked was, how does one apply the scripture to the example. I do not think the Bible, is like "The Code" in the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, "more like guidelines", I think that the Bible, gives us real instructions, not that we have to obey them for salvation, but we obey them out of love, gratitude, and a recognition, that we were bought with a price, and we owe obedience, and strive for that. 

So, does "obey the authorities" have a meaning? I would suggest, that possibly, that citizen believer, solved the problem most certainly, by not engaging in that practice that he/she might be legally entitled to do, because in that way, there is not risk of disobeying.

I really did not want to poison the well with my thought or opinion, I am hoping to see the opinions of others, especially if they can express reasons for their opinions.

Thanks for your contribution.

I believe we are to obey the authorities where possible, but if they go contrary to God's laws, we should obey God.  There is a lot of Biblical examples of this, from Daniel and the three Hebrew children to the Apostles refusing to stop preaching in Jesus' name.  I believe that the 10th Amendment to the Constitution makes it clear that most issues are left up to the states and the people, but the Supreme Court has acted like that Amendment doesn't exist.  To me, the Constitution itself, not the Supreme Court, is the chief law of the land.  For the Christian, God's laws are greater than man's laws.  I see the Bible as more than a book of guidelines.  I believe God expects us to obey what he says, according to original intent. 

[The_Patriot21]

I would think, there's a lot of factors that play i n

 Is this activity something you can livewithout? 

Is it something that could affect your witness if you went against the state laws?

And most importantly is this activity constitionally protected?

I'm of the sort in many cases to say obey the state over the feds, on nothing but principal alone. But, a lot depends in the individual scenario.