Hot answers tagged

20

As Christians we are first and foremost subject to God's commandments for us. However one of the instructions he gave us for life on this earth is that we be "subject to the governing authorities". In fact we learn that government itself, however secular and/or corrupt, is itself an institution that God places over us. Romans 13:1 (ESV) Let every ...


16

I think we need to deal with 3 cases: The government's laws are consistent with God's laws, like laws against murder and stealing. This is a simple and obvious case: the Christian should obey these laws. The government's laws are debateable applications of valid moral principles. For example, I think U.S. copyright law, which gives the author's heirs ...


13

I strongly believe that should the governing body within the country be corrupt and in conflict with God's Word, we should keep to our own ways. Daniel 6:12 (ASV)  12 Then they came near, and spake before the king concerning the king's interdict: Hast thou not signed an interdict, that every man that shall make petition unto any god or man within ...


12

I tend to agree with Marc Gravell's answer on this, but I would like to add that I don't think that any religious influence or moral framework could make a true democracy work. True democracy, history has shown, always degenerates into what Lord Acton described as "the tyranny of the majority" in which the rights of the minority get trampled by the opinion ...


11

Consider this. A man walks into a court room and long story short, the judge convicts the man of murder in the first degree. However, the man did not commit the crime. Therefore, he is falsely accused, and falsely convicted. Nevertheless, he was convicted, and he was sentenced to death. Was Jesus guilty of blasphemy? According to the Sanhedrin, yes. Was ...


11

While many Christians are against the death penalty, there is also biblical sanction for it. Genesis 9:6 commands the killing of those who commit murder- He who sheds a man's blood, by man shall shall his blood be shed. For many fundamentalists, such a clear case for the death penalty means that the death penalty should thus be supported. The key ...


11

What lies below is certainly not the only way to interpret this scripture, but it is one way I find extremely compelling, and to my knowledge, provides a reasonable historical understanding. This passage in scripture is built on a long foundation of culture and history, which is largely lost on a modern audience. First, a reminder about the immediately ...


10

I agree with your assessment. You really answered your own question - don't do it. That's as far as the civil disobedience can go in that case - not participating yourself. Anything else (speaking out against the activity, protesting, etc) isn't civil disobedience, it's merely exercising your first amendment rights. The only way that I can see such ...


10

The idea that a law can be 'unjust but not immoral' is entirely foreign to Christianity. Anyone who has read significantly in the Old Testament prophets (see here) realizes that injustice is something that God condemns very strongly, and the people of Israel are frequently admonished for failing to deliver justice (Isaiah 10:2, Ezekiel 22:29, Amos 2:7 and ...


10

In Revelation 22 it says: Let the one who does wrong continue to do wrong; let the vile person continue to be vile; let the one who does right continue to do right; and let the holy person continue to be holy.” Christianity is not by nature a conquering faith. In 1 Corinthians 5: I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually ...


9

This answer is not from a Biblical context, and applies equally to any sector: Are [insert group here] bound to the laws of their country? Yes. Yes they are. If they break those laws, they are accountable to the clauses of those laws. If they find those laws incorrect (as indeed laws evolve and change), then due process should be sought to question ...


9

Some people use Mark 12:17 towards this goal. 17 And Jesus answering said unto them, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." And they marvelled at him. The argument goes something like this: The government is here to govern the society here on Earth. God has been given to us to govern our hearts, ...


9

Christianity does not hold a "church and state must be separate" view at all; that might be part of the US constitution, but : not universal - and to all intents and purposes it is not even correct in the US, since it is quietly acknowledged that you don't stand much chance of election if you are openly non-Christian (regardless of your actual views). Indeed,...


9

The Church of Scotland is not a state church. It is recognised as "national church", but it is independent of the state in matters spiritual. The Church of Scotland and the Church of England have very different histories - it is not a question of one trying to imitate the other. The Scottish Reformation of 1560 took place when Scotland was still a separate ...


9

It's special because the PLO is not a sovereign body, that is, it is not a national or supra-national body like other countries or the United Nations or European Union. The Sovereign Military Order of Malta is headquartered in Rome, and is "widely considered a sovereign subject of international law" [according to a quote in Wikipedia]. Although the ...


8

I think this has to do with whether biblical laws should apply to non-Christians or not. 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 (ESV) 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you." So, we should not seek to judge outsiders. Not even by ...


8

My understanding is that the passage quoted does not forbid all oaths in general, but in specific was addressing the practice of the Scribes and Pharisees, who were invoking the name of God, or heaven in their oaths, and breaking them. I don't see myself where the Scribes or Pharisees are mentioned specifically. I'd have to study it out further, but I do ...


8

Quakers are considered one of the "peace churches" who oppose war of any kind, and typically refuse to participate in it. However they are also not a denomination which expects everyone in it to do exactly what the church says. See this article for more information. The biblical basis for pacifism is discussed here. I believe that some Quakers have indeed ...


8

No, there is no Biblical imperative for us to participate in government in the way you describe. The New Testament doesn't say much about our relationship with government, because the emphasis is on our membership in Christ. We are to be less concerned with things of the world, and more concerned with the things of God. Here's what the Bible does say ...


8

No, no and no. But it doesn't matter. He was guilty of what he was charged of. Blasphemy. Claiming to be God. The thing he was guilty of did carry a death penalty under Jewish law. The Jews couldn't actually administer the death penalty, they had to get something to take to the Romans to get clearance. The Roman governor (Pontus Pilate) operated the trial ...


8

Survey of Roman law A now deleted (near) duplicate of this question asked if a claim that the Roman law forbid the crucifixion of thieves, so I'll start with that question, which is highly relevant to our exegesis of the Gospel accounts. There are a lot of claims on the Internet and in popular-level books about Roman crucifixion. Some common claims ...


8

Can Christians be judges? Yes. We are told to judge others within the church. (1 Cor 5:12) As @CecilBeckham said, we are told not to judge people's hearts/righteounness. (Mt 7:1-2, Lk 6:37) We are also told not to be hypocritical in our judgment (Ro 2:1) Paul endorses the idea of governmental authority in Romans 13, and says Romans 13:4 (NASB) But ...


8

The requirement to obey government laws is based on the Book of Romans, chapter 13, where the Apostle Paul writes: Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling ...


7

I think this article should help: The Bible does not articulate a full-blown doctrine of the separation of church and state. Yet, its seeds are clearly present. Jesus at least foreshadowed the concept when he said “[g]ive therefore to the emperor things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Matthew 22:21) Jesus’ behavior was ...


7

In the Bible one of the 10 Commandments says "Thou Shalt Not Kill". However the belief is based on many other references too. Quakers also refuse to swear oaths, on the basis that they always tell the truth and will not swear in God's name or any other. The Quakers formed unarmed pacifist units to supply relief to refugees and ambulances to drive in ...


7

I suppose it is emphatic “no”. This is because we cannot bring moral equivalency between abortion and the death penalty. Both these issues are circumstantially different to each other. One is about an innocent baby’s life being taken in the womb and other a convicted murderer being executed. A baby in the womb has committed no crime. It is inhuman not to ...


7

Catholicism does not keep a comprehensive list of what does and does not constitute a sin; there are too many actions with moral consequence to allow for such a list. Although the Catechism of the Catholic Church does point out several actions (including procuring an abortion) as sins, even grave sins, it says nothing specifically about voting for candidates ...


7

I know that software first-hand because I served as a ward clerk. The quote is misleading. On the "members record" appears information about parents, children and husband/wife, along with their member number. Members may have access to a so-called "summary of ordinances" (translation from german, i don't know the english name). The only difference is that ...


6

Christians are obliged to oppose governments that enforce legal positivism, moral relativism and eugenic policies. The way we weigh the relative weight of laws is the following: Eternal Law Divine Law ---------- Natural Law Human Law So, if a human law contradicts with natural law, then follow natural law. Everything else should be perfectly ordered ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible