Originally posted by Littlejoe
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Did Rosa Parks sin by refusing to go to the back of the bus?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Pentecost View PostDoes anyone know what MLK Jr. said about it? I am much too you to have personal experience with the matter, but I am given to understand Luther was a Reverend who supported civil disobedience? Was he ever confronted by detractors with Scripture? How did he support his position with Scripture? I assume that the easiest way (if perhaps not the most effective) to determine if it is a sin or not is to look at someone with both the motive and opportunity to comment on the subject at hand and then determine if his arguments are flawed or not. Equally you could look toward a segregationist preacher, but I assume that there are more records of MLK than others.
It's a fascinating read, but he doesn't actually engage with Romans 13 in it.
At this point in time I am not 100% sure how to fully apply this chapter. I don't see how Sean's stance of basically ignoring it because he doesn't like it is any different from how people ignore the biblical prohibitions on homosexuality because they don't like them."I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill
Comment
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostHis most well known defense of his views was in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles...irmingham.html
It's a fascinating read, but he doesn't actually engage with Romans 13 in it.
At this point in time I am not 100% sure how to fully apply this chapter. I don't see how Sean's stance of basically ignoring it because he doesn't like it is any different from how people ignore the biblical prohibitions on homosexuality because they don't like them.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostThen I hear people say it was just hyperbole, but that doesn't solve the problem either, because we have to ask the same question -- where and how we apply it in a practical sense exactly.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostWhat the text means and how to apply it are two distinct issues.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostIf Paul was talking about church authority, this makes a whole lot more sense to me. Of course, we'd then all be in noncompliance of that command since none of us can possibly obey all authorities in the myriad number of different Christian sects. But at least it makes sense than if he was referring to secular authorities (at the time, there was only one church authority -- the apostolic church authority). But if he was talking about church authority, then Christians need to stop brow beating other Christians with it to get them to submit to secular authority.
Comment
-
N.T. Wright holds that Romans 13 needs to be understood in the light of the rest of the book in which he sees Paul "consciously parodying and subverting imperial ideology". He makes six points about chapter 13, but I'll only highlight the first here,
And Thomas R. Schreiner (Professor of New Testament interpretation and Professor of biblical theology) in his commentary on Romans, has this to say about the passage,
Comment
-
Hananiah (Shadrach), Mishael (Meshach) and Azariah (Abednego) refused to bow to the image of Nebuchadnezzar, despite that being the law. So, civil disobedience is not against God's designThat's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostIf Paul was talking about church authority, this makes a whole lot more sense to me. Of course, we'd then all be in noncompliance of that command since none of us can possibly obey all authorities in the myriad number of different Christian sects. But at least it makes sense than if he was referring to secular authorities (at the time, there was only one church authority -- the apostolic church authority). But if he was talking about church authority, then Christians need to stop brow beating other Christians with it to get them to submit to secular authority.
Here's another factor... peaceful disobedience CAN be submission to authority, because you realize you are violating the law (or policy or whatever), but will SUBMIT to the penalty that goes with that.
We see, in Exodus 1, we see the midwives disobey their Pharoah by not killing Jewish babies - and the Bible says that they "feared God and did not do as the king of Egypt had commanded, and let the boys live".
Later, we see that they lied to Pharaoh, so God was good to them and "established households" for them.
Rahab disobeyed a command from the king of Jericho, and was blessed, along with her household, for this willful disobedience. Obadiah, Jonathan, Daniel.... there are numerous cases where people disobeyed their governments or kings or rulers, and were blessed by God.
I think the totality of Paul's instruction needs to be considered, and he says "Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil.."
In the case of Rosa Parks, she was not doing "what is evil", and she WAS under subjection to her government, understanding that the penalty for her willful disobedience could result in prosecution.
When I was arrested in the early 80's for homeschooling [gasp] I fully understood that I could be arrested (and I was) and tried, and that it could cost me. (It did - I lost my job).The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostHananiah (Shadrach), Mishael (Meshach) and Azariah (Abednego) refused to bow to the image of Nebuchadnezzar, despite that being the law. So, civil disobedience is not against God's designThe first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostN.T. Wright holds that Romans 13 needs to be understood in the light of the rest of the book in which he sees Paul "consciously parodying and subverting imperial ideology". He makes six points about chapter 13, but I'll only highlight the first here,"As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostIf Paul was talking about church authority, this makes a whole lot more sense to me. Of course, we'd then all be in noncompliance of that command since none of us can possibly obey all authorities in the myriad number of different Christian sects. But at least it makes sense than if he was referring to secular authorities (at the time, there was only one church authority -- the apostolic church authority). But if he was talking about church authority, then Christians need to stop brow beating other Christians with it to get them to submit to secular authority."As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View PostHananiah (Shadrach), Mishael (Meshach) and Azariah (Abednego) refused to bow to the image of Nebuchadnezzar, despite that being the law. So, civil disobedience is not against God's design"As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Darth Executor View PostThey were asked to bow to an idol. There's a pretty large gulf between bowing to idols and objecting to bus seating arrangements.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostSo you incline to the metaphoric interpretation like Soyeong, except that you think that "authorities" refer to the church authorities?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 04-14-2024, 04:34 PM
|
5 responses
54 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-28-2024, 05:40 PM | ||
Started by Zymologist, 07-09-2019, 01:18 PM
|
369 responses
17,397 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by NorrinRadd
04-27-2024, 01:18 PM
|
Comment