Christians and Government (Part 2)
September 5th, 2008
(By Nathan Williams)
Yesterday, we looked at a couple of reasons why we have government in our lives. Those reasons included (1) the fact that God ordained that the state exist and (2) that the state is given to us to restrain evil and promote good. In this article, I’d like to look at one of the responsibilities the Christian has toward government.
Perhaps the most important and certainly the most extensive text dealing with the Christian perspective on government is Romans 13:1-7. As we seek to understand the implications of this text in our daily lives, we must understand these verses in their proper context.
The first verse of chapter 13 takes us back to the first two verses of chapter 12. We find out that it is our responsibility to present our bodies as a living sacrifice to God. We are not to be conformed to this world, but are to be transformed by the renewing of our minds so that we can live out God’s will in our daily lives.
These are among the most beloved verses in all the Bible for many Christians. They lay out our duty so clearly and challenge us to give everything to God in order to live in a way that is pleasing to Him. These verses set the stage for a series of commands given in chapter 12. Verse 3 tells us not to think more highly of ourselves than we ought to think. Verse 6 instructs us to exercise our gifts for the good of those around us. Verse 9 says to let love be without hypocrisy. Verse 16 says to be of the same mind toward one another. Verse 21 says to not be overcome with evil, but to overcome evil with good. For some reason we tend to stop there, but in the original documents there was no chapter break between 12 and 13. We should continue right into chapter 13. This chapter begins by telling us that we all must be in subjection to the governing authorities.
In other words, to fulfill the command in chapter 12:1 to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, you must obey the command in chapter 13:1. The way in which you relate to your government is extremely significant in terms of your relationship to God. To put this another way, your personal sanctification includes how you submit to your government.
We have a specific command here to submit ourselves to our governing authorities and this is the first major responsibility a Christian has toward his government. Submission means much more than grudgingly obeying civil laws. This is the same word that is used in Ephesians 5:21 where we are commanded to submit to one another. Submission means literally to subject oneself, to obey; to submit to one’s control; to yield to one’s admonition or advice. We are to arrange ourselves under the leadership of the state in our lives in an attitude of submission and respect with the purpose of obedience for the glory of God.
Several other passages also make this requirement of Christians very clear. First Peter 2:13-17, for example, tells us basically the same thing.
Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.
Next week we’ll discuss two more important responsibilities the Christian has toward government.
It seems to me that you are conflating the distinction between government and state. All governments are not states. The state as a form of government is rather modern and new. Nowhere in the Bible are states mentioned. How did you come to the conclusion that states are God ordained?
And if the state is given to people to do good and restrain evil, why then do states so often do evil and restrain good? The Nazi lead German state comes to mind.
I don’t think the state is God ordained and states do all sorts of evil.
I gave as an example, the Tenboom family, after I read part 1 of this discussion.
What about Christians in countries where they are persecuted? Are Christians meeting secretly in China violating Romans 13?
Jacob, I’m not sure I get your point.
What about Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-Nego?
Jacob,
There may have been some confusion over my use of the term state. One of the definitions of the word “state” is as follows.
state – the body politic as organized for civil rule and government.
I was using the terms “state” and “government” interchangeably. Sorry for the confusion, hopefully this will clear that up.
NW
Richard,
The third article in this series will hopefully be posted next week and I’ll touch on the issue you have raised as it relates to the payment of taxes.
I think the short answer to your question is that we are not responsible to obey government when our obedience to government causes us to violate a clear command from the Word of God. For instance, when the government tells us we cannot come together as the church and meet for the corporate worship of our Lord, we would have to disobey the government in that instance to obey a clear command from Scripture.
In Acts 5 we see the Apostles being told by the religious leaders not to preach about Jesus anymore. Peter responds in verse 29 informing the leaders that the Apostles would obey God rather than men. I think this principle applies to our interaction with the government. The tough part for many Christians comes when we try to determine what command by the government is causing us to disobey a clear teaching of Scripture and should thus be disobeyed.
NW
Amen. Submit to government. What is government? The organized and recognized governing body of the society/nation in which you live. Those who exist for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right. Don’t be an evildoer and you’ll have no reason to fear human government. Be an evildoer and you’ll have a reason to fear. Largely that is the case…at least in our nation.
In so many other areas, submitting to the government is contrary to scripture. In which case, as was observed above, we ought to obey God rather than men. And that no matter the cost. That is quite easy for us to say, those of us who have never faced such costs. Though regardless of who says it, it is nonetheless true. Thanks for the post.
I guess my question would be, how does this translate for us as Americans when our “rulers” are actually subject to us? Our Constitution, that our elected officials take an oath to uphold, reads “we the people.” We aren’t ruled by Ceasar and there are legal ways of removing those in gov’t who do not uphold the Constitution. I know many Christians who take this passage(Acts 13) to mean blind obedience. Looking forward to the next installment.
Blind obedience is ruled out by the exhortation by the Apostles not to obey man over God.
For us, though the government is “subject” to us according to the constitution, their purpose is still the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right. For my part, I’d say that we ought to still obey them in the same way, with the above exceptions.
Please forgive me for changing the subject here, but it is a question regarding government. If I need to be re-directed to another thread, I’m cool with that! My question is about the Biblical position on women being in places of leadership. I’ve read that Al Mohler thinks Sarah Palin might even make a great president, but something in me winces at that. I read John Knox’s position (in “The first blast of the trumpet against the monstrous regiment of women, 1558) and I think its compelling. Is anyone talking about this?
Corey,
I was wondering the same thing myself. So many in the Christian community are excited about Sarah Palin being on the Republican ticket. But, I found it so disturbing watching the Republican National convention and seeing Palin on the stage talking about this big job and responsibility that they have ahead of them (while her husband sat holding their 3 month old baby in the background). I think her primary responsibility/and biblical role is a wife, mother and keeper of her home. How can she think she can fulfill that role while taking on the job of VP of the United States? I wonder what Christians should do in this situation? My conscience tells me NOT to vote a woman into office (who is obviously willing to neglect her biblical role). I wonder where Christians are willing to draw the line and vote for what is right? By the way, I am also a stay at home mom and I find it hard enough to try to do what I am called to. I have no idea how Palin thinks she can do it (babysitter, nanny)?? What is more important here, changing the government or taking care of your family and fulfilling your role?
C,
I, too, am struggling with this issue and seem to be the only one in my circle of Christian friends who is. It seems to me that Isaiah 3 speaks of “women ruling” as being a reflection of God’s judgment on a society. If McCain is elected he will be the oldest president in history and there would be 2 women behind him in line for leadership (Palin and Pelosi). So as a Christian do I vote to elect a ticket that hastens God’s judgment? This in addition to the fact that Palin would be struggling to “have it all” (Satan’s oldest lie to women – see Gen. 3). I am also a stay-at-home mom and know that it is DEFINITELY a 24/7 job. Sorting out our responsibility as Christians in this election has just gotten much harder.
Corey,
When the Bible, specifically the New Testament, speak of women in leadership it is addressing leadership in the church, not as head of state.
Knox’s work is an interesting one, but for whatever reason there seems to be no problem with women in leadership if they toe the line on certain issues (i.e. Protestantism as the state religion).
C,
When you express concern about the Sarah Palin being able to take care of her children do you have the same concern about someone like Joe Biden whose wife died shortly after after he became a Senator? Instead of stepping down and taking a job that would allow him to care for his children he continued on as a Senator.
Please don’t misunderstand me, my wife is a stay at home mom and I am thankful for that. But frankly, if she wants to go back to teaching when our daughter goes to school (if we don’t homeschool), I do not have a problem.
Being in government puts an additional pressure on the family regardless of who is actually in office (the husband or the wife). With the offices of VP and President the spouse still has expectations placed on them, which is why every four years a big deal is made out of the candidates spouse. I see nothing wrong with voting for a ticket that includes Sarah Palin because her home is largely in order, I know where she stands on the issues, and from everything I have heard she is a believer. The issue of her daughter is irrelevant to me, I know several families where there are stay at home moms and somebody still ends up pregnant that shouldn’t be.
Jonathon,
With all due respect, although you correctly point out the difference between church leadership and other forms of leadership in relation to the role of women, you fall off point in mentioning Joe Biden.
Sarah Palin is claiming to be a born again Christian. I don’t think that any of us would take it seriously if Joe Biden claimed this. However, as Palin does claim Christ and has a 3 month old special needs child, we are called to point out what is clearly a sin issue as regards her neglect of her biblical duties as a wife and mother. If Joe Biden stopped supporting his children, he would be in sin. But it really wouldn’t matter as he is clearly not a Christian and we can’t expect him to act like one.
Additionally, I am not sure how you ascertain that Palin’s home is in order. It seems clear evidence that it is not, in the fact that she is not raising her youngest child.
Let’s say that Joe X, a solid, conservative born again believer were chosen as the VP pick and we came to find out that he is not working to support his family financially. Should we vote for him without reservation or comment?
Debbie,
Isaiah 3:12 is written in the context of a prophesy against Jerusalem and Judah (Is. 3:1). The women and children pictured in the verse are pictures of those who ruled over the people that would conquer Judah – Isaiah is not in any sense making a broad statement that women rulers are a sign of judgment on a nation. Such an interpretation has nothing to do with the context of this prophesy. MacArthur’s note in his Study Bible mentions that the women and children are the rulers of those who would oppress Judah – the Babylonians. Isaiah is not saying that women and children rule in Judah or that their rulership is a sign of judgment.
Jonathan,
According to the notes in my MacArthur Study Bible (New King James version, 1997):
note on Is. 3:8 – “The fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC was only a partial fulfillment of this prophesy. The final fulfillment awaits the times just prior to Christ’s second coming.”
note on Is. 3:12 – “Children and women were considered ill-suited for governmental leadership, so they figuratively depicted the incompetent rulers.”
note on Is. 3:1-3 – “God’s judgment was to include a removal of the people’s leadership.”
Is. 3:14 speaks of the LORD entering into judgment with the elders of His people and His princes. Nowhere do I see this speaking of the Babylonians (none of the notes in my MacArthur mention them). Clearly the Lord is judging His people’s sin by giving them incompetent, corrupt leaders. And what was the picture of unfit leadership for a nation He chose to use? Women and children. I think there’s a principle here He meant for us to see.
Another thought: God has ordained 3 institutions: the family, the church, and human government. He has said clearly in His word that the head of the family is to be the husband and the head of the church is the male pastor (serving under the true Head which is Christ). Women are to have equally important but supportive roles in both the family and the church. As for human government? God raised up men to lead the nation of Israel – Moses, Joshua, the judges (with the exception of Deborah who ruled with Barak), and a multitude of kings (with the exception of Queen Athaliah who was extremely wicked in her influence and actions). Female rulership was the exception, but women did play supportive roles (i.e. Miriam). Again, I think there is a principle here He meant for us to see. The pattern He established was male leadership of a nation. Have we as humans always followed God’s pattern in all 3 institutions? Not at all. But when male leadership is usurped and God’s pattern is violated, more often than not conflict (dare I say sin) results (again, see Gen.3).
So my question is – can we as Christians participate in an election where a vote for one ticket is a vote to potentially violate God’s pattern for human government and a vote for the other ticket is a vote to elect someone who does not value the life of the unborn, since both issues have and potentially will again bring God’s judgment on a nation?