What Is a Christian’s Duty to Unjust Government?

[Phil Johnson] The only exception to this principle is when the one in authority instructs us to sin. Then “we must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

When I taught through Romans 13, I found these questions to be very difficult.

One of the key issues is this. The passage not only teaches *our* responsibilities towards government, but also what *governments* ought to be doing, i.e., being a terror to bad conduct and not good, and being God’s servant for your good, and carrying out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

What is the Christian’s responsibility when one’s government is not carrying out their responsibilities properly? And who gets to decide if they are doing that or not? And how bad does it have to be before one acts?

For example, in Hitler’s Germany, should Christians have attempted an overthrow of that government? How does abortion compare to genocide? In my mind the big difference is what the government allows and what it mandates. Also, in a representative democracy we have different ways to change governments that people in totalitarian regimes don’t have. But still, what is the answer?

I’m not really coming to any conclusions here. Just expressing some thoughts that make this a difficult question in my mind.

[AndyE]

Phil Johnson wrote:The only exception to this principle is when the one in authority instructs us to sin. Then “we must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

When I taught through Romans 13, I found these questions to be very difficult.

One of the key issues is this. The passage not only teaches *our* responsibilities towards government, but also what *governments* ought to be doing, i.e., being a terror to bad conduct and not good, and being God’s servant for your good, and carrying out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

What is the Christian’s responsibility when one’s government is not carrying out their responsibilities properly? And who gets to decide if they are doing that or not? And how bad does it have to be before one acts?

One thing I would consider in working through this is the historical context in which Paul and Peter wrote what they did. Phil mentions this in his post.

The Roman emperors weren’t paragons of virtue and several of them actively persecuted Christians. Yet, Paul calls us to submit to them and pray for them.

[T Howard]

One thing I would consider in working through this is the historical context in which Paul and Peter wrote what they did. Phil mentions this in his post.

The Roman emperors weren’t paragons of virtue and several of them actively persecuted Christians. Yet, Paul calls us to submit to them and pray for them.

No doubt. However, Paul did use the law to his advantage when he could. Our government, when it is failing in its duties, allows us to “provide new guards for [our] future security,” essentially, changing the government. That doesn’t mean we “rebel” in any way, but we can use legal means for redress of grievances. How and when to do that to fulfull our duties as both Americans and Christians would require a lot of prayer and wisdom.

[T Howard]

One thing I would consider in working through this is the historical context in which Paul and Peter wrote what they did. Phil mentions this in his post.

The Roman emperors weren’t paragons of virtue and several of them actively persecuted Christians. Yet, Paul calls us to submit to them and pray for them.

[dcbii] No doubt. However, Paul did use the law to his advantage when he could. Our government, when it is failing in its duties, allows us to “provide new guards for [our] future security,” essentially, changing the government. That doesn’t mean we “rebel” in any way, but we can use legal means for redress of grievances. How and when to do that to fulfull our duties as both Americans and Christians would require a lot of prayer and wisdom.

I’m less concerned about acting American than I am about acting Christ-like. Jesus did not demand his rights or assert his privileges. We have too many Christians in our country who are more concerned about their rights as Americans than they are about their sanctification as Christians. Sure, use the legal system to protect yourself, but don’t compromise your Christian testimony while “being American.”

[AndyE] Yes, that is a good thing to remember in these discussions. So, does that mean there is never a time when Christians should try to overthrow their government? Such as in Hitler’s Germany? God raises up rulers and brings them down. One way he brings them down is via revolt. Should Christians never participate in that, even if the government is killing millions of Jews and committing other atrocities? Does a believer have a legit means of removing oneself from under that authority so as to try to remove that authority? I’m not really trying to take a position, just trying to work through what a position actually means.

I love how these discussions almost immediately jump to Hitler and Nazi Germany. :)

As a Christian, I would refuse to go along with or support the racism and the extermination efforts or any other state-sponsored sin of Hitler’s regime. I would not seek to unlawfully remove him from power.

[T Howard]

I’m less concerned about acting American than I am about acting Christ-like. Jesus did not demand his rights or assert his privileges. We have too many Christians in our country who are more concerned about their rights as Americans than they are about their sanctification as Christians. Sure, use the legal system to protect yourself, but don’t compromise your Christian testimony while “being American.”

T Howard, like you, I’m less concerned about “acting American,” as you put it, since our true country is in heaven. However, just as Paul used his Roman citizenship, I want to use my American citizenship wisely. Obviously, in any case where scripture and American law conflict, my allegiance is to the Bible. Outside of that, we do obey government where we have to (Romans 13), but since American law itself gives us the ability to protest, vote, and make changes in the government legally, I want to do so wisely when necessary without in any way “compromis[ing] my Christian testimony.” It’s the “when necessary” part that I was saying requires wisdom and prayer.

One of the times Paul used his citizenship was to simply protest his treatment in prison. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to extend that logic to government making demands on churches meeting (which they are commanded to do) to decide how to act. Again, we want to have a good testimony, but we don’t want to avoid using and taking advantage of American law where we can do so with good conscience.

[dcbii]

T Howard wrote:

I’m less concerned about acting American than I am about acting Christ-like. Jesus did not demand his rights or assert his privileges. We have too many Christians in our country who are more concerned about their rights as Americans than they are about their sanctification as Christians. Sure, use the legal system to protect yourself, but don’t compromise your Christian testimony while “being American.”

T Howard, like you, I’m less concerned about “acting American,” as you put it, since our true country is in heaven. However, just as Paul used his Roman citizenship, I want to use my American citizenship wisely. Obviously, in any case where scripture and American law conflict, my allegiance is to the Bible. Outside of that, we do obey government where we have to (Romans 13), but since American law itself gives us the ability to protest, vote, and make changes in the government legally, I want to do so wisely when necessary without in any way “compromis[ing] my Christian testimony.” It’s the “when necessary” part that I was saying requires wisdom and prayer.

I don’t think any biblical principles are violated by protesting, voting, or making changes in the government legally (as long as what is communicated during a protest and how it is communicated does not violate Scripture). But, I personally would only legally protest if the government were asking me to violate Scripture. For example, I would not protest proposed gun laws or other “American rights” issues. Our kingdom is not of this world.

In Ohio, our governor has exempted churches from state-wide social distancing requirements. Even if he hadn’t, like Phil, I don’t think the government has purposely singled out churches in its social distancing orders.

This whole discussion has got me thinking about George Floyd and how he was recently killed in Minneapolis. If I had been there and had seen what was happening and I had some pepper spray in my pocket, would it have been acceptable to use it to save George’s life? Does the fact that someone has a badge mean that we as Christians should never intervene? I recently watched a documentary about a missionary who had tactical military training. He was in an area where the “authorities” were slaughtering whole villagers. He helped them defend themselves. Was he wrong? I know these examples are not about COVID and lockdowns, but they still relate to Romans 13.

[JD Miller]

This whole discussion has got me thinking about George Floyd and how he was recently killed in Minneapolis. If I had been there and had seen what was happening and I had some pepper spray in my pocket, would it have been acceptable to use it to save George’s life? Does the fact that someone has a badge mean that we as Christians should never intervene? I recently watched a documentary about a missionary who had tactical military training. He was in an area where the “authorities” were slaughtering whole villagers. He helped them defend themselves. Was he wrong? I know these examples are not about COVID and lockdowns, but they still relate to Romans 13.

I would not interfere during the arrest for several reasons.

• First, I would not feel confident that I understood the context of the situation. I don’t know what led to the arrest or what has transpired between the police and the individual being arrested.
• Second, criminals frequently complain about the details of their arrest. They complain about the officers hurting them one minute then turn around and attack the officers as soon as the officer loosens their restraints. I’ve known several police officers who attended past churches and even did a ride along with one of them. The police have to deal with a lot of crazy stuff that most people can’t even imagine. I give them the benefit of the doubt.
• Third, it’s illegal to interfere with an arrest. If you interfere in a lawful arrest (even though you may think it isn’t) and a police officer gets hurt, you’re going to do significant jail time.
• Fourth, although not ideal in the case of George Floyd, the time to respond to an unlawful arrest is after the arrest is made and the matter is in the court system.
• Fifth, if you used pepper spray and George still died, your use of pepper spray and not the officer’s restraint would be implicated in his death.

T. Howard. I do not disagree with anything you said. As a former police chaplain, I did a lot of ride alongs too. Still this is an extreme example and I would not have asked the question if I had not watched the whole video. The guy was no longer resisting and had already passed out and the officer still would not remove his knee from the neck. If I were watching a slow murder, it would be hard for me not to take action. It is hard for me to imagine that the officers I used to work with would not have taken action either. I am confident most of them would have even if off duty. If I had acted, I would have done so knowing I would go to jail, but I don’t know if I could have not tried to help. There again who knows what I would have done in those few minutes.

I think I would have actually called 911 and reported that a cop had lost his mind and was killing someone who was no longer resisting and let the cop know the call had been made and I was ready to testify against him and he better stop. It is easy to come up with a course of action in hindsight, but who knows what I would have done then.

I still cannot understand why these cops were not immediately arrested and video footage of them being cuffed and processed with their photos and booking numbers in the background posted for all to see so that people could see that justice was swift and fair.

“The only exception to this principle is when the one in authority instructs us to sin. Then “we must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).”

I disagree with Phil here.

If he didn’t live in the USA, maybe he would see the flaw in this line of thinking: It presumes that the government has rightful authority over every area of your life that God does not. I’ve heard Christians argue this before, but it’s problematic.

If an absurd state in which you lived made a law for you to crawl about and bark like a dog for the rest of your natural life, would it be wrong to resist? They’re not asking you to sin, as such.

That’s a terrible example, but I’m sure we can think of many more where the govt’s overreach is completely unreasonable and cannot be complied with. Such things seem unlikely and outlandish to the American mind; they’re not, from a global context. Should you not try to flee with your family if your govt. has ordered your execution for your faith? Isn’t that “disobeying your rightful rulers”? Be careful whom you are accusing of sin here.

Incidentally, I think for many of the problems mentioned above, a recovery of the Protestant doctrine of the “lesser magistrate” could be a hepful way forward in the discussion.

The police were on him about eight minutes after they called the ambulance. Now, we may or may not find that this killed him from the autopsy and so on, but I think we can reasonably conclude that (a) the use of force on a person who was basically unconscious was indeed unreasonable and (b) medically speaking, it also was almost certainly not helpful.

Would I have intervened? I don’t know, but I hope that if I’d been able to see the peril he was in, I’d have pleaded with the police to at least get off the man and allow any medical worker in the vicinity to try to help. I know for sure that I’ve confronted other public officials I felt were in sin.

[JD Miller]

T. Howard. I do not disagree with anything you said. As a former police chaplain, I did a lot of ride alongs too. Still this is an extreme example and I would not have asked the question if I had not watched the whole video. The guy was no longer resisting and had already passed out and the officer still would not remove his knee from the neck. If I were watching a slow murder, it would be hard for me not to take action. It is hard for me to imagine that the officers I used to work with would not have taken action either. I am confident most of them would have even if off duty. If I had acted, I would have done so knowing I would go to jail, but I don’t know if I could have not tried to help. There again who knows what I would have done in those few minutes.

I think I would have actually called 911 and reported that a cop had lost his mind and was killing someone who was no longer resisting and let the cop know the call had been made and I was ready to testify against him and he better stop. It is easy to come up with a course of action in hindsight, but who knows what I would have done then.

I still cannot understand why these cops were not immediately arrested and video footage of them being cuffed and processed with their photos and booking numbers in the background posted for all to see so that people could see that justice was swift and fair.

Um, in answer to your last statement, perhaps because their superiors weren’t there to see what happened as it happened? But I think you’re right: all 4 officers should have been executed as summarily as you think George Floyd was, with no investigation, right? Because that’s both the American and biblical approach to justice, as we all know.