Romans 13. How literal a guide is this admonition?

[Jax Agnesson]

I  would like to carry on a debate that went way off topic on the "9th Commandment" thread. I don't want to derail that thread, but nor do I want to drop this one. So:
Jax Agnesson said:

I'm sorry to ask the same question again, but I'm hoping I have misunderstood somehow. Daniel, are you seriously saying that, when  individual Christian Germans, (professional patriotic soldiers or unwilling conscripts, ordinary Christian police officers seconded to the Gestapo, and other Christian citizens working in the civil service, the railways etc, ) when they obediently perpetrated the Holocaust, you believe they were doing God's will? And you also believe that those who organised illegally to oppose and subvert this horror were acting against God's will?

Have I really got this right?

Daniel said:

If Paul is going to advocate obeying authorities in Romans 13 under the reign of Nero, who burned Rome, blamed it on the Christians, and basically committed genocide against them, I don't see how the rules change just because our version of Hitler was later in history.  So no, I don't need more time to think about it.

[Jax Agnesson]

Wandering off in yet another direction, but related; (sorry about this, folks, my head's on fire, lol) at the moment in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Syria, etc, Muslims are debating this same question with consideable passion. The traditionalists are saying that democracy is incompatible with Islam (=literally "surrender to the Will of God"); the modernists (mainly but not all of them young; mainly but not all of them devout Muslims) are arguing that democracy is perfectly in accord with Islam, and so is civil disobedience. Any thoughts from a Christian perspective?

[JRKH]

As with most things I will say that the answer is not "either/or" but rather "both/and"...

One extreme of obedience can and likely WILL result in despotism.  The other extreme results in anarchy. 

The beauty of Democracy in civil matters is that it allows for debate, argumentation, adjustment and (hopefully) consensus.  Once this occurs, or once a matter is thrashed out and voted on, then humility and confidence in the democratic system requires our obedience to the "Will of the people" 

In spiritual matters too, there is much to be said for the "democratic" form.  The Bible shows us that even from the earliest days things were argued about and that particularly contentious issues could be settled in council. 

So the openness and desire to debate (in Christian Love) various aspects can and does lead to better understandings of Truth.

Peace

James

[Daniel]

Earlier, Jax asked, "Does this mean God placed Pol Pol, Joe Stalin etc in authority?"  Some thoughts come to mind.  

1. I think when it comes to matters like this, many want to stretch God's Sovereignty too far to make God the causal agent of things like this.  Sometimes oppressive people can be used by God.  He did, after all, harden Pharaoh's heart.  And He can USE the sinful actions of someone to accomplish His purposes.  But that doesn't mean that He's the one making oppressive things happen. 
2. While God can and does cause some things to occur, He does not violate His own character from which His commands derive and does not make others violate those commands.  They are responsible for their own choices and will answer for them.  The fact that God can make lemonaide from the lemons doesn't mean that He is responsible for the messes we cause.
3. I think James 1 is very applicable for those suffering under oppressive regimes.  The point of the chapter is that regardless of whether this is a trial from God to grow our faith, a temptation that we've fallen into (a mess that WE created), reaping what we have previously sown, or just the way of the fallen world, our response should be the same - turn to God.

[Jax Agnesson]

"He can use the sinful actions of. . . "  So you accept that the govt 'placed over you' might give sinful commands.  . So how do we know whether the govt is actually doing God's will or commanding us to sin?  Personal conscience?

(I know, as an ex-Catholic, I'm not very well versed in the main points of the Protestant cause, but I have very vague recollections of learning what Cromwell's revolution was about.  .  . . . . Something about 'every man standing equally before his maker'? Something like that. 

Daniel said:

Earlier, Jax asked, "Does this mean God placed Pol Pol, Joe Stalin etc in authority?"  Some thoughts come to mind.  

1. I think when it comes to matters like this, many want to stretch God's Sovereignty too far to make God the causal agent of things like this.  Sometimes oppressive people can be used by God.  He did, after all, harden Pharaoh's heart.  And He can USE the sinful actions of someone to accomplish His purposes.  But that doesn't mean that He's the one making oppressive things happen. 
2. While God can and does cause some things to occur, He does not violate His own character from which His commands derive and does not make others violate those commands.  They are responsible for their own choices and will answer for them.  The fact that God can make lemonaide from the lemons doesn't mean that He is responsible for the messes we cause.
3. I think James 1 is very applicable for those suffering under oppressive regimes.  The point of the chapter is that regardless of whether this is a trial from God to grow our faith, a temptation that we've fallen into (a mess that WE created), reaping what we have previously sown, or just the way of the fallen world, our response should be the same - turn to God.

[Daniel]

In a representative republic, I vote my conscience.  But I am not the Judge they will ultimately stand before for their actions.  

Jax Agnesson said:

"He can use the sinful actions of. . . "  So you accept that the govt 'placed over you' might give sinful commands.  . So how do we know whether the govt is actually doing God's will or commanding us to sin?  Personal conscience?