Honor the king

[RZehr]

We may not have a king but we have a president who is the governing authority.
Romans 13:1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Sure. No problem.

I just believe that as believers we are called to be careful how we speak about anyone, especially those who are in authority over us.

I’m wondering what the word ‘especially’ is based on. To be sure, I was raised with the mindset that you spelled out. But why? Why do we think that? Where does it come from? I showed -I think- that Peter could be understood in a little different light. That the specific callouts to honor these secular leaders could be to clarify that they are not exempt just because they are who they are, and what the do.
And the only place that is coming to my mind right now where it would indicate special honor for a man, is where it talked about a leader of the church having “double honor”.
How sure are we that we should give a secular leader extra honor? Is there somewhere in the NT that would give us that idea? I haven’t looked, there could be something that I’m forgetting.

[QuietlyListening]

Maybe the especially comes from the fact that we tend to resist anyone in authority over us and if we dislike them, don't respect their actions we find it difficult to be subject to them and esteem them as better than ourselves, treat the office with respect therefore while they are in office treat them with respect by your words and actions.

You have a point. Hadn't thought of that.

[Josh]

Maybe the especially comes from the fact that we tend to resist anyone in authority over us and if we dislike them, don't respect their actions we find it difficult to be subject to them and esteem them as better than ourselves, treat the office with respect therefore while they are in office treat them with respect by your words and actions.

You have a point. Hadn't thought of that.

The President of America has repeatedly spoken in favour of killing innocent babies through abortion. I am unclear on how one is supposed to "respect" that action. It is a wicked, evil act, and one that I share a personal concern for every person who affirms and promotes it. I can treat the office with respect, but I can't respect people in authority who promote wickedness.

I would levy the same criticism at a plain Anabaptist minister who looks the other way or even condones people under his authority he knows are engaging in grievous wickedness and sin. It is no different.

[Soloist]

The President of America has repeatedly spoken in favour of killing innocent babies through abortion. I am unclear on how one is supposed to "respect" that action. It is a wicked, evil act, and one that I share a personal concern for every person who affirms and promotes it. I can treat the office with respect, but I can't respect people in authority who promote wickedness.

I would levy the same criticism at a plain Anabaptist minister who looks the other way or even condones people under his authority he knows are engaging in grievous wickedness and sin. It is no different.

We can get bogged down with the actions a president does, no one here suggesting respect for the president means endorsing his actions. You know that isn’t what I am advocating for and this also is what I was pointing out Josh.

You are trying to muddle the primary point with political rhetoric. You certainly should know I don’t endorse his actions or support abortion.

[Ernie]

Should we just "whitewash" the sins we see in the president and other leaders?

But I don't see you making the same kinds of statements about politicians whose policies you prefer. If you were calling out all leader's sins, regardless of their political leanings, than I think you could make a better case that you are following in Jesus' footsteps.

[Josh]

We can get bogged down with the actions a president does, no one here suggesting respect for the president means endorsing his actions. You know that isn’t what I am advocating for and this also is what I was pointing out Josh.

You are trying to muddle the primary point with political rhetoric. You certainly should know I don’t endorse his actions or support abortion.

No, I'm not, but there is no biblical commandment to honour a President beyond whatever is due to any magistrate, or to any human being.

The Bible never says that means people are above criticism for grievous, obvious sin. In fact, the Bible is full of prophets pointing out grievous, obvious sin - including of actual kings.

[Ernie]

The President of America has repeatedly spoken in favour of killing innocent babies through abortion. I am unclear on how one is supposed to "respect" that action. It is a wicked, evil act, and one that I share a personal concern for every person who affirms and promotes it. I can treat the office with respect, but I can't respect people in authority who promote wickedness.

And I will challenge you with the same thing... Why don't we see such calling out of sin among those whose policies you favor?

[Ken]

Pe 2:17  Honour all men. Love the brotherhood(church). Fear God. Honour the king(president)

Is your conduit honoring our president? The brothers/sisters you attend church with?

Consider this a rebuke to evil speaking of leaders of our country. The way you speak of one another slandering and distorting.
If you wouldn’t say it before God or in front of the president, or to someone face to face perhaps you should repent.
Why is our forum looking so similar to Reddit without the language? Or like a news comment section?

This is why people leave, not because of liberals taking over or of backwards conservative thoughts.
If you consider yourself free of this, what exactly does it mean to you to honor all men, honor the king, love the brotherhood?

Going back to Soloist's original post. The NIV translation says "honor the emperor" The KJV says "honor thy king"

I tend to ask myself what is the purpose and intent behind this teaching. What REASON would he have to be saying this. And in the context the Roman Empire in the 1st Century I don't think he is making the argument that the Emperor is necessarily ordained by God and instrument of God's plan on earth. 1 Peter is usually dated to about the time of the emperor Domitian who engaged in various reigns of terror against political enemies as well as Christians. He was a horribly violent and repressive ruler.

I think he is making a different argument. Namely, that Christians should not take up arms against the state and engage in the political rebellions that were taking place across the middle east. The Jewish wars against the Roman Empire were raging at this point in time and so the region was a political caldron. I think he is making more of a 2-Kingdom argument. That one should respect the state and put one's focus on spreading the word of God, not engaging in political rebellion. Perhaps more of a "turn the other cheek" argument when interacting with the state.

Translated and interpreted for the modern day. I think it is more of an argument for respecting the institution of the American State as reflected in the Constitution. All Americans who work for the government take an oath (or affirmation) to support the Constitution, not any specific leader who is elected or chosen under the Constitution. Under the constitution, our "king" is literally us and we hire people to temporarily act on our behalf. The presidency does not "belong" to Trump or Biden. It belongs to us. Honor the institution even if you don't agree with the person who temporarily occupies the office.

So for me the instruction in 1 Peter is to respect the Constitutional process and the outcomes that it produces in terms of presidents, Senators, judges, government policies, etc. And do not spend your time railing or revolting against it. You have more important things to do. And note, I don't think that means complete disengagement from politics. There is no instruction in this verse to not engage in politics. The instruction is to honor the Constitution and process. So I don't interpret this particular verse as as argument not to vote or work for political change. But to honor the process if you do so.

[Joy]

Maybe this command, a few verses later, clarifies some questions.

Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. [1Pe 2:18 ESV]

We obey and respect those over us, not because of their high moral character, but because they are put there of God. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. [Rom 13:1 b KJV]

[Grace]

Should we just "whitewash" the sins we see in the president and other leaders?

But I don't see you making the same kinds of statements about politicians whose policies you prefer. If you were calling out all leader's sins, regardless of their political leanings, than I think you could make a better case that you are following in Jesus' footsteps.

FYI, I have called out other leaders sins. But let me rephrase that comment. Should we "whitewash" the policies of our government leaders that blatantly promote sin? How do you denounce promotion of sin, without discrediting those doing the promoting?