Bootstrap wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 9:10 amOver and over again, we are told that the real problem is the failure to submit to abusive power. Not abusive power in the first place.
Perhaps a better perspective is that activity like pulling guns on cops, carjackings, robberies, and fleeing the cops and hurting other people in car crashes from a police chase, and so on is “abusive power”.
Isn’t the power to conduct a robbery, the power to steal, and the power to conduct a carjacking “abusive power”?
Last edited by ohio jones on Sat Dec 30, 2023 11:39 am, edited 2 times in total.
Reason:coding
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 9:10 amOver and over again, we are told that the real problem is the failure to submit to abusive power. Not abusive power in the first place.
Over and over again the Bible tells us to submit to those in authority. And doesn’t seem to carve out much exception when the authority is forfeited by abuses. The exception is that we ought to obey God rather than man. The exception is not, if the police doesn’t technically follow all proper protocol.
So it makes sense to me that we focus more on our responsibility than on the authorities. Besides, we don’t believe we should be in authority anyway.
I lost signal... second attempt.
The new testament is not strong on authority except for Jesus. Believers are prohibited from forming hierarchies of power and authority among themselves (... the gentiles Lord over one another, not so among you...) and discouraged from recognizing or accepting ethical authorities outside of Jesus (...call no man Father...). I understand the instruction to accept civil authority to be in a similar vein of rejecting the exercise of power and authority, for if we reject civil authority we are claiming or exercising authority over it.
This acceptance is a function of delineation, not endorsement or support. It's not about whether or not to "speak truth to power" but rather to speak the truth about who we are.
