ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2026 5:16 pmYou're certainly have the right to stop discussing things at any time. I would have a lot more respect for you if you would stop before blasting me with personal attacks instead of afterward. But it is your right. I won't demand that you answer my questions.
Part of the dynamic, Ken, is what you take as a personal attack against you, and what you do not consider a personal attack in what you write about me. And when that enters the discussion, it's time to stop.
I think I'm trying to steer the discussion toward the topic and away from a fight or talking about each other. When that becomes impossible, it's time to stop. And it's not important to agree on who is to blame, it's just time to stop.
Perhaps we can both agree to let this thread be about the topic?
1 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2026 4:01 pm
I see that I did not post this. I think this is a direct, content-based answer to a direct, content-based question, so I think it's worth posting.
ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2026 5:22 pm
Has anyone suggested what? That Romans 13 tells us to pay our taxes because they are used for a good purpose?
Well, somebody posted earlier in this thread that Romans 13 tells us to pay our taxes because governing authorities function as God's servant.
Yes, that is, in fact, what Romans 13 says. Quite literally. I don't see any way around that.
13 Let everyone submit to the governing authorities, since there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are instituted by God. 2 So then, the one who resists the authority is opposing God’s command, and those who oppose it will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you want to be unafraid of the one in authority? Do what is good, and you will have its approval. 4 For it is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, because it does not carry the sword for no reason. For it is God’s servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong. 5 Therefore, you must submit, not only because of wrath but also because of your conscience. 6 And for this reason you pay taxes, since the authorities are God’s servants, continually attending to these tasks. 7 Pay your obligations to everyone: taxes to those you owe taxes, tolls to those you owe tolls, respect to those you owe respect, and honor to those you owe honor.
Any good interpretation of Romans 13 needs to take that into account. I used the phrase because I was quoting Paul.
I don't disagree with that.
Could you clarify for me what you are asking this post here? You're asking if anyone has suggested what?
ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Thu Apr 02, 2026 3:01 pm
Romans 13 is descriptive about government, not prescriptive, but it is prescriptive about how a Christian should interact with government. And yes, Christians should pay their taxes. But that isn't a statement about whether it's right or wrong to levy taxes on someone else.
If we're going to say that Romans 13 tells us to pay our taxes because they are used for a good purpose, then does it follow that we should refuse to pay taxes that will be used for anything other than "good" law enforcement?
Has anyone suggested such a thing?
I think Romans 13 says that government is God's servant, we should respect and honor it, and we should give it its due, including paying taxes. It does not say that everything government does is good. It does not promise us that our taxes will always be used for something good. It does not say we should pay our taxes only if they are used for a good purpose.
Nobody has suggested that Romans 13 tells us to pay our taxes because they are used for a good purpose. We don't have that guarantee.
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
ken_sylvania wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2026 5:16 pmYou're certainly have the right to stop discussing things at any time. I would have a lot more respect for you if you would stop before blasting me with personal attacks instead of afterward. But it is your right. I won't demand that you answer my questions.
Part of the dynamic, Ken, is what you take as a personal attack against you, and what you do not consider a personal attack in what you write about me. And when that enters the discussion, it's time to stop.
Yep, sure enough! And another part of the dynamic is what you take as a personal attack against you, and what you do not consider a personal attack in what you write about me.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2026 5:28 pm
I think I'm trying to steer the discussion toward the topic and away from a fight or talking about each other. When that becomes impossible, it's time to stop. And it's not important to agree on who is to blame, it's just time to stop.
Perhaps we can both agree to let this thread be about the topic?
Hey, that's fine by me. This post here is what I would call a detour away from the topic, but I suppose opinions may differ.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2026 11:06 am
"It seems to me that you ..." is often most of the energy in your responses to me. And much of the time, it does not seem to me that you understand how I think.
Why put words in my mouth? I am perfectly capable of expressing myself, and you could simply quote and respond to what I write. You usually get it wrong and try to put me on the defensive, and then I feel like you are cross examining me about something unrelated. Makes it extremely hard to actually discuss the Scripture that I just quoted or the post that I just wrote.
I think it's against forum rules, too.
If you want to free associate theology, please own it as your own thinking, not mine. If you want to understand how I interpret the Old Testament, that would take some time, and it would take a different kind of conversation.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2026 4:01 pm
I see that I did not post this. I think this is a direct, content-based answer to a direct, content-based question, so I think it's worth posting.
Yes, that is, in fact, what Romans 13 says. Quite literally. I don't see any way around that.
Any good interpretation of Romans 13 needs to take that into account. I used the phrase because I was quoting Paul.
I don't disagree with that.
Could you clarify for me what you are asking this post here? You're asking if anyone has suggested what?
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Fri Apr 03, 2026 4:13 pm
Has anyone suggested such a thing?
I think Romans 13 says that government is God's servant, we should respect and honor it, and we should give it its due, including paying taxes. It does not say that everything government does is good. It does not promise us that our taxes will always be used for something good. It does not say we should pay our taxes only if they are used for a good purpose.
Nobody has suggested that Romans 13 tells us to pay our taxes because they are used for a good purpose. We don't have that guarantee.
OK. Fair enough. Is government still acting as God's servant when they imprison political opponents without good cause?
What is Paul referring to when he says that the powers that be "are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing?" What is "this very thing?" I would say it seems to refer to punishment of evildoers, in which case the thought being expressed is that the reason we pay tribute is because government is keeping order by punishing evildoers.
