- God gave us minds.
- God gave us free will
Ergo and thus… He expected us to use them. I also suspect that He expected us to use logic and compassion in our applications. Those 2 standards are not incompatible.
Then we face the knotty problem of how do we resolve the issue of obeying those in authority over us. Blindly following doesn’t seem to fit the above. So how do we scripturally and effectively ‘disagree’? A very dear friend asked me about how I resolve this particular conundrum. I still wrestle with this and am not confident in my stand, but, at least, I choose to stand on what I know.
Obviously I am talking about human ‘authority’ and not God’s. I suspect that blind obedience has never been my strong suit… probably still isn’t. The more I think about it, I think I’ll blame my parents. They never gave me a ‘because I said so’ response to any question I had… especially regarding what they wanted me to do. Typically they supplied their ‘why’ before I asked.
Ergo and thus, when this subject of ‘authority’ arises, my ‘passion’ related to it also rises, mostly because how scripture considers this subject. Without question, obedience without understanding is difficult for me… so I react. This particular subject fits this description (no understanding) as does the one that states that women should be quiet in services. (However, I have a partial response to that one.)
In this issue, let’s begin at where I typically begin – starting with definitions:
Obey: Webster
transitive verb
1: to follow the commands or guidance of
2: to conform to or comply with, obey an order
intransitive verb
: to behave obediently
Synonyms for obey
• adhere (to). comply (with), conform (to), follow, mind,
Words Related to obey
• defer (to), submit (to), surrender (to), yield (to), accede (to), acquiesce (to), agree (to),
assent (to), attend, hear, heed, listen (to), (etc.)
Summary: to follow, conform, comply, behave, Does this give us further understanding? Or produce more questions?
Scripture
Romans 13:1-2. AMP
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God [granted by His permission and sanction], and those which exist have been put in place by God. Therefore whoever resists [governmental] authority resists the ordinance of God, And those who have resisted it will bring judgment (civil penalty) on themselves.
1 Peter 2:13-14. AMP
Submit yourselves to [the authority of] every human institution for the sake of the Lord [to honor His name], whether it is to a king as one in a position of power, or to governors as sent by him to bring punishment to those who do wrong, and to praise and encourage those who do right.
End of discussion? So how do we reconcile this with the words and acts of Christians… even the Lord? He threw moneychangers out of the temple. He rebuked the Pharisees, who were the ruling authority. [The Woes of the Pharisees is a list of criticisms by Jesus against scribes and Pharisees recorded in the Gospels of Luke 11:37–54 and Matthew 23:1–39. Mark 12:35–40 and Luke 20:45–47 also include warnings about scribes. Eight are listed in Matthew, and hence Matthew’s version is known as the eight woes.] And, from a ‘human’ standpoint – how do we reconcile the actions of our ancestors when we sought our independence?
From this do we understand that we should/can disagree openly against authority? Or is this only for the Lord? How does disagreeing and complying coexist? [Matthew 23:1-5. AMP]
“Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: ‘The scribes and Pharisees have seated themselves in Moses’ chair [of authority as teachers of the Law]; so practice and observe everything they tell you, but do not do as they do; for they preach [things], but do not practice them. The scribes and Pharisees tie up [a]heavy loads [that are hard to bear] and place them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not lift a finger [to make them lighter]. They do all their deeds to be seen by men;”
Obviously you can deduce from this lame discussion that questions still remain and I really don’t have it all together. Still… somehow my mind says – why give us minds if we aren’t to use them? IF the issue was in reference to what the scriptures say related to themselves – God, Jesus, Holy Spirit – I really have no problem there. If they say it then that’s the end of the discussion.
However, when it comes to man and his understanding… I think healthy debate, discussion should always prevail. Why have free will if it doesn’t? I realize this is an extremely banal example but… if the leader, let’s say mayor of PDC said, in the middle of the day, we are actually in the night, would we accept and follow this? We probably would start a petition to remove that person from office. Again, not a good example but is it still the prevail action we should be taking in regard to our leaders? Or, do we treat national leaders differently… and if so, why?
Duly notice that the scripture in Romans says, we will bring judgment (civil penalty) on ourselves. Understand that civil disobedience will/can bring civil penalty… but is this the question?
As you can see, I’m still wrestling with this. I don’t know if it’s the fact of disobeying or the method of disobeying…
