DISQUS

DISQUS Hello! the Jesus Manifesto is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

  • Subscribe

  • Community

  • Top Commenters

  • Popular Threads

  • Recent Comments

    • Yeah, you don't hear that preached much in church, but that is as central to Christianity as it gets. The gospel Jesus preached was the "Gospel of the Kingdom." He proclaimed that...

      39 minutes ago by Zack Allen

      in The Kingdom of God

    • Woa. Something about the way you put that... Gives a whole new understanding (to me, at least) of "the kingdom of god is within you." See, I always kinda thought of the kingdom of God as...

      4 hours ago by Jesse Evans

      in The Kingdom of God

    • Well I was always under the impression that "freedom costs a buck-o-five." Seriously though, I think I like the heart of what you're saying here (we're offered salvation (freedom)...

      4 hours ago by Zack Allen

      in Independence day sort of

    • Yes, I suppose that could describe our experience of it, Jesse. But I'm more interested in the reality of the kingdom that Jesus proclaimed. If it comes slowly to us because we're not...

      16 hours ago by paul munn

      in The Kingdom of God

    • I see what you're saying Paul. As another possible perspective, it could be one of those things that just "creep up on you." Like, all the signs are there but you just don't see...

      23 hours ago by Jesse Evans

      in The Kingdom of God

the Jesus Manifesto

following the way of Jesus in the land of our captivity
Jump to original thread »
Author

Church and State pt 4: What Paul is Saying in Romans 13

Started by markvans · 10 months ago

As I promised, today I will offer my general understanding of Romans 13. More accurately, I’ll be be sharing my understanding of Romans 12:9-13:10 (the chapter break between 12 and 13 is forced and betrays a “Christendom” reading of the text).
I&%2 ... Continue reading »

4 comments

  • graham

    2 years ago

    Hi Mark,

    I can't believe I haven't properly responded to any of these posts yet!

    Though I'd agree with most of what's in your other posts, I'm not sure that I'd go along with this paraphrase. It seems to allow too close a co-operation between the State and God. I'd also want to argue that God is 'in charge' of "America" in the same sense that he is in charge of Creation. I'm not sure that it makes any statement about how good or (usually godly) the State is. I find it preferable to think that God has set America in its place, namely under Him. And any authority she does has is from Him.

    The passage is then a call to Christian Anarchy in that rather than asserting the authority of the State it is putting the State in its place as nothing but an instrument under God.
    reply
  • markvans

    2 years ago

    I agree with what you are saying, Graham. Maybe you can point out where my paraphrase is allowing too close of a co-operation between the State and God. I think the passage does support (or at least doesn't take away from) a Christian Anarchist perspective...though it does seem to say that Rome (I don't want to universalize this too much) can "do God's bidding" in its functions, even if they aren't legitimized and sanctioned by God.
    reply
  • graham

    2 years ago

    I may have misread your meaning, but I know that I wouldn't have been comfortable with a paraphrase like this:

    'Instead, you should submit to them. Why? Because God is in charge and America is restrained by God. If you rebel against America, you will get slapped down.'

    I wouldn't have used the word 'submit', personally. It also sounds a little too like, 'when you are slapped down you are actually being slapped by God'. I know that some would agree with that, but I'm not sure you would.
    reply
  • markvans

    2 years ago

    Great point Graham...I agree. I'm open to suggestions for better wording...
    reply

Add New Comment

Returning? Login