Comments on: Nature’s God: The god of The Founding Fathers http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/ Nothing Idle : No Word Wasted Thu, 21 Aug 2008 12:07:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU By: Jon Rowe http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1651 Jon Rowe Sat, 24 May 2008 14:58:24 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1651 "Looking at the big picture, too, whenever a government upholds evil (such as was perceived by the founders to be the case with King George), then ‘we ought to obey God rather than men.’ (Acts 5:29)." I think that's a pretty big stretch. Rome certainly upheld evil and Paul instructed believers to submit to that government. Acts 5:29 applies to a believer's duty to spread the Gospel and holds if government tries to prevent you from so doing, obey God and not men. It is not an applicable verse for trying to justifying revolt against tyranny as well or the notion that government must uphold some kind of "godly" standard in order to be legitimately ordained by God. As one evangelical professor put it on my blog: "In Acts 5:29, Peter and the apostles refuse to quit preaching the Gospel (as they did previously in 4:19-20); but they make no claims of political liberty and organize no rebellion. In fact, they make it clear that they are under the authority of the Council by affirming its authority to judge their actions (4:19) and by submitting to the punishment prescribed (flogging) in 5:40. No one demands any rights or appeals to political liberty or calls for rebellion – quite the contrary." http://positiveliberty.com/2006/08/frazer-replies-to-babka.html “Looking at the big picture, too, whenever a government upholds evil (such as was perceived by the founders to be the case with King George), then ‘we ought to obey God rather than men.’ (Acts 5:29).”

I think that’s a pretty big stretch. Rome certainly upheld evil and Paul instructed believers to submit to that government. Acts 5:29 applies to a believer’s duty to spread the Gospel and holds if government tries to prevent you from so doing, obey God and not men. It is not an applicable verse for trying to justifying revolt against tyranny as well or the notion that government must uphold some kind of “godly” standard in order to be legitimately ordained by God. As one evangelical professor put it on my blog:

“In Acts 5:29, Peter and the apostles refuse to quit preaching the Gospel (as they did previously in 4:19-20); but they make no claims of political liberty and organize no rebellion. In fact, they make it clear that they are under the authority of the Council by affirming its authority to judge their actions (4:19) and by submitting to the punishment prescribed (flogging) in 5:40. No one demands any rights or appeals to political liberty or calls for rebellion – quite the contrary.”

http://positiveliberty.com/2006/08/frazer-replies-to-babka.html

]]> By: kylegebhart http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1650 kylegebhart Sat, 24 May 2008 10:33:45 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1650 @ jon, thanks for the link @ scott and all: bad writing week last week, working something up for the next day or two to post. @ jon, thanks for the link

@ scott and all: bad writing week last week, working something up for the next day or two to post.

]]> By: tduffie http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1648 tduffie Fri, 23 May 2008 13:34:50 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1648 Romans 13 certainly makes the case for civil obedience, and Paul distinguishes between Church and state. However, they are not separated or isolated from one another. Looking at the big picture, too, whenever a government upholds evil (such as was perceived by the founders to be the case with King George), then 'we ought to obey God rather than men.' (Acts 5:29). The founders were drawing from generations of frustration brought about by the Puritan/Anglican/Roman Catholic ideological battles that manifested into civil unrest. The personal faith of the founders may be interesting and may have played a significant role in the rebellion to tyranny and the formation of the Constitutional compact, but they were in no way establishing an ecumenical church-state. The US has never been that, and it's foolish to think it ever could be. It's my view that there should always be synergy between both entities of church and state, but neither submitting in blind obedience to the other. td Romans 13 certainly makes the case for civil obedience, and Paul distinguishes between Church and state. However, they are not separated or isolated from one another. Looking at the big picture, too, whenever a government upholds evil (such as was perceived by the founders to be the case with King George), then ‘we ought to obey God rather than men.’ (Acts 5:29). The founders were drawing from generations of frustration brought about by the Puritan/Anglican/Roman Catholic ideological battles that manifested into civil unrest.
The personal faith of the founders may be interesting and may have played a significant role in the rebellion to tyranny and the formation of the Constitutional compact, but they were in no way establishing an ecumenical church-state. The US has never been that, and it’s foolish to think it ever could be.
It’s my view that there should always be synergy between both entities of church and state, but neither submitting in blind obedience to the other.

td

]]> By: Scott http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1645 Scott Thu, 22 May 2008 03:44:56 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1645 Hi Kyle - I just want to encourage you for your next post. Checking everyday and looking forward to what you have to say on the subject. Hi Kyle - I just want to encourage you for your next post. Checking everyday and looking forward to what you have to say on the subject.

]]> By: Positive Liberty » A Christian Blog That “Gets It” http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1644 Positive Liberty » A Christian Blog That “Gets It” Wed, 21 May 2008 19:13:55 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1644 [...] discusses among other things the dangers for traditional Christians in patriotism. Here is one of his posts on Romans 13 and the Nature’s god [he purposefully has god in lowercase] of the Declaration [...] [...] discusses among other things the dangers for traditional Christians in patriotism. Here is one of his posts on Romans 13 and the Nature’s god [he purposefully has god in lowercase] of the Declaration [...]

]]> By: Jon Rowe http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1642 Jon Rowe Wed, 21 May 2008 01:21:30 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1642 Good stuff here; my blog(s) deal with this stuff on a daily basis. Someone mentioned Mayhew. A note of caution: He was a theological unitarian who had a rationalist based approach to scripture. Many ministers of the Founding era, preaching from the pulpit DID attempt to deal with Romans 13, but used a very cafeteria liked, rationalistic hermeneutic to try and explain away that text. In short, many of the pro-revolutionary preachers were really preaching Enlightenment, not Christian principles from the pulpit and many of them were unitarians and universalists (thus heretics) to boot. Good stuff here; my blog(s) deal with this stuff on a daily basis.

Someone mentioned Mayhew. A note of caution: He was a theological unitarian who had a rationalist based approach to scripture. Many ministers of the Founding era, preaching from the pulpit DID attempt to deal with Romans 13, but used a very cafeteria liked, rationalistic hermeneutic to try and explain away that text. In short, many of the pro-revolutionary preachers were really preaching Enlightenment, not Christian principles from the pulpit and many of them were unitarians and universalists (thus heretics) to boot.

]]> By: Greg Comiskey http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1637 Greg Comiskey Wed, 14 May 2008 21:45:50 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1637 Kyle - I'm glad you're tackling this complex issue of faith and nationalism. It's an important one for Chrisitians to reflect on - Christian nationalism is a dangerous beast because it hinders us from soberly discerning both the evils of the United States as well as its positive contributions to the world. Not to mention distorting our theology. Peace. Kyle - I’m glad you’re tackling this complex issue of faith and nationalism. It’s an important one for Chrisitians to reflect on - Christian nationalism is a dangerous beast because it hinders us from soberly discerning both the evils of the United States as well as its positive contributions to the world. Not to mention distorting our theology. Peace.

]]> By: kylegebhart http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1636 kylegebhart Wed, 14 May 2008 20:53:13 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1636 @ greg - I think your example is too theoretical for me to give a clear response, I'll tackle civil disobedience in a post in the future and we can examine a few sides of it. PS - love your comments, thanks for taking the time. @ scott - that is not my premise for one key reason, the word "every" - I've outlined the basic circumstances where I think there is clear biblical justification for disobeying the state's decrees. finally, the whole series of posts, in due course, will put the spotlight on xian nationalism and its risks. it may take me awhile to build the case, simply because i'm trying to not do these posts in blog-speak, but writing, revising and rewriting them before i post them. please be patient with me :) @ greg - I think your example is too theoretical for me to give a clear response, I’ll tackle civil disobedience in a post in the future and we can examine a few sides of it. PS - love your comments, thanks for taking the time.

@ scott - that is not my premise for one key reason, the word “every” - I’ve outlined the basic circumstances where I think there is clear biblical justification for disobeying the state’s decrees.

finally, the whole series of posts, in due course, will put the spotlight on xian nationalism and its risks. it may take me awhile to build the case, simply because i’m trying to not do these posts in blog-speak, but writing, revising and rewriting them before i post them. please be patient with me :)

]]> By: Scott http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1635 Scott Wed, 14 May 2008 00:12:03 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1635 Kyle, I think you have a great point to make, which is this, to quote you: "The first premise is that many Christians are unaware of the power of nationalism over their worldview." Thus far you haven't really made a good argument for the above premise. Now, Greg Comiskey said, on May 13th, 2008 at 10:01 pm: "Kyle, if the premise of your argument decrying the evil American Revolution is that Christians are called to submit to the government in every circumstance, that is a biblically flawed premise." I agree with Greg that the premise you've actually argued so far is as he stated; and we probably all agree that that premise is biblically flawed. You've also argued that many of the founding fathers were not theologically sound, which is important and true, but still doesn't directly address YOUR premise. So: Tell us! Argue, prove and enlighten on the subject... "many Christians are unaware of the power of nationalism over their worldview." It's a great point and I want to hear it expounded clearly. Sharpen your case! Kyle,
I think you have a great point to make, which is this, to quote you: “The first premise is that many Christians are unaware of the power of nationalism over their worldview.”

Thus far you haven’t really made a good argument for the above premise.

Now, Greg Comiskey said, on May 13th, 2008 at 10:01 pm:
“Kyle, if the premise of your argument decrying the evil American Revolution is that Christians are called to submit to the government in every circumstance, that is a biblically flawed premise.”

I agree with Greg that the premise you’ve actually argued so far is as he stated; and we probably all agree that that premise is biblically flawed. You’ve also argued that many of the founding fathers were not theologically sound, which is important and true, but still doesn’t directly address YOUR premise.

So: Tell us! Argue, prove and enlighten on the subject… “many Christians are unaware of the power of nationalism over their worldview.” It’s a great point and I want to hear it expounded clearly. Sharpen your case!

]]> By: Greg Comiskey http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/2008/05/12/nature%e2%80%99s-god-the-god-of-the-founding-fathers/#comment-1634 Greg Comiskey Tue, 13 May 2008 23:06:35 +0000 http://kylegebhart.wordpress.com/?p=72#comment-1634 This topic of civil obedience is interesting. Kyle, do you think that we should submit to the govt. to the point of death? What if a govt. chose to execute and torture its citizens for no rational reason, w/o due process, and did so without preventing them from worshipping God, preaching the Gospel or living morally? If I knew a govt. officer was coming to my house to bludgeon me to death, would I not be justified in running away as a means of civil disobedience? This topic of civil obedience is interesting.

Kyle, do you think that we should submit to the govt. to the point of death? What if a govt. chose to execute and torture its citizens for no rational reason, w/o due process, and did so without preventing them from worshipping God, preaching the Gospel or living morally?

If I knew a govt. officer was coming to my house to bludgeon me to death, would I not be justified in running away as a means of civil disobedience?

]]>