This requires education and wise discernment by the citizens. I was fond of saying that my job as a federal prosecutor was a Romans 13 job. And it confers the power to do certain things on government authorities that it does not give to individual believers. An individual believer cannot unilaterally imprison someone he observes committing a crime, for example. That itself would be a crime.
Our process was designed to reflect universal truths about the inherent dignity of each individual, their freedoms as given by God, and process by which those freedoms are protected. And it was also designed to create a limited government whose power resided in the people.
The bigger government gets, the more it strays outside its limited function, the harder it is for believers to discern and make decisions about how and whether to submit.
Taxes? Necessary.
But what about when taxes go toward priorities with which we disagree? Um … still probably need to submit … unless … the thing we are paying for is something God clearly says in Scripture is a moral evil.
Such actions can then and should be resisted.
But it’s not always so clear is it? I’ve had many fellow Christians argue with me about immigration and “welcoming the stranger.” (Interestingly, this was never much of a debate throughout the first 7 or so administrations — Democrats and Republican — I served under and prosecuted immigration cases for).
But again, what God commands the individual believer does not always translate to the function of governing authorities, who have the larger mission of protecting its citizenry and setting the rules for citizenship based on those principles. Enforcing immigration laws is an entirely legitimate function of government. But then we can move on to HOW the enforcement is occurring and whether the government authorities are following their own rules. That can be a different and more nuanced conversation.
Others I hear, “turn the other cheek,” and “don’t judge,” etc etc etc. Again, (putting aside for a moment the likely misinterpretation of what is actually being communicated in those passages), our jury system is very much designed to judge the actions of others. And that is not a contradiction (for several reasons).
I think at the end of the day, believers need to carefully, thoughtfully, and prayerfully evaluate each action on its own merits, with an underlying attitude of submission. If something can be interpreted reasonably to be a good or at least neutral government action, then submit. Even if you don’t much like it. (After all, who wants to pay taxes?).
agreed... I think you would like my book - I work through the ways Christians have responded starting from the early church (Polycarp) all the way through history... I do a deep dive into exegeting the passage & finally I have a chapter on - what can / should this look like in real every day life. Obviously resistance is peaceful. Then as you stated - the general posture is one of obedience - followed by thoughtful and prayerful resistance where this is really necessary and this will look different from person to person and situation to situation
I'll use your comparative interpretation of those 2 verses as a "comparative" example in learning how to divide the truth of God's Word:
• Romans 13~ "Let every soul be subject to the governing *authorities.*" = HUMAN government authorities
• Ephesians 6:12~ "For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood (humans) but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the HEAVENLY PLACES." (emphasis added) = 4 different rankings & divisions of demons operating in the evil SPIRITUAL domain of satan's empire.
IMHO - am inclined to think traffic laws are not always a legitimate excercise of authority, BUT it would still be wrong for a Christian to disobey them, simply because we are called to "be a Roman unto the Romans to win the Romans". If we simply chose to disobey every rule that we could not find Christian reasons for, we'd be bogged down/side tracked from what is important, namely the evangelisatoin of the lost. Here is an example where I think it was right for Christians to disobey the state. When the state said "Churches should be closed during Covid" and then simultaneously permitted brothels to be left open, that was a clear violation for the Christian since we are commanded not to neglect meeting & celebrating communion. Same thing when the state attempted (not everywhere in the same way) to force you to be vaccinated in order to "move freely" - again this was a clear violation of human freedom.. Each country has different speed laws and they each claim reasons for why their law is better than everyone else's - clearly demonstrating that these laws do not have solid objective "fact" to back them up. Wreckless driving can kill people and people should be held to account for that - but whether you drive 40 km or 50 km on this or that street is based on "subjectivity" and no one comes to harm by the difference - i.e. these laws are very often the creators of "victimless crime" and state revenue. In that sense they are surely not legitimate. However as a believer it's a distraction to battle that -- there are far more important issues to battle with -- such as foreign policies and senseless wars.
I think they are, I am a Christian libertarian and I observe traffic laws more faithfully than my more statist friends, Christian and otherwise. In fact I obey everything that does not require disobeying God. I find it hard to do so, but I also try to remind myself to pray for my leaders.
In my reading of the bible, it seems clear that libertarianism comes straight from the bible, maybe that's why so many people want to pretend as if libertarianism is objectivism, something objectivists vehemently disagree with. But that's a topic for another day.
I believe that much too often, a lot of opposition to traffic laws is a thinly disguised way of saying, "I'm a 'Murrican! Ain't nobody gonna tell ME what to do!"
Well I live in Australia, and I grew up in Germany. Interesting fact.. Germany does not have more a speed deaths (relative to size of country and population etc) than AU - yet on many roads there is no speed limit in Germany... which actually does lend weight to the libertarian argument that much of bureaucratic rule creation is just noise by those who seek control... nothing more. And... those states that are worst at this don't have lower crime rates either....
One difference is that Germany actually makes people demonstrate knowledge and proficiency in driving which they have gained through a much longer process than we do. Our driving tests need to be harder so we can weed out the incompetent rather than just pass them through. My experience in teaching Defensive Driving for a state agency opened my eyes to a lot, such as people driving too fast and too close. Most Americans vastly overrate their driving ability.
I actually lived in Germany (I grew up there) and also passed my driving tests there for car and Motor bike. I think you are correct that the skills training in Germany is better — but then that also proves my point that the government rules are not “necessary” in that the market for driving schools could provide proper solutions and training - which in fact it does in Germany
This requires education and wise discernment by the citizens. I was fond of saying that my job as a federal prosecutor was a Romans 13 job. And it confers the power to do certain things on government authorities that it does not give to individual believers. An individual believer cannot unilaterally imprison someone he observes committing a crime, for example. That itself would be a crime.
Our process was designed to reflect universal truths about the inherent dignity of each individual, their freedoms as given by God, and process by which those freedoms are protected. And it was also designed to create a limited government whose power resided in the people.
The bigger government gets, the more it strays outside its limited function, the harder it is for believers to discern and make decisions about how and whether to submit.
Taxes? Necessary.
But what about when taxes go toward priorities with which we disagree? Um … still probably need to submit … unless … the thing we are paying for is something God clearly says in Scripture is a moral evil.
Such actions can then and should be resisted.
But it’s not always so clear is it? I’ve had many fellow Christians argue with me about immigration and “welcoming the stranger.” (Interestingly, this was never much of a debate throughout the first 7 or so administrations — Democrats and Republican — I served under and prosecuted immigration cases for).
But again, what God commands the individual believer does not always translate to the function of governing authorities, who have the larger mission of protecting its citizenry and setting the rules for citizenship based on those principles. Enforcing immigration laws is an entirely legitimate function of government. But then we can move on to HOW the enforcement is occurring and whether the government authorities are following their own rules. That can be a different and more nuanced conversation.
Others I hear, “turn the other cheek,” and “don’t judge,” etc etc etc. Again, (putting aside for a moment the likely misinterpretation of what is actually being communicated in those passages), our jury system is very much designed to judge the actions of others. And that is not a contradiction (for several reasons).
I think at the end of the day, believers need to carefully, thoughtfully, and prayerfully evaluate each action on its own merits, with an underlying attitude of submission. If something can be interpreted reasonably to be a good or at least neutral government action, then submit. Even if you don’t much like it. (After all, who wants to pay taxes?).
agreed... I think you would like my book - I work through the ways Christians have responded starting from the early church (Polycarp) all the way through history... I do a deep dive into exegeting the passage & finally I have a chapter on - what can / should this look like in real every day life. Obviously resistance is peaceful. Then as you stated - the general posture is one of obedience - followed by thoughtful and prayerful resistance where this is really necessary and this will look different from person to person and situation to situation
I’ll look for it. Sounds awesome!
Romans 13: “submit to the higher powers.”
Ephesians 6: “we wrestle against powers in high places.”
https://www.glibertarians.com/2025/04/god-and-state/
I'll use your comparative interpretation of those 2 verses as a "comparative" example in learning how to divide the truth of God's Word:
• Romans 13~ "Let every soul be subject to the governing *authorities.*" = HUMAN government authorities
• Ephesians 6:12~ "For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood (humans) but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the HEAVENLY PLACES." (emphasis added) = 4 different rankings & divisions of demons operating in the evil SPIRITUAL domain of satan's empire.
I hope that helps! :)
Are traffic laws a legitimate exercise of authority? So many believers treat speed limits as suggestions!
IMHO - am inclined to think traffic laws are not always a legitimate excercise of authority, BUT it would still be wrong for a Christian to disobey them, simply because we are called to "be a Roman unto the Romans to win the Romans". If we simply chose to disobey every rule that we could not find Christian reasons for, we'd be bogged down/side tracked from what is important, namely the evangelisatoin of the lost. Here is an example where I think it was right for Christians to disobey the state. When the state said "Churches should be closed during Covid" and then simultaneously permitted brothels to be left open, that was a clear violation for the Christian since we are commanded not to neglect meeting & celebrating communion. Same thing when the state attempted (not everywhere in the same way) to force you to be vaccinated in order to "move freely" - again this was a clear violation of human freedom.. Each country has different speed laws and they each claim reasons for why their law is better than everyone else's - clearly demonstrating that these laws do not have solid objective "fact" to back them up. Wreckless driving can kill people and people should be held to account for that - but whether you drive 40 km or 50 km on this or that street is based on "subjectivity" and no one comes to harm by the difference - i.e. these laws are very often the creators of "victimless crime" and state revenue. In that sense they are surely not legitimate. However as a believer it's a distraction to battle that -- there are far more important issues to battle with -- such as foreign policies and senseless wars.
I think they are, I am a Christian libertarian and I observe traffic laws more faithfully than my more statist friends, Christian and otherwise. In fact I obey everything that does not require disobeying God. I find it hard to do so, but I also try to remind myself to pray for my leaders.
In my reading of the bible, it seems clear that libertarianism comes straight from the bible, maybe that's why so many people want to pretend as if libertarianism is objectivism, something objectivists vehemently disagree with. But that's a topic for another day.
I believe that much too often, a lot of opposition to traffic laws is a thinly disguised way of saying, "I'm a 'Murrican! Ain't nobody gonna tell ME what to do!"
Well I live in Australia, and I grew up in Germany. Interesting fact.. Germany does not have more a speed deaths (relative to size of country and population etc) than AU - yet on many roads there is no speed limit in Germany... which actually does lend weight to the libertarian argument that much of bureaucratic rule creation is just noise by those who seek control... nothing more. And... those states that are worst at this don't have lower crime rates either....
One difference is that Germany actually makes people demonstrate knowledge and proficiency in driving which they have gained through a much longer process than we do. Our driving tests need to be harder so we can weed out the incompetent rather than just pass them through. My experience in teaching Defensive Driving for a state agency opened my eyes to a lot, such as people driving too fast and too close. Most Americans vastly overrate their driving ability.
I actually lived in Germany (I grew up there) and also passed my driving tests there for car and Motor bike. I think you are correct that the skills training in Germany is better — but then that also proves my point that the government rules are not “necessary” in that the market for driving schools could provide proper solutions and training - which in fact it does in Germany