Yes, use civil authorities to bring about God's wrath. God forgives people in jail but they are not released. They are spiritually free but physically must remain jailed.
The pagan courts give unjust penalties to criminals which are sometimes wildly out of proportion to the crime. By turning someone over to the civil magistrate are you implicitly condoning their unbiblical punishments?
It's a good question, but my answer is No. The powers that be are ordained of God. For example, we believe prisons are unbiblical but authority means the various civil governments that make up the United States can make wrong decisions with that authority. This is true of parents, pastors, and kings, and each are in turn subject to other authorities. A while back we published an episode titled "Can You Lie to the Nazis?" where we deal with a favorite hypothetical of, the Nazis are coming to arrest your daughter. Can you lie to save her? We push on the lie in the scenario. Either the Nazis are legitimate authorities or they are not. You should either treat them like authorities or you should treat them like murderers. The purpose of the hypothetical is to create a situation where the stakes are so high that a person goes of course it's right to lie. Vicious jack-booted thugs are coming to kill your daughter under the pretense of law. The difficult part of the situation isn't whether you should lie or not it's whether you should treat them as authorities or not. If the question is how do I keep my daughter alive and nothing else matters, you've made yours and your daughter's lives more precious than obedience. I think that's kind of what's at stake here in regards to your question. The courts are either authorities or they aren't. We don't get to elevate ourselves above them because we don't like their judgment. Charles
@@TheConqueringTruthThe authority of the courts doesn't extend beyond God's laws. Where they try to you have to ask yourself if you want to challenge their power (not the same thing). Matthew 5:25 commends settling out of court.
I'm pretty sure Matthew 5:25 is talking about a civil matter where you owe someone money for instance, and before they go and appeal to the courts to have to tried and imprisoned, you should make peace with them (for instance, by paying what you can or agreeing to some payment plan). This sort of thing goes on in court all the time, even in the middle of a trial, where the two sides come to an agreement even as the court case is unfolding. The problem I have where you say, the authority of the court doesn't extend beyond God's laws. How do you square that with Paul writing Romans 13 and submitting to ungodly rulers, probably Nero, at the same time. Where do you draw the line and how do you do so using Scripture? We have an episode titled, "When Must Christians Disobey?" that talks about a part of the issue: ua-cam.com/video/UUjP08kwWvA/v-deo.html
@@TheConqueringTruth You wrote, "We believe prisons are unbiblical but authority means the various civil governments that make up the United States can make wrong decisions with that authority." If the "can" here is a permissive "can", then, in the context here, this seems to imply, for example, that it is morally and legally permissible for the authorities to imprison people as a punishment for their crime, which goes beyond and violates God's law (Deut 4:2, Ex 21:16). Also, the regulative principle of the state teaches that civil government should be regulated entirely by God's word in scripture. Civil rulers have a duty to conform their policies, laws, and conduct to what scripture requires, prohibits, permits, or implies through good and necessary consequence. They cannot ignore the Bible's instructions for civil matters. This is to ensure civil authorities use scripture alone as the standard for governing and rejecting any law or policy not based on biblical teaching. Romans 13:3-5 says, "For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer." Plug "Nero" (or any other famously evil ruler) in place of "rulers" here and your interpretation strains credibility. Was Nero rewarding good and punishing evil during the Neronic persecution when he was murdering Christians? Nero's rule was much gentler before the Neronic persecution, which began after the fires of Rome in AD 64. Romans was written in AD 56-57.
Proverbs 28:4: "Those who forsake the law praise the wicked, but those who keep the law resist them
Yes, use civil authorities to bring about God's wrath. God forgives people in jail but they are not released. They are spiritually free but physically must remain jailed.
The pagan courts give unjust penalties to criminals which are sometimes wildly out of proportion to the crime. By turning someone over to the civil magistrate are you implicitly condoning their unbiblical punishments?
It's a good question, but my answer is No. The powers that be are ordained of God. For example, we believe prisons are unbiblical but authority means the various civil governments that make up the United States can make wrong decisions with that authority. This is true of parents, pastors, and kings, and each are in turn subject to other authorities.
A while back we published an episode titled "Can You Lie to the Nazis?" where we deal with a favorite hypothetical of, the Nazis are coming to arrest your daughter. Can you lie to save her?
We push on the lie in the scenario. Either the Nazis are legitimate authorities or they are not. You should either treat them like authorities or you should treat them like murderers. The purpose of the hypothetical is to create a situation where the stakes are so high that a person goes of course it's right to lie. Vicious jack-booted thugs are coming to kill your daughter under the pretense of law. The difficult part of the situation isn't whether you should lie or not it's whether you should treat them as authorities or not. If the question is how do I keep my daughter alive and nothing else matters, you've made yours and your daughter's lives more precious than obedience.
I think that's kind of what's at stake here in regards to your question. The courts are either authorities or they aren't. We don't get to elevate ourselves above them because we don't like their judgment.
Charles
@@TheConqueringTruthThe authority of the courts doesn't extend beyond God's laws. Where they try to you have to ask yourself if you want to challenge their power (not the same thing). Matthew 5:25 commends settling out of court.
I'm pretty sure Matthew 5:25 is talking about a civil matter where you owe someone money for instance, and before they go and appeal to the courts to have to tried and imprisoned, you should make peace with them (for instance, by paying what you can or agreeing to some payment plan). This sort of thing goes on in court all the time, even in the middle of a trial, where the two sides come to an agreement even as the court case is unfolding.
The problem I have where you say, the authority of the court doesn't extend beyond God's laws. How do you square that with Paul writing Romans 13 and submitting to ungodly rulers, probably Nero, at the same time. Where do you draw the line and how do you do so using Scripture? We have an episode titled, "When Must Christians Disobey?" that talks about a part of the issue: ua-cam.com/video/UUjP08kwWvA/v-deo.html
@@TheConqueringTruth You wrote, "We believe prisons are unbiblical but authority means the various civil governments that make up the United States can make wrong decisions with that authority." If the "can" here is a permissive "can", then, in the context here, this seems to imply, for example, that it is morally and legally permissible for the authorities to imprison people as a punishment for their crime, which goes beyond and violates God's law (Deut 4:2, Ex 21:16). Also, the regulative principle of the state teaches that civil government should be regulated entirely by God's word in scripture. Civil rulers have a duty to conform their policies, laws, and conduct to what scripture requires, prohibits, permits, or implies through good and necessary consequence. They cannot ignore the Bible's instructions for civil matters. This is to ensure civil authorities use scripture alone as the standard for governing and rejecting any law or policy not based on biblical teaching.
Romans 13:3-5 says, "For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer." Plug "Nero" (or any other famously evil ruler) in place of "rulers" here and your interpretation strains credibility. Was Nero rewarding good and punishing evil during the Neronic persecution when he was murdering Christians? Nero's rule was much gentler before the Neronic persecution, which began after the fires of Rome in AD 64. Romans was written in AD 56-57.