The Bible & Ron Paul, pt. 2: The Role of Civil Government

Part two of thirteen-part series comparing Ron Paul's platform to biblical principles for government. Friendly discussion is encouraged in the comment section. Inappropriate comments, including those without a legitimate argument, are subject to removal.

This production was cut without hands, copyright 2011
Presented by Adam M.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• The Bible
• Ron Paul
• Civil Government
• Politics
• Christianity
• God
• Father
• Son
• Holy Spirit
• Trinity
• Triune God
• Republican
• Democrat
• Obama
• Rand Paul
• Conservative
• Constitution
• Tea Party
• Role of Civil Government
• Civil Justice

[jesseakers]

dude you are the bomb and thank you much! you are spreading the seeds of liberty AND of the gospel!

[1MatildaChestersen]

Very good. I will share this with my local tea party groups.

Thank you

[TheGoat1954]

Very well done cut , This will be a great resourse . My Church consists of 3 colors of people , all with opposing political views . I'm a staunch rp supporter, this video may change there minds, hopefully. As for scripture , i like micah 6:8 , He has told you o man what is good, and what does the LORD require of you , but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your GOD . RP 2012

[Ipostle]

@Twichard Would you consider Genesis 9:6 no longer binding? Are all murders to go unpunished in this life?

[cutwithouthands]

@Twichard,(2of2) I'm the one going by the strict record of Scripture,you are the one adding a context that is void from the text.It's strange that you choose to take the side of the Pharisees in this story,when pointing out the flaws of the Pharisees is one of the primary themes of the four gospels! If your issue is that Jesus' reaction to the situation seems incompatible to God's law,then you do not understand the details of God's law.PM me if you wish to continue this discussion...

[cutwithouthands]

@Twichard,(1of2) This is getting slightly off-topic, but Jesus claimed to be the Son of Man (the Messiah, per Daniel's prophecy),so the hypocritical Pharisees were always looking for ways to trap Jesus in his faithfulness to God's law.If Jesus violated God's law at any point,they could accuse him of blasphemy.They come to him to see how he would respond *as if he truly was the son of man!* And so Jesus responds by fully obeying God's law while pointing out the sins of the Pharisees....

[Twichard]

@cutwithouthands The pharisees are not bringing the woman to Jesus for him to act as a judge for "sentencing." That cannot have been, Jesus was not a legally recognized priest. Likely it was an existing case--which had been (properly) brought to the pharisees--who bring it to Jesus under the pretense of asking for his legal advice, really seeking to trap him.

Or at least that interpretation isn't contradicted by the text. There's no reason to prefer your interpretation over that one.

[cutwithouthands]

@Twichard,If God doesn't instruct man to execute justice,how do you explain the commands to have murderers killed all throughout Lev, Num, Deut? Did God reveal these laws into empty space for no one to actually facilitate?That wouldn't make much sense.There's no way to deny that God gives men in authority the power to execute justice upon criminals.You'll have to elaborate more for me to grasp your position.

[cutwithouthands]

@Twichard,I agree that obedience to authorities is in view.What you're missing is the necessary implications of such a command.Is everything any govt does a "terror to evil"Must we morally accept every law passed by any government?With your logic,Paul would have to be saying that the Roman empire was being a terror to evil when they persecuted the Church.That's absurd!When a govt becomes a terror to good works,they are in disobedience&must be protested&called to repentance.

[cutwithouthands]

@Twichard,Under OT law,victims were the only ones who could prosecute criminals. I explain this in my scribd link.The victims choose to have mercy or prosecute.Just like God does, and just like we do today.The act of adultery is a crime against the husband and only he can bring her to a judge for sentencing. The text says the "Pharisees" brought her to Jesus the Judge, not the husband.They were in clear violation of protocol and Jesus caught them in their own trap.

[seekerofconsistency]

The government's role in Romans 13 is what a fist can do. Protect liberty and punish evil doers. The open hand of creativity is to remain unhindered and unregulated by free people. Romans 13:1 in the ONLY Bible commissioned by Congress in the 1782 Robert Aitken's Bible (King James Bible) does not demand blind obedience to ANY government. Good video.

[Twichard]

@Twichard To me it just seems like you are really stretching the text to get the meaning you want out of it. I'm with your position all the way -- I support Ron Paul and libertarianism to an extent... But I do not support erroneous argumentation.

My position is that the Bible just flat out doesn't say much about these matters. Jesus was far more interested in telling people how to live than how to run a government. So unless you are arguing we should implement the mosaic law in full...