Chapter 13 of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Christians of the Roman community establishes the criterion that the existing order is given by God, exists and by the fact of being is allowed by God. Most likely, an existing order is not God's will, which if you can be sure is allowed by God. For what purpose?

Historically it is known that the Roman Empire, for the years 55-56 after the death of Christ, was in no way sympathizing with Christians, and that of course its civil order, its laws, its customs did not approach Christianity. It is clear to think that no Christian of the time would agree with this, even more, if it suffered consequences by that civil order.

Now, how to act on that situation should be taken: to rebel against or to convert order? What is the closest thing to what Christianity preaches?

St. Paul writes: accept order, and from your Christianity makes this order one more similar to the will of God.

He even puts some examples from common sense: you should not fear the magistrates if you comply with the law.

All this does not mean, in any way, that you are in agreement with the unjust but rather fulfilling, respecting, giving light and showing the way of justice better.

I may extend myself, but I want to take the opportunity for an example.

Here in Venezuela three opportunities have been presented in which the people have taken up positions of rebellion against the Government, with just reason (2001, 2014 and 2017). The actions of 2001 and 2017 were very similar, very violent. The hardest have been this year. Verbal aggression, on both sides, occurred on a daily basis. Hatred became visible. There was serious damage to all public services, attacked urban transport, burned trees, closed and obstructed roads. Not counting the dead, side and side.

All those who cry out for democracy prevented elections (something incongruous). All this under the slogan of Machiavelli: the end justifies the means.

Can anyone recognize Christianity in this way?

I ask the question because ecclesial sectors participated in this.

Result of these actions: NOTHING. Nothing has changed. But in people there are: pain, mourning, hopelessness, lack of faith, and still think that everything is unfair.

What remains to be done? What must have been done from the beginning: Convert from Christianity, to do the apostolic work that Paul calls: "And this taking into account the moment we live in. For it is time to rise from the dream: that salvation is more close that when we embrace the faith ... let us take a look at the weapons of light .. As in the day we proceed with decorum .. See more of the Lord Jesus Christ .. "

I hope it has been useful, and forgive the extensive.

Chapter 13 of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Christians of the Roman community establishes the criterion that the existing order is given by God, exists and by the fact of being is allowed by God. Most likely, an existing order is not God's will, which if you can be sure is allowed by God. For what purpose?

Historically it is known that the Roman Empire, for the years 55-56 after the death of Christ, was in no way sympathizing with Christians, and that of course its civil order, its laws, its customs did not approach Christianity. It is clear to think that no Christian of the time would agree with this, even more, if it suffered consequences by that civil order.

Now, how to act on that situation should be taken: to rebel against or to convert order? What is the closest thing to what Christianity preaches?

St. Paul writes: accept order, and from your Christianity makes this order one more similar to the will of God.

He even puts some examples from common sense: you should not fear the magistrates if you comply with the law.

All this does not mean, in any way, that you are in agreement with the unjust but rather fulfilling, respecting, giving light and showing the way of justice better.

I may extend myself, but I want to take the opportunity for an example.

Here in Venezuela three opportunities have been presented in which the people have taken up positions of rebellion against the Government, with just reason (2001, 2014 and 2017). The actions of 2001 and 2017 were very similar, very violent. The hardest have been this year. Verbal aggression, on both sides, occurred on a daily basis. Hatred became visible. There was serious damage to all public services, attacked urban transport, burned trees, closed and obstructed roads. Not counting the dead, side and side.

All those who cry out for democracy prevented elections (something incongruous). All this under the slogan of Machiavelli: the end justifies the means.

Can anyone recognize Christianity in this way?

I ask the question because ecclesial sectors participated in this.

Result of these actions: NOTHING. Nothing has changed. But in people there are: pain, mourning, hopelessness, lack of faith, and still think that everything is unfair.

What remains to be done? What must have been done from the beginning: Convert from Christianity, to do the apostolic work that Paul calls: "And this taking into account the moment we live in. For it is time to rise from the dream: that salvation is more close that when we embrace the faith ... let us take a look at the weapons of light .. As in the day we proceed with decorum .. See more of the Lord Jesus Christ .. "

I hope it has been useful, and forgive the extensive.

Very briefly I think that according to the Bible there are God-given limits to secular power. They should not interfere with spiritual matters, especially not with articles of faith, especially not with "state religion". The main task of the secular power should be to limit criminal actions and to protect the property. The secular power should be subjected, however, to its own laws and laws should be changed in an orderly manner, not according to the temporal interest of the ruling class or politicians. My impression in many countries politicians do not try to limit criminal acts only to monopolize it. The divine origin of secular power is interesting in the Bible. Jesus does not deny the claim of Satan when he says that he can give the power on Earth to anyone bowing to him. (As usually he did not add that this right is limited by the consent of God). Therefore my personal conclusion is that we should be subject to secular law insofar as it does not hurt higher, God-given principles and does not force us to disobey God. Even within limits, however, we do not need to praise and support immoral secular power. I also know that these conclusions are not shared by many Christians let alone by followers of other religions.

I don't understand what the comments above mean. They do not answer the original question.

Dear All,

Here you are the original quotation:

https://biblia.com/bible/Romans13.1-7

Submission to the Authorities

„13 Let every person pbe subject to the governing authorities. For qthere is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 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 rwill receive his approval, 4 for she 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, tan avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also ufor the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 vPay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.”

My first note: it was regrettable that the Catholic Church got such a power for centuries. The church went thorough “Romanisation” which could not be the intention of Jesus. This might have been a kind of decadence. The power always makes corrupt everybody but mainly the institutions.

Dear György,

You wrote „Therefore my personal conclusion is that we should be subject to secular law insofar as it does not hurt higher, God-given principles and does not force us to disobey God.”

I would say secular power instead law because governments or regimes often do not respect their own ab ovo manipulated laws. Regarding only my personnel experiences, the timely powers have tried to force even have forced the God-given principles. So I highly doubt the good willing/intentions or aims of actual powers in Hungary in the past as well as in the present.

You have asked a very interesting and dicey question. Indeed, God requires absolute obedience to the authorities. If rulers abuse their powers by setting unjust laws, I think they are accountable to the Supreme Being (God). It is difficult to kotow to such humiliating laws but we leave every thing to God. Best regards

Dickson Adom

Wonderful question and apologize for the answer is not within my specialty and the authors of the answers greetings

If one has conscience and humanitarianism, each human being has the freedom to choose not to comply with unjust laws; even knowing the consequences of his decision.

Si se tiene consciencia y humanitarismo, cada ser humano tiene la libertad de elección de no cumplir las leyes injustas; aun conociendo las consecuencias de su decisión.

It seems that Romans 13: 1-7 requires that you obey secular laws. But remember, Paul wrote this, not GOD, so U can ignore it because Paul made it up.