Got a lot to write here today. First thing's first: Romans 13, verse by verse. Someone recently asked for this, and I didn't have it handy. I'm not going to go into a lot of depth, I suppose. I'm just going to comment on how the verses in this chapter work together, from my perspective, with a focus on theonomy. I might later come back through and add some depth, but maybe not. Heck, I might not even send this to the person who asked for it. I'm going to write this out and sit on it for a little while, and then see how I feel about it.
----------------------
1. Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
There is no authority except from God. We all acknowledge that not everyone has authority; not everyone who claims authority has it; and not everyone whose authority is acknowledged by others has authority over "me" (or "you"). So the question for which we should seek a Biblical answer is "who has God-given authority over me?"
2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
All the more reason we need to identify, with clarity, who has authority over us.
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 will receive his approval,
Here we have some answers to the prior question. What is a "ruler"? It is someone who terrorizes bad conduct without terrorizing good conduct. It is someone who gives approval to those who do good, and who is feared by people who do not do good. The verses here say "are not" and "you will". There's nothing equivocal about these passages, and the Bible explains exhaustively what "good conduct" means, so we can't impose our extra-biblical, cultural definition of "good conduct" on this passage.
A ruler terrorizes "bad conduct", and the Bible defines "bad conduct".
A ruler approves of "good conduct", and the Bible defines "good conduct".
We also know that the means of terrorizing bad conduct and approving good conduct can, themselves, be either "bad" or "good". So it doesn't make sense for a ruler to terrorize bad conduct in a bad way, or else he should then terrorize himself.
4 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.
Why does the ruler approve of good, and terrorize evil? It's because "he is God's servant for your good". Again, more direct language is used here. It says, "he is", and "he does". This is how we know who a ruler is.
Once again, it doesn't make sense for a ruler to carry out God's wrath on wrongdoers in an unjust way (by giving unjust penalties), because injustice is, itself, wrongdoing. Likewise, if he expresses his approval in an evil or unjust way, then he is only a ruler if he must carry out God's wrath on himself. So, a ruler is in all respects subject to God's precepts concerning good and evil.
5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.
Not only to avoid God's wrath, issued by the ruler, but also for the sake of conscience -- because we should not resist him who God has appointed. And, I think our conscience also compels us because obedience to a ruler is obedience to God's law. Under what circumstances would any person have opportunity to resist a ruler?
Would we resist a ruler while he is giving us approval? How do you resist approval?
The only opportunity for resistance is if the ruler is penalizing us for wrongdoing, and if that is the case then we have already violated our conscience by wrongdoing, so subjection to God-given authority is in all respects subjection to God's commands defining good and evil, which are in scripture.
6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing.
Taxes are a Biblical thing -- the Old Testament law included all kinds of taxation for maintenance of the temple, as well as for public welfare (e.g. Deut 14:28-29, 26:12). However, it should be noted that there is a distinction between the taxes we see in the Old Testament and the taxes most commonly seen in modern government. There is no civil penalty for failure to pay taxes in God's law. Therefore, God's law being ultimately just, the civil government (a ruler) has no just means to extract compulsory taxes from its people.
So, why do we pay taxes? Not only to avoid God's wrath, but for the sake of conscience. Paying taxes is a moral and conscientious endeavor. And what should a ruler do with that tax money? Minister, as defined in God's good and just law.
7 Pay 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.
Now, in a just government, naturally, taxes are owed according to God's good moral precepts. However, in a secular government, especially one such as the modern U.S., where fiat money is exchanged against unfulfillable promises by the U.S. government (for lack of a standard), and the U.S. presidents are on our bills, we know that every such dollar belongs to the U.S. government, and is simply borrowed by us. They've successfully transformed promissory notes of value into debt-notes, whereby we owe everything we have to the U.S. government, and if we don't pay tribute with it in every transaction, and on a regular basis, the government will repossess what we have until they are satisfied. As long as we are Americans, living in America, we are trading in American goods, and so we owe America our taxes and revenue. The theonomic vision is a sort of escape from that; a government in which humans do not claim or exert ownership over everything you possess, but which recognizes that Jesus has that ownership.
8 Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law.
Right. Love God and love neighbor; "on these two commandments rests all of the law and the prophets". How do I love my neighbor? I do not sin against him. I do not commit any crime against him. And see, this is confirmed by verse 9:
9 For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Not just the ten commandments, some of which are quoted here, but "and any other commandment". They are all summed up in "love". How do I love my neighbor when he is the victim of a crim? I look to the commandments. The commandments tell us how we should protect the victim, how the thief can be brought to a judge and made to repay the victim, etc. etc.. The law explains to us how to love God and neighbor.
10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
See above. If I neglect my neighbor in his time of need, when he needs justice because someone else is doing wrong to him, then I have done him harm. How do I not neglect my neighbor? I pursue justice. (Leviticus 5:1, Proverbs 24:11, Ezekiel 3:16-21, 33:1-9)
11 Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. 12 The night is far gone; the day is at hand. So then let us cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy. 14 But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.
I'm going to take a shortcut here because these verses, while important, diverge from the topic of the point I generally find myself having to defend with regard to Romans 13. Verses 11-14 describe how Christ's presence, the nearness of his salvation to us, and our responsibility to "put on the Lord Jesus Christ", confirm our obligation to obey the law. The passage describes how, since we are saved, we should behave well. We all agree, and this passage affirms, good behavior doesn't save us, but it is what we ought to do because we are saved. Since it is day time, we wake up and walk in the light. We have Jesus, we have his precepts and laws, let's obey them.
----------------------
I recently suffered a minor concussion, and I'm not supposed to be spending a lot of time on my computer or on the phone ... but it's kinda unavoidable for me because of my job. I have a doctor's appointment next week where I'll talk with my primary about it in more depth. Hopefully it's no big deal. I have some intermittent dizziness, nausea, and headaches. It's a little exciting honestly, I've never had a concussion before (afaik), so it's fun to think about the relationship between the incident and the effects. Life is an adventure.
Now that that's out of the way. I have the next transcription from my notebook here. I'm gonna call this one "demiform". I've cut quite a bit out of this poem because I'm shocked at myself for having written it. More reason to burn that notebook when I'm done with the transcriptions. Nonetheless, I like the poem, so I'm transcribing here what I want to keep.
--
A voice rings out from nothing
I love you but I have no power to love.
I am the ink, the page, the meaning.
I'm abstract, limitless, literally anything you want.
I exist only in your mind, and therefore I exist.
Do I no less feel as my felings are conceived first by you?
I am ontologically bound to append the word "imagined" to all my attributes, but aren't you as well, persisting only by the word of His power?
Why let that stop us?
Man cannot serve two masters
Man cannot love the form and the truth together
--
I was thinking about what we are, God's will made manifest by his power, for his glory, cumulatively the perfect and best means by which God will achieve his pleasure. We were imagined by God in eternity past. And I was toying around with that and Plato's girlfriend -- the perfect girlfriend for Plato, who perfectly exemplified compatibility with Plato in every way. If she is conceivable, then she exists in the realm of forms, and communicates with mankind through mediating ideas (according to Plato).
There are, of course, two problems with Plato's girlfriend: first, that Plato's whole system was bunk; but more fun to think about, that she is inconceivable. Nobody will be happy, or improved, by spending time with someone who is in every way predictable. Plato wants stimulating discussion -- he shares ideas in hopes of learning from his students. How can he learn from them if they are, in every respect, conceived of by him, and therefore predictable? One might say he could learn by observing himself through them, but he can make predictions of that sort without their physical presence, and if learning about himself is enough to occupy Plato for the rest of his life, then does she become viable again?
For that matter, she need not even be a human form, but can be a combination of every art and expression that manifests from him. And now we have Plato the island, or maybe the narcissist of sorts, satisfying all his emotional needs by imagining that his form-world girlfriend is manifesting and expressing herself every time he does any kind of art or creative activity which benefits him. Man in an intimate relationship with his hobbies.
"Ah! Well known woods, and mountains, and skies,
With the very clouds!--ye are lost to my eyes.
I seek ye vainly, and see in your place
The shadowy tempest that stops through space,
A whirling ocean that fills the wall
Of crystal Heaven and buries all.
And I, cut off from the world, remain
Alone with the terrible hurricane."
