“Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to God.”

                                                     ~ Benjamin Franklin

One would have to ask Mr. Franklin where he gets his understanding of obedience to God before accepting his statement.  However, assuming this claim was being made (either by Franklin or any other) from a Biblical perspective (for the sake of the conversation) I propose two further questions should be asked.

1.  What is a tyrant?

2.  What is rebellion against him?

In James Jordan’s book, Primeval Saints, he describes a tyrant in a way that leads me to define him as one who breaks covenant.  For example, he describes Isaac as a tyrant when he is trying to pass along the covenant blessings to the unfaithful Esau (covenant blessings that God had promised to Jacob).

By my understanding, rebellion would be the act of either overthrowing and replacing or reforming the covenant-breaking tyrant.  Again, in the case of Isaac, Rebekah successfully rebels against Isaac (in the reforming sense of the word) by bringing him to see his disobedience through her deceiving him into blessing Jacob.  After the fact, Isaac willingly extends the covenant blessings to Jacob as he heads off to find a wife.  She rebelled against him via deception, and he was reformed via his repentant act of obedience.

If this example serves to prove the point, it would still lead to the inevitable question, “What about Romans 13?”  Here, Paul has exhorted Christians to submit to the ungodly rule of the Romans.  However, we must look at this in light of the above questions and answers.

1.  A tyrant is a covenant breaker.  Wherein consists Rome’s covenant breaking?  Rome was not breaking covenant with her people (as Britain broke the covenant–charters–made with the colonies and as America is with her disregard for the Constitution–her covenant with her people).

2.  Rebellion is an act of overthrow/replacement or reformation by those with whom the covenant is being broken.  Therefore the rebellion against Rome comes not from the people, but from God in judgment.  God prepared Rome for such judgment by His people.  Wasn’t the obedience of first century Christians (and the worldview in which they were living) an act of overthrow and reformation?  Read Quo Vadis (which does an excellent job of showing the torment a Roman went through in trying to reconcile the Christian worldview with his own) and you can see the rebellion being lived out in a “my Kingdom is not of this world” kind of way.

This is not an exhaustive look at this topic, just some thoughts I’ve had as of late.  So, I’d love some feedback on this.

–
mattb

How do we hear that we are justified by faith?  Pastor Leithart answers that question in this post of his, reproduced below.

–
mattb

_________________________

Justification by Faith
by Peter Leithart

We are right before God because Jesus has obeyed perfected, offered Himself on the cross, and received the verdict of righteousness in the resurrection, a verdict in which we are included by union with the Risen Christ. We come to share in this verdict by faith.

But a question arises: Where do we ever hear this verdict? How is it communicated to us? We need to hear the verdict. What good is a verdict that’s never declared to us?

We could say: I hear it in my heart. But how do I know that what I hear in my heart is God’s verdict or my own self-justification?

We could say: In the preaching of the Word. Correct. But how do I know the promise delivered in the preaching of the Word is addressed to me, individually and personally?

We could say: I hear God declare me righteous when I hear His minister pronounce my sins forgiven in worship. Correct. But again that is a general declaration of forgiveness. I hear it, so to that extent, it is personally directed at me. But it doesn’t have my name attached.

Here’s one of the points where baptism links up with justification. Baptism is not the “ground” of justification; the ground is the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, the results of which we share in our union with Him. Baptism is the declaration of the verdict, to me personally, with my name attached.

In baptism, God promises to forgive me my sins for Jesus’ sake. In baptism, He communicates His verdict to me, just as truly as He communicates it in preaching, but in baptism he more obviously communicates it to me. In baptism, He says that I am included in Christ, and in the verdict that He passed on Jesus. This is what it means for baptism to join us to Christ’s death and resurrection, since the resurrection is the Father’s verdict over the Son through the Spirit (Rom 4:25; 6:1-7).

I receive what my baptism declares only by faith. If I don’t believe what God says about me in baptism, then I don’t receive the verdict, for I make Him a liar.

In this sense, the relation of baptism-justification-faith is the same as the relation of preaching/absolution-justification-faith. God declares sins forgiven in the preaching of the gospel, calls me to believe that declaration; and I believe. God declares that He forgives my sins in my baptism (”for the remission of sins”); and I’m called to believe what He says.

This is not trusting in water. This is trusting the God who declares me cleansed through water. This is justification by faith.