Jesus and Civil Disobediance

[sweetlissa]

Did Jesus practise civil disobediance?

 

[^_^]

He certainly didn't seem to have a problem breaking traditions that were done under pretense of righteousness.
He did look to uphold Torah and the prophets
I'm not sure what the definition of civil disobedience is, but I know that I'm willing to run a red light if it's late at night and there's no traffic.

 

[Mark C]

Did Jesus practise civil disobediance?

In the context that the term "civil disobedience" is technicaly used, the answer would have to be no, sweetlissa. But in the more general sense, the story becomes more clear. What He did was to teach, in Word and in deed, that we must be very careful Whom we serve, and "worship Him only". There are many stories and examples that make His point - whether it is the specifics of His encounter with Satan, 'the prince of this world', or the parables which demonstrate that we cannot serve two masters. (Whether that is taken to mean God as opposed to mammon, God as opposed to Satan, or God as opposed to 'Caesar' - it becomes clear that ANYTHING which we would put ahead of Him is essentially an idol.)

The stories of how they repeatedly tried to trick him are worth re-reading over and over; I find more insight into the subtle distinctions each time. Ultimately I contend they all hinge on the theme from Joshua/Yohoshua (His namesake) - "Choose this day Whom you will serve."

When God's commandments and man's tradition DEPART is where He might SEEM disobedient - because He frequently and deliberately DISOBEYED the vain traditions of men, while specifically honoring the Written Torah. (In every case where there was a doubt, note that He would start by saying, "It is Written...")

The Bible says repeatedly that we are not to "add to" or "subtract from" His commandments; Yeshua noted that the Pharisees (among others, of course) "increased men's burdens", by adding their own traditions to what He actually commanded; the prime examples are all of the additional Sabbath prohibition, and the famous hand washing story. In EVERY case, He strictly kept what He had Written, and was "disobedient" to THEIR additions, which were of course really disobedient to Him!

Perhaps one of the best teachings I have ever heard on the topic is by Michael Rood, who did a lecture series (now on DVD) called "The Jonah Code". In it he recounts the lengthy story of Yeshua's healing of the man by the pool on the Sabbath, by scooping up some dirt, spitting in His hand, making mud (a creative act, and ALL explicitly prohibited by tradition, but NOT by God), and then putting it on his eyes. Yeshua then told the man to walk a distance that was in EXCESS of the man-mandated 5/8 of a mile, and so on. EVERY SINGLE THING recounted in the story is a specific violation of the Sabbath as modified by man, but is UTTERLY within the Written commandment for the Sabbath from God (and, of course, the "Lord of the Sabbath") !

Utlimately, I contend, the question is 'civil disobedience to whom?' - God, or the idol man has tried to set in His place?

 

[^_^]

Thanks Mr. C.
Those words expressed the very thing I was not able to put into words myself. :mrgreen:
This is how I express my 'civil disobedience'. I revel in challenging the establishments of man that violate the priciples Yahweh put forth, and knock down these idols of paper.

 

[sweetlissa]

Thank you very much gentlemen. I asked the question because Randy and I were discussing it and it seemed like a good thing to talk about. I was specifically thinking about Jesus healing on the Sabbath and how he purposefully destroyed the "manmade" traditions that the Pharisees were so fond of.

And I expressly used the term "civil disobediance" because to me civil means "of the government" not of God.

I am not a bible scholar or a speaker, but I do enjoy these discussions a great deal.

Lissa

 

[pastor]

How do we answer people that say we are to follow the laws of the land, so having more then one wife is against the law. Pastor

 

[^_^]

as far as I know, the law only minds if you marry according to civil law.
I've spoken with police officers and they rarely if ever prosecute for what they call bigamy and polygamy.
Ususally when they do, it's because it was related to some sort of other legal statute being broken such as underage sex or physical abuse.

so as far as the legality, you break no laws unless you have more than 1 civil license to marry, which I wouldn't recommend even for someone who only ever wishes to have only 1 wife. Basically by doing so, it puts the state in headship instead of God. You, in return for their permission to marry, give them permission to 'own' your estate, your offspring and your income. Sounds like a bad investment all the way around to me :ugeek:

 

[Mark C]

as far as I know, the law only minds if you marry according to civil law.

Generally true; well, so far.

(It is decidedly less true when, like Isaac/Israel, a patriarchal example acquires significant power or influence.)

...
[A marriage license] puts the state in headship instead of God. You, in return for their permission to marry, give them permission to 'own' your estate, your offspring and your income....

Agreed, ^_^.

The law dictionaries generally define "license" as permission from a competent authority to do that which, without such permission, is unlawful.

If God ordains marriage, oversees the Covenant, and Writes the Rules, there is no need for 'permission' from any usurper to His Authority. In fact, I think it is very clear that He continually teaches that we are to "choose this day Whom we will serve", whether it is God, or Caesar, and that we "cannot serve two masters". A State license or charter, whether it is for a house, or a church, clearly invites another 'maker' in as head of that 'creation'. There are "adherent clauses" (aka the fine print) that attach like fishhooks to that 'deal with the Devil'.

In the former Republics, the united States of America, this supremacy of the Creator and His Law was acknowledged by both State Constitutions and that which delegated specific powers to the federal union. The latter made no mention WHATSOEVER about any power associated with marriage, and indeed was specifically barred from "prohibiting the free exercise" of following God according to His Word as one's conscience and the Holy Spirit guided.

There were some other words in the founding document which noted "that when any government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it." Perhaps that is why God warns us in Revelation to "Come out of her, My people...be not partakers of her plagues.".

How do we answer people that say we are to follow the laws of the land...

So, I'd start by asking "Which law of the land? The Supreme Law, or the "traditions of men" that Yeshua so specifically warned us against?

Depending on the level of understanding which follows, I may add additional questions to help clarify the situation as well. Things like "although it's obviously "OK" if it's "only about sex" - and we are inclined to just "use 'em and lose 'em", like most good politicians do (this I usually refer to as politically-correct "Serial Monogamy :roll: );
or - "Oh, I understand. It's not about "sex" - that's not a problem. It's about covering - honoring a committment. THAT is what is Verboten, correct?"
or even the "call evil good, and good, evil" reference -- (typically for the self-professed "believer" who picks and chooses from the Word) --
"So, when the Almighty State blesses something God calls "abomination", like male homosexual 'marriage' - that makes it OK, but when the State condemns that which God sanctions, we ignore Him? Remind me of what that guy who wrote the letter to the Romans wrote in his letter to Timothy, will ya?*"



The answer I would give, Pastor, is that we DO. We follow both the Law of our Creator, and the lawful government of our nation. Sadly, the converse is not so often true.


Blessings, and Shabbot Shalom,


---------------------------------------
* I Timothy 4

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
...Forbidding to marry...