OK, I finished reading the article. I really liked it and agreed wholeheartedly with it. Here are some of my notes.

Was the American Revolution an act of biblical rebellion?

There is no doubt, as the writer writes, that there are many examples of non-violent civil disobedience in the Bible.

Theological view 1: Forbidden to live in anarchy (without gov’t), not required to submit to every law and policy. CORRECT.

God ordained gov’t but not every specific gov’t and not every specific ruler. Tyrannical rulers who had themselves rebelled against God could be resisted (the book of Judges). CORRECT.

The institution of Gov’t is not to be opposed, but tyranny is.

The only king who has divine right is God Himself. CORRECT.

Power rests with the people (Ex. 18.21; Dt. 1.15-16, etc.) CORRECT.

“Inasmuch as all rulers are in fact the servants of the public and appointed for no other purpose than to be “a terror to evil-doers and a praise to them that do well” [c.f., Rom. 13:3], whenever this Divine order is inverted – whenever these rulers abuse their sacred trust by unrighteous attempts to injure, oppress, and enslave those very persons from whom alone, under God, their power is derived – does not humanity, does not reason, does not Scripture, call upon the man, the citizen, the Christian of such a community to “stand fast in that liberty wherewith Christ….hath made them free!” [Galatians 5:1] The Apostle enjoins us to “submit to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake,” but surely a submission to the unrighteous ordinances of unrighteous men, cannot be “for the Lord’s sake,” for “He loveth righteousness and His countenance beholds the things that are just.” (Rev. Jacob Duche)
Agreed.

The American Revolutionary War was a war of self-defense. America was not the aggressors. CORRECT.

It was a just war, from the American perspective. Contending for freedom, fighting tyranny, oppression, and barbarism. CORRECT.

For 11 years Americans pursued diplomatic resolution in response to military attack.

MY CONCLUSION: The American Revolution was a legitimate expression of biblical principles.


So let's talk.

WOW, it’s a LOOOOOONG article. I can’t process it all tonight. I think the American Revolution was borderline as far as biblical justification goes. As the article points out, Rom. 13.1-7 is not the only biblical teaching on our relationship to the government. While Romans 13 doesn’t assume a righteous and just government (after all, it was Rome, though at the time of the writing Rome was a fairly just government), it does say that government exists basically to live out God’s righteous rule on Earth. It also doesn’t mandate that any particular gov’tal leader has divine right, but only that the idea of government is God ordained. The writers of the Declaration considered that the English gov’t had breached the line of righteousness and was at present an ungodly gov’t. In itself it was an act of civil disobedience, not war, as the colonists declared independence on biblical bases. it was England who brought war and even fired the first shot.

I disagree with the writers of the Dec. of Indep. in that our God-given rights are not life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but rather life, liberty, and justice. On that basis, the King of England was again at fault. The D of I contains a long list of grievances and injustices warranting their declaration. If England wanted to act righteously it could have just granted freedom to the colonies without war (something happened a half century later in other parts of the world), but the King coveted America’s resources and wanted the economic benefit of the Colonies.

When you examine ALL of the Bible, we see that Moses declared Independence from Pharaoh, and there was a subsequent attempt at war following it. In that case God destroyed the Egyptian army, but the conditions are not much different. Nehemiah also resisted the local gov’t and armed his workers for battle, though it never came. The Hebrews of Dan. 3 clearly defied King Neb, as later Daniel did king Darius (Dan. 6). No war evolved from either of those. The book of Judges is full of examples where people rose up, with God’s blessing, against unjust gov’ts. So we just can’t rely on Rom. 13.1-7. The Bible gives a far more complex picture than that.

But I’ll grant you i didn’t read the article. I skimmed the first couple of paragraphs and then realized the whole project would probably take more than an hour. I'll get to it tomorrow. This post should at least start the conversation.

On its surface, Romans 13 leads a person to believe the American Revolution was immoral or unjust in the sight of God. What is your opinion?

Here's an article I'd like you to read.

https://wallbuilders.com/american-revolution-act-biblical-rebellion/