Yes. Most people who are planning on defying the Bible try to avoid mentioning the Bible. They don’t usually make a point of quoting the specific passage they plan on breaking.
You seem to be longing for a world union (me too) – but if we had one we would still need national/state/provincial/local governments, wouldn’t we?
No Paul was generalizing here, but it would be laughable to think for instance that the verse justifies us say killing random civilians just because the government ordered us to do so,
No to your opinion, but my opinion is based on the Bible which isn’t the case for many people.
Was this supposed to be sarcastic, because you were also of the opinion that violence isn’t justified in any situation including self-defence.
No this thread was not about killing abortion doctors. I do not support such actions and those who do kill abortion doctors should be arrested and tried.
depends on which parts. many contain admonishments to be fair. When it comes to judges judging others “without respect of persons,” which comes from the bible, I have no problem. And stuff like no murder or thieving can’t be argued with.
There’s a lot of the bible that makes a lot of sense in government. But each of these things can be justified outside of the bible, too.
As you say, each of the biblical things re government can be justified outside the bible. I’d a damn sight prefer that the bible and religion kept out of our government.
I hope this isn’t too far afield, but with the confused nature of the OP maybe I can get away with it.
I have always wondered about this–When Paul wrote Romans, he lived in a world where the only forms of government vested their power in a king or emperor, that is to say, in a man himself.
But in America there is no such thing. In America the will of the people rules; because that power is impractical to wield, We The People vest the Constitution with our will and the power flows into the concept of rule of law.
Rule of Law is the authority in America, and not in any man.
So rule of law is the authority; what to do when the supposed agents of the rule of law ignore the rule of law, therefore divesting them of their authority?
Would Paul have us obey Rule of Law or the illegitimate petty dictator?
Not governments, no. Where “government” means “a separate class of people whose job is telling other people what to do”. We don’t really need that. We should be able to govern ourselves, each and every one.
We’re not able, but we should be.
Because “violently” is the only way to have a rebellion?
And until the day comes when we are so capable, we really need that.
Anyway, Hamilton – or was it Madison? – some Publius – was flat wrong, when he said, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.” Society needs standing public institutions to get a lot of things done that have nothing to do with fighting crime.
No, but it’s definitely my favorite! 
We need organisation, sure. I’m in favour of anarchism, not anarchy. But that organisation doesn’t have to take the form of a government, as such. A series of syndicates could work just as well.
I’m not Scotsmanning, I really do think that some level of public service provision is possible without it being a government, as such.
I agree on the necessity of standing public institutions (I like roads and clean air as much as anyone), but I disagree that those institutions needs must be manned by a professional class dedicated to it. It is possible to have institutions whose membership comes from the general populace and returns to it when service is completed.
I guess I’m saying government of some sort might be needed, politicians and bureaucrats aren’t.
I think you greatly overestimate human capability. I don’t think the general populace would be capable of doing much beyond flailing about and screwing up mightily in such an arrangement; they just wouldn’t have the skills or experience to do anything else. And if they did get the necessary skills and experience, then at that point they are those very politicians and bureaucrats you want to get rid of.
Basically, you seem to be making the popular error of assuming that government jobs are unskilled labor that any random untrained guy off the street can handle.
Current human capability, sure. Possible human capability, I don’t think so.
No, I’m saying government can be re-organised so that random (but not untrained - my system would require *everyone *to have some training in civil service during childhood) people can do the necessary tasks. It *would *require quite a different setup - in a nutshell, one where lawyers don’t run everything.
What exactly do you mean by “some training in civil service”.
Let’s use you own example of a necessary standing public institution: roads. In my local area there are plans underway to have the national highway, which currently runs literally down the main street, bypass the city.
In order to perform just the preliminary stages of that task they have needed to spend about 50 million dollars on engineers, surveyors, economists, ecologists, geologists, hydrologists, quantity surveyors, furturists, agronomists and many more professional civil-service bureaucrats.
Can you explain how your system would handle such a project? Would every child be trained in childhood for fields as diverse as ecology, economics and hydrology? Or do you think that basic education in generic “civil service” will enable randomly selected individuals to handle such a gargantuan project.
How would random individuals even know which of these professionals to seek advice from? Despite being a civil servant myself for over 15 years, I would not have the foggiest notion where to start on a project like this. So why do you believe that a few years of “civil service” education in childhood would enable me to manage this project?
With the current system, when a problem is perceived then elected politicians can call up civil servants and say “There is too much traffic in this city, what can we do about it, what will the ramifications of this action be?” and the bureaucracy goes to work answering those questions. The politician then gives one solution the green light, and the bureaucracy goes to work implementing it.
But in your world there is no bureaucracy.
So will people like me, but without 15 years training as a civil servant, just get a call one day from someone and be told there is a problem and asked how to deal with it? This is a problem with multiple possible solutions, and the chosen solution, bypassing the city, itself has dozens of major challenges across a wide variety of fields. Without a bureaucracy behind me, how could I possibly even begin to deal with this problem?
I honestly don’t see how this sort of road work would be possible without a standing bureaucracy. The idea that people with some training in civil service during childhood could do it seems utterly implausible. Never mind the legal aspects; the ecological, sociological, economic, hydrological and engineering problems are all significant enough.
So can you explain how a person with “some training in civil service during childhood” would be able to undertake this project? If possible, start from the day when somebody representing the community phones up and says “we have a traffic problem” then take it from there, showing how these random individuals would evaluate options, present options to the community leaders, then implement the chosen option avoiding ecological, sociological and engineering catastrophe as well as budget overrun.
We had exactly that at most levels of government in America in the 19th Century and believe me, you don’t want to try it!
Isn’t it conceivable that angels would volunteer their efforts on the public needs? Assuming all these angels agree on what public works are needed and where? Why must angels twiddle their thumbs while sitting around being good?
Humans are evil by nature so how could this happen sort of massive genetical enginnering?
Speak for yourself. That’s a reckless blanket statement.
Those of us who have not drunk that Christian Koolaid, that we were all born sinners, aren’t too pleased to be lumped in with you evil sinners.
Volunteers ain’t enough. Big cooperative efforts don’t get done without leaders.
Non-Scriptural cite, please?