Quote:
Originally Posted by satz  Quote:
Originally Posted by Spear Dane Quote: |
As far as homeschooling goes, I know this is a sensitive topic in reformed circles, but I am not convinced that it is a matter that requires, or allows rebelling against the government. Nor do I think it is consistent for churches to say it is, unless they already discipline each and every parent that does not homeschool.
| Your last line is a red-herring fallacy. | My point, be it correct or not, was that rebellion is only allowed in matters of sin. If christians do not see non-homeschooling as sin enough to require discipline, why should they see it as enough to warrant rebellion against authority? |
Your point only stands upon the assumption that *all* Christians would either see non-homeschooling as a sin. My point, and this is an insight into the Southern American mind, is the govt, the local seceeded govt, resists the outside forces. Therefore, given the Romans 13 argument now applies to those under said govt, Christians now have the right to resist. I will say the argument another way.
1.Romans 13 says Christians should obey the govt.
2. The new govt, the said seceeded govt, goes to defensive war and enlists the aid of its populace, which includes Christians,.
__________________________
Conclusion
3. Christians can wage defensive war is this context against foreign (UN) invaders.
This is a basic syllogism.