How'r we defining "anarchy" here?
In the sense that we cannot arbitrarily change reality to suit us, yeah God's rules always apply. But in the political sense, "no rulers" is much more in line with God's rules, or the structure of reality, than any sort of tax funded political tyranny.
Love these questions as they match the questions that roll around in my head.
The church proclaims Christ as King, but His kingship is based on self-giving love and invitation, not force and coercion.
It would seem we have to rethink our definition of "ruler", "Lord" or "King" in order to define if anarchy fits or does not
I mean, the way I see it, the story of Jesus illustrates that govt & religious authorities (same thing) are what kill God.
And I think there are few things demonstrated quite so clearly throughout human history.
Yes, that is a profound insight.
The selfish individual has responsibility as well.
We now know evil and it has taken our hearts.
Jesus was actually demonstrating proper selfish individualism. He refused to deny reality or give up who he was & submit to human authorities even when faced with torture & death.
It is always those claiming to be protecting "society" & "the greater good" that destroy truth in an effort to cling to their status & power. Their status can only exist to the degree that certain group or social structures continue to exist. They want to sacrifice the individual who speaks uncomfortable truths in order to protect themselves from reality. That is the tendency that kills God, truth, pluges the world into darkness, etc.
Of course He was, He is God in the flesh.
Yes, what I mean is that Christ is the ruler. He is King. There can be no pure anarchy. Anarchy defined as "No rulers"
I think the personification of non-human or super-human forces confuses the conversation. Anarchy = no human rulers.
That's the thing about Jesus, He is fully God and fully man.
Yeah, that's not really useful in this context. Jesus isn't a person commanding others to go around & collect taxes. Voluntarily funded organizations are not governments. What distinguishes govt from business & charity is forced funding.
Right. My point is, if we structured our nation's under the rule of King Jesus, it would eliminate government tyranny. When the Israelites asked for a King God warned them that human government would be tyrannical. Until then they had God as King. They chose human government and rejected God as their King.
Check 1 Samuel 8
When God freed the Israelis from slavery in Egypt He could have given them any kind of government He wanted to, a democracy even. Instead, He gave them the best form of government possible, anarchy, i.e., no earthly rulers, with Himself as king. But they didn't realize how good they had it; they wanted a human king like all of the other nations around them, and voluntarily subjected themselves to taxation and slavery again...
#[1]
Amen, good summary
Another way of understanding anarchy is a system of mutual respect. It is the affirmation of the principle of self ownership universilized to everyone.
When you state that "Christ is ruler over all" are you actually saying that we as individuals don't own ourselves i.e. our bodies? If we don't own ourselves and instead Christ does, it would follow that he is responsible for all of our actions. I don't think this is what you're saying though.
I'm saying that He is King over all in the same sense that a king has all authority in His kingdom.
