It's a real dilemma for inerrancy advocates, literalists and Sola Scriptura followers, isn't it.
Not so much. We know from the Founders’ writings what they intended the 2nd Amendment for, and being the unorganized militia to oppose tyranny is a constitutional function. In other words, it’s obedient to our government.
No dilemma, the government itself is unlawful in abridging the Second Amendment rights of citizens.
Not at all. Has Rome sent out its marching orders yet?
Just a little food for thought.
The Bible is pretty clear that the believer is not bound to obey the government no matter what. The Bible clearly expects obedience to the government, but also sets due limits upon what a believer can demand from a Christian.,p> Acts 5:29
29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
There is also the famous incident of the tribute money from Mark 12:17 which Jesus declared:
"Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."
Both of these citations expect that we are to obey the government within certain divinely set limitations. However,The primary question is "What are those divinely established limitations?" That's where things start to get a bit sticky.
The circumstances of governmental ideology has changed quite a bit since since Paul's time so its not always clear if the Pauline admonition holds up. Paul was living in a monarchical system in which the will of the Emperor and magistrates was law. The US is living in a system in which the will of the officials are supposed to follow the law, not be the law. When the command of St. Paul to obey the government was given, there was no such thing as a written Constitution establishing limits to governmental power. Our form of government did not exist in Paul's time, and there were no legal limits on the power of magistrates. The will of men was law back then and oaths of loyalty were taken to the emperor, not to the any principle of government.
However, what if the government itself commanded that there be limits to its power, but then tried to violate those limits? Is the government not bound by to obey law? So does Paul's admonition to obey the governmental require us to obey governmental officials acting outside of the law in violation of the law, or does it require us to obey the authority of the government as created by the Constitution? Do you obey illegal orders to violate the constitution established by the government or do obey the command of the government official? if you obey the constitution rather than the official are you obeying Paul's admonition to obey he government or are you violating it?
Moreover, if you have taken an oath to defend and uphold the Constitution are you not violating that oath to God by obeying the magistrate's order?
The government made a promise to the people via the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution and that was that the government could not infringe on the people's right to keep and bear arms. Many Christians have sworn to uphold that law. If Christians accept the principle that Christians should obey the men in government over the laws, then the Christian is essentially saying that government by Constitution does not exist because the government is allowed by God to do whatever it wants as long as it can get away with it. They would be teaching that Christians believe in the rule of men not in the rule of law.
So what does God want here, does He want us to obey government commands that are obviously illegal to any honest observer? Does He want us to obey the law contrary to the magistrates of the government, does God expect men to keep their oath to uphold the Constitution even if it means disobeying government officials?
These are some complex and tough questions, that all Christians may have to face.
Not really. Jesus disciples carried swords. And then let’s look at Romans 13.
Romans 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.
Would you say the this administration falls under “For rulers are not a to terror to good works, but to the evil”?
Yeah, I don’t think so either. So the passage cannot possibly be talking about this administration.
Then let’s look at 1 Peter 2.
1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; 14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
Once again. Is this administration punishing the evildoers and praising those that do well? Yeah, I didn’t think so.
See, there are criteria by which we know that leaders are sent of God. Either look at the whole passage or none of it.