Forgive my ignorance, but I’m not sure what your shorthand terms are supposed to mean.
I disagree with this interpretation. The first part of Romans 13 is not about the Government per se, but rather our response and obedience to our civil laws. It’s not about what government should do, it is about what we should do in relation to our governments.
Furthermore, this focus on our actions toward the government ends at verse 6, but the theme of our actions continues in verses 7-10 with “others” instead of the government as the point of reference.
So when we get to verses 11-14, we are removed from any direct reference to government, so there is nothing that supports your assertions about this being about the government praising Jesus.
Four different times? For what? There can only be one “Day of the Lord”; only one 42 months time of the beast and his prophet; only one point in time when he sends his angels to get us, and according to you, all of these are said to be “near” or “soon”.
God knows perfectly when and where everything will or has happened. He hasn’t delayed anything and if he has he didn’t tell us this in scripture, which shakes the very foundations of our faith! This is dangerous thinking!
Doug
D'ism is dispensationalism. Most people think it is exactly the Bible. It is quite off. The 2 peoples-2 programs doctrine has always been the mark of D'ism; it is a chapter in the Dallas prof Ryries' book defining D'ism. He called it the
"sine qua non" (the one thing without which the thing is not distinct). You are probably aware of it, but on the affirmative, unquestioning side.
As Reformation scholars have shown, Rom 13 has three roots of freedom which the West has enjoyed against totalitarianism for maybe 5 centuries (since the Magdeburg Confession of 1550):
1, government is seen as a lowly domestic servant
2, the offices, but not the people in them, are ordained of God (there are some times in modern times when this is not even the case. Most reformers sought the smallest possible scope of government).
3, "good, right, evil" are used in the normal sense as defined by the Law. They are not twisted to accommodate totalitarianism.
Mk 13's parable of the 4 times means that there can be a delay (there has been) and that the 1st cent. Judean material is accomplished. That is true for the Revelation too, as the 1st page says (repeated throughout). There are good sources here at CCCF about the historic view; the last I saw was on the 2 witnesses. Try for ex., "Marty."
What John was trying to do was wrap up the 70th week in terms of the 1st cent. devastation, as far as the beast and the 42 months go. I encourage you to at least know what this research means.
As far as the unfolding 1st cent. and future, it means that those kinds of details have taken place in that generation, and then when you see the descriptions of the final day of judgement, it is very quick, even an hour. The Bible is not trying to describe modern times, although the 6th decade of the 1st cent. has echoes! If you think our times are bad, try some of the medieval periods where then was: the little ice age, the Bubonic plague, and the totalitarian Holy Roman Empire all at the same time! So long as organizations like Tacticalcivics.com keep growing, it is proof that we have a say in this unfolding.
All the best,
Marcus, writer, THE COVENANT REVOLT, at Amazon.
