Government

archive

Home Tag : Government

Exemple

Retractable Leashes in School Choice Legislation Call to Action

March 12, 2024 Eric Potter Current Inks, Legislation Alerts , , ,

(Updated 3/22/24 with Correction at end concerning testing requirements) 

Although having grown up in a rural county meant that I never needed to put a leash on my family pets, I do appreciate whoever came up with the idea of a retractable leash.  You can strap the leash on and grant your pet of choice a feeling of great freedom until you shorten the retractable leash and they hit their allowed limit.  Sometimes you can give them 20 feet of open leash, sometimes you have to shorten it to 3 feet so they don’t cause trouble.

Government regulations often operate much like a retractable leash, attaching accountability measures which initially seem quite permissive, but later get tightened down when they decide you are not doing what they think you should do.  The school choice legislation before us in the 2 houses of the Tennessee General Assembly are a great example of such a retractable leash which will be placed upon the necks of those trying to escape their failing local public school.  Not only will escaping families be held accountable to the program’s rules, but the private schools and homeschool communities which accept them will also have a leash attached to their necks.

Multiple public statements have been made denying the reality that government money always has strings attached.  The strings are euphemistically labeled accountability measures.  On face, this is quite absurd as the explicit content of the legislation in both houses places specific limits on the money’s use:

  • The money cannot go directly to the parent or student.
  • The money can be used only for expenses approved by the Department of Education and require receipts for reimbursement.
  • Expenses without receipts or which are not approved will require parent to return that money.
  • A parent or school which is believed to commit fraud in regard to the expenses may be remanded to civil authorities for criminal prosecution.
  • Schools which are not in compliance with DOE’s promulgated (and potentially changing) academic standards and regulations will lose the right to participate in the program.
  • Testing requirements are attached to HB1183 which comply with the federal ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act). — CORRECTION AT END
  • Compliance with ESSA is required to receive federal funding with its strings.

Parents and their private schools should be concerned about these strings or leashes in their present form, but future prospects for the leash shortening are even more troublesome.  We may (or may not) feel comfortable with the leash length right now, under the current administration and the current General Assembly, but the future holds no promises that future state leaders will allow such leash lengths to remain unrestrictive.  Once the leash is attached to our neck through funding and the regulations which always follow such funding, we will have great difficulty extracting our necks from the leash when it shortens. 

The best option is to avoid the leash being attached in the first place by rejecting the legislation and rejecting the promised money for educating our children. 

Please take a few minutes to contact the House Government Operations committee and share the ideas above in your own words in opposition to this bill.  You can email (good), call (better), or make an in-person / phone appointment (best).  Their committee oversees the regulations written by various state government departments which would eventually tighten the leash.  Tell Legislators that private school parents and homeschool parents DO NOT WANT a leash attached through this legislation, especially one which can be tightened later by future leaders.  Their contact information is below. Parents can further warn their private school or homeschool umbrella program with this information.

Thank you.

Dr. Eric Potter

LINK to the Contact List for the House Government Operations Committee Members

CORRECTION 3/22/24

From details learned during Moms for Liberty legislative day 3/20/24

Posted separately on 3/22/24

You Learn Something New Everyday

In this brief post we offer a correction in part of our review of House Bill 1183.  Because HB1183 has language dealing with the scholarships and even more language dealing with public education issues, we need to clarify the testing requirements for scholarship recipients.  Previously, we noted that the testing requirements in the bill for the scholarship students follow the federal guidelines and testing schedule.  However, that testing schedule is for the public education portion of the bill.

While the scholarship students in private schools will have their academic performance indicators monitored by the Department of Education,  they are not required to test according to the federal guidelines like the public-schools.  Instead, a third-party contractor will be collecting data from the private schools regarding the scholarship student’s academic performance per the school’s chosen measures.  These will be included in a yearly report to the house education committees.  We have been told that the third-party contractors will be prohibited from selling the student’s data for profit but do not see the language for this provision in the current version of the bill. 

Despite its less rigorous testing schedule, the house bill still contains the same Department of Education approval oversight, DOE rules promulgation issues, and public-private funding concerns.  Because the funding schema in this bill involves government money (not tax relief) being paid directly to private education institutions, it tips the balance of power over private education in favor of ever greater state oversight- especially in the future as the size of the program grows.   

While some of the public education measures in this bill seem to have some merit, we continue to oppose the bill for reasons discussed.  Let’s find another way to help children stuck in a bad education system, not extend the power of that system over the private sphere.

Read More →
Exemple

How Could This Affect My Private School

March 11, 2024 Eric Potter Current Inks, Legislation Alerts , , ,

When a student uses ESFA funds to pay for a part of their private school tuition, the schools bring themselves more directly under the DOE and potentially lose their autonomy.

First, the schools will have to deal with testing issues.   In the Senate bill, scholarship recipients must undergo annual testing using a normed referenced test approved by the state board of education as well as administering an English language arts test (TCAP or other DOE approved test) in third grade and a mathematics test (TCAP or other as approved by DOE) in eighth grade.  Then, in eleventh grade they must take the ACT or SAT.  Administering the tests is the responsibility of the schools on pg. 13 (b). 

In the House bill, testing will be required for ESFA students. THIS WAS INCORRECT AND HAS BEEN CORRECTRED AT THE END AS WELL AS IN A SEPARATE POST. ——-ERROR REMOVED———– Right now, this is being set up as a state funded endeavor. The legislation gives the commissioner of education the right to establish the schedule for the statewide tests.  No further information on who administers the test is given in the legislation. If a private school has scholarship students, presumably they will come under the administration schedule of the commissioner of education but this is not clear in the legislation. If federal funding ever comes into play, the schools may be brought under federal guidelines. 

Second, the school is responsible for providing adequate receipts for documentation for all expenses paid with funds (p 14).  They may not refund the parent but only the state account (p 14). Should the school have several students using the funds in various ways, the administrative overhead may increase depending on the rules and requirements established by the DOE regarding this matter.

Third, the senate bill gives the state board of education duty to “promulgate rules allowing the department to suspend or terminate a private or public school from participating in the program due to low academic performance, as determined by the department” (emphasis mine) (pg. 15 (2)).  The school can then be removed from participating in the program.  What other rules come into play regarding the school remaining open are not addressed but probably can be found in other legal codes and rules. The testing that the schools are required to perform is stated to be for information purposes only so it is unclear how the school’s academics will be evaluated.  These rules will be made by the state board after the legislation passes.   Direct oversight by the DOE who perhaps has a different educational philosophy from the private schools should be concerning to independent private schools.

Fourth, fraud protections extend to “any other person” who use funds deposited in an account in a way that is not qualified or “any other person” who misrepresents the nature, receipts, or any other evidence of one or more expenses could be made to pay restitution or may be brought up on criminal charges. The DOE is given the right to promulgate the rules regarding all these issues (pg. 15-16). 

Fifth, for private students with educational disabilities, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) funding uses federal money to provide those services.  One child using this money could bring the entire private school under federal regulations. This is a complicated issue that was left unanswered by the Education Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, legal counsel for the House, and legal counsel for the DOE.  Both bills include IDEA funding for students with disabilities who leave the public system to go into the private system.  Schools need to be aware of this issue and careful that they do not come under federal regulations. In conclusion, by taking this money, the private schools are taking on the responsibility of annual testing, adding administrative tasks and possibly legal consultation fees to their budgets, putting themselves under direct evaluation by the DOE for academic performance, and possibly opening themselves up to fraud charges if the money is not handled just as the yet to be promulgated rules allow.   They also must be careful with the use of IDEA funds for special education student needs or could end up under federal regulations. Even more important, everyone should be aware that federal ESSA guidelines are being followed for testing schedules which sets the state up for being able to take federal funds in this endeavor in the future which could put private schools under federal regulations. Private schools need to count the costs carefully before accepting this money.

Stay Tuned for a Call To Action March 12th (tomorrow).

CORRECTION 3/22/24

WE LEARN SOMETHING NEW EVERYDAY

By Jennifer Potter

In this brief post we offer a correction in part of our review of House Bill 1183. Because HB1183 has language dealing with the scholarships and even more language dealing with public education issues, we need to clarify the testing requirements for scholarship recipients. Previously, we noted that the testing requirements in the bill for the scholarship students follow the federal guidelines and testing schedule. However, that testing schedule is for the public education portion of the bill.

While the scholarship students in private schools will have their academic performance indicators monitored by the Department of Education, they are not required to test according to the federal guidelines like the public-schools. Instead, a third-party contractor will be collecting data from the private schools regarding the scholarship student’s academic performance per the school’s chosen measures. These will be included in a yearly report to the house education committees. We have been told that the third-party contractors will be prohibited from selling the student’s data for profit but do not see the language for this provision in the current version of the bill.

Despite its less rigorous testing schedule, the house bill still contains the same Department of Education approval oversight, DOE rules promulgation issues, and public-private funding concerns. Because the funding schema in this bill involves government money (not tax relief) being paid directly to private education institutions, it tips the balance of power over private education in favor of ever greater state oversight- especially in the future as the size of the program grows.

While some of the public education measures in this bill seem to have some merit, we continue to oppose the bill for reasons discussed. Let’s find another way to help children stuck in a bad education system, not extend the power of that system over the private sphere.

Read More →
Exemple

Show Me the Bill

February 15, 2024 Eric Potter Current Inks, Legislation Alerts , ,

We, the people of the State of Tennessee, as parents, grandparents, future parents, teachers, and if nothing else taxpaying citizens respectfully request that our elected officials temporarily serving us at our voting discretion immediately publish for public consideration the language for the Education Freedom Act.

This proposed legislation was first announced in November of 2023 by our Governor. The legislation filing deadline has passed with only 2 caption bills filed, SB2787 and HB2468. These bills only request a study of this school choice program to be performed, yet through accidental leaks we have seen potential drafts of a full program bill. Per legislative rules, the full bill could be added as an amendment with only 24 hours notice for public viewing before an Education Committee vote occurs in either legislative chamber.

This situation is considered unacceptable by the citizens of Tennessee who will be burdened by at least $140,000,000 per year expense for an unproven program to eventually impact the full population of Tennessee children for decades and change our educational system profoundly.

If our request for transparency and opportunity for dialogue is not granted, we will press our position until our public servants respond.

If you agree with me, go to the Education committee pages for each house and either email this or call their office. Also let others know.

House of Representatives Education Committee

Senate Education Committee

Read More →
Exemple

Lots of Money Flying Around from 50CAN and Friends Supporting “Education Freedom”

December 13, 2023 Eric Potter Covenant , ,

“When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” — P. J. O’Rourke LINK (Brainy Quote)

               Our educational system directs the flow of billions of dollars each year to not only schools, but to the myriad of services connected to schools averaging $17,013 per pupil nationally 2019-20 (NCES).  Mark Lieberman reported in Education Week that in 2019-2020 our combined state and federal governments spent a total of $795 billion on direct education expenses amounting to 7% of the federal budget (Lieberman 2022).  According to the Sycamore Institute, Tennessee receives 1.1 billion from the Federal government for K-12 funding through over 12 programs (Spears 2023).  Between all these direct and indirect expenditures, testing companies, textbook companies, consultants, and bureaucrats reap significant dividends and salaries based on decisions made in the halls of our state and federal governments.  With that amount of money, no one should be surprised that large sums of money are also spent on swaying the positions and votes of our politicians.  Ninety million dollars was reported in 2022 for the entire U.S. for lobbying in education. 

               Long before Bill Lee became governor of Tennessee, educational reform foundations began their work in Tennessee.  These foundations are funded by other foundations – often run by billionaires living and working outside of Tennessee. The visionaries and advocacy groups behind these education reform movements have been working hard behind the scenes, some taking credit for directing the changes taking place over the last few years and some taking credit for influencing elections across the state through money spent for or against candidates – See “Election Influences” in Bibliography. 

               Now that Governor Lee has made the announcement about his Education Freedom legislation concerning school vouchers, the organizations and political action committee’s (PAC’s) working behind the scenes may see their decades long work paying off if Universal School vouchers come to Tennessee.  These entities have been hard at work positioning their legislators with funding for years.  One would expect groups like teacher’s unions to be constantly trying to influence votes, but they are not alone.  These pro-“school choice” groups have been consistently donating money to influence elections. Given the influence of money on one’s inclinations on an issue, one must ask how unbiased the politician may be after those larger donations along with other monetary influences to be described further below have become the norm for over a decade. 

               Now, before you dismiss five to ten thousand dollar donations as a drop in the bucket of a political campaign, some perspective is in order to gain a fuller picture of the influence of his money.  First, although there are dollar limits on how much money one person or one PAC can donate, the combination of several PAC’s working together can add up to much more than an individual donation.  Examples of this can be found in resources mentioned further below.  Second, for some state legislators whose total campaign donations are in the 100,000 to 200,000 dollar range, a total of $20,000 can be a sizable chunk.   Third, not all money is listed in campaign finances thanks to something known as “independent expenditures” which don’t have to be reported in the donations.  These expenditures can include a group covering the mailing cost for a candidate’s flyers or simply paying for ads against the competition.  Either way, thousands can and have been spent to help elect an official who will of course remain unbiased by such help when it comes time to vote (sarcasm).  Independent Expenditures can be seen here on this TABLE.  

               Fourth, and finally, we come to lobbying and lobbyists.  Tom Humphrey published in the Knox News Sentinel online edition in 2018 about this issue.  Even back then, he notes that three of the above pro-school choice PAC’s reported 1.2 million dollars in July 2018 disclosures.  He describes how this money was used in a variety of ways.  Some was spent on lobbyist direct work.  Some was spent on “independent expenditures” as noted in the prior paragraph.  Some of this money was spent on attack advertising in school board elections.  The full article linked below contains more details.

               With these various potential influxes of influential dollars into our legislators’ campaign pockets, we should ask who might these influences be and do we agree with them.  You could look at a state campaign finance website to wade through vast and confusing data hoping to make sense of it, or you can look at a few websites where others have done the arduous work for you.  By looking at these more understandable user interfaces, you will first see that Big Medicine influences our state government with a lot of money (this is a story for another day).  Then if you know the names to look for, you will see a number of education related groups beyond the Tennessee Education Association (TEA – teachers union) doing the same forms of influencing. 

               Some of the most noticeable pro-charter school, pro-education reform foundations and advocacy groups influencing legislation through legislators in Tennessee include the national entity 50CAN in Tennessee known as TennCAN (Tennesseans for Putting Students First (PAC)), Tennesseans for Student Success (Team Kid PAC), the national entity known as the  American Federation for Children (or Tennessee Federation for Children(, and the Great Public Schools PAC (also sometimes listed as Campaign for Great Public Schools/City Fund/Public School Allies.  (see Bibliography for “Organization Links”).

               Each of these groups deserve much deeper descriptions than this article can provide. However, I can give you enough of an overview through portions of their history, their founders, their operators, their stated goals, their past work, and their own financial sources to see that we as parents should be concerned about their influences.

               50 CAN:  Mark Magee started 50CAN as CONCAN in Connecticut and then expanded to national work.  This founder has a B.A. from Georgetown and a Ph.D. from Duke in sociology and desires to create local advocacy for reimagining schools through vouchers and accountability.  He was a founding member of the Progressive founding director of the Center for Civic Enterprise at the Progressive Policy Institute which worked toward influencing the “New” democratic party (Magee FutureEd and Fordham Institute).  He focuses on science based political advocacy at the local level and education reform through Choice options which include accountability as a core tenant. The organization began working in TN in 2011.  They take credit in their work for many of the education reforms in TN in recent years and they have a strategic plan for the state laid out in their Annual Updates and scoring of TN educational laws (2022 Tennessee Report Card).  This organization played a significant role in passing the TISA (Tennessee Investment in Student Achievement Act) educational reform in 2022.  Reading their site would initially make one think that their motives are well-intentioned for the good of children, but the complexities of how that is worked out deserves attention in a separate article to come.  For now, considering the sources of their funding one might be more hesitant to trust their stated goals.  Their donors include the Bill Gates Foundation and The Walton Foundation as noted on Influence Watch.  Tennessee CAN or TennCAN is simply the Tennessee chapter of 50CAN. Tennesseans for Putting Students First PAC appears to be the Political Action Committee arm of 50CAN and Tennessee, but I could be wrong as the campaign reports are confusing on this matter. Student Firsts was another pro-school choice organization initially operating in Tennessee but merged with 50CAN in 2016. 

               Tennessee Federation for Children (chapter of American Federation for Children (AFC)):  William Oberndorf partnered with the late John Walton in the early 1990s to form what today is known as the American Federation for Children.  Mr. Oberndorf still serves as Chairman. The AFC is reportedly an offshoot of the defunct All Children Matters organization connected with the DeVos family (Vogel 2016). See the Vogel site for their explanation of funding sources as their own site does not list funding sources. The focus of the Foundation is on K–12 education, mental health initiatives, and the environment. He is a life trustee of the University of California San Francisco where he chairs the Neuroscience Academy.

               Tennesseans for Student Success (and their TeamKid PAC) seems to be run by Tennesseans across middle and east Tennessee but their funding sources are not clear.  Of the two sources that are listed one is the Campaign for Great Public Schools which also has their own PAC.  Other funding sources are unknown.  Like the other entities, the website talks about innovation in education and charter schools as a means of choice (Friedman 2023 “27.1 million”).

               Great Public Schools PAC appears to be run by the democratic ex-mayor of Indianapolis, Indiana who now runs charter schools.  It is a pro-charter school PAC with two billionaire donors- one from California (the founder of Netflix) and one from Texas.  The PAC makes donations to both Tennessee legislators and to the other foundations such as Tennesseans for Student Success.

               For further insights and financial facts on how much these groups spent on various races in Tennessee, you can read the articles on the Tennessee Lookout by Friedman in the bibliography.  For even further nitty-gritty details you can compare and contrast database compilations for campaign contributions from both sides of the political fence.  On one side you can look at Legislative Report Card’s Contribution Dashboard.  On other side you can dig into the Cash For Clout site.  Their links are below.

Summary

               As I find myself in the odd position of agreeing with Democrat politicians on opposing School Choice (although for very different reasons), I appreciate one more quote:

“It’s an issue that Democrats and Republicans seem to come together on, the over-influence of money in politics and in power.” — Andrew Gillum – LINK (AZ Quotes)

               We clearly have good reason to question the neutrality of many legislators on the issue of choice after seeing the dollar amounts they have received from these groups.  These groups, on the surface, sound well-intentioned and agreeable, but the further you dig, the more concerning their worldviews and agenda become. Their donations and independent expenditures assisted in multiple re-election or opposition efforts across our state.  Politicians know who they need to please when the next election cycle comes around and do not forget who got them there in the first place.

               This same list of pro-“school choice” and public accountability organizations will likely be around for the next election cycle.  This list will help keep them there if they want to get re-elected.  Given the stakes in the decisions to be considered regarding education policy in Tennessee, we must hold our leaders accountable to the voters more than to these nationally funded advocacy foundations.  Our children and the future of our state are affected by the votes on Capitol Hill.  Take this issue seriously and return to learn more as we share more about why we believe School Choice or its Tennessee rebranded name “Education Freedom” is false advertising.  The people and groups behind this movement do not deserve our trust.  When you are ready, tell your Representative or Senator what you think and why you believe that way.  Reach out to me if you want to know more. 

Election Influences:

50 Can . (n.d.). Our results. 50CAN National. https://50can.org/our-approach/our-results. Accessed 12/10/2023.

About Tennesseans for student success. SuccessCard. (2020, June 17). https://tnsuccesscard.com/about-tennesseans-for-student-success/#12/10/2023.  Accessed 12/10/2023.

Friedman, A.  T. L. N. 30. (2023, December 3). The $27.1 million clash between Education Reform and Public School advocates. Tennessee Lookout. https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/11/30/the-27-1-million-clash-between-education-reform-and-public-school-advocates/. Accessed 12/10/23.

Williams, P. (2023, November 20). Revealed: Confidential documents describe secret effort to elect lawmakers for school privatization. News Channel 5 Nashville (WTVF). https://www.newschannel5.com/news/newschannel-5-investigates/revealed/revealed-confidential-documents-describe-secret-effort-to-elect-lawmakers-for-school-privatization. accessed 12/10/23.

Winning candidates in competitive legislative primaries were rewarded for putting students first. Tennesseans for Student Success. (2022, August 5). https://tnsuccess.org/winning-candidates-in-competitive-legislative-primaries-were-rewarded-for-putting-students-first. Accessed 12/10/23.

Organization Links:

               50CAN  https://50can.org/ 

               TennesseeCAN  https://tn-can.org/

               American Federation for Children https://www.federationforchildren.org/

               Tennessee Federation for Children https://www.schoolchoicetn.com/about/

               Tennesseans for Student Success https://tnsuccess.org/

               Great Public Schools PAC- no website found- 2 billionaires give money (Smith 2022)

               Casey Smith, I. C. C. O. 31. (2022, October 31). PAC led by former Indy mayor Bart Peterson gives                big to pro-charter School candidates. Indiana Capital Chronicle. https://indianacapitalchronicle.com/2022/10/31/pac-led-by-former-indy-mayor-bart-peterson-gives-big-to-pro-charter-school-candidates/


Bibliography:

2022 Tennessee Policy Report Card. TennesseeCAN. (2022, November). https://tn-can.org/research-and-resources/research/

50CAN. Influence Watch. (2020, January 2). https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/50can-inc/#:~:text=50CAN%20has%20received%20grants%20over,the%20Silicon%20Valley%20Community%20Foundation.

Contributions dashboard. The Legislative Report Card. (2023, November 14). https://tnreportcard.org/contributions-dashboard/

Fordham Institute. By the company it keeps: Marc Porter Magee. The Thomas B. Fordham Institute. https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/company-it-keeps-marc-porter-magee

Friedman, A. (2023, July 24). Cash for clout: Who’s funding Tennessee’s politics? Tennessee Lookout. https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/07/24/cash-for-clout-whos-funding-tennessees-politics/

Friedman, A. (2023, November 28). Independent spending by pro-charter groups. Flourish. https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/15928805/

Humphrey, T. (2016, October 16). Tennessee pro-charter School Pacs’ spending up. Knoxville News Sentinel. https://www.knoxnews.com/story/news/2016/10/16/tennessee-pro-charter-school-pacs-spending-up/92055016/

Leading lobbying industries U.S. 2022. Statista. (2023, November 3). https://www.statista.com/statistics/257364/top-lobbying-industries-in-the-us/

Lieberman, M. (2022, May 11). What America spends on K-12: The latest federal snapshot. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/what-america-spends-on-k-12-the-latest-federal-snapshot/2022/05

Marc Porter Magee. FutureEd. (2023, February 8). https://www.future-ed.org/team/marc-porter-magee/

NCES Fast Facts.  National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home Page, a part of the U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66

Spears, M. (2023, November 9). Federal funding for K-12 education in Tennessee. The Sycamore Institute. https://www.sycamoreinstitutetn.org/tn-federal-k12-funding/#:~:text=Programs%20and%20Requirements-,Tennessee%20typically%20receives%20about%20%241.1%20billion%20annually%20in%20federal%20K,federal%20requirements%20(Figure%202)

Vogel, W. by P. (2016, April 27). Here are the corporations and right-wing funders backing the Education Reform Movement. Media Matters for America. https://www.mediamatters.org/daily-caller/here-are-corporations-and-right-wing-funders-backing-education-reform-movement#ascafc

Read More →
Exemple

Conclusion of Romans 13:1-7 Analysis

December 6, 2023 Eric Potter

Excerpt #14 of “Analysis of Romans 13:1-7 in Light of the Analogy of Scripture”

               Given the length of the full paper I recently published on this site, I am posting excerpts which emphasize specific principles within the paper.  Hopefully, these excerpts will not only encourage you to read the actual paper, but also think more deeply about the role of Romans 13:1-7 in our response to both Godly and ungodly civil government in our day and time.  A proper understanding and obedience to Scripture is critical today as always.  This particular Scripture has been mishandled in so many ways that a methodical approach to its exegesis is needed to avoid further error by both individual Christians and the broader church.  The pressures being exerted upon true Christianity by the contemporary civil government demand a Biblical response informed by Romans 13:1-7 and the other Scriptures addressed within this paper.

               (These excerpts are posted in the order as found in the paper, but do not include the entirety of the paper which combined.  Only the PDF contains all sections of the paper.)

Conclusion of Romans 13:1-7 Analysis

              In regard to Romans 13:1-7, the analogy of Scripture provides support, clarification, and deepening of this debated and critically important passage.  Submission to authorities means obedience to those powers placed by God over the believer as a dual citizen.  Those authorities derive their power from God as the ultimate authority.  Authorities whose commands coincide with that which God has commanded or permitted must be obeyed dutifully by Christians for God has not only instituted them, but done so for the good of all.  Resisting such righteous authority and such righteous commands by these human authorities brings judgment.  Christians’ goals for the good of society should coincide with the God ordained goals of the governing authorities in punishing evil and encouraging good.  Where Romans remains silent is whether there are times in which Christians can righteously oppose evil government.  The analogy of Scripture both in the Old and the New Testaments attest that obedience to God not only often stands in opposition to obedience to rulers, but also unequivocally commands believers to choose obedience to God over human authorities.  However, even in such resistance, Christians are to remain prayerful and to exhibit subjection to human authorities through respect and obedience to all that which does not contradict God.  The principles of self-defense and defending the weak or needy as well as examples of fleeing evil acts limit submission to the punitive consequences of such an evil government.  It permits Christians to seek reasonable or lawful escape from such oppression.  This resistance can extend beyond individual interactions to larger, societal resistance in cases where God works through appointed leaders to suppress an evil ruler, even overturn their rule.  Even Calvin permitted the idea of “God’s Avengers” in chapter 20 of the Institutes (1517).  As the primary two commandments make clear, the goal of Christians in regard to government is to love their neighbor by seeking their good and to love God by keeping His commandments.  When this can be accomplished through obedience to civil government, Christians are bound to obey that government, but God’s Word demands that Christians resist that which resists God, yet only that part which resists God, submitting as far is lawfully possible to government while maintaining a prayerful and respectful attitude.  From this starting point, the committed exegete can continue the grammatico-historical hermeneutics approach in search of not only orthodoxy, but with the goal of orthopraxy to God’s Will in this area of life.

Read MORE NOW.

Read More →
Exemple

Other Verses Influencing an Analysis of Romans 13

December 4, 2023 Eric Potter

Excerpt #13 of “Analysis of Romans 13:1-7 in Light of the Analogy of Scripture”

               Given the length of the full paper I recently published on this site, I am posting excerpts which emphasize specific principles within the paper.  Hopefully, these excerpts will not only encourage you to read the actual paper, but also think more deeply about the role of Romans 13:1-7 in our response to both Godly and ungodly civil government in our day and time.  A proper understanding and obedience to Scripture is critical today as always.  This particular Scripture has been mishandled in so many ways that a methodical approach to its exegesis is needed to avoid further error by both individual Christians and the broader church.  The pressures being exerted upon true Christianity by the contemporary civil government demand a Biblical response informed by Romans 13:1-7 and the other Scriptures addressed within this paper.

               (These excerpts are posted in the order as found in the paper, but do not include the entirety of the paper which combined.  Only the PDF contains all sections of the paper.)

Other Verses Influencing an Analysis of Romans 13

               A few miscellaneous Scripture references which do not fall into any of the above categories provide a little further insight into Romans 13 as well.  In regard to the welfare of a city, Proverbs 11:10-11 and Proverbs 14:34 note how righteousness among the inhabitants bring blessing upon them while sin is a reproach and shameful acts brings wrath.  The combining of the command to “seek the welfare of the city”, if it is applied to today’s Church, implies that the righteousness of individuals contributes to whether a city whose welfare is to be sought can be promoted otherwise.  The shalom of their city is to be a goal of Christians.  Matthew 5:13, in which Jesus told his disciples that they would be the salt of the earth, further echoes this principle.  Priestly connotations were inescapable as they were to guard the nations with their covenant loyalty, acting as a preserving agent (Grant, 39). Grant also points out that when God wants to preserve the earth, He often puts His priests in positions of political prominence; Joseph (Genesis 42:6), Nehemiah (Nehemiah 2:1), Mordecai (Esther 10:3), and Daniel (Daniel 6:25-28) (39 Grant).  Another consideration is the Great Commission in Matthew 28:18-20 in which the disciples are told to make disciples of all “nations”.  Does “nations” mean individuals or people groups?  Much debate which will not be addressed here has focused on this question.  The application of bystander responsibility in Exodus 23:1-5 and Deuteronomy 22:1-4 could be applied to how Christian’s interact with an evil government, affecting how far they may participate in the government’s sinful acts through commission or omission.  Psalm 82:1-4 and Proverbs 24:11-12 seem to encourage rescuing the weak and needy from the hand of the wicked, without regard to the office of the wicked.   The frequently repeated command to love our neighbor as ourselves also seems to apply here (Mathew 22:39)   2 John 1:9-11 teaches that we are to reject both the teaching and the teachers of heresy.  Each of these examples either clarify or nuance the general principles discovered by this approach while maintaining their integrity in particular applications.

Read MORE NOW.

Read More →
Exemple

Christian Resistance

November 29, 2023 Eric Potter

Excerpt #12 of “Analysis of Romans 13:1-7 in Light of the Analogy of Scripture”

               Given the length of the full paper I recently published on this site, I am posting excerpts which emphasize specific principles within the paper.  Hopefully, these excerpts will not only encourage you to read the actual paper, but also think more deeply about the role of Romans 13:1-7 in our response to both Godly and ungodly civil government in our day and time.  A proper understanding and obedience to Scripture is critical today as always.  This particular Scripture has been mishandled in so many ways that a methodical approach to its exegesis is needed to avoid further error by both individual Christians and the broader church.  The pressures being exerted upon true Christianity by the contemporary civil government demand a Biblical response informed by Romans 13:1-7 and the other Scriptures addressed within this paper.

               (These excerpts are posted in the order as found in the paper, but do not include the entirety of the paper which combined.  Only the PDF contains all sections of the paper.)

Christian Resistance

              Narrative examples of the early Christian’s resistance or disobedience to established civil authority provides helpful insight through a variety of responses.  In Acts 4:1-31 and Acts 5:29, Peter and John demonstrated respect towards the Sanhedrin while unequivocally refusing to obey their commands which contradicted those of God.  Paul, undergoing harassment from both civil and religious leaders, escaped in a basket from the authorities who sought to execute him (Acts 9:23-25).  No disapproval of this fleeing is found in that text.  In another instance, Paul used his Roman citizenship to avoid unlawful punishment in Acts 22:24-29. 

              Some means of resistance are also noted in commanded flight from authorities.  As mentioned earlier, Joseph and Mary fled from Herod.  Matthew 10:23 commands the disciples to flee to the next city when they are persecuted in one town.  Hebrews 11:37-40 commends the faith of those who had wandered “about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth” in their fleeing from persecution.    If one considers the analogous pattern of children being commanded to obey parents in Ephesians 6:1-3 as a form of instituted authority, then the approved description of the Gospel turning children against their parents in Luke 12:53 would seem to coincide with this concept that man is to obey God rather than any instituted authority if only one may be obeyed to the exclusion of the other (Volkmer). In fact Ephesians 5:6-11 clearly commands Christians to “not become partners with them” (the sons of disobedience) (Volkmer).  I Peter 4:14 even describes those who are persecuted for Christ’s sake as blessed as does the Beatitudes (Matthew 5:10), assuming that Christians will oppose evil in whatever form it occurs and suffer for such opposition. 

Read MORE NOW.

Read More →
Exemple

Beyond a Simple Attitude of Submission

November 27, 2023 Eric Potter Papers

Excerpt #11 of “Analysis of Romans 13:1-7 in Light of the Analogy of Scripture”

               Given the length of the full paper I recently published on this site, I am posting excerpts which emphasize specific principles within the paper.  Hopefully, these excerpts will not only encourage you to read the actual paper, but also think more deeply about the role of Romans 13:1-7 in our response to both Godly and ungodly civil government in our day and time.  A proper understanding and obedience to Scripture is critical today as always.  This particular Scripture has been mishandled in so many ways that a methodical approach to its exegesis is needed to avoid further error by both individual Christians and the broader church.  The pressures being exerted upon true Christianity by the contemporary civil government demand a Biblical response informed by Romans 13:1-7 and the other Scriptures addressed within this paper.

               (These excerpts are posted in the order as found in the paper, but do not include the entirety of the paper which combined.  Only the PDF contains all sections of the paper.)

Beyond a Simple Attitude of Submission

               Besides an attitude of submission, believers are commanded in I Timothy 2:1-3 to pray for all peoples, including civil authorities, as this is pleasing to God (Duncan III).  Not only is it pleasing to God, but immediately afterwards God’s desire for “all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” expands this to include spiritual benefits in addition to earthly ones (WCF, Nelson).  This command sounds very similar to the one in the book of Jeremiah to seek the welfare of the city in which they were exiled, for believers are sent into the world not to be a part of it but to interact with it on many levels (John 17).  When one combines this idea with Matthew 6:10-13, where Jesus instructs the disciples on how to pray, God’s Will for the shalom of all people becomes a particular portion of His Will to “be done on earth as it is in heaven”.

              Several examples of obedient submission are provided in the New Testament.  Jesus himself provides a model for submission to earthly authorities.  He submitted to the jurisdictional boundaries of instituted governments by paying instituted taxes or acknowledging civil jurisdiction right to tax in Matthew 17:24-27, Matthew 22:15-22, and Luke 20:25.  Despite the command to obey government, believers are foremost commanded to work not for man, including rulers, but for the Lord (Colossians 3:23-25). 

              Examples of obedient submission to government within the bounds of obedience to God may be discerned in Scripture in examples where new believers continued to work for government institutions after their conversions.  In Luke 19, Zaccheus is nowhere said to have forsaken his position of tax collector, only that he performed his duties righteously after having paid restitution.  In Acts 13, Paul did not instruct the leader Sergius Paulus to resign from Paphos leadership, nor did Paul direct the Philippian jailer to quit in Acts 16.  Paul exhibited these principles of obedience in how he behaved before the Roman government in Acts 25:10-12, Acts 24-25 before Felix, Festus, and Herod Aggrippa, as well as before Caesar in Acts chapters 26 through 28 (Bromiley, 545 ). The ISBE notes that in no Scripture does the New Testament forbid participation by Christians in civil government and cites the Ethiopian eunuch, Cornelius, “those in Caesar’s household”, as well as some already mentioned above as examples.  The ISBE highlights that these believers exercised these privileges as individuals rather than as representatives of the corporate Church (Bromiley, 545). 

Read MORE NOW.

Read More →
Exemple

The Response of Christians to Civil Government

November 22, 2023 Eric Potter Papers

Excerpt #10 of “Analysis of Romans 13:1-7 in Light of the Analogy of Scripture”

               Given the length of the full paper I recently published on this site, I am posting excerpts which emphasize specific principles within the paper.  Hopefully, these excerpts will not only encourage you to read the actual paper, but also think more deeply about the role of Romans 13:1-7 in our response to both Godly and ungodly civil government in our day and time.  A proper understanding and obedience to Scripture is critical today as always.  This particular Scripture has been mishandled in so many ways that a methodical approach to its exegesis is needed to avoid further error by both individual Christians and the broader church.  The pressures being exerted upon true Christianity by the contemporary civil government demand a Biblical response informed by Romans 13:1-7 and the other Scriptures addressed within this paper.

               (These excerpts are posted in the order as found in the paper, but do not include the entirety of the paper which combined.  Only the PDF contains all sections of the paper.)

The Response of Christians to Civil Government

              The response of Christians and the Church after the first advent builds on the Jewish principles elucidated from the Old Testament, deepening them and furnishing further examples of how to obey God in the public expression of Christian life.  Again, commands for submissive attitudes, exhortations towards prayer, and God’s reactions to both obedience and disobedience will provide the student of Scripture with great wisdom. 

              The exhortation towards an attitude of submission to ordained authorities stands out repeatedly in the New Testament.  The primary New Testament texts addressing government make this clear.  Titus 3:1 and I Peter 2:13-17 both stand beside Romans 13:1-7 as the most explicit statements regarding Christian’s obedience to earthly authorities.  Romans 13:1-7 leaves no doubt that such an attitude is commanded by God.  In I Peter Christians are commanded to “be subject … to every human institution whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors…”  Peter also commands his readers to honor the emperor.  Dale R. Bowne and Jon D. Currid, note that despite Peter’s calling civil government a “human institution”, he directs believers to obey their rulers.  It has already been established that God delegated the authority to these “human institutions”.  Therefore wisdom demands appropriate submission to God’s instituted leaders.  Peter explains that by doing so they will silence foolish people (Hoffecker, 183).  Titus 3:1 also directs a submissive attitude to rulers and authorities.  No denial of this direct command is possible.

Read MORE NOW.

Read More →
Exemple

Summary of Old Testament Jew’s Response to Government

November 20, 2023 Eric Potter Papers

Excerpt #9 of “Analysis of Romans 13:1-7 in Light of the Analogy of Scripture”

               Given the length of the full paper I recently published on this site, I am posting excerpts which emphasize specific principles within the paper.  Hopefully, these excerpts will not only encourage you to read the actual paper, but also think more deeply about the role of Romans 13:1-7 in our response to both Godly and ungodly civil government in our day and time.  A proper understanding and obedience to Scripture is critical today as always.  This particular Scripture has been mishandled in so many ways that a methodical approach to its exegesis is needed to avoid further error by both individual Christians and the broader church.  The pressures being exerted upon true Christianity by the contemporary civil government demand a Biblical response informed by Romans 13:1-7 and the other Scriptures addressed within this paper.

               (These excerpts are posted in the order as found in the paper, but do not include the entirety of the paper which combined.  Only the PDF contains all sections of the paper.)

Summary of Old Testament Jew’s Response to Government

              In summary of Jewish subjection and response to human government, several principles can be ascertained.  First, they were to have a submissive attitude towards earthly rulers while praying to God in all matters including for provision through foreign powers and protection from these same powers. Second, they owed obedience first to God and then to human government only so far as obedience to God could be maintained.  Third, when that obedience to God could be maintained, they were to seek the welfare of the government or culture ruling them.  Fourth, should the government demand disobedience to God and His Law, the people could resist that government when led by God to do so through leaders appointed by God.  Fifth, in contrast, resistance to godly government would result in judgment for those who rebelled.  Ultimately, it all boiled down to obeying God.  God, as ultimate authority demanded submission to His Will and Law. 

Read MORE NOW.

Read More →

Stewardship of the gift of life