Bible Hub

2 Samuel 23:3 - David

The God of Israel spoke; the Rock of Israel said to me,

To understand the true meaning of scripture, it's best to go to the source and study the etymology of the words. In this case, it seems to mean to have dominion over justice, which traditionally means giving each his due.

Good questions. So the root meaning is basically "dominion" which ties back to Genesis. As for your second question about coercion, that is a bit more complicated. The simple answer is that there are plenty of just ways a person may attain authority and rule. That someone would attain authority isn't in itself wrong but, again, an inevitability. I also should say that coercion once someone is IN authority is baked into the pie. It is not a matter of if they will be coercive but how they will be coercive. Or, put another way, to what end. For example, I am coercive with my children—I will discipline them if they are rebellious to my authority—but my coercion is aimed in the direction of them being self-disciplined, respectful, and responsible individuals who are not mastered by their emotions and impulses and sins but rather learn how to submit themselves in righteousness to God. My authority as a father is to love them enough to teach them to obey all that God has commanded. That involves coercion. On the flip side, If I were a tyrannical father I would still have authority over them because of my "governing office" as father but my rule would be using coercion for MY OWN gain, not my children's gain. This, in principle, is true of magisterial rulers. God calls rulers to love their people and place. To use coercion in righteous ways for the benefit and flourishing of the people. You specifically asked about attaining power through coercive means. On that note, and this is a harder reality to grapple with, God allows, for his purposes, selfish and evil men to do such things. Just as men can come to power through just means, so they can through unjust means. God is infinitely wise and we often do not understand why he allows all that he does. But, as was stated before, sometimes it is to discipline an unruly peoples. To discipline and rebuke in order to call them back into righteous submission to Christ. Pardon the novel I wrote in response here. Does all that make sense?

Rulership rightly understood has love at the centre, because God is the ultimate Ruler and God is Love. Rulership attained by coercive means is not true Rulership, it is Rulership corrupted by the Fall, motivated by greed, violence and the lust for power.

I'll add one more thing, that despite God using unjust and tyrannical rulers for his good purposes, it is equally true that we are to resist unjust rulers and unjust coercion. John Calvin considered governing officials who betray their office to essentially be reduced to private persons, what's more, mere "brigands" and "criminals". We are to respect the office but rebel against the office holder if that man rules unjustly.

Very interesting! And is dominion equal to monopoly, ie can a ruler exclude others from doing justice?

Regarding god allows evil: My theory is that allowing "evil" is the basis of giving choice, wouldn't make much sense as a god to say: "Choose whatever you want, but I'll only allow good choices". Opening up a second topic: God influencing the "evil" freedom by answering prayers: Personally I believe that god doesn't instantly answer/resolve typical askforhelp prayers, because it would contradict the freedom to choose evil. P.S. I am no christian, but my philosophy has a lot of parallels with christianity.

I would submit it is not coercive to have dominion over your own house. That one's children are in effect "Trapped" under your care is a function of reality. For example If I take someone up in a hot air balloon that I own. I have every right to remove them from my property if they do not follow my rules. However, I may not throw them out of my balloon 1000meters in the air, that would be murder. The physical reality is your children's upbringing is that same hot air balloon. You must safely ferry them to a place where releasing them from your property would not kill them. You are not "Coercing" them to stay on your property (and thus abiding by your rules) you are preventing their demise at the hands of the physical reality of the world. On the Broader point, government is a mental game we play with each other. We all pretend that we are, in some ethereal way in the same "group" as everyone in our geographical vicinity. That is not a physical reality. That is simply something people like to do. Other people do not like to play that mental game. It is only when the mental game of "I'm the boss and you have to do what I say" meets the physical reality of extortion(taxes), kidnapping(arrests), and murder(the death penalty) that this game becomes not so fun. And to invoke the metaphysical as some sort of justification for the behavior of those not participating in an illusory mental game is a bit myopic. God is my ruler not because of some vote, appointment or some other contrivance. God rules because God created the physical reality I dwell within and the rules of reality itself. The words of men are simply inconsequential to the will of God because it physically can't be any other way.

Agreed. God is a father, and all earhtly rule is modeling something of the fatherhood of God. In the home it is familial fathers, in the church it is ecclesiological fathers, and in the civic sphere it is city fathers. A man in authority may model God the father well or poorly, be a good father or a bad father, but in either case he is a father.