Civil Disobedience Comparison

Words: 891
Pages: 4

Because of the Bible and Thoreau’s teachings the world had a drastic change. Both have good things to offer in regard to their teachings but in the end it leaves us with the question, who is right? How do we respond to what Thoreau says? In Thoreau’s piece Civil Disobedience he offers his strong opinions on the government and how it should be. Thoreau believes that no government is the best government. Thoreau’s opinions on government and how to follow the government rules often contradicts the Bible and contradicts my opinions on how to deal with unjust laws, taxing, and the government itself.
Thoreau and God’s Word have differing views about government and the people’s interaction with it. Thoreau’s argument is that “which also I believe-
…show more content…
The question is whether we should be content to obey them, whether we should try to change them but obey until they're changed, or whether we should disobey them at once. Thoreau believes that the second course is best. They believe that if they resist, the revolution would be worse than the injustice. However, it is the government's fault that this is the case: The government doesn't encourage reform and dissent. Thoreau asks, "Why does [the majority-led government] always crucify Christ, and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?"This shows his hatred towards unjust laws. The bible contradicts thoreau’s statements and beliefs. The bible agrees more with the first option that was mentioned. In 1 Peter 2:13-14 it says “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.” Rather than disobeying and creating a bigger problem we need to slow down and realize that God has a plan no matter how unjust the law is. Just because you do not want to do something does not mean that you just cannot not do