How to Follow Romans 13
How to Follow Romans 13
This chapter has bothered me for a long time. This teaching on submitting to the governmental authority doesn't seem to jive with the rest of scripture, unless it's simply telling us not to break any known laws. But that's not the main thing that troubles me here. Paul says that God has set up every government and ruler in power and because of this, we should obey. Nazi Germany and Cambodia under Pol Pot come to mind as two governments that God would certainly oppose us submitting to. Can someone help me out with Romans 13 and this whole teaching that God has set every ruler in place? Thank you.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
There is a danger of taking Paul's words beyond the point that I think he intended them. We know that the apostles did not teach absolute obedience to any human authorities, because they served "another King, one Jesus." However, they also did not wish for the Christians under their watch to assume that, since the civil rulers were pagans, they could simply be disregarded.
I hear Paul reaffirming certain basic biblical truths. "The authorities that exist are appointed by God" (Romans 13:1) simply restates what is affirmed, concerning the sovereignty of God, in Psalm 75:6-7:
For exaltation comes neither from the east
Nor from the west nor from the south.
But God is the Judge:
He puts down one,
And exalts another.
And in Daniel:
"He removes kings and raises up kings" (Daniel 2:21)
"The Most High rules in the kingdom of men, gives it to whomever He will, and sets over it the lowest of men" (Daniel 4:17).
It is apparently possible for a person to rise to authority, without God's direct initiation, by human devices through political processes:
"They set up kings, but not by me. They made princes and I did not acknowledge it." (Hos.8:4).
Even when this is the case, however, it is God who decides whether to let him remain in power, and for how long. Zimri, the usurper of Baasha's throne, lasted only seven days (1 Kings 16:15), while some of the Roman usurpers, like Galba, Otho and Vitellius, reigned only a few months each. Men reign by God's allowance, if not always by His direct installment, and it therefore remains true that they remain in power by God's "appointment."
The fact that God allows a person to be in authority does not mean that the person will always be one admirably suited for the position. He may be "the lowest of men." This is because God may judge or test a nation by giving them evil and incompertent rulers (Isa.19:4/Zech.11:16).
God has appointed a particular task to rulers, which defines their sphere of legitimate authority. When they operate outside that sphere, they are acting without authority, because "There is no authority, except from God" (Rom.13:1). If they are outside the sphere of God's appointment, there is no authority innately in them.
The task that God has authorized rulers to perform is defined in 1 Peter 2:14 as being "the punishment of evildoers, and the praise of those who do good." This agrees with Paul's words in Romans 13:
"For rulers [when fulfilling their appropriate function] are not a terror to good works, but to evil...Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same...for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil" (vv.3, 4)
That a man has been ordained by God to do a certain task does not guarantee that he will perform the task assigned to him. Tyrants like Hitler and Stalin violated their commission, in that they did not refrain from punishing innocent people, and they elevated wicked people.
At the time Paul wrote this, Nero was Emperor, but had not yet begun to persecute Christians, and was doing, for the most part, what Emperors were intended to do. I believe that Paul would have written differntly to the Romans about Nero, had he been writing during the neroean persecution. When Nero became the persecutor, he was no longer seen as God's minister, but as a beast empowered by Satan (Rev.13). Thus the same official can be in either role, depending upon conduct.
The statement that it is God who appoints the rulers underscores the fact that God, in order to appoint them, must necessarily stand above them in rank. They answer to Him. If they neglect their commission, and do what is evil, He will settle with them ultimately. Rulers often believe themselves to be independant of any person above them, including God, but Paul states that this is not the case.
How does a Christian, then, relate to evil authorities that God has not yet taken down? There seem to be several aspects to the relationship of Christians to evil governments:
1. Paul seems to forbid the Christian any part in overthrowing tyrants: "Be subject to the governing authorities." This was written to Christians who, when the rulers were particularly bad, might have wondered whether to ignore or oppose them. So long as God has kept them in power, play the role of a subject.
2. There are times when the keeping of certain laws would compel Christians to sin. To such laws, defiance must be offered. A law commanding Christians to worship the emperor, to kill their fellow men, to expose their infants, or to surrender their chiildren to state educational institutions, are among the laws that tyranical governments have sometimes imposed upon their subjects. Such laws do not fall within the defined sphere of authority that God has given to rulers ("to punish evildoers and to praise those who do good"). Therefore, there is no divinely-recognized authority behind such laws. Christians are under no obligation to obey them, and may defy them without incurring God's disapproval, spoken of in Romans 13 (Acts 5:29).
3. When governments become extremely oppressive, forbidding normal Christian activities, the Christians may "go underground" and continue to do what they know to be right, though it be technically illegal. "When the wicked rise, men hide themselves: but when they perish, the righteous increase." (Prov.28:28).
I hear Paul reaffirming certain basic biblical truths. "The authorities that exist are appointed by God" (Romans 13:1) simply restates what is affirmed, concerning the sovereignty of God, in Psalm 75:6-7:
For exaltation comes neither from the east
Nor from the west nor from the south.
But God is the Judge:
He puts down one,
And exalts another.
And in Daniel:
"He removes kings and raises up kings" (Daniel 2:21)
"The Most High rules in the kingdom of men, gives it to whomever He will, and sets over it the lowest of men" (Daniel 4:17).
It is apparently possible for a person to rise to authority, without God's direct initiation, by human devices through political processes:
"They set up kings, but not by me. They made princes and I did not acknowledge it." (Hos.8:4).
Even when this is the case, however, it is God who decides whether to let him remain in power, and for how long. Zimri, the usurper of Baasha's throne, lasted only seven days (1 Kings 16:15), while some of the Roman usurpers, like Galba, Otho and Vitellius, reigned only a few months each. Men reign by God's allowance, if not always by His direct installment, and it therefore remains true that they remain in power by God's "appointment."
The fact that God allows a person to be in authority does not mean that the person will always be one admirably suited for the position. He may be "the lowest of men." This is because God may judge or test a nation by giving them evil and incompertent rulers (Isa.19:4/Zech.11:16).
God has appointed a particular task to rulers, which defines their sphere of legitimate authority. When they operate outside that sphere, they are acting without authority, because "There is no authority, except from God" (Rom.13:1). If they are outside the sphere of God's appointment, there is no authority innately in them.
The task that God has authorized rulers to perform is defined in 1 Peter 2:14 as being "the punishment of evildoers, and the praise of those who do good." This agrees with Paul's words in Romans 13:
"For rulers [when fulfilling their appropriate function] are not a terror to good works, but to evil...Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same...for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil" (vv.3, 4)
That a man has been ordained by God to do a certain task does not guarantee that he will perform the task assigned to him. Tyrants like Hitler and Stalin violated their commission, in that they did not refrain from punishing innocent people, and they elevated wicked people.
At the time Paul wrote this, Nero was Emperor, but had not yet begun to persecute Christians, and was doing, for the most part, what Emperors were intended to do. I believe that Paul would have written differntly to the Romans about Nero, had he been writing during the neroean persecution. When Nero became the persecutor, he was no longer seen as God's minister, but as a beast empowered by Satan (Rev.13). Thus the same official can be in either role, depending upon conduct.
The statement that it is God who appoints the rulers underscores the fact that God, in order to appoint them, must necessarily stand above them in rank. They answer to Him. If they neglect their commission, and do what is evil, He will settle with them ultimately. Rulers often believe themselves to be independant of any person above them, including God, but Paul states that this is not the case.
How does a Christian, then, relate to evil authorities that God has not yet taken down? There seem to be several aspects to the relationship of Christians to evil governments:
1. Paul seems to forbid the Christian any part in overthrowing tyrants: "Be subject to the governing authorities." This was written to Christians who, when the rulers were particularly bad, might have wondered whether to ignore or oppose them. So long as God has kept them in power, play the role of a subject.
2. There are times when the keeping of certain laws would compel Christians to sin. To such laws, defiance must be offered. A law commanding Christians to worship the emperor, to kill their fellow men, to expose their infants, or to surrender their chiildren to state educational institutions, are among the laws that tyranical governments have sometimes imposed upon their subjects. Such laws do not fall within the defined sphere of authority that God has given to rulers ("to punish evildoers and to praise those who do good"). Therefore, there is no divinely-recognized authority behind such laws. Christians are under no obligation to obey them, and may defy them without incurring God's disapproval, spoken of in Romans 13 (Acts 5:29).
3. When governments become extremely oppressive, forbidding normal Christian activities, the Christians may "go underground" and continue to do what they know to be right, though it be technically illegal. "When the wicked rise, men hide themselves: but when they perish, the righteous increase." (Prov.28:28).
Last edited by FAST WebCrawler [Crawler] on Tue Mar 21, 2006 2:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve
Perhaps the comic strip "BC" had one answer when Clinton was president and embroiled in his scandal. Much of the media and nation seemed to not be bothered by his behavior. The comic strip had a line that said "God gives us presidents to show us what we are; how do you like "us" so far?
Just a thought.
One thing for sure, when the rule of government conflicts with the rule of God, we must obey God.
Just a thought.
One thing for sure, when the rule of government conflicts with the rule of God, we must obey God.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean
Richard Wurmbrand, a Jewish Lutheran pastor expressed his belief in the authorities that God has established in the following way (I'm doing this from memory, and so it may not be exactly what he said)
In Romans 13, verse 1 states:
"There is no authority except from God."
Verse 3 states:
"Rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad."
"Do what is good and you will have the appoval of authorities."
Verse 4 states:
"Authorities are the servants of God to execute wrath on wrongdoers."
Wurbrand said the Communists in his day were exactly the opposite.
Instead of rewarding the doers of good and punishing the wrongdoers, they rewarded the wrongdoers and punished the doers of good.
Instead of being a terror to bad conduct, they were a terror to good (the opposite of the first sentence in verse 3.
Wurbrand's conclusion was that the Communists were therefore NOT authorities, but anti-authorities, those who posed as authorites, and set themselvespu in place of authorites. Therefore they should be resisted and disobeyed. Wurbrand believed it was morally right to lie to the Communists to save other Christians from being sent to prison and be tortured and killed.
In Romans 13, verse 1 states:
"There is no authority except from God."
Verse 3 states:
"Rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad."
"Do what is good and you will have the appoval of authorities."
Verse 4 states:
"Authorities are the servants of God to execute wrath on wrongdoers."
Wurbrand said the Communists in his day were exactly the opposite.
Instead of rewarding the doers of good and punishing the wrongdoers, they rewarded the wrongdoers and punished the doers of good.
Instead of being a terror to bad conduct, they were a terror to good (the opposite of the first sentence in verse 3.
Wurbrand's conclusion was that the Communists were therefore NOT authorities, but anti-authorities, those who posed as authorites, and set themselvespu in place of authorites. Therefore they should be resisted and disobeyed. Wurbrand believed it was morally right to lie to the Communists to save other Christians from being sent to prison and be tortured and killed.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Paidion
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald