The believer’s responsibility to those who are in power - Romans 13:1-7

In 13:1–7 Paul discussed the divinely authorized role of government and the believers’ responsibility to those in power. Christians, like everyone else, are to submit to the governing authorities. Commitment to God does not negate responsibility to secular authority. In Paul’s day all those serving as public officials probably were nonbelievers. That is to make no difference for the Christian because there is no authority apart from that which God has established. He alone is the sole source of authority, and it has pleased him to delegate authority to those in charge of the public well-being. Paul clearly stated that “the authorities that exist have been established by God.” When Pilate told Jesus that he had power to set free or to crucify, he was reminded that he would have no power at all if it had not been given to him from above (John 19:11). It is important to remember that government is God’s way of maintaining the public good and directing the affairs of state.

13:1 Let everyone submit to the governing authorities, since there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are instituted by God. Knowing that God is sovereign, He gives good authorities as a blessing, and there are times He institutes evil rulers for the purpose of trail or judgment (2 Chron. 25:20; 32:24–25). Here is something that you must remember is that God is sovereign over all earthly authorities (Ps. 75:7; Dan. 2:21). One day these earthly authorities will be replaced by the divine rule of Jesus Christ (Dan 2:44; Rev. 22:1-5).

13:2–3 It follows that the one who resists authority is resisting what God has ordained. Those who act in this manner will bring judgment upon themselves. Those who rebel against authority are rebelling against God who is the giver of authority. It is a dangerous thing to set oneself in opposition to a divinely ordered process. Those who rule pose no threat to those whose lives are marked with good deeds. It is the one who does evil who fears authority. Just imagine if this country didn’t have civil government enforcing laws; crime would be rampant, evil wouldn’t have any boundaries, because there would be no consequences for crime. Paul asked his readers whether they would like to be free from fear of the one in authority. The answer was simple: practice doing what is right. This brings the approval of secular society (cf. 1 Pet 3:13).

Obviously, this does not happen in every instance. There will be times when you can do what is right, but the authorities are unjust, and it is natural to be afraid. This is why we must pray for those who are in authority. This come to no surprise that government sometimes oversteps its rightful domain. When this happens, the believer will find it impossible to obey the ruler. Two clear examples of civil disobedience are found in Acts. When Peter and John were told by the Sanhedrin not to preach in the name of Jesus, they replied, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God” (Acts 4:19). Upon being released they resumed their work and consequently were taken into custody. To the charge of the Sanhedrin that they had filled Jerusalem with their teaching they replied, “We must obey God rather than man!” (Acts 5:29). The believer’s ultimate allegiance is to God. Wherever the demands of government law’s or regulations clearly violate the moral Biblical standards that is revealed in God’s Word, the Christian will act outside the law or regulations. This, of course, must not be done in an arrogant fashion with no Biblical grounds to rebel.

Robert Mounce in his commentary pointed out that there are several other passages show that God approves of Christians disobeying government, but only when obedience to government would mean disobeying God (see Ex. 1:17, 21; 1 Kings 18:4–16; Est. 4:16; Dan. 3:12–18; 6:10; Matt. 2:12; Acts 5:29; Heb. 11:23). Scripture shows there were even times when God raised up leaders to rebel against the government and deliver his people from evil rulers (Exodus 1–14; Judg. 2:16; Heb. 11:32–34).

13:4–5 When did the origin of the authority of government begin? It began when God instituted in His Covenant with Noah (Gen 9:1-6).

The ruler serves as an instrument of God for the benefit of society. We are reminded of Cyrus, the Persian emperor, whom God anointed to carry out his will (Isa 44:28; 45:1; cf. also Jer 25:9). It is the person who makes it a practice of disobeying who has reason to be afraid. The ruler serves as the agent of God for the punishment of the one who does wrong. The text says that “he does not bear the sword for nothing.” The sword is a symbol of the power delegated to governing authorities to enforce punishment even to the extent of execution. Here we have the biblical basis for the use of force by government for the maintenance of law and order. The power to punish has been delegated by God to those who rule. To disobey the laws of the land, except where they go against the express will of God, is to violate the purpose of God himself. Obedience to civil law is necessary not only for fear of punishment but also for the sake of conscience. As Phillips puts it, one should obey “not simply because it is the safest, but because it is the right thing to do.”

Romans 13:4 “For it is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, because it does not carry the sword for no reason. For it is God’s servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong.” What about capital punishment? Understand that verse 4 informs us that Retribution is placed in the hands of governments by God.

* Ge 9:6; Ex 21:23-25 This “lex talionis” (Lex talionis is Latin for the law of retaliation, the law of exacting like for like) was not for private retribution. It insisted that justice be fair and not out of proportion to the crime; (Ro 13:4 See also Lev 24:17-22; Nu 35:16-25; 1Pe 2:14).

I’ll share this from one Biblical scholar who said the following.

With respect to the issue of capital punishment, the debate usually centers on the question of the deterrent value of capital punishment. The advocates of capital punishment maintain that the threat of the death penalty is a deterrent to some from the commission of murder. Opponents of capital punishment point to various statistics that downplay the deterrent value of capital punishment and argue that it serves no useful purpose.

But the power of the sword, although given as a restraint, was not only given as a restraint. There is a deeper moral question here, and that is the question of justice. The basic biblical support for capital punishment does not rest upon the principle of deterrence (The action of discouraging an action or event through instilling doubt or fear of the consequences); that would be a secondary consideration. The primary consideration, biblically, for capital punishment, is retributive justice. Capital punishment is instituted very early in Genesis, in 9:6: ‘Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.’ God declared that if anyone murders another person, that person is to be put to death. The reason is not for deterrence, but for retribution, because man is made in the image of God. There is a certain sense in which a murderer assaults the very being of God. And there is nothing in the New Testament at any point that would indicate a repeal of this principle of capital punishment, at least in terms of a just treatment for murder. God has commanded the civil magistrate to be his avenger in this case (Rom 13:4-5). Both Jesus, Paul, and executed by capital punishment. Although we don’t have concrete evidence about Peter, but the early church fathers said he died in Rome by being crucified upside down (he did face death as told by Jesus John 21:18-19).

But there were certain safeguards and provisions in Israel for the carrying out of the mandate. In fact the more I study the law code of Israel, the more amazed I am by its wisdom, by its fairness and by its justice. Even the law of the eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth has nothing unjust within it. What could possibly be more just than that—an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth? It’s perfectly balanced, perfectly symmetrical, perfectly harmonious and the scales of justice were never in better balance than when that principle was being applied to a culture and to a society.

But the safeguards against the unjust use of force are very severe in the Old Testament. For example, for a person to be convicted of a capital offence required two eyewitnesses (Deut. 17:6, 7). Circumstantial evidence was never grounds for capital punishment in the Old Testament. It required two eyewitnesses whose testimonies had to agree. The two eyewitnesses had their own lives on the line when they bore testimony, because the rule in Israel was that if, in a capital case, an eyewitness bore false witness, then he would himself be executed. Religious leaders invited false witnesses against Jesus (Mark 14:55-59); Again against Stephen (Acts 6:11-14).

We don’t have that kind of safeguard today in our Western society where anyone who gives a false testimony in a capital case would be executed. There are those who are justly concerned about inequities in our systems in which the poor and minority groups tend to do very poorly in legal trials that are of a capital nature, in comparison to those who have greater status in the community and greater wealth. It is still unusual in the United States for a prominent person, who has the ability to hire an excellent lawyer, to end up being executed. In our culture there are inequities in the exercise of capital punishment. And for this reason some Christians have taken the position that even though in principle they believe in capital punishment they argue for a moratorium (a temporary suspension of an activity or law until future consideration warrants lifting the suspension) on executions in the United States until such time as these inequities have been redefine, and we have a better law system.

But I think we are in shallow water here if we try to rule out capital punishment on a biblical basis. I don’t know of any document in history that is more clearly in favor of capital punishment than sacred Scripture. God gives to the civil magistrate the power of the sword to restrain and to avenge.

Romans 13:6–7 “And for this reason you pay taxes, since the authorities are God’s servants, continually attending to these tasks. Pay your obligations to everyone: taxes to those you owe taxes, tolls to those you owe tolls, respect to those you owe respect, and honor to those you owe honor.”

Taxation was a big part of the economy in the Roman Empire. The author A. H. M. Jones, book The Roman Economy (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974), 151–58, on taxation in the Roman Empire, states that the Roman historian Tacitus noted that in the year A.D. 58 there were persistent complaints against taxes and the greed of tax collectors (Ann. 13).

Tertullian an author and apologist from the 2nd to late 3rd century said, “That which the Romans lost by the Christians refusing to bestow gifts on their temples, they gained by their conscientious payment of taxes.”

And here we have Paul telling Christians in Rome to pay their taxes to the Roman Empire. This is the very same thing that Jesus taught his disciples in the synoptic gospels (Matt 22:21; Mark 12:17; Luke 20:25).

To quote R.C. Sproul he states: When Paul speaks of paying taxes here, the taxes he is referring to are, first of all, the head tax that was imposed by the Roman government upon their subjects, and secondly, property taxes that were imposed upon landowners in Rome. In addition, there were certain customs, duties and requirements placed upon merchandise.

Part of what it means to submit to the authorities is to pay taxes. Believers are to carry out this obligation because those who impose taxes are servants of God (Rom 13.6). They devote their time and energies to governing. They are “God’s servants” in the sense that it is God who has granted them the authority with which they secure and maintain civil order (Rom 13.1).

Believers are under obligation to those in authority in government (cf. Mark 12:16-17). Christians are to pay taxes where taxes are due, income tax, payroll tax, fees and tolls, property-tax, consumption tax (applied to goods and services) and unfortunately tariffs which are a tax that are imposed on U.S. imports in which we will have to pay higher prices for imported goods. As Christians we are to respect and honor governing authorities, “not because they are powerful and influential men, but because they have been appointed by God.”

As one study Bible expresses: Christians must not refuse to pay taxes simply because they think some of the money is used unjustly, for the Roman Empire surely did not use all of its money for godly purposes! So, too, believers are to honor their leaders, even if they are not fully admirable (1 Pet 2:17).

Paul moves from pay taxes that are due to not owing anyone.

Romans 13:8–10 “Do not owe anyone anything, except to love one another, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. The commandments, Do not commit adultery; do not murder; do not steal; do not covet; and any other commandment, are summed up by this commandment: Love your neighbor as yourself. Love does no wrong to a neighbor. Love, therefore, is the fulfillment of the law.”

Some Christians have taken Paul’s words to mean not to borrow money, and don’t enter into debt. So they will only pay cash for cars, homes, or others things. Even using credit cards is out of the question. Scripture doesn’t prohibit borrowing money (Ex 22:25; Lev. 25:35-37; Deut 15:7-9; 23:19; Matt 5:42; Luke 6:34, but it has much to say about not paying back what you owe (Ps 37:21).

What Paul is not saying that you cannot borrow money. He is saying that you must pay off the debts that you owe. What we as Christians are commanded to owe according to Paul in (v. 4a) is to “love for one another, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law.” Be indebted to love our brothers and sisters in the Lord because this is what God has commanded each of us to do (John 13:34, 35; 1 Cor. 14:1; Phil. 1:9; Col. 3:14; 1 Thess. 4:9; 1 Tim. 2:15; Heb. 6:10; 1 Pet. 1:22; 4:8; 1 John 2:10; 3:23; 4:7, 21).

As Christians our love for one another isn’t limited to other believers in Christ, but we are to love those who are not Christians (Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:27, 35; Rom 12:14, 20; Gal 6:10; 1 Thess 5:15).

As one writer has said about biblical love. He says that love is not just a feeling, it has a behavioral aspect. When the Bible says I am to love my neighbour, it means I am to be considerate to my neighbour. It has to do with action: what I say, what I do with my money, what I do with my body, what I do that may bring harm and injury to another person. I am to care about other people. Christians should be the most caring, considerate and neighborly people in the world. To be a lover of God requires that we show that love through being kind and considerate to people.

Looking back to what Paul said, when you love one another you have fulfilled the law. Paul cites the moral law that deals with our relationship with each other that says “Do not commit adultery;” do not murder; do not steal; do not covet; and any other commandment.” For he says that they are “summed up by this commandment: Love your neighbor as yourself. In other words treat other the way you would want to be treated (Luke 6:31).

Paul says that “Love does no wrong to a neighbor.” Love doesn’t commit adultery to a neighbor, love does not murder, love does not steal, love does not covet what others have. Love, therefore, is the fulfilment of the law.

61 Some find a discontinuity between chaps. 12–13, which leads them to regard 13:1–7 as an independent segment that Paul inserted (e.g., J. Kallas, “Romans xiii.1–7: An Interpolation,” NTS 11 (1965): 365–574). J. C. O’Neill says it is Stoic in origin and by giving license to tyrants has caused untold misery in the Christian world (Paul’s Letter to the Romans [Middlesex: Penguin, 1975], 207–9). Käsemann says “it can be pointedly called an alien body in Paul’s exhortation” (Romans, 352), a position questioned by Black, who settles for “a traditional Jewish (or Jewish-Christian) body of doctrine on relations with the civil power,” which Paul adapted for his immediate purpose (Romans, 179–80). Cranfield, however, says that it would have been surprising if Paul “had had nothing to say on a subject which must have been of great importance to Christians of the first century” (Romans, 2:651–53). For a recent article against the hypothesis that this is a non-Pauline interpolation see D. Kroger, “Paul and the Civil Authorities: An Exegesis of Romans 13:1–7,” AJT 7 (1993): 344–66.

62 ὑποτάσσω occurs thirty-eight times in the NT, most often in the middle voice, meaning “to subordinate oneself.” It is used of submission to political authorities (Titus 3:1); wives to husbands (Col 3:18), the younger toward elders (1 Pet 5:5). Cranfield argues that the predominant thought is not obedience but the conduct that flows naturally from the recognition that the other person as Christ’s representative has an infinitely greater claim on one than one has on oneself (Romans, 2:660–62). O. Cullmann argued that ἐξουσίαι denoted the angelic powers that stood behind the state (The State in the New Testament [London: SCM, 1957], 95–114), but most exegetes have rejected the idea and regard them as the duly constituted civil authorities (e.g., F. F. Bruce, “Paul and ‘The Powers That Be,’ ” BJRL 66 [1984]: 78–96).

63 In Prov 8:15–16 wisdom says, “By me kings reign and rulers make laws that are just; / by me princes govern, and all nobles who rule on earth.”

64 ἀνθεστηκότες is a perfect participle, which suggests that their rebellion had hardened into an established policy. The NEB translates v. 2b, “Those who so resist have themselves to thank for the punishment they receive.” κρίμα is used in the sense of κατάκριμα, condemnation. Paul spoke of divine judgment, primarily but not solely eschatological.

65 ποίει is a present imperative denoting a general rule (Analysis 2.489).

66 “Whenever laws are enacted which contradict God’s law,” writes Stott, “civil disobedience becomes a Christian duty” (Romans [Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1994], 342).

67 Many understand this to refer to the Roman right of a magistrate to inflict the death penalty (the ius gladi), but Sherwin-White has shown the limited nature of that power during the first two centuries of the empire (Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament [Oxford: Clarendon, 1963], 8–11).

68 Note the emphasis on “God” in the clause θεοῦ γὰρ διάκονός ἐστιν. Black translates, “God’s servant he is” (Romans, 183).

69 C. A. Pierce says that conscience in this context means “the pain a man suffers when he has done wrong” (Conscience in the New Testament, SBT 15 [London: SCM, 1955], 71).

Phillips J. B. Phillips, The New Testament in Modern English

70 See A. H. M. Jones, The Roman Economy (Oxford: Blackwell, 1974), 151–58, on taxation in the Roman Empire. The Roman historian Tacitus noted that in the year A.D. 58 there were persistent complaints against taxes and the acquisitiveness of tax collectors (Ann. 13).

71 λειτουργός describes one commissioned for service whether secular or priestly. It was formed from the Ionic λήϊτος, “concerning the people,” and ἔργον, “work, service” (EDNT 2.348). In the same article Balz says that in Rom 13:6, when Paul described the Roman tax officials as λειτουργοὶ, he meant that they were “representatives or instruments commissioned by God for service” (p. 349).

73 “Give everyone what you owe him” is not a general exhortation regarding our responsibility to all men but has to do with “the obligations we owe to those in authority in the state” (Murray, Romans, 2:155).

TLB The Living Bible

74 It is customary to consider φόρος (“tribute”) as a direct tax, such as a property tax or a poll tax, and τέλος (“revenue”) as an indirect tax, such as customs.

75 Barrett, Romans, 248. φόβος as respect toward governing authorities is considered a higher form of reverence than τιμή. Cranfield questions whether τῷ τὸν φόβον in v. 7 refers to the magistrate and suggests that exegetes not dismiss too cavalierly the possibility that it refers to God (Romans, 670–73).

Robert H. Mounce, Romans, The New American Commentary, (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 27:243–245.