I want to share two possible interpretations of Romans 13:1-7. For the sake of context, here are those verses:
13:1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.
13:2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will ring judgment on themselves.
13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same.
13:4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.
13:5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake.
13:6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing.
13:7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.
Interpretation #1– The “governing authorities” are our congregational leaders and not secular officials.
According to verse 1, these authorities are appointed by God. And some of the wording in verse 1 reminds me of 1 Cor 12:28 which speaks of God’s people being appointed to various ministry positions within our congregations (apostles, prophets, teachers, etc.). In verse 2, God then tells us not to resist (or oppose) those same people. To resist them is essentially to resist God Himself, potentially bringing judgment upon ourselves. In verse 3, we learn that rulers are “not a terror to good works,” in other words, their works are not a terror (or bring dread to) good works, their works are a terror to evil. Secular rulers by definition are not operating based on God’s will. Yes, there are many people of faith who are within the ruling establishment, but there is no argument that the establishment, as a whole, is not operating in faith. So these authorities that Paul is writing about, they are “God’s minister to you for good,” according to verse 4. That same verse goes on to say that this authority is, as a minister, an avenger upon evil doers, one who would execute wrath on those doing evil. Rendering the tax (or tribute), in this case, is speaking about our support of those doing godly work.
As we look out across this world, we do not see any country, king, dictator or elected official, that is a terror to evil; it really is the opposite. They pass and enforce laws that stand opposed to God’s character and will, make it more difficult in many parts of the world to walk in faith, and often don’t defend the innocent and needy. The leaders within our congregations, ideally, have been appointed by God and stand as a terror to evil while supporting all that is good and just.
Interpretation #2 – The “governing authorities” are our secular officials.
The above interpretation (which I have personally held for nearly 20 years) loses some weight when we look at the beginning of verse 3 (“For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil.”) The word for “rulers” is archōn (G758) which means ruler, prince, magistrate, etc. It not impossible, but it is extremely difficult to fit those words alongside words like apostle, prophet or teacher. In addition, 1 Peter uses similar wording as certain aspects of these Romans 13 verses do, but does so in a way that makes who Peter is talking about, unmistakable:
1 Peter 2:13 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme,
1 Peter 2:14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.
Peter is clearly stating that we should submit to the ordinance (ktisis G2937 – creation, establishment, formation) of men. He uses words like king (basileus-G935), supreme (huperecho-G5242), and governors (hegemon-G2232) which leave little doubt as to exactly who he is suggesting we submit to.
One of the reasons I began to look into the first interpretation is I simply couldn’t reconcile the idea that if I were alive in 1940 Germany, that I would have followed the ordinances of somebody like Hitler. I had been told, by many pastors and teachers, that we are to follow these secular rulers unless they ask us to do something against God’s will. The problem is, that caveat isn’t written into Romans 13 and it goes as far as saying that if we resist them, we are resisting God and are in danger of judgment. How
can we reconcile these two interpretations?
A possible answer?
This morning this topic came up again and for the first time two characters from Scripture came to mind, and their submission to secular authorities might give us the living example to follow. The first person who came to mind was Daniel. Here is man taken from his home and his land. He was relocated into a foreign country and put under their governing structure. While he never bowed before other gods (i.e. he pays no homage or worship to anyone but the one True God) he does otherwise, do what he’s asked. The second person that came to mind was Joseph. Again, we have a man taken from his home and placed under the authority of a foreign rule. Like Daniel, Joseph doesn’t worship false gods, he doesn’t bow before anyone other than the Most High, but he does otherwise follow the authority of the land in which he lives. In fact, Joseph became such an integral part of Egyptian life that he looked the part to the extent that his brothers did not even recognize him.
By submitting to these rulers, Joseph and Daniel were able to be a beacon of light in an otherwise dark place and dark situation. God’s character, God’s love, God’s mercy, God’s patience, all of the things that define who and what God is, was seen in the actions and heard in the words of these two men. And because of it, entire cultures, one way or the other, were changed according to God’s will. God was never not in control.
Conclusion
While my own interpretation of this topic could very well undergo a tweak or two, I believe this much is certain. If we follow the examples of Joseph, Daniel, and the many others from Scripture who found themselves under the authority of another but who shined through the darkness, revealing God as always being present as promised, then we will, ultimately, have done well in His eyes. Paul wrote in Colossians 3:17 that all we do and all we say should be done “in the name of the Lord Yeshua.” This means that every word we speak, and every deed we perform, should be done in a manner that is consistent with Yeshua’s character, reputation, and authority… regardless of our situation. Whether we find ourselves in isolation, within the jurisdiction of a foreign land, or in our home surrounded by family, we must make sure that our words and actions reflect the one we truly know to be, the Supreme Authority. If we do that much, we have done well.
Your article is appreciated. Both of the interpretations have problems for me. I think it sounds like he really means civil rulers… however, there are so many times that secular rulers are persecuting good people and those who have done no evil do fear those who are supposed to be a terror only to evil and not to good. I too have wondered about times and places such as Hitler’s Germany. There were many who stood against his wickedness and were punished greatly to the point of death. I think the discussion needs to also reflect what Peter said about obeying God rather than men in Acts 5:29. Sometimes, God intervenes and rescues people miraculously, like Peter and John released from prison by an angel and Daniel in the lion’s den and Shadrach, Meshech, and Abednego surviving the furnace… Many other people have bucked authorities and been put in jail, beaten and killed. Most of the twelve disciples were martyred eventually. So, it is not without consequence.
I like what you said about those who were in captivity (Joseph and Daniel) and how they operated with integrity under those secular rulers (who btw were not believers) and shined the light of the Yeshua in those places, doing in a manner that is consistent with his character, reputation, and authority.
I just had a thought. I wonder if the context of Paul’s letter to Corinth was something like a person there was promoting a lot of unnecessary non compliance to civil authority which makes Christians look like petty nuisances. Maybe it was, I dunno, something like traffic rules that are just helpful for managing a city…. because I can’t imaging Paul thought we should obey Hitler and hand the Jews over for slaughter. And if we could have asked for clarification, he would have probably agreed with Peter.
I thank you for taking you time and expounding on these. Yahweh placed rules and leaders and some place themselves which Yahweh let it happened. We have to ultimately follow Yahweh we obey the Earthly rule until it goes against the Word of Yahweh.