My Life and Books (18) Powers that Be

After many years pondering the meaning of Romans 13:1, I discovered that Paul was actually affirming the system of excellent judges interpreting the law of God established in the Torah.

Every person should submit to the more excellent judges, because the ones that exist have been established by God (Rom 13:1).

When explaining which authorities are from God, Paul constructs a strange sentence that uses the verb “to be” twice. Translated literally, the verse means “the authorities that are, are from God.” This is odd. Paul was saying that “the authorities that are” or “the authorities that be” are from God. This strange expression, “the authorities that be” refers back to where the book of Deuteronomy says that refers to “the judges that are”.

You shall come unto the judge that shall be in those days: and you shalt inquire; and they shall show you the sentence of judgment (Deut 17:9).

A literal translation is “the judges that shall be in those days” or “the judges that are in those days”. Paul would have been familiar with these texts. When he started thinking about justice, the Holy Spirit brought this expression to his mind.

The Torah introduced a unique system of justice: God’s law applied by local judges. Paul is simply referring back to this verse and confirming that God’s will has not changed. He confirmed that the judges who have emerged in a free society are arranged by him.

More at Understanding Romans 13.

Not Rome

Christians often blandly use Romans 13:1 as a slogan for political power, assuming it settles the issue, without considering what Paul actually said in his letter.

A well-known theologian recently gave a slightly more sophisticated version of their argument,

Biblical political theology is predicated on the fact that the one God who made the world wants the world to be wisely ordered, and to be wisely ordered through human government. So even people who would be seen as a bad ruler would have a God-given job which must be honoured. Even a cruel, wicked, stupid government has a role that is God-given.

This type of political theology, which is very common, is used to interpret Romans 13 and claim that Paul was authenticating the authority of the Roman emperor. The evil man Nero was probably emperor at the time when Paul was writing, so if he was God's servant, we must submit to every political power. The implication is that God gave the Roman emperor authority so that he could bring order to the earth. Therefore, all Christians should submit to him, even if he often does evil things. The same principle is applied to all rulers. We are required to submit to rulers, even when they do evil, because they are carrying out a God-given rule.

This logic is flawed. Firstly, God never said that he was appointing rulers to ensure that his creation was wisely ordered. He gave responsibility for caring for the world to all humans. And he gave the law for the specific purpose of maintaining order on the earth (1 Tim 1:8-11). The idea that God appointed kings, presidents and other rulers to ensure that the world is wisely ordered is simply not true. In fact, they have been the main cause of disorder (1 Sam 8). Therefore, the claim that they have a God-given role that should be honoured is incorrect.

More important, even a cursory reading of the words that Paul wrote in Romans 13 shows that they are not a description of the Roman Empire. Rome did not do what Paul claimed that good judges would do.

The idea that Rome was interested in order and peace is a myth. The Caesars wanted control. They expanded the area under their area, so they could extract food and other resources and bring them back to Rome.

Roman soldiers were not scattered around the world to protect the people of the nations from trouble. They were there to keep people under control, and they were ruthless in putting down all opposition. Roman soldiers were cruel and heartless in dealing with ordinary people. They would defend countries against invading armies, not for their protection, but to ensure that another empire did not get control of their resources.

Paul was able to travel fairly freely around the Roman empire, but that was not the result of Roman efforts to spread peace. It was an accidental consequence of their attempts to expand the areas they controlled.

If Paul was claiming in Romans 13 that political power could bring peace and order in the world, he was certainly not talking about the Roman emperor.

Paul was not describing the Roman justice system when he wrote in Romans 13:3-5.

Worldly rulers (archon) cause no fear for the good way, but only for those choosing the bad option. So, if you don't want to be afraid of his authority, be doing good and you will be commended. For you who are into the good, it can be God's servant. But if you do bad, be afraid. A ruler does not carry the sword for no purpose; it is a servant of God making right in anger to the one committing evil. Out of necessity, order yourselves under it; not just to avoid its anger, but due to common awareness.

The Romans were not interested in providing justice for the ordinary people. Roman law provided some protections for the noble families who controlled Rome, but even that was quite capricious. A nobleman could be up one day, and down the next. Most ordinary people got no justice at all. Roman justice was used to enslave people and extract wealth for the benefit of the Empire. Beatings for trivial things were frequent and crucifixions were common for people who had done very little wrong. Even a Roman soldier would be lucky to get justice, if their commanding officer took a snitch against them.

Paul was not thinking about Rome when he said that people who do right have nothing to fear. Good people had very good reasons to fear the Roman authorities. Paul was able to appeal to Caesar because he was a Roman citizen. That put him into an elite group. Ordinary people could not make that appeal. And the appeal did not seem to work for Paul, because he died in Rome, despite a representative of Rome recognising that he was innocent. King Agrippa said,

They began talking to one another, saying, "This man is not doing anything worthy of death or imprisonment." And Agrippa said to Festus, "This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar" (Acts 26:31-32).

This was not justice. True justice would have set Paul free once it was understood that he had not committed a crime. But Agrippa and Festus wanted to protect their own reputation, so they were scared to do the just thing and set him free.

Paul's statement about good people having nothing to fear does not fit with Jesus' treatment by Pilate. He agreed that Jesus was innocent, but he had him flogged and crucified anyway, because he was scared the Jewish power brokers would report him to Rome. Jesus was killed by Roman justice, like many others of his countrymen, so it could not be said that good people had nothing to fear from Roman justice. Paul knew what happened to Jesus and many other disciples, so he was clearly not writing about Roman justice in his letter to the Romans.

When Paul spoke about giving money to those we owe, he was not writing about Rome.

Pay back debts to everyone. If you owe a tax, pay the tax; if an excise duty is owed, then pay it. Respect those worthy of respect. Only honour those worthy of honour (Rom 13:7).

Paul was not saying that people should pay taxes to Rome in return for the services that Rome provided them. He did not see Rome as a service provider. Rome was not committed to providing services for ordinary people. Any benefits that fell to ordinary people were a mistake.

The Roman tax system was not set up to raise money to support ordinary people in the way that modern people think about taxes. It was an extraction system designed to seize as much wealth as possible from subservient peoples. Rome-appointed tax farmers would take as much as they could get, leaving their victims with almost nothing to live on. Roman soldiers would wreck the house of anyone thought to be hiding grain or gold. Romans 13:6-7 is not a description of the Roman tax system.

When Paul wrote Romans 13, he was clearly not thinking about the Roman Empire. He must have been thinking about something quite different, so this passage cannot be used to demand submission to all political power.

This is explained further in Understanding Romans 13.

Romans 13

I have just completed some corrections and added some new insights to my study of Romans 13

The full article can be read at Understanding Romans 13 on Substack

The same article is available on Kingdom Watcher at Understanding Romans 13.

For more on related passages that deal with submission, see Submission to Political Power.

I describe God’s alternative to human political power in my book called Government of God.

Romans 13 (5) Rulers

In Romans 13:3-4, Paul says that a worldly ruler (arkon) is God's servant. This is often misunderstood, because the contrast that Paul is exposing is missed by commentators who trust political power.

• • A judge (exousia) is "God's servant for your good".

• • A ruler (arkon) is "God's servant, an avenger for anger".

These are quite different roles. An excellent judge applying God's law provides the only true justice.

God sometimes uses rulers, but not to do good for everyone, because they are not capable of that, but to avenge those who do serious evil. In Romans 12:19, this is a task reserved for God, so his people are not to engage with it. Instead, they must respond to evil with good (Rom 12:17, 21).

In an article about called Prophetic Events, I described the nature of "Protective Judgements".

God sometimes assesses a nation and decides that it has become so evil that it is beyond saving. In this situation, he then has no choice but to allow its destruction to minimise evil. I refer to these as protective judgments, rather than destructive judgments, because their primary purpose is to protect the world from evil. God does not engage in mindless destruction. He always destroys empires when it is the best way to constrain evil.

In the Old Testament environment, prompting one nation to destroy another was often the only way to restrain evil. This did not destroy the evil spirits, but the disruption of war breaks down their uneasy unity and causes them to fight against each. Concentrating in one place allows them to leverage their evil. When evil spirits are dispersed and isolated, they do much less harm.

God uses powerful rulers as his servants. When evil gets out of control through an empire like Rome or Babylon, God often stirs another powerful ruler to destroy it. When the gospel is weak, this is often the best way for him to do it, although he would far rather that the people in the empire came to faith.

Isaiah called Cyrus the Persian God's shepherd and his anointed (messiah) (Is 44:28-45. God used him for two roles. He used him to subdue Darius the Mede, who had defeated Babylon and was getting out of hand and becoming evil. He took hold of Cyrus's "right hand to subdue nations before him and to strip kings of their armour". The right hand symbolises military power. God used Cyrus's military prowess to shift the balance of power in the Middle East.

The second thing that God used Cyrus for was to get the temple rebuilt in Jerusalem (2 Chron 36:22-23; Ezra 1:1).

These verses explain that God moved Cyrus's heart. This is something that the Holy Spirit is skilled at doing. He is clever enough to put an idea into the mind of a ruler that he will like and implement, even though he has not chosen to follow God. Cyrus was superstitious and restored the worship of the local gods in many of the lands that he conquered. Cyrus had not chosen to follow Yahweh, but just wanted to ensure that the gods that controlled Israel were not offended. This is how the Holy Spirit was able to move his heart.

Of course, the Holy Spirit had no problems persuading him to take over the Median empire. Cyrus was a ruthless military leader, so he was eager for that challenge.

Although God called Cyrus his shepherd, he was not a follower of Yahweh. He was a ruthless ruler who controlled a huge empire with brutal force. In turn, Cyrus was controlled by a powerful government-spirit called the Ruler of Persia (Dan 10:13,20).

Cyrus was not interested in establishing the rule of God, but was intent on establishing the strength of his dynasty. He was not interested in serving God, but God was able to use him to achieve a few things that he wanted to achieve at that time.

Cyrus was not a good man that you would submit to in order to become a better person. Two types of people would submit to him. Most of the people within his empire had no choice but to submit to his decrees. They would be beaten if they didn't. Many of them would be slaves, and those who retained their freedom were not much better off. A favoured few would submit to Cyrus to support his rule and share in the benefits of his power. They would have to do everything that he demanded without question. These people served under Cyrus to become rich, not to do good in the world. If they fell out of his favour, they would lose all their wealth and possibly be killed.

Rulers are God's servants, in the sense that God uses them, but that does not mean that followers of Jesus should unreservedly submit to them, because they serve him infrequently and in quite a narrow way by disrupting evil when it gets out of control. The Holy Spirit has to be really clever to get them to do what he wants. He often has to appeal to their baser nature to get them to do his will. Most of the time, they do not serve God, because they reject the voice of the Spirit.

Christians should recognise that rulers will sometimes avenge a great evil. However, they should be very careful about obeying a ruler who is an unreliable servant and who is often controlled by powerful government-spirits.