Romans 13:1-7
Z-NOTE: August 1, 2024:
Christians, There IS a secular world and you will mostly be at odds with it.

Are you're trying to apply secular definitions of "equity" to the Bible standard? Or you are trying to compare politics to scripture? They will be naturally opposed to each other. The right point, IMHO, is apply the Biblical standard....but realize that at no time in history has the secular world ever been on the same page. I am not saying politics doesn't have some importance, because it will as long as the earth lasts. The Greek word hupo-tasso, which is translated as "submit" or "be subject" in Romans 13, literally means to arrange things respectfully in an orderly manner underneath. Paul and Peter believed that governing authorities are necessary for keeping the peace. The governing authorities will do that whether they are Republican or Democrat. Salvation, or my relationship with God has nothing to do with secular politics, but my response to it is how I can keep at peace with it . Let every person be subject to the governing authorities.
Romans: For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
I have seen scores of people rewrite that to appeal to their party of persuasion. That is wrong. It says exactly what it means.
Romans: For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
I have seen scores of people rewrite that to appeal to their party of persuasion. That is wrong. It says exactly what it means.

“If only Christians will concentrate on perceiving what is good and on doing it as God commands, they can live ‘without fear of the authorities.’ … What has the Christian to fear, so long as he remains faithful to his Lord and does that which is good? ‘… It does not matter what others do, but what we do. Do that which is good, without fear, and without limit or reserve”
-Dietrich Bonhoeffer
“If only Christians will concentrate on perceiving what is good and on doing it as God commands, they can live ‘without fear of the authorities.’ … What has the Christian to fear, so long as he remains faithful to his Lord and does that which is good? ‘… It does not matter what others do, but what we do. Do that which is good, without fear, and without limit or reserve”
-Dietrich Bonhoeffer

“Truly I perceive that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him.” (Acts 10:34-35)
God will judge all men according to they themselves who live in various nations...and not because of being part of a nation. The ideas of theocracy or a country that establishes laws in order to make the nation Christian is doomed to fail...since sin and evil are a matter of and from the heart of man. We see people who claim to be Christian on almost a daily basis who have been uncovered doing sexual sins or theft...so an environment meant to build Christians still has to rely on one thing as a foundation: the person. Conversations from what has become know as a party who wants to establish the USA as a Christian Nation is entirely wrongheaded....and not because it is not possible...it is because it ABSOLUTELY is NOT possible. In all Biblical history the number of attempts have been plentiful...but the end result NEVER fruitful. God has established nations.
Romans 13:1-3: Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
A person who wants to establish a "Nation" unto God generally has an alternative motive: To establish themselves in power. Don't take their bait.
God will judge all men according to they themselves who live in various nations...and not because of being part of a nation. The ideas of theocracy or a country that establishes laws in order to make the nation Christian is doomed to fail...since sin and evil are a matter of and from the heart of man. We see people who claim to be Christian on almost a daily basis who have been uncovered doing sexual sins or theft...so an environment meant to build Christians still has to rely on one thing as a foundation: the person. Conversations from what has become know as a party who wants to establish the USA as a Christian Nation is entirely wrongheaded....and not because it is not possible...it is because it ABSOLUTELY is NOT possible. In all Biblical history the number of attempts have been plentiful...but the end result NEVER fruitful. God has established nations.
Romans 13:1-3: Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
A person who wants to establish a "Nation" unto God generally has an alternative motive: To establish themselves in power. Don't take their bait.
![]() What is clear from this passage is that it does not matter whether a government exists because a king has appointed his son to rule, or a tribal chief has defeated his rivals, or a people have voted for their candidate — all authority is there because God put it there. Verse 1b: “There is no authority except from God.” And we know that includes bad authority because Pilate, the man who ordered Jesus crucified, was a bad authority, and Jesus said to his face in John 19:11, “You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above.”
So it doesn’t matter what human means brought the authority to power, and it doesn’t matter whether the power itself is just or unjust — this text says that God is behind all authority and that all authority has at least some claim on our submission. The implication this has for America is that we are to be submissive to the governing authorities even if we ourselves, under God, are the ones who put them in place. And, as you know, there are two senses in which we did put the government in place and two senses in which we submit. First, the people established the Constitution which, under God, is the foundation of our nation and governs us profoundly. the Constitution begins, We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. So under God, the people ordained and established the Constitution which now governs this country. Therefore, in America, submission to “governing authority” is first submission to a constitution. This has significant implications for the way the Constitution is interpreted and applied — which is a weighty issue in American life at the present time. One implication is that a constitution (or a contract or a lease or a statute or a Bible) cannot have authority over us if we can make it mean whatever we want it to mean. In other words, if you don’t believe that there are objective, original intentions of the authors of the Constitution that define and control its meaning, then you will give to it your own meaning, and that is the opposite of submission to it. So one great implication of saying that God calls us to submit to the Constitution (including its due process for amendment) is that it implies that the Constitution has a fixed, objective meaning. In the days to come, as appointments to the Supreme Court are put forward, we will be hearing much about how judges interpret the Constitution. I am saying that implied in Romans 13 and in the Bible as a whole is the truth that documents can have authority no further than they have objective unchanging meaning. And the Constitution should have authority and therefore it should be interpreted according to the objective meaning given by the authors, along with all the proper applications of those meanings which the authors may not have foreseen. I said that there are two senses in which we the people put the government in place and two senses in which we submit. The first was that we put the Constitution in place. The second is that we now put the President and Vice President and Senators and Representatives in place with our vote. These leaders are sworn to uphold the Constitution and so are a secondary authority in America. And then, of course, there are state governments and city and county governments, and so on. All of these are “governing authorities” in the sense of Romans 13:1. The point, then, is that our being the means God uses to put people in office does not make them any less a “governing authority.” Therefore, we should submit to the laws they make. In other words, my first main point from verses 1–2 is that even in a democratic, constitutional republic like ours there is real governing authority and there should be real submission. -John Piper |
![]() “The starting point of St. Paul’s thinking is always the Church, and his sole concern is its well-being and manner of life. So much so, he feels obliged to warn the Christians to refrain from any unjust or evil conduct themselves, but does not utter a single word of reproach to the State.” -Dietrich Bonhoeffer
![]() Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God .” (Romans 13:1)
Christians have long used Romans 13 as a way to promote their preferred brand of political idolatry. But being “subject to the governing authorities” isn’t a free pass to accept and condone anything the government — or the president — says or does. Often weaponized as a way to propagate partisan agendas while simultaneously shut down criticisms, this passage is commonly misunderstood by many Christians. Partisans use Romans 13 to baptize their politics as being “ordained by God.” But Christians who reference Romans 13 typically do so using an us vs. government relationship. But unlike the first century when Roman rulers were mainly determined by heredity, lineage, or brute force, today we are the government. There is no us vs. them because we play an active role in how our government works and is run. We the people vote, support, and help decide who our leaders will be. We can’t disassociate ourselves from being responsible for a government we directly influence, control, and put into power. Suggesting that God put the government in place and President Trump should be exempt from any sort of religious criticism is usually a partisan ploy to excuse the words, actions, legislation, and executive orders that are often callous and cruel. Christians who think President Trump is sovereignly chosen by God but shouldn’t be judged according to Christ’s standards of truth and holiness are succumbing to both moral relativism and cognitive dissonance. If you believe in the constitutional legality of having a separation between the church and state while also propping up a president as being a divinely appointed servant of God, you are embracing a theocracy. For Trump-supporting Christians, his perceived status as both a president and pseudo high priest who they believe is faithfully carrying out God’s plan provides immunity from any type of legal, spiritual, or moral accountability. If you use Romans 13 to support Trump, then you must also use Romans 13 to divinely sanction the support of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, who were both elected as government officials. But usually, the people who are the most adamant that Trump is ordained by God are also the most adamant that his critics aren’t. If you believe God sovereignly ordains governments, you must accept this truth across whatever political spectrum comes into power — something virtually impossible to do. For example, when Obama was president, Trump’s supporters warned that the government was morally indefensible and evil. If you believe the government is a sovereignly divinely appointed institution, then why lambast past presidents who disagreed with you, or current politicians who get elected in place of your preferred party? Could it be that one’s interpretation of whether they should “submit to governing authorities” is largely dependent on their political opinions, and whether their preferred brand of government is currently in power? Of course it is, which is why Trump’s policies and actions are glorified as being “godly” while same sex marriage and abortion are demonized as being wicked, even though same sex marriage and abortion are completely legal and were legalized through the government. Christians also fail to consider governments beyond their own when referencing Romans 13. There are countless institutions and leaders throughout the world, and besides the problem of trying to decipher which God-ordained authorities are favored by God and which ones aren’t — especially when governments oppose, battle, and contradict one another. Are we supposed to respect authorities who are dictators, war criminals, and brutal regimes as being divinely appointed by God? How can we fault citizens living in enemy states who wage war against the U.S.? Aren’t they just following a biblical command and submitting to their rulers and governing authorities, too? The gospel is ultimately a message of following Jesus, not passively cowing to a government. Peter boldly tells the apostles, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29) and Jesus himself warns that “no one can serve two masters” (Matt. 6:24). We often miss the simplest messages of the Bible even when they’re right in front of us. For example, when the Bible says to "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's..." (Matthew 22), it is a basic statement that claims the things of Caesar and those of God are not the same thing. The moral of the story: don’t mistake the government and its leaders as always being aligned with God — they aren’t. Followers of Jesus should always pledge allegiance to God over any carnal power. Christians should recognize that Jesus and his earliest followers were arrested, persecuted, and killed by the government of their day — often defying Roman orders and being viewed as treasonous. Theologian Greg Boyd notes : It was never God’s goal to have humans rule other people. Governments are God’s concession to human sin. They are now a practical necessity in the world, and God uses them to further his purposes (Rom. 13:1-6). But this doesn’t mean that God approves of them … The Kingdom of God, on the other hand, is based on people trusting God as their sole ruler. Kingdom people are therefore to place no more trust or confidence in governments than Jesus did – which is none. If a government’s laws happen to be consistent with the rule of God, we obey them. If they’re not, we follow the example of Jesus and disobey them (cf. Ac. 5:39). But either way, it’s clear that our behavior isn’t dictated by what government says, but by what God says. Christians must choose which kingdom they will serve: a kingdom of this world or the Kingdom of God. Because eventually, you’ll be forced to choose which one has the highest priority in your life. When your desire to “respect governing authorities” directly opposes God’s great command to “love your neighbor as yourself,” what will you do? God has already told us which directive is more important, but Christians too often prefer listening to their partisan politicians over their Prince of Peace. God help us. -Stephen Mattson |

The New Testament urges Christians to obey governing authorities (Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:17), but other times to look forward to the day when God burns wicked governments to the ground (Revelation 13). I surmise that Paul aims to avoid two extremes of over-realized eschatology (i.e., the kingdom is here, so ignore Government, and carry on as if it doesn’t exist), and under-realized eschatology (i.e., the kingdom is not here, so sharpen your sword, let’s storm the capitol, assassinate Caesar, and make the kingdom come that way). Paul is perhaps arguing, in effect, “Jesus is the Lord, the new age has dawned, but be that as it, we cannot get ahead of ourselves and live as if authorities are not there. They are here, and for good reasons, God has appointed them to provide justice for their peoples. What is more, some hot-heads in Judea might be sharpening their swords for holy war, looking for opportunities to revolt, but that will not solve the problem, just replace imperial rule with lawless anarchy. God can bring Rome to its knees and he does not need your sword to do it.” -Michael Bird; Romans 13:1-7 – Translates, Paraphrase, and Notes
Beyond the immediate subject of vaccine mandates, these actions uphold the broader principle of the separation of powers. This, in turn, is built on the Bible. It is the practical outworking of the Bible’s teaching most concisely articulated in Romans 13:1, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”
These words make clear that governments should be respected as divine authorities. But that is not all. They also teach that all government officials – from school board members to presidents – wield authority from God. They are not mere functionaries of the king, but have duties and responsibilities in their own right. Further, since all authority is from God, all authority is ultimately answerable to God. Kings that use their authority to do objective evil – like murder, theft and homewrecking – act illegitimately. When higher authorities usurp the power of other God-appointed authorities (i.e. “lesser magistrates”), they are taking over what God has given to another. And when they do this in open defiance of justice, the “lesser magistrates” have a duty to protect their constituency from the unjust higher authority. - Jonathan Lange |
![]() “Every soul” refers to every person (the whole being) both believer and non-believer, but Paul is obviously only addressing the Christians here. “Governing authorities” is from exousia which is translated as “authority” and refers to those with authority to govern, oversee, rule. Exousia is the word Jesus used when he said, “All authority (exousia) in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” This is not referring to spirits who are exousia or authorities because: When exousia is used like that it is always combined with archai Other uses of exousia in Romans 13 will not fit the context of a spiritual being Paul is building on God the Creator’s order of human culture and not revealing a spiritual principle Why would Paul command believers in Jesus Christ to be submissive to spiritual authorities here, when in Colossians he rejects that very concept. Plus, many spiritual authorities are evil spirits. Paul uses the word “submit” which is NOT the word “obey”. This may be intentional because submission would include accepting the punishment for NOT obeying. And, this was the situation many times where the Christians had to decide if they should obey or disobey the authorities they were submitted to. Example, Acts 4:19, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God.” The same word “submission” or hupotasso is used by Paul to refer to relationships to: Government authorities (Titus 3:1) Church leaders (1 Cor. 16:16) “One another” (Ephesians 5:21) Slaves to masters (Titus 2:9) Prophets to prophets (1 Cor. 14:32) Wives to husbands (Eph. 5:24; Col. 3:18)
|
The commands in Romans 13 are quite broad, aimed at "everyone," with no exceptions listed. In fact, when Paul wrote these words, Nero was on the throne. If Romans 13 applies to the cruel and capricious Nero, it applies to all kings. The early church followed the principles of Romans 13 even during the wicked and oppressive reigns of Claudius, Caligula, and Tacitus. No qualifications or "outs" are given in the passage. Paul does not say "be subject to the king UNLESS he is oppressive" or "you must obey all rulers EXCEPT usurpers." The plain teaching of Romans 13 is that all governments in all places are to be honored and obeyed. Every ruler holds power by the sovereign will of God (Psalm 75:7; Daniel 2:21). New Testament examples of believers paying proper obedience and respect towards government authority include Luke 2:1-5; 20:22-25; and Acts 24:10 (see also 1 Peter 2:13-17).
This is not to say that God approves of everything governments do or that kings are always right. On the contrary, Scripture has many examples of kings being held to account by God (e.g., Daniel 4). Furthermore, Romans 13 does not teach that Christians must always obey the governing authorities, no matter what. The one exception to the general rule of obedience is when man's laws are in direct conflict with the plainly revealed law of God. Examples of God's people practicing civil disobedience include Peter and John defying the Sanhedrin (Acts 4:19; 5:29), the Hebrew midwives refusing to practice infanticide (Exodus 1:15-17), Daniel ignoring the Persian law concerning prayer (Daniel 6:10), and Daniel's friends refusing to bow to the king's image (Daniel 3:14-18). -S Michael Houdmann
This is not to say that God approves of everything governments do or that kings are always right. On the contrary, Scripture has many examples of kings being held to account by God (e.g., Daniel 4). Furthermore, Romans 13 does not teach that Christians must always obey the governing authorities, no matter what. The one exception to the general rule of obedience is when man's laws are in direct conflict with the plainly revealed law of God. Examples of God's people practicing civil disobedience include Peter and John defying the Sanhedrin (Acts 4:19; 5:29), the Hebrew midwives refusing to practice infanticide (Exodus 1:15-17), Daniel ignoring the Persian law concerning prayer (Daniel 6:10), and Daniel's friends refusing to bow to the king's image (Daniel 3:14-18). -S Michael Houdmann
Romans 13: 2:
Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. |
![]() The last reference in the Bible to principalities and powers is in Titus 3:1: Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work,
This is a reference to earthly authorities and governments, who are ultimately placed over us by God's will. We are told to submit to governments out of respect for the God who ordained their rule over us. Rebellion against earthly authority brings judgment (Romans 13:2). -Compelling Truth |
Rebellion against authorities is rebellion against God’s established order. Judgment could be immediate or it could be eschatological.
Romans 13: 3:
For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, |
Even the most wicked, godless governments act as a deterrent to crime so that peaceful and law abiding citizens need not fear the authorities. Few governments will harm those who obey their laws. -Bible Studys
|
Romans 13: 4-7:
for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed. |
Murder was differentiated in Scripture from different degrees of manslaughter.....and to murder was relegated the most severe penalty. God’s commandment required the death penalty because “in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6). A murderer not only took the life of his victim, he also assaulted the divine majesty. Taking animal or vegetable life is in no way comparable to taking human life, for though all creation is His handiwork, only man was created in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-27). Nothing else in God’s creation was vitalized by God’s own breath (Genesis 2:7). No matter how sinful man has deformed God’s image, he still bears some likeness of his Creator (James 3:9; 1 Corinthians 11:7).
The death penalty was imposed as a measure of protection for organized society, but purely social considerations fail to give sufficient warrant for the severe punishment. Therefore, God showed the preciousness of human life to be its reflection of His image, and violence against human life constituted rebellion of inestimable magnitude. The argument that capital punishment only adds a second murder to the first reveals an unfortunate lack of discernment between the violent acts of depraved man and the holy justice of the righteous God. Human government is commissioned to be “a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil” (Romans 13:4). (Bible.org) |

Let no debt remain outstanding. The borrower is the slave of the lender. This is an unfortunate commentary of the state of our government. It has borrowed from itself many times, but never been able to pay itself back. Several reasons for that, but one in particular is that it simply cannot. The best it can do is print money that has little to no value and try to reimburse itself that way. That, of course, is also corrupt. It has now become so enslaved to its own corrupt efforts that, save for a miracle, it is really beyond repair. “A just weight and balance are the LORD’s: all the weights of the bag are his work.” (Prov 16:11). The following verse (Rom 13:9) speaks about love being the greatest commandment in that it does no harm to its neighbor. We live in dark times where acts of true (righteous) love are the exception rather than the rule. This is true with our neighbors and, unfortunately, right up to the acts of government leaders.
Note the use of the phrase “servant of God” or diakonos. This can apply to an unbeliever being used by God as a governmental authority. This was the case with Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel’s eyes and Pharaoh in Moses’ eyes. “Bear sword in vain” - beginning with the penalty of execution and continuing down to a parking ticket, the government has authority 13:4
|
In a study of how the Bible was used in the American Revolution, the historian James Byrd argues that “American patriots” rejected against the notion that Romans 13 required unconditional obedience. Instead, he wrote, they preached from the text “to deny that Paul gave kings the right to be tyrants.” As the Anglican priest and regimental chaplain David Griffith said in a sermon on Romans 13, Paul “never meant … to give sanction to the crimes of wicked and despotic men.” (SOURCE: The Atlantic The Fight to Define Romans 13-June 15, 2018)
|
When confronting Governor Festus, Paul says in Acts 25:11, "If I am a wrongdoer, and have committed anything worthy of death, I do not refuse to die; but if none of these things is true of which these men accuse me, no one can hand me over to them." He both affirms capital statutes and accepts them as binding on him if he has broken one. Later, in the New Testament's most famous passage on the nature of government, Paul explains, "But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for [the government] does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil" (Romans 13:4). Finally, the same Bible which begins in Genesis 9:6 with the establishment of capital punishment, carries the theme consistently throughout the text, and ends by reiterating it in Revelation 13:10, "If any one is destined for captivity, to captivity he goes; if any one kills with the sword, with the sword he must be killed. Here is the perseverance and the faith of the saints." --Andrew Tallman (Religion Today)
Once we understand God's sovereignty over the nations, it is not difficult to understand where Paul bases his instructions in these verses. Thus we can understand why Moses so quickly and surely considers the actions of Korah and his group as rebellion against God rather than merely against himself (Numbers 16). When Israel rejects Samuel as judge over them because they want a king, God reveals to the prophet that the people are really rejecting the rule of God Himself (I Samuel 8:7). It does not matter whether a Christian considers his nation's government to be unlawful. What matters is whether God permits it. If He permits it, this One, who is aware of even sparrows falling, has allowed it or has directly brought it to pass because of the purpose He is working out. That is all that matters. God is ruling His creation, and this is what we are here to learn and trust.
Jesus lived His entire life under an unlawful civil government. The Roman government ruled over Judea as a result of military conquest. Moreover, at times even the ecclesiastical government was not in the proper hands because corrupt Roman officials discovered that just-as-corrupt Jews were willing to pay bribes to "buy" the high priesthood. But the Scriptures repeatedly show Jesus subject to them, though He called both, especially the ecclesiastical one, into account. Matthew 17:24-27 is a clear example: When they had come to Capernaum, those who received the temple tax came to Peter and said, "Does your Teacher not pay the temple tax?" He said, "Yes." And when he had come into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, "What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take customs or taxes, from their sons or from strangers?" Peter said to Him, "From strangers." Jesus said to him, "Then the sons are free. Nevertheless, lest we offend them, go to the sea, cast in a hook, and take the fish that comes up first. And when you have opened its mouth, you will find a piece of money; take that and give it to them for Me and you." The Temple tax was one-half shekel per year for every Jew over 20. Since Jesus Christ was Lord and Owner of the Temple, He and His "children" should have been free of taxation. Jesus orders Peter to pay it anyway for both of them to avoid a bitter and offensive debate on the merits of His claim. By doing this, Jesus sets the right example looking by faith beyond a legal technicality to the True Ruler, the Father. God likely brought this episode to pass for our instruction. Perhaps a brief statement of Solomonic wisdom will summarize Christian understanding of God's sovereignty over the governments of men: "There is no wisdom or understanding or counsel against the LORD. The horse is prepared for the day of battle, but deliverance is of the LORD " (Proverbs 21:30-31). His meaning becomes clearer in other translations. The Living Bible renders it, "No one, regardless of how shrewd or well-advised he is, can stand against the Lord. Go ahead and prepare for the conflict, but victory comes from God." The Revised English Bible translates it as, "Face to face with the Lord, wisdom, understanding, counsel avail nothing. A horse may be made ready for the day of battle, but victory rests with the Lord." It may seem a remote possibility, even strange, that we would fight against the Lord, yet because human nature remains in us, we do. The apostle Paul complains in Romans 7:14-23 that what he did not want to do he did anyway because a law of enmity against God worked within him. Proverbs 21:30-31 tells us that human wisdom, insight, and counsel must be in conformity with God's will to be successful. God's children must understand His sovereignty over everything and conduct their lives knowing that nothing avails against God and nothing without Him.-- John Rittenbaugh Of course, God's spiritual law is of prime importance and takes precedence over all other law. As Peter said, "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29) when a conflict between the two occurs. Though breaking man's laws may not always be sin, a rebellious attitude against what God appoints over us will in time lead to transgressing God's law. One who will not submit to law in one area will not submit to it in others. Richard T. Ritenbaugh |
First, civil government is secular in nature while Christianity is spiritual. Christians are aliens and strangers, just passing through this world (see 1 Peter 1:1). Their citizenship is in heaven (Philippians 3:20). Second, the state can look upon Christianity as competitive, even hostile to its authority. The Christian’s highest authority is God. In Rome, Caesar was “god.” Because of this, Romans considered Christians as atheists. Christianity was eventually seen as treasonous. Third, at times Christians were required to “obey God, rather than men” (see Acts 5:29), which openly confirmed the government’s suspicions. Fourth, government officials, either unconsciously or willingly, used their authority to actively oppose the church and to persecute Christians.
If governmental authorities began to view Christians with suspicion, and even fear, Christians also were tempted to see government as their opponent, and as an enemy of God and the gospel of Jesus Christ. Civil disobedience might easily become common practice rather than a necessary exception. Submission to governmental authority was a vital topic in a day and time when the Lord’s church and civil government were on a collision course. The church is on a very similar course today. In the earlier days of our nation, our government was founded on certain Christian assumptions and convictions. If our early government founders and officials were not Christians, at least their beliefs and values were compatible with Christian doctrines and practices. Our culture and our government has strayed over the years farther and farther from Christianity. Until recently, many Christians thought their views and values were still held by a majority of Americans. Christians only needed to mobilize the moral majority and encourage them to speak out—especially by voting. We could turn things around, we were assured, if only we could mobilize the masses. This view is now for the most part recognized as unrealistic and untrue. Christians and their values are becoming an unpopular minority view. Consequently, government will increasingly regulate, hinder, and even oppose Christian activity. At the same time, some Christians are becoming increasingly disobedient to the laws of our land. Some even teach that if we disagree with a particular law, we are not only obliged to disobey, but we can also justify disobeying other laws in protest. --Bible.org |
In the wake of recent uproar against police officers, this isn’t a popular passage, at least by the world’s standards. But Paul sets the bar high for believers concerning divinely sanctioned government offices and our response to them. For to rebel against authorities is rebelling against what God has instituted and will incur God’s judgment (vs. 2). God’s purpose of rulers and their use of force is to keep order in society by rewarding good conduct and punishing wrongdoers (vs 3). -KD Manes
|
c. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God: We subject ourselves to governing authorities because they are appointed by God and serve a purpose in His plan.
i. No authority except from God: God appoints a nation’s leaders, but not always to bless the people. Sometimes it is to judge the people or to ripen the nation for judgment. ii. We remember that Paul wrote this during the reign of the Roman Empire. It was no democracy, and no special friend to Christians – yet he still saw their legitimate authority. iii. “Your Savior suffered under Pontius Pilate, one of the worst Roman governors Judea ever had; and Paul under Nero, the worst Roman Emperor. And neither our Lord nor His Apostle denied or reviled the ‘authority!’” (Newell) (SOURCE: Enduring Word Commentary) |
Paul continues to lay down guidelines concerning how Christians should respond to, interact with and treat people outside the Christian faith (Christian community). Paul addresses the secular government and secular authorities the Christian is living under. The teaching of Romans 13:1-8 should prevent any extremism by the Christian in the temporary world since it also has been established and ordered by God. A nation like Judea was granted the status of collegia licita (or, a “permitted associations”) under Roman law. Nations like Judea where accepted no matter how strange or foreign their national customs or religious practices might be. In 51/52 AD Gallio ruled that the Jewish debate with Christians should be taken care of in the synagogue, and NOT in the Corinthian court. (Acts 18:12-17) This set the legal standard and Paul traveled freely through the Roman Empire preaching for Christ.

Verses 1-7 The grace of the gospel teaches us submission and quiet, where pride and the carnal mind only see causes for murmuring and discontent. Whatever the persons in authority over us themselves may be, yet the just power they have, must be submitted to and obeyed. In the general course of human affairs, rulers are not a terror to honest, quiet, and good subjects, but to evil-doers. Such is the power of sin and corruption, that many will be kept back from crimes only by the fear of punishment. Thou hast the benefit of the government, therefore do what thou canst to preserve it, and nothing to disturb it. This directs private persons to behave quietly and peaceably ( 1 Timothy. 2:1 1 Timothy. 2:2 ) trick or fraud. All smuggling, dealing in contraband goods, withholding or evading duties, is rebellion against the express command of God. Thus honest neighbours are robbed, who will have to pay the more; and the crimes of smugglers, and others who join with them, are abetted. It is painful that some professors of the gospel should countenance such dishonest practices. The lesson here taught it becomes all Christians to learn and practise, that the godly in the land will always be found the quiet and the peaceable in the land, whatever others are. --Matthew Henrys Commentary

I must make explicit that the apostle who wrote Romans 13 also made crystal clear that Christians are not first citizens of any human nation but citizens of the kingdom of God. Philippians 3:20, “Our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.” Colossians 3:2–3, “Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth. 3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.” We are not our own, we were bought with a price (1 Corinthians 6:19–20) by the blood of Christ who rose from the dead and owns us and rules us. Therefore Peter says, “Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul” (1 Peter 2:11). Christians are aliens and exiles in America. Jesus Christ is our king, and no human authority is above him. That’s why Peter says in 1 Peter 2:13, “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution.” We submit to human authority because a higher authority, Jesus Christ, tells us to submit for his glory. When Jesus said, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21), he meant at least: Everything is God’s, and when you have surrendered everything to God, then you will be in a position of rendering obedience to Caesar without committing treason against heaven. -John Piper
![]() Paying tribute is the same as “paying taxes”. Paul uses the term in the broadest possible sense to speak of all kinds of taxes.
That tax was usually a combined income and property tax. Because God ordained human government and demands submission to it, tribute or taxes came into being. The Greek word for taxes referred specifically to taxes paid by individuals, particularly those living in a conquered nation to their foreign rulers, which even makes the taxes more distasteful. Jesus explicitly taught that taxes are to be paid, even to the pagan Roman government. He set an example by willingly paying the temple tax as we see in Matthew. Matthew 17:24-27 “And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute [money] came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?” “He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? Of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?” “Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.” “Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.” -Bible Studys |
![]() Fugitive Slave Act: Romans 13 erupted into the public debate in 1850 with the passage of the Fugitive Slave Act. That law gave teeth to a provision in the Constitution by requiring that state officials and even “all good citizens” aid in returning people who had escaped slavery to bondage. Defenders of the slave system dismissed the abolitionist argument that the act was “opposed to the Divine Law.” The Richmond Daily Dispatch was sure that there were “hundreds” of “passages from Scripture proving the slavery has the divine sanction,” among them Romans 13, which demanded cooperation with the return of fugitive slaves. A North Carolina paper railed that “these Christians in the free States set up their judgments against that of the Almighty, and blindly strike against all law, order, and right!” It bluntly called down Paul’s threat of “damnation” as “Divine vengeance upon their evil deeds.”There were at least three other commonly held interpretations of Romans 13 as it related to the Fugitive Slave Act. Illinois minister Asa Donaldson took the quiescent view that “the scriptures everywhere treat the worst of human governments as better than anarchy,” and that because no one was forced to participate in “buying and selling slaves” everyone was bound to avoid “all acts of hostility against the laws of the land, however corrupt.” Many anti-slavery activists, by contrast, held that the moral law God had ordained took precedence over the government leaders he had ordained. So without threatening to dissolve the union, they refused to participate in bringing “the fugitive slave back to the master and the bondage” and were willing to “suffer the penalty” for civil disobedience rather than “commit the crime” of helping to re-enslave a person. One Vermont author, for example, argued that the United States, “with its enslavement of the Africans and its extermination of the Indians,” stood outside Paul’s command to obedience. But the most radical of abolitionists came to believe that the Bible did justify slavery, and rejected the Bible on precisely those grounds. Black Christians were accustomed to hearing from white slaveholders a bowlderized gospel that emphasized texts like Romans 13 and Colossians 3 (“Servants, obey in all things your masters.”) But their own readings of the Bible emphasized the book's themes of deliverance from bondage. The Exodus narrative was a more central text than Romans 13. The black abolitionist David Walker compared the United States to slaveholding Egypt and enslaved African Americans to the children of Israel. “All persons who are acquainted with history, and particularly the Bible,” he wrote, and “who can dispense with prejudice long enough to admit that we are men ... and believe that we feel for our fathers, mothers, wives and children, as well as the whites do for theirs” could see plainly that the Bible was on the side of the oppressed and not the oppressor. As Maria Stewart put it in an 1831 address suffused with scripture, “You may kill, tyrannize, and oppress as much as you choose, until our cry shall come up before the throne of God.” The debates in the 1850s over whether Romans 13 required obedience or resistance to the Fugitive Slave Act, and more broadly over whether the Bible supported enslavement or abolition, fractured the Bible’s authority in the public sphere. Americans’ allegiance to Romans 13 in a democratic society grew even more tenuous. While Southern Christians did keep defending slavery from the Bible even after the Civil War was over, slaveholders could no longer claim that they were “the powers that be.” The text never entered the public discourse again the way that it had in the 1850s. -Lincoln Mullen; The Atlantic; The Fight to Define Romans 13 |