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. Therefore, he who resists the authorities, resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 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; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, one must be subject not only to avoid wrath but also for the sake of conscience.

In the fall of 1561 an important conversation took place in Scotland between Queen Mary and the Calvinistic Protestant preacher John Knox.

Mary was a Catholic. She had been educated in Catholic France, and she believed that sovereigns—she herself was one—had absolute power over the consciences of their subjects. Knox was a reformer. For his uncompromising preaching he had been sentenced to serve as a galley slave for nineteen months. After his release, he had studied in Geneva under John Calvin from 1553 to 1559. Then, in the summer of 1560, he had participated in the drafting of the Scottish Confession of Faith that stated that Jesus Christ “is the only Head of His Kirk” (sections 11 and 18). Knox had returned just two years before his celebrated conversation with Queen Mary.

In the interview Mary accused Knox of having wrongly taught the people to receive another religion than their princes allow. “And how can that doctrine be of God, seeing that God commands subjects to obey their princes?” she asked. She was referring to Romans 13:1 and other texts.

Knox answered, “Madam, as right religion took neither [its] origin nor authority from worldly princes, but from the Eternal God alone, so are not subjects bound to frame their religion according to the appetites of their princes.”

He admonished Mary, “God commands queens to be nurses unto his people.”

“Yes, but you are not the church that I will nourish,” she retorted.

Knox replied, “Your will, Madam, is no reason.” In this way the issues of church and state and the proper role and function of the state were framed in Scotland in the sixteenth century. There was no relief in Scotland until Mary’s forced abdication in 1567.

The fundamental principle here in Romans 13 is that Christians are, as a people, to be noted for their civil obedience. One of the strange ironies of early church history is that, while the Roman government was persecuting the Christian community, the church apologists were writing defences of Christian behaviour to the emperors. The Christians were not interested in
disobeying the civil magistrates in civil matters; they paid their taxes, they did everything that a good citizen was supposed to do. They got into trouble when they refused to obey commands to worship the state or the emperor, rather than Christ.

In that situation, they were to obey God rather than men.

That is the second principle found here balances number 1, we must always obey God. If there is a conflict between what the civil magistrate commands and what God demands, it is our moral duty to disobey the civil magistrate.

Paul does not answer a lot of our questions. For example, when is a government a legitimate government, and when isn’t it? When is it right to rebel against an unjust or tyrannical government, or isn’t it permitted at all?

What about our own American War of Independence?

If we had been living then, what side should we have been on, with England or with the colonists? What are we to do when there are rival claimants to the throne? Which one should we obey? Again, at what point does an unjust ruler become legitimate?

What about unjust acts commanded by an evil government? Killing civilians?

Are there no limits to what must be obeyed?

Our Submission to Man’s Laws is Limited

The church is a people who are sojourners, strangers, exiles, refugees in this world (Hebrews 11:13; 1 Peter 2:11). A happy, peaceful, loving people who swear allegiance to a foreign king, Jesus Christ, and to no other.
As a free people because our minds are not conformed to this age but are transformed by the mercies of God, we are not to be enslaved by fashion or fad, but to have a single and radical allegiance to the king who said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36).
A crucial issues before the church in America today is:

Will we be American with a pinch of religious flavoring? Or: Christ’s people with a pinch of American flavoring?

We are constantly being shaped by forces in our culture which make it almost impossible for the world to see any difference in our values, we act and look just like the world.

It is a radical declaration of independence to turn from our culture and turn with absolute allegiance to a foreign king, Jesus.

Romans 13:1–7 has often been used to justify an unseemly conformity to the status quo in this country and in others.

Paul’s argument has three main steps.

Step one is: all governing authority has been ordained or instituted by God. If there is a government, God put it there.

Step two is: therefore, a person who resists or opposes governing authorities experiences two things: one is pangs of conscience that he is really opposing God, and the other is punishment that the authorities mete out to those who oppose them. To avoid these two experiences, verse 5 concludes with step three:

Step three is: to avoid wrath and a bad conscience, therefore, be subject to the governing authorities. In summary then, governing authorities are appointed by God; therefore, to oppose them is to oppose God and to incur punishment; therefore, do not oppose them, but be subject to them.

There are several texts which don’t seem compatible with Romans 13. If we want to honor the whole Bible as God’s Word, we have to ask how Romans 13 fits in with some other parts of Scripture.

There Has Been Civil Disobedience in Biblical History

Exodus, The Israelites had lived in Egypt under the rule of the Pharaohs for several centuries. They became very numerous, so the king of Egypt commanded the Hebrew midwives to kill all the boy babies born to the Israelites (v. 16). But verse 17 says, “The midwives feared God, and did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live.” And verse 20 adds, “So God dealt well with the midwives; and the people multiplied and grew strong. And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families.” It seems clear that these women were not subject to the governing authorities.

They saw the command of the king not from God, but contrary to God’s command. So they disobeyed the civil authorities for God’s sake, and God was pleased.

Daniel. King Nebuchadnezzar made a royal decree that all who heard his music must fall down and worship the golden image of his god. But Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refused to obey the edict. So they were thrown into the fiery furnace, and God miraculously saved them and thus put his stamp of approval on their civil disobedience.

Daniel, Darius the king establishes an edict that for thirty days no one can make a petition to any god or man other than Darius himself (6:7). Daniel was one of Darius’ three chief presidents (6:2), but verse 10 says, “When Daniel knew that the document had been signed, he went to his house where he had windows in his upper chamber open toward Jerusalem; and he got down on his knees three times a day and prayed and gave thanks before his God, as he had done
previously.” The result was that he was thrown to the lions. But again God shows his approval of Daniel’s disobedience by saving him from the lion’s mouth.

In the New Testament. When Peter and John were arrested by the Jewish authorities and commanded not to speak or teach in the name of Jesus, they answered in Acts 4:19, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard.” So they went on teaching in public and were arrested again. The high priest said to them in Acts 5:28, “ ‘We strictly charged you not to teach in this name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.’ But Peter and the apostles answered, ‘We must obey God rather than men.”

These examples make it difficult to say that the Bible teaches that since all governing authority is from God, it must, therefore, be obeyed.

God Sets Up Governments

What then are we to make of Romans 13:1–5, which calls for subjection to governing authorities? Is the basic premise wrong? Are all governing authorities really instituted by God? Is all authority from God? Or are only just governments instituted by God?

Yes, all authority which exists has been set up by God.

Daniel describes the deeds of very evil kings, he says in 2:21 that it is God who “removes kings and sets up kings,” and in 4:32, “The Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.” So, according to Daniel even wicked kings should acknowledge that they have their position and authority only from God. The same thing is taught in the Gospel of John. Pilate, by whose authority Jesus was finally crucified, was a governing authority set and ordained by God (cf. Acts 2:23; 4:27, 28). In John 19:10 Pilate says to Jesus, “ ‘Do you not know that I have authority to release you and authority to crucify you?’ Jesus answered, ‘You would have no authority over me unless it had been given to you from above.’ ”

If Pilate, Nebuchadnezzar, and Darius were set in their places and given authority by God, even though they did much evil, then we have no reason to deny Paul’s assertion that “there is no authority except from God” (Romans 13:1).

Submitting to Governing Authorities

verse 3,Rulers are not a terror to good conduct. Do good, and you will receive their praise.” This verse and the next one must be a general statement of how governments should and often do function. Not all governments are good an don’t have the best in mind for the people.

If this is correct, then it will no longer be possible to insist that Christians should always be subject to the governing authorities. As long as authorities punish only what is evil and praise
only what is good, submission to God will always conform to submission to the authorities. But if the authorities ever begin to punish the good and reward the bad (as has repeatedly happened in church history), then submission to God will bring us into conflict with the authorities.

So the command to be subject in verses 1 and 5 is not absolute; it depends on whether subjection will involve us in doing wrong. The ultimate criterion of right and wrong is not whether a ruling authority commands it, but whether God commands it.

The fact that God has ordained all authority does not mean all authority should be obeyed. It is right to resist what God has appointed in order to obey what God has commanded.
verse 5 says we are to be subject in order to avoid wrath, it means the punishment that comes from wrongdoing, not from obedience to Christ. 1 Peter 4:15, 16 makes this issue clearer. It says, “Let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or a wrongdoer or a mischief-maker; yet if one suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but under that name let him glorify God

Sum it Up

1) There is no authority except from God. The greatest human ruler should humbly confess he is where he is by virtue of God’s sovereign appointment.

2) Nevertheless, some rules and governments are good, and some are bad. Some reward the right and punish the wrong. Others do the reverse. Most do a little of both.

3) the demand for subjection is relative, not absolute. It depends on whether the demands of the governing authorities require us to disobey Jesus. (1 Peter 2:13).

All our submission to man is not only limited by the lordship of Christ; it is also an expression of how we yield to Christ’s lordship.