icon__search

73: The Powers That Be (Pt 1)

Or, God’s Rules for Submissive and Tax-Paying Citizens

August 27, 2023 • Sean Higgins • Romans 13:1–7

God and government is a huge and tangled subject, and Romans 13:1-7 is a fairly small paragraph comparatively. These verses include some foundational principles, and for Christian citizens in the current (covidian) climate, it has pushed its way into the spotlight.


We desire to understand Romans 13, and to apply it, almost two-thousand years after Paul wrote it. That requires some thoughtfulness. What's also relevant, is that much of (or at least much of the remnants of) our ideas about government in Western Civilization have been built on Romans 13. That requires our thankfulness. Rights as God-givens rather than state-givens, checks-and-balances among men, legislation for maximum liberty, these are not the fruit of idolatry or atheism, humanism or secularism.


Whether you are blue pill, red pill, black pill, white pill, you need God over the system. If all we have is what's under the sun, if there is no God over the state, then the state becomes god.


The eternal God says earthly, temporal government is good, though obviously not every governor governs in a godly or good way. God says authorities, hierarchy, structures, powers, force, and taxes are good. God says individualism, anarchy, rebellion and revolution are bad. God is sovereign over all, God sets up kings and kingdoms and nations and boundaries and God tears them down (Psalm 75:7; Daniel 2:21). God will take account from every official, and every citizen. It is part of the human condition.


I've read men who’ve argued that there would be no need for government apart from the fall (Abraham Kuyper is one example). It's speculation either way, but had mankind not sinned I'm not convinced that some kind of political organization would not have happened. There wouldn't be a need for laws and punishments, but there could have been leaders and followers among fathers, just as there was organization and hierarchy in the household. As they filled the earth, a collection of households might have decided to do things one way in one place, and another collection differently, both good and not resulting in conflict.


I say that to emphasize the fact that authority is *good*. Abuse of authority is obviously not, whether by self-interest or indolence or ignorance, and we have seen that all over. When men have power over men to their hurt (Ecclesiastes 8:9), it is a heavy trouble and grievous evil.


But good authorities are like the dawn.


> The God of Israel has spoken;

> the Rock of Israel has said to me:

> When one rules justly over men,

> ruling in the fear of God,

> he dawns on them like the morning light,

> like the sun shining forth on a cloudless morning,

> like rain that makes grass to sprout from the earth.

> (2 Samuel 23:3–4 ESV)


Righteous rulers are a blessing to a nation and cause the people to rejoice, though they groan when the wicked rule (Proverbs 29:2, see also Proverbs 14:34). Part of how we know that our rulers are bad is not just because of pain we experience, but because our consciences tell us that something else is better. We know there is a better pattern, and that's because God has built it into us.


As I said, there has been renewed interest in Romans 13 since 2020, and these verses are like a step-stool for living sacrifices as they get up on the altar in public. So many sermons, podcasts, books, Twitter threads, memes. Here is another.


A good look at this paragraph will show that "Shut up and submit no matter what" is *not* what Paul required, of the mid-first-century Romans, or of us two millennium later. Paul was arrested/beaten for disobeying the government multiple times. He also avoided death and got to Rome itself on the government dime. But Paul does help us see that our default attitude should be toward law and order, and to see our opportunity to serve God as we submit to our governors.


Sure it's worthwhile to take a couple Sundays to consider this Scripture, unique in the Pauline epistles. Today verses 1-2, digging out the foundation.



# The Origin and Scope of Government (verse 1)


This is an exhaustive-exhaustive, a two-fold fullness.


> 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)


We're talking about **every person** and every **authority**, stated as **there is no authority except**, a universal affirmative (All persons are required-to-submit-to-authorities-persons) and a universal negative (No authority-person is a non-God-appointed-person). Put that on your square of opposition.


Let's not let it go without saying that Paul is writing to the Roman *Christians*, those who had been saved by the mercies of God. But let's also observe that Paul doesn't limit his target to living sacrifices, though living sacrifices are included. There aren't any escape clauses. Every *soul*, Christian and non-Christian, means that there is no entirely private person; no one is above the law.


The **governing authorities** are *human* beings in positions of power. There is another use of the word “authorities,” even by Paul, to refer to supernatural, angelic beings “in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 3:10, 6:12). But in none of those passages do we *submit* to angels, we submit to men.


That is the command here: **be subject**. It means to submit, follow, do what someone else wills.


The reason is built in: God is the one who put these people in place. “*The powers that be* are ordained of God” (Tyndale/KJV). Paul says it twice, the first that eliminates alternatives and the second that emphasizes God's appointment. Where there is authority, it's **from God**; God **instituted**, He “established” (NASB), put in place, all those powers. This does *not* mean that the authorities realize how they got/hold their seat, and so problems arise when they fail to recognize their authority is only delegated, not absolute. But *we* know the origin of civil authorities-God Himself, and the scope of civil authorities—every person.



# Resistance to Government and Its Result (verse 2)


The reality is so inescapable that God installs government/governors that disobeying the human authority is disobeying God.


> Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. (Romans 13:2)


**Therefore**, here's the conclusion based on the divine origin and ordination of authorities. "The one resisting," is the opposite of submitting; there's a play on words, submit is *hupotasso* - get under, and resist is *antitasso* - go against. To **resist** is to go against the force.


Opposition to the authority is opposition to what God ordained. One example, as when Moses told the Israelites in the desert, “Your grumbling is not against us but against the LORD” (Exodus 16:8).


There is a synonym for the anti-arranging in the last part of verse 2, the anti-stander. The ESV uses **those who resist** again, and it's another way to refer to those who stand-against, who oppose.


What about when the apostles said that they had to obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29)? And if Paul wasn’t a hypocrite to his own instruction, why was he in prison so often? These are good questions, but they are good *second* questions, after we acknowledge the default of divine authority in the affairs of nations.



# Conclusion


Verse 5 makes clear that we are to submit not just because we might be punished, "but also for the sake of conscience." This is higher than any human authority can accomplish, even if they do “want to know what we think” and convict us of thoughtcrime. We submit directly to God while we submit indirectly but more intimately to the governing authorities.


What about when those rulers are illegitimate; what if power was seized through a coup, or a stolen election? What about when those rulers are unjust? Do we submit to the powers that be *de facto* (according to what is in fact), or just to those *de jure* (according to what is right by law)? Again, all really relevant questions.


We are commanded to recognize that civil government is God-ordained, even as we would recognize that family/household government and church governments are God-ordained. These are *all* subject to God, whether they realize it or not. As such, each sphere of authority can function as checks-and-balances to each other. But fathers are not the boss of everything, though they are first-responsible at home. Elders/pastors are not presidents, and Health Department directors can't prohibit Christian communion.


Paul himself was imprisoned *wrongly* by the government, he used the government to keep himself from death, and he deliberately disobeyed the government when it came to proclaiming the gospel. Before that, Paul himself had used power to cause the unjust suffering/death of Christians.


Government is given by God, government that does not acknowledge God will give account for that, will inevitably move toward taking on god-like ego, and Christians are *not* allowed to serve two gods. But we also must take care not to qualify ourselves out of anything that looks like submission. The results are never good when every man does what is right in his own eyes, and professing Christians are no less susceptible to that temptation.


And while we pray for kings/presidents/governors and all who are in high positions (1 Timothy 2:2), we also know that apart from repentance (cf. Isaiah 46) and submission to Jesus as Lord, we deserve all the judgment *of* wicked rulers we receive.


There is more in the paragraph, more principles, more unanswered but relevant questions, more about God’s rules for submissive and tax-paying citizens.


----------


## Charge


In _Mere Christianity_ C.S. Lewis noted:


> “If you read history, you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were just those who thought most of the next. The Apostles themselves, who set on foot the conversion of the Roman Empire, the great men who built up the Middle Ages, the English Evangelicals who abolished the Slave Trade, all left their mark on Earth, precisely because their minds were occupied with Heaven. It is since Christians have largely ceased to think of the other world that they have become so ineffective in this. Aim at Heaven and you will get earth ‘thrown in’: aim at earth and you will get neither.”


Be occupied with God and presenting your body as a living sacrifice to God. Thank Him for blessing you with fruit here because your hope is in Christ’s forever kingdom.


## Benediction:


> Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire. (Hebrews 12:28–29, ESV)

More from Romans

77: Outstanding Love

September 24, 2023 • Sean Higgins • Romans 13:8–10

When Christians talk about Romans 13 they’re almost always thinking about the God and government part in the first paragraph. It’s a good start to the chapter, about earthly authorities promoting the good, and the good of citizens submitting to do good. But there is more good in Romans 13, in two more paragraphs. Romans 13:8-10 is maybe one of the most underrated three-verse summaries in Scripture. If you like profound truth in pithy form, if you like a paragraph that does the work of many pages, if you like rubber meets the road repetition, it’s all here for you. We learned how to behave as citizens toward the people in charge in verses 1-7, and verses 8-10 show us how to behave toward our fellow citizens. There is certainly application for how we treat one another as Christians, but members of the body of Christ already got explicit instructions in chapter 12. While we would say only Christians have the capability to consistently treat others the way Romans 13:8-10 describes, the picture is what makes our civil lives together *civil*. There’s a summary command, a summary of all the commandments, and a summary clarification. # A Summary Command (verse 8) Paul just commanded citizens: “pay to all what is owed to them” (verse 7). “Paying” had reference to taxes and to honor; we give dollars and deference. These things are “owed”; there is an obligation that some have to taxes, some to revenue, some to respect, some to honor. Their work and their offices/“high positions” (1 Timothy 2:2) are due a certain response. In verse 8 a different group is owed something different. > Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. (Romans 13:8 ESV) If English allowed it, we could double the negatives and say “no one nothing owe” (μηδενὶ μηδὲν). The command **owe** connects with the concept of what is “owed” in verse 7. Be obliged to have no obligations. I’ve heard Romans 13:8 used as an argument for not ever using credit or taking out a loan. There certainly are issues with borrowing; the borrower is slave to the lender (Proverbs 22:7). Depending which family member you borrow from, that can make reunion picnics testy. But the Bible doesn’t prohibit loans (for example, in Matthew 5:42 Jesus teaches His disciples, “do not refuse the one who would borrow from you”). Scripture does prohibit not paying the loan by the borrower (along with excessive interest gathering from the lender). “The wicked borrows but does not pay back” (Psalm 37:21). To borrow and not return is a form of theft. Do not have ongoing, unpaid (college. car, consumer) bills. Instead, we do all have an ongoing, unfinished responsibility to **love one another** (not sure why the ESV used “each other” instead of the normal “one another”). Love toward one another is *outstanding* in the adjective’s second meaning, “remaining to be paid, done, or dealt with.” Let no debt remain outstanding except the other-loving debt. “The one loving the other” is a substantival participle, stressing the *continuous* loving, and the reason why we keep paying on this debt is because that loving-one **has fulfilled the law**. An interesting switch to a past tense. This fulfillment matters in verse 9 and verse 10 as well. I pointed out that Paul didn’t use the word **law** once in verses 1-7, but law bookends this paragraph, along with the word “commandments” in the middle. He even gives examples of the commandments in verse 9. Since loving is law-fulfilling, then love and law are not opposites, or enemies. It also means love (casually applied as a term for sentiment or feeling or passion) is *not* love. Love is lawful, as in, genuine love loves within standards. So also, the point of law is love, not mere conformity to standards. Similar to Romans 12:9 and love being without hypocrisy, love must be without unrighteousness. How about new t-shirts: “Love is (NOT) love. Love is (God's) law." # A Summary of All Commandments (verse 9) What do we *owe one another in love*? We owe them recognition as separate persons, they are not us, they have their own stuff, and they do not owe us their stuff. > For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Romans 13:9 ESV) The specifics: **adultery**, **murder**, **steal**, **covet**, are in the second table of the 10 Commandments. They are four of the five “thou shalt *not*”s. Adultery is the taking of another man’s spouse, murder is the taking of another man’s life, stealing is the taking of another man’s stuff, and coveting is a wishing that you could take another man’s life, wife, and/or stuff. Not mentioned are honoring one’s mother and father (5th commandment) or bearing false witness (9th). Also not mentioned are the first table of the 10 Commandments (1st-4th), all those related to God and no other gods or disrespect to God. These commandments relate to others and their households, to the sacredness of human life, the sanctity of the family, the recognition of the right to ownership of private property, and the need to control ones’ desires (against envy and it’s political outcome in Marxism/Communism). Covetousness is the way of selfish-love and selfish-love is opposed to neighbor-love. But note that Paul adds **and any other commandment**. That doesn’t only mean the other six of Decalogue, it includes the other 609 of the 613 in the Mosaic Law. In an amazing, preview/notification-sized text, he says, all the commandments **are summed up in this word**. He got this from Jesus, who also summed up the entire Old Testament in two commandments. Paul is focusing on one of them, the one that matters in the social sphere. **You shall love your neighbor as yourself.** This is *Leviticus* 19:18. Did you realize that the most important thing you needed to know about getting along in local life would be in Leviticus? When you think Leviticus, do you think *love*? This law has been there since about 1444 BC, around for almost 3,500 years. Jesus Himself summarized the 39 books of the Old Testament, > “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 22:37–40 ESV) The **neighbor** means the *near*, the one *next* to you. Does this mean that the 10 Commandments are still binding on us today? I don’t think that’s the best way to say it, but if someone asked me how to know what *lawful* love is, these would be first principles to measure by. In love all the commandments are summed up. # A Summary Clarification (verse 10) Here’s a review of the summary, saying what’s been said. > Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. (Romans 13:10 ESV) **Love** is what persons have/share/do, here love is like a person; love works no wrong, does no damage, carries out no evil against the locals. “Love hurteth not” (Tyndale). Do no harm ("First do no harm" is a summary of the original Hippocratic oath, written by Hippocrates circa 400 BC - a vow for any physician in training and also applicable for political and economic philosophy). Compare the “negative” commands in verse 9 to this “negative” summary in verse 10. It highlights the difference between Positive and Negative/liberty rights. A positive right means you have the right to have something given to you (which amounts to an obligation on the part of someone else to provide it, requiring their harm). A negative right means that you have the right to be left alone to have your stuff. In economic terms this is a major dividing basis between Socialism/Communism/“Woke Capitalism” and free-market Capitalism. There are all kinds of ways to *wrong* a neighbor. No lies; so, for example in our day, no so-called Pronoun Hospitality, calling a he a “she” and so forth. There’s no permitted stealing, through sneaking into their house or sneaking into their taxes. # Conclusion Love is not lawless. Specific commands are mentioned in verse 9 so that we will see what love looks like in action. For example, one cannot commit adultery, murder, steal, and covet and claim to be loving. Love is not lawless, but “following” the law is not necessarily love. One can be unloving while giving everything away to the poor as in 1 Corinthians 13:3. So we must love our neighbor, who and how? Great questions! They've been asked before. As verses 8-10 relate to verses 1-7, our system of government depends on a moral people, and fine, but it really depends on a *loving* people. John Adams said, > “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. **Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.** It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” This is true between neighbors, in the don’t bother one another sense, as well as in the blessing through business sense. Consider George Gilder’s argument that in (good) Capitalism giving comes first, considering how to love others in product or services, rather than other approaches which start with taking/redistributing. In all our interactions we must “Owe no one anything, except to love one another.” Outstanding love is the way to a fulfilling life. ---------- ## Charge If you can't afford the hospital bill for your hurt neighbor in the ditch like the Good Samaritan, at least don't vote for universal healthcare and let the government steal from other neighbors to cover the cost. If you can't say something nice to your transgender neighbor, at least don't harm them by lying to them with false pronouns. If you can't stand the idea of spending time with your Christian neighbor, at least don't slander them, and also ask God to get your heart right in love. Love one another. ## Benediction: > [M]ay the Lord make you increase and abound in love for one another and for all, as we do for you, so that he may establish your hearts blameless in holiness before our God and Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints. (1 Thessalonians 3:12–13, ESV)

76: The Powers That Be (Pt 4)

September 17, 2023 • Sean Higgins • Romans 13:1–7

It’s time to wrap up our observations on Romans 13:1-7, though we’re in for a lifetime of application. Some of the next few months might feel like a “lifetime.” I don’t really expect to answer *all* the questions about our relationship to civil authorities, partly because it takes a lifetime of “constant practice to distinguish good from evil” (Hebrews 5:14). That said, we can keep working to develop our discernment powers. We’ve outlined the whole paragraph over three previous messages. Verse 1 calls every person to submit himself to governing authorities because all governing authority has been instituted by God. Verse 2 concludes that resisting authorities whom God has appointed will result in God-approved judgment. Verses 3-4 profile the purpose of governing authorities, namely that they’ve been delegated to promote good conduct and punish bad conduct, even to the death penalty. Verse 5 clarifies that we ultimately answer to God for our submission or lack of it. And verses 6-7 make clear that our support of the government should be both pecuniary and postural, paying taxes and honor. These verses teach in principle that the sphere of civil authority is God-given, and so to be seen by us as good and supported by us for our own good. In principle we learn that civil authorities are God’s servants, and so our default position should be that of submission. God has given us rulers and rules and we’re to be submissive and tax-paying citizens. And all God’s people said, “But what about…?” Or, all God’s people said, “You and what army?” I am going to attempt to answer, in principle, some of our responsibilities when the governors are *not* fulfilling their delegated responsibilities. This question has been asked before, not just by Junius Brutus, but by the sweet psalmist of Israel (as David is called in 2 Samuel 23:1): > “if the foundations are destroyed, > what can the righteous do?” > (Psalm 11:3 ESV) Seven considerations/consolations to cheer our souls when the cares of our hearts, especially regarding wicked rulers, are many (see Psalm 94:19-10). # There Is a Higher Throne (1) We do not care about governors governing for state/society’s good more, or more carefully, than God Himself. The LORD is God, God is the ultimate authority. He is the only Sovereign who determines the allotted periods and boundaries of every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth (Acts 17:26). After asking what the righteous can do (Psalm 11:3), the faithful are encouraged that: > “The LORD is in His holy temple; > the LORD’s throne is in heaven; > His eyes see, His eyelids test the children of man. > The LORD tests the righteous, > but His soul hates the wicked and the one > who loves violence. > (Psalm 11:4-5) Not only do we not care about earthly authorities as much as God, but not one of us comes close to the LORD’s delight in His Anointed, in His Son, to whom all authority in heaven and on earth has been given (Matthew 28:18). Jesus Christ will be recognized as King of kings and Lord of lords on earth at His second coming (1 Timothy 6:14-15, Revelation 17:14, 19:16). We must learn to laugh along with the Father who holds the rebellious rulers in derision (Psalm 2, see especially verses 4 and 7-8 and 12). “Blessed are all who take refuge in Him,” and this is necessarily true for *all* nations, not just Israel. This means that as Christians we must care about what God cares about, we must honor His highest throne, and we must “fret not…because of evildoers” who “will soon fade like the grass” (Psalm 37:1). This is not a political punt on difficult questions, but it is the necessary perspective of faith. This is a reminder that “our citizenship…in heaven” (Philippians 3:20) colors all our submission on earth. # De Facto or De Jure or De Bate (2) First of all, I was helped to see that I was saying the second option wrong, it should be *day JOOR-ay*. We might not be able to fix the President’s dementia, but I can at least fix my pronunciation. De facto means “of fact” or in fact, whether by right or not. De jure means “of law” or according to rightful entitlement or claim. (De bate is just my playful addition about the debate.) When it comes to the governing authorities in Romans 13, is Paul talking about *rightful* rulers or about *whatever* rulers? Think of an example close to home: if an elected official stole the election, must we submit to that cheater? The text itself answers: “the powers that be” (KJV), “those that exist” (ESV). In Latin law terms, Paul is talking about whatever governing authorities are in place, the de facto ones. But that only helps us so much. Our responsibility is higher than this. It doesn’t matter if the authority got his power through all the right channels if he legislates the doing of evil. We cannot do evil “for sake of conscience” (Romans 13:5). And if the authority got his power illegitimately, we still must do good and not evil, whether or not he inconsistently promotes good law later. That said, doing good might include challenging the de facto’s fraud. Perhaps more difficult is when others *act* as if they are an authority; ruling in rhetoric instead of ruling in reality. Brother doesn’t submit to brother, just because he’s older or bigger does not make him the boss. If you got a bill from the Canadian Prime Minister for using maple syrup, you don’t have to pay it. The Colonists had an agreement with the King George III, not with Parliament, so by *law* Parliament wasn’t their authority. That said, we know that they eventually went to war to be free from the overreach. But on the basic point, the colonists were submitting to what was lawful. Scripture is full of examples of God’s appointment of wicked rulers as a scourge to wicked people. That said, Scripture also provides us with laments over it not silent, “sit there and take it” acquiescence. We pray for judgment on those rulers, and prophets call rulers and the people to repent and fear the Lord. Whether de facto or de jure doesn’t change our responsibility to do good, even if it takes wisdom to know what is the best good to do. # Paper or Persons (3) I’ve mentioned previously the observation that Paul doesn’t use the word “law” even once in this paragraph. He consistently talks about the servant-rulers not about their standard for rules. The Romans were known for establishing a legal system, with a decent set of agreeable, knowable, consistent laws, but whatever might have been on paper had to be enforced by persons. For us, as citizens of the United States, all our laws are on paper…somewhere, probably, if you can find it, or understand it. For us to apply/obey Romans 13:1, we expect the president to fulfill his oath: > "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." (From the [Inauguration oath of office](https://www.usa.gov/inauguration#:~:text=the%20u.s.%20constitution%3a-,%22I%20do%20solemnly%20swear%20(or%20affirm)%20that%20I%20will,Constitution%20of%20the%20United%20States.%22)) We say “no one is above the law” in reference to presidents, governors, legislators, judges, and law enforcement persons. We have a national Constitution with Amendments, we have a WA State Constitution, we have RCWs (Revised Code of Washington), along with County and City laws. Who, or what document, do we have to listen to? It’s been said, when everyone is special, then no one is special. Well, when everyone is a lawyer, we all hate one another. Due to the corruption in our day, laws have about the same use as a batting average, interesting to argue about but no guarantee you ever get another hit. In a land where the happiness of the people is promoted, the laws are easy to find, easy to understand, and expected to be upheld. We are not in a happy place, whether men “frame injustice by statute” to “build disorder” (Psalm 94:20), or to provide cover under confusion, or enough people with enough power ignore the laws to make it miserable for everyone. Words have to matter, with definitions for terms that don’t change, even when the words are on paper. Most of the chastisement, though, comes from pietistic, milk-of-the-Word drinkers, who read that submission is right, and are looking for the simplest understanding of that. The aftermath of so many court cases post 2020 has shown that churches that disobeyed the governors/persons were not the ones disobeying the law/papers, and so have won their cases. It’s not surprising when criticisms come from the wanna-be tyrants, that’s to be expected. But a lot of “friendly fire”/accusations were thrown by the stay-at-home Christians at the assembling-for-church Christians who were, turns out, the ones submitting to the law. In all this, Christians need to keep their discernment powers sharpened through mutual discernment, in good working condition. # Many Magistrates (4) What about conflicting (legitimate) authorities, in the same sphere, in layers of authority, let alone conflicting with authorities in other legitimate spheres? This has some similarity to the Paper vs. Persons, Constitution vs. President discussion, but carries over to authorities that are near and far. I’ve learned more about the “doctrine of the lesser magistrates” the last few years. Magistrate is another name for an authority, coming from *magister* in Latin meaning “master.” This “doctrine” is a political expression that recognizes that local authorities—so authorities over smaller areas and numbers of people—have responsibility to resist the higher authorities when the King, the governor, the higher-up has made an unlawful rule. For example, a week ago or so, the Governor of New Mexico banned the right to carry firearms in some public areas for at least 30 days (under a her emergency powers in the aftermath of a shooting), and a County Sheriff said he would not enforce that ban; a federal judge has also now blocked that ban. Good on them. While I appreciate the lesser magistrate piece, what if the lesser magistrate is the problem? What if the Mayor is a mini-despot and the Governor is a freedom-lover? It could look like we’re just picking and choosing according to whatever we like, and, of course, people do that. But if we Christians are constantly distinguishing good from evil, then we would be constantly excited about whatever authority at whatever level is doing the same. The moral responsibility is the same, before God to do good. The strategic opportunity changes, to celebrate or to criticize different levels as necessary. This is not every man doing what is right in his own eyes, this is finding any man that will do what is right in God's eyes. Likewise, the church and the household have their own spheres of authority. A president does not have the authority to tell a pastor how to celebrate communion, and so a pastor *must* resist in that scenario. Pastors must also function as protection to their flocks from overreach. # Restrictions on Rulers (5) Submitting to authorities in the civil sphere does not equal the civil sphere being the “boss” sphere. The State, Church, and Household spheres are a divinely established checks-and-balances on each other. Are there limits on what the civil authority can legislate? How far does his jurisdiction extend? The men at the Kuyperian Camaraderie have been talking about this, and Grant and Philip have written up some of the options. If (righteous) civil life was a fenced in field, can the state roam anywhere he wants inside the fence, or is he on a leash, having access only to a smaller circumference? This is a good discussion, and you can read some of those posts here. Grant has written some about the issue here: https://cgweinberg.com/a-christians-responsibility-to-submit-to-authority and here: https://cgweinberg.com/why-christians-have-a-duty-to-defy-defend-some-governing-authorities And Philip wrote about it here: https://inmirkwood.com/garlic-lemon-butter-trout-is-served-best-in-blue-houses Our national governing documents limit federal government, not just with checks and balances, but specifically Amendment IX and especially Amendment X were meant to clarify that, at least on the national level, if it’s not in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, the power belongs to the State or remains with the people themselves. Again, it’s good and sharpening to discuss these things, for sake of doing good for our neighbors. # Cross-Country Consequences (6) God is not mocked (Galatians 6:7). As US citizens we are connected to all the US citizens. And considered as a country, we are guilty of rebellion against and unbelief toward God. We are part of the same body-politic, and it hurts to get out of bed every morning. Most men don't want to be bothered, and it shows. There is some merit in the let your neighbor be, but not when we don’t bother to pray, to pursue office, or to teach their kids lines of authority. Why should the devil have all the good politicians? The bandits and the stupid have a lot of energy, and we’re getting what we deserve as a whole. That said, as Christians, we are also corporately guilty of tolerating junk in the church, among pastors, let alone in ourselves. We see the stream of stupidity in the State, and want it fixed, and fine. It’s not an either/or effort. But the lack of faithfulness among Christians is the first and foremost pain, the mess we have most immediately responsibility for. # No Wasted Disobediences (7) The authorities murdered Jesus due to what they perceived as rival political claims (Luke 23). He was persecuted to death for “disobeying” the rulers. So consistently be on the lookout for the good to do, even when others call that good “disobedience”; your genuine good deeds will not be wasted, or overlooked (Hebrews 6:10). “Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is good?” (1 Peter 3:13 ESV) Be *zealous*, don’t hold back. “Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:28 ESV) # Conclusion *Jesus is Lord*. We should act like it. Pray like it. Vote like it. Work like it. Be zealous for good like it. We should not be craven, milquetoast, or jello-spined. Do not give way before the wicked. > Like a muddied spring or a polluted fountain > is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked. > (Proverbs 25:26 ESV) We also must not qualify ourselves into anarchy; authority is good from God in principle. As we see so much of the foundations destroyed, we should seek a multitude of counselors in order to be as submissive as possible citizens for sake of conscience, with thanksgiving praying for and supplicating for and interceding for those in high positions (1 Timothy 2:1-2). ---------- ## Charge When we look around, it appears that we live in days of groaning and burden; it’s *bleak*. We are tempted to say “behold, all is vanity and a striving after wind.” But it is possible to be “always of good courage,” as long as “we walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Corinthians 5:6-7). Beloved, walking and working by faith is never vanity, it is victory. ## Benediction: > But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. > Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain. (1 Corinthians 15:57–58, ESV)

75: The Powers That Be (Pt 3)

September 10, 2023 • Sean Higgins • Romans 13:1–7

One of the great illustrations in God’s Word about receiving God’s Word is that of milk and meat. When admonishing his readers that they should’ve known better, the author of Hebrews wrote, > You need milk, not solid food, for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil. (Hebrews 5:12–14 ESV) The “word of righteousness” is Scripture, and the basic stuff, the “elementary doctrine” (6:1), is for the immature. There’s nothing wrong with the milk, but the Christian should start to grow some teeth. The solid food, or “strong meat” (KJV), is for the mature. Note that this maturity doesn’t come from time passing, it comes from “constant practice.” It comes from work and “training” one’s “discernment powers.” Romans 13 has milk and meat applications. There are basics, rudiments, fundamentals of the faith when it comes to the Christian’s relationship to God and government. What does a newer Christian need? He needs milk, and the milk is that earthly authorities are good, they are God appointed, and good citizens submit to those governors. That said, in the same passage, there are some things that require some chewing. For the Christian whose submission bones have plenty of calcium, he’ll need steak to build up some discernment muscles. Again, the milk and the meat are both good. The simple answer is submission, but the more you learn the more you realize that not everything is simple. In order not to choke, we’re going to need to up our training and practice in distinguishing good from evil (which is not too different from Romans 12:2 “that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect”). It’d be worth praying that God would bless our civil authorities to do the same. So far in verses 1-7 we’ve considered the origin and scope of government (verse 1), namely that God calls every soul to be subject to every civil authority He’s established. The God-makes-governors establishment is so recognized that resistance to the government is actually resisting God and so results in judgment (verse 2). Then Paul provides encouragement with the delegated purposes of government which include promoting the good and punishing the bad (verses 3-4). To finish the paragraph we’ll see how Paul takes our accountability up another level in verse 5 and then makes it very practical when it comes to how we support the authorities. There will still be more meat on the bone after today, so I’ll see what I can do to “set the record straight” next Sunday. # The Highest Accountability to Government (verse 5) This is the second conclusion in the paragraph, the second “therefore.” God established the authorities, therefore resisting the authorities results in judgment (verse 2). Paul repeats the same requirement and the result, but ups the motivation ante. > Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. (Romans 13:5 ESV) The ESV adds “to avoid”; it’s a fine supplement. But in its bare for it is necessary to **be in subjection** “because of the wrath,” which is God’s wrath brought about through the human authority as an avenger in verse 4. Again, that’s a repeat reminder. The new piece is “but also because of the conscience.” This is *internal* motivation. We submit because of what we know is right, not just in order to evade negative consequences. The **conscience** is God-given, and universal, as in, every soul/person has one. Paul referred to the conscience in earlier in this letter, which was explicitly about *un*believers having a conscience in which their “conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them” (Romans 2:15). Christians have more than mini George Washington sitting on one shoulder (maybe fighting with mini Napoleon on the other). We have redeemed consciences, and we have God’s Word to inform us about what is right. It is right to do what is right, including when the authorities promote it. Conscience makes our duties in the civil sphere both higher and also tighter. We answer to God whether or not the governor cares. We answer to God above governor, which also simplifies the pecking order of which we must obey if there’s a conflict between them. For that matter, no governor can make this claim; our consciences are beyond the reach of man. “Be subject *for the Lord’s sake*” (1 Peter 2:13). (For the interested, the Greek phrase in Romans 13:5 is διὰ τὴν συνείδησιν compared to διὰ τὸν κύριον in the 1 Peter passage.) # Giving Practical Support to Government (verses 6-7) This final principle of God and government hits deep down into the dark parts of our wallet where dust gathers. For us who have continued to climb out of the hole of dualism, we see that our support of the civil authorities can’t be mental only, it takes our monies. > For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 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. (Romans 13:6–7 ESV) It’s a big **because**, this **this**. The **this** is referred to again at the end of verse 6, pointing back to **this thing**. What is “this”? The “this” is when the authorities follow their delegated purpose as God’s servants, approving do-gooders and bringing judgment on wrong-doers. This is what they are **attending to**, being “busy with, engaged in, devoted to” (BAGD). It’s their lawful vocation to establish a society of justice as **ministers of God**. This is a different word than *deaconos* in verse 4, this official is referred to as a *liturgos*, the one doing work for the public. Because the authorities are doing divinely-appointed duties they should be financially supported, so we **pay taxes**. It’s not a command in verse 6, it’s a reality, and a reality approved by God. We provide the state with fiscal resources, with the implication that we depend on them to do their job for our good. As with most of the principles in the paragraph Paul provides no explicit qualification regarding percentage, collection methods, or accounting of all expenditures. We pay, even when they might fritter away. Verse 7 finishes off with a basic code, and these *are* commands. Citizens have obligations; authorities are **owed** certain things, it’s not based on citizen’s discretionary free-will offerings. Paul repeats **taxes**, probably collected based on income and property, and adds the word **revenue**, which could be distinguished as a toll for use or as duties on goods. Perhaps our sales tax has some similarities. Paul says: pay it. Federal, state, city. We are getting a lot out of our taxes (and so is Zelensky). We must also pay **respect** and **honor**. Civil authorities at various levels deserve various levels of recognition and deference and esteem. Their roles are subordinate to God, so they must not be deified, but they do have delegated dignity. Our refusal to give honor to whom honor is owed makes *us* dishonorable. It is well known that Jesus Himself said, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” (Matthew 22:21). God established the sphere of civil/state authority, and expects that all souls will give practical support for the maintenance of the work. This is a great *blessing* to those who do good, who have their property and profits protected from theft and vandalism. Societies in which justice is sure and sentences against evil deed are executed speedily are a check against evil hearts (unlike the opposite as Solomon describes in Ecclesiastes 8:11). Those who fear the LORD and the king wisely avoid those who do otherwise and the disaster that comes on them (Proverbs 24:21-22). # Conclusion And again we say, *But!*. Must we pay taxes when the authorities are *not* doing their job, especially when they are opposing good and upending justice? Can we honor the office without honoring a dishonorable man holding that office? There is more to say next time. We do know, though, that private vengeance is out (Romans 12:18), and that prayer for our authorities and paying taxes toward and promoting their judgment on evil is in. Let us do so much good that we put to silence the ignorance of foolish people (1 Peter 2:15). In application from Romans 13:6-7 I particular, - Milk: pay your taxes, don’t grumble about the reality of taxes, and look for all the ways we can be grateful for what good God gives us through tax-supported infrastructure. - Meat: as you look at the meat of the instruction, and as you’re able, sharpen up the steak knife to keep as much of your own fat as you can. ---------- ## Charge Paul told the Thessalonians about a coming great rebellion under the man of lawlessness, the son of destruction, who will proclaim himself to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4). He’ll actually be successful in his deception because men have refused to love the truth (2:10) and have their pleasure in unrighteousness (2:12). That all sounds bad. And in light of all that, he said, “as for you, brothers, do not grow weary in doing good” (3:13). Don’t be idle, and don’t be distressed by evil men. ## Benediction: > Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times in every way. The Lord be with you all. (2 Thessalonians 3:16, ESV)