A Very Brief Examination of Romans 13
This is a very short reflection that I wrote on Romans 13 in response to James Willson.
It is significant to remember that the first section of is preceded by the Paul’s encouragement to live at peace with all men, Roman 12:18. This seems to be tied to our interaction with the governing authorities.
It is this focus on our lives with other non Christians which is the motivation for Paul’s examination about dealing with the civil authorities.
On Verse 4.
This is a passage which some might take as an ordination of the civil magistrate. I think that this would be a mistake. Ordination after all comes from the church, unless in one verse Paul is bringing some NT understanding of Deutoronomy to bear. Additionally, challenges arising with the national covenanters if they say that a government is illegitimate if it does not claim Christ, for its authority. Paul in this text is saying that no matter what the civil government position on Christ, Christ has placed them in their position and we are to obey the law. I would suggest that this is simply a fleshing out of the principle applied in 12:18 Calvin says that the magistrate is to rule with the intention of the public good. Again I think it is less helpful to divide 13:1-7 from its context in the book of Romans. Paul speaks to persecution in 12, and in both 12 and 13 the main focus seems to be love, not Paul’s ideal government, but the churches actual response to the government that they are living under, just as Revelation was written for the early church not 20th century dispensational movement, so Romans is written primarily for the church living in the capital city of the known world, and not the 16th kirk.
For he is God’s minister for good, etc. Magistrates may hence learn what their vocation is, for they are not to rule for their own interest, but for the public good -John Calvin
Are we talking about James Wilson, signer of the Declaration of Independence and the decision to sever American ties from England, James Wilson the Scottish insurrectionist (who would also disagree with your position), or the guy on House M.D. who kidnapped House’s ‘67 Fender guitar and held it to try to force House to hire a staff?
I guess I’d side with Nelson Mandella. In my mind the question is how egregious the offense is by the government and what possible remedies there are. Hitler — I’d fight. George W. Bush — I’d try to get him impeached for incompetence in prosecuting the Iraq war for totally fouling up any chance at Coalition victory and supporting the terrorists as a direct result.
Posted by Rob on Wednesday, Sep. 26, 2007.Rob Im talking about James M Willson, 18th century presbyterian minister.
Posted by Sam on Saturday, Oct. 6, 2007.