Chapter 13
13:1-2- Paul has pointed out that not only is the world in rebellion to God (Rom. 1-2), but that with the gospel comes those who oppose it and even persecute those who obey it. He’s even spoken to the eschatological hope we have (5:1-11, 8:17-39, 12:4, 12:18-21). His readers might falsely infer a rejection or rebellion against secular authority. This is not the case as Paul will make clear. Christians should be model citizens in regards to the civil government in which they reside. Why is this the case? According to Scripture, God sovereignly ordains those in power to be His vessels of establishing order and His will on the earth. This includes non-Christians. Dan. 2:21 says, “He changes times and seasons; he deposes kings and raises up others. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning” (NIV). See also: Prov. 8:15-16, Isa. 45:1, Dan. 2:37, 4:17, 5:21. This is a lesson even the pagan king Nebuchadnezzar learns the hard way in Dan. 4. And in John 19:11, Jesus bluntly tells Pilate: “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above.” F.F. Bruce provides helpful insight when he writes: “God Himself is the fount of all authority, and those who exercise authority on earth do so by delegation from Him; therefore, to disobey them is to disobey God. Human government is a divine ordinance, and the powers of coercion and commendation which it exercises have been entrusted to it by God, for the repression of crime and the encouragement of righteousness. Christians of all people, then, ought to obey the laws, pay their taxes, respect the authorities–not because it will be the worse for them if they don’t, but because this is one way of serving God.”
Since this is the case and since God is sovereign in appointing rulers, Paul says to “be in subjection to the governing authorities.” This is also consistent with 1 Peter 2:13-17 and is the general instruction on how we ought to view and therefore submit to earthly governments. Obviously, the precedent we see from the apostles is that obedience to governing authorities stops when compulsion to deny Christ or transgress His ways starts. This is illustrated for us in Acts 4 and 5, “But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.” -Acts 5:29. So also says Bruce, “When the decrees of the civil magistrate conflict with the commandments of God, then, say the Christians, ‘we ought to obey God rather than men.’ (Acts 5:29); when Caesar claims divine honors, the Christian answer must be ‘No.’ For then Caesar (whether he takes the form of a dictator or a democracy) is going beyond the authority delegated to him by God, and trespassing on territory which is not his. But Christians will voice their ‘No’ to Caesar’s unauthorized demands more effectively if they have shown themselves ready to say ‘Yes’ to all his authorized commands.” However, the immediate concern of Paul in this context is the general submission to human authority by believers, not to speak on the exceptions. He speaks to the overarching truth of the sovereignty of God in appointing human institutions and is concerned with how it applies to the church. Early church father John Chrysostom wrote, “He does not speak about individual rulers but about the principle of authority itself. For that there should be rulers and ruled and that things should not just lapse into anarchy, with the people swaying like waves from one extreme to the other, is the work of God’s wisdom.”
What follows then in verse 2, is those who “resist” authority are actually in rebellion to God and will receive condemnation/ judgment against themselves (either divine or by governing officials as the following verses indicate).
13:3-4- The basic logic of verses 3-4 is easily understood. People who commit crimes have a good reason to fear being caught and punished accordingly. Prison isn’t for lawful citizens, but for those who commit crimes. As Thomas Schreiner notes, “Without civil government there would be anarchy, a horrible alternative in which evil runs rampant.” God uses the institution of civil government to uphold basic rule of law. Twice in verse 4, Paul says that government is a “minister” or “servant” of God for good (however unwittingly) and even has authority to “bear the sword.” Among many others, Craig Keener notes that this “refers to the standard method of execution in this period (beheading).” Paul says explicitly that the governing authority is “an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.” So Paul is in line with the Old Testament as well as the apostle Peter when he states in 1 Peter 2:13-14 (NIV), “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.” Paul is even consistent in his own personal life in regards to this teaching. Just a few years after his letter to the Romans, we read Paul both submitting to Roman authority as well as to the legitimacy of capital punishment in Acts 25:11 (NIV), If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die. But if the charges brought against me by these Jews are not true, no one has the right to hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar!” I. Howard Marshall remarks, “If Paul had committed a crime against Rome for which death was the penalty, then he was prepared to face Roman punishment.”
Excursus: (Capital Punishment)
We find the inception of capital punishment as well as the implicit concept of civil government in Gen. 9:6, “Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.” This is part of the Noahide covenant after the flood and was part of God’s way of establishing order and temporal justice upon the earth. Not only was this the consistent punishment in the Mosaic Law for murder (Ex. 21:12-14, Num. 35:30-34), but this certainly transcends and far predates the Law given to Moses for the society of Israel, thus speaks to God’s establishment of justice for mankind in general. Wayne Grudem writes of Gen. 9:6, “This commandment from God says that when someone murders another person, the murderer himself should be put to death. This execution of a murderer was not going to be carried out directly by God, but by a human agent: “by man shall his blood be shed.” Yet this was not to be seen as human vengeance, but as carrying out God’s own requirement of justice.” Robert Jamieson notes: “That this law was designed to be universal, is evident from the reason annexed, which is applicable to all ages and parts of the world. For in the image of God made he man. The human nature reflects the divine image-ruthlessly to mutilate or destroy that image, as a murderer in effect does, is to commit a daring outrage against the majesty of the Creator.” And Grant Osborne, commenting on Rom. 13:4 writes: “While ‘bear the sword’ primarily connotes the death penalty, it also generally describes the duty of the state to punish people who commit crimes in general. Modern debates over capital punishment were foreign to the ancient world for the most part. Paul means that those who do wrong will receive their just desserts from the state.”
However, some Christians might object to capital punishment despite passages in Scripture that speak on the matter. I’ll take this time to address several objections one might raise from Scripture (though this is far from exhaustive).
1- Some may refer to Jesus’ teaching in Matt. 5:38-44 (turn the other cheek, pray for your enemies), but this speaks to personal conduct towards others and is similar to what Paul has already taught in 12:14-21 (no doubt intentionally echoing his Master’s teaching-see comments there). Jesus was not commenting on the authority of government to enact civil justice in that passage just as Paul wasn’t in chapter 12. Rather, Jesus and Paul were prohibiting the seeking of personal vengeance.
2- Another objection might be Matt. 22:39 in which Jesus says to “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Some perceive the death penalty as contradicting this command. As with Matt. 5, Jesus is addressing personal conduct and in this passage He is quoting from Lev. 19:18 (NIV), “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.” In the very next chapter, God commands the death penalty for murder of children. “Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him.” -Lev. 20:2 (NIV). Again, we must not conflate prohibitions against personal vengeance with governmental authority to uphold justice. As Wayne Grudem says,“Love for one’s neighbor does not nullify the requirement to carry out God’s justice on wrongdoers.” Just as the command in Leviticus to love one’s neighbor doesn’t conflict with or contradict the command of capital punishment for those who murder their children, the teaching of Jesus and Paul on love for neighbor does not conflict with government’s role in upholding justice as we read about in Rom. 13. In fact, similar to Leviticus, Paul affirms capital punishment (13:4) and love for neighbor (13:8-10) without contradiction. Additionally, one could argue that upholding justice is required in loving your neighbor. “When justice is done, it brings joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.” -Prov. 21:15 (NIV). And what is the justice for murder that God commands? Gen. 9:5-6 provides the answer.
3- Another misguided objection might be an appeal to the 6th Commandment (Exodus 20:13). This commandment is a prohibition against the unlawful killing of a human. As we all understand, there is a difference between “killing” and “murder.” The Hebrew word, ratsach (רָצַח) is best translated as “murder.” That is, an unlawful, premeditated taking of a human life. Clearly, the lawful killing of a human is commanded by God in the Mosaic Law for capital offenses as has been noted. God is not contradicting one of the Ten Commandments. We must not conflate categories. Walter Kaiser Jr. writes that this prohibition does not apply “to defending one’s home from nighttime burglars (Exod 22:2), to accidental killings (Deut. 19:5), to the execution of murderers by the state (Gen. 9:6), or to involvement with one’s nation in certain types of war as illustrated by Israel’s history.”
4- Lastly, another common objection is the woman caught in adultery (John 8:1-11) in which Jesus “usurps” the death penalty for adultery. It should be noted that this account in John is not found in any of the earliest Greek manuscripts, nor does it appear in any of the earliest writings of the church fathers. The textual evidence along with some internal evidence makes this almost certain not to be original to the Apostle John, thus not inspired Scripture. Because of this, most modern translations rightly designate it as a later scribal addition. While most scholars think it is likely a true event, consistent with the character of Jesus, and similar to other attempts to ‘trap’ Jesus found in the synoptics, it is unwise to build any doctrine based on this passage alone.
*See note on John 7:53-8:11 in ESV Study Bible; translation note on 7:53 in NET Bible. For further study see, Geisler & Howe: The Big Book of Bible Difficulties, p. 414-415 and D.A. Carson: The Gospel According to John, PNTC, p. 333-334
Be that as it may, a few things can be said if one still seeks to glean some understanding from the text in regards to the subject at hand. First, the death penalty discussed here is in the context of adultery, not murder (the context of the base text in Gen. 9:6) and is therefore not a good “case study” in regards to civil authority punishing a murderer. Second, the accusers misrepresent the Mosaic Law which states that both the man and the woman must be put to death (Lev. 20:10, Deut. 22:22-24), but as the entire situation was manufactured to be a trap for Jesus, the accusers were less interested with proper justice or even the merits of the case (to be genuinely caught in the act would involve the discovery of the man who was nowhere to be found in this account). To quote Gary Burge, “They have no interest in a trail. They are thinking about a public lynching, and they want Jesus to make a judgement.” Third, Rome had exclusive rights to enact capital punishment as Israel was under Roman rule. This is why the religious leaders had to turn Jesus over to Roman authority to be executed (see John 18:31). This is less about the validity of the Mosaic Law and more about the motives of the accusers, thus is not a good case for Jesus’ opposition to capital punishment for murder. Additionally, it should be noted that “exceptions” do not negate the “rule.”
As I write this, many in my country are reeling from the assassination of Charlie Kirk, a Christian who boldly proclaimed biblical truth in the public square and impacted millions of lives. At his memorial service, his wife, full of the Holy Spirit and in front of tens of millions watching around the world, publicly forgave the assassin after quoting our Savior’s words in Luke 23:34 and went on to echo Christ’s teaching in Matt. 5:44. I can think of no better contemporary example for us to follow in this regard in how we ought to respond to suffering and persecution. Likewise, if found guilty, it is now the government’s job to follow suit and to uphold biblical justice for the murderer in the form of capital punishment, following Gen. 9:6, Rom. 13:1-4 and 1 Peter 2:13-14. The testimony of the Old Testament which Jesus upheld as the Word of God, as well as the apostle’s teachings as the inspired word of God, speak clearly on the matter of the authority of civil government as well as capital punishment.
13:5-7- Therefore, Paul says in verse 5, we ought to be in subjugation (or submission) not just for fear of the wrath of the civil government, but because it’s the right thing to do as a follower of Christ as it is His will for us. Matthew Henry writes that to be in subject in this way includes “Inward honour and outward reverence and respect, both in speaking to them and speaking of them.” Submitting to civil authority in this way also means paying taxes (verses 6-7). For the Christians in Rome at this time, it might have even symbolized the primary way of showing submission. Osborne along with Witherington III cite the Roman historian Tacitus (Annales 13.50-51) in reference to a growing discontentedness to the tax burden in Rome in Paul’s day. Osborne writes, “At the time this letter was written (A.D. 57) there was a growing resistance to the indirect taxes. Rome’s increasing demands on its people culminated in a tax revolt in A.D. 58 (so Tacitus)… Paul thus would be telling the Roman Christians that they were obligated before God to pay these taxes as a sign of their submission to the state.”
What’s also of note is the fact that Paul refers to both “taxes” and “revenue” in verse 7. This is why translations like the NIV (among others) render v. 7, “If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue;” The Greek word for “tax” is phoros, literally meaning “tax” or “tribute.” This was levied yearly against non-Roman citizens (conquered nations like that of Israel). The second word translated “revenue” is telos, an indirect tax. This covered things like sales tax, customs duties (on imported items), tolls and so on. Both Romans and non-Romans alike paid these (so Osborne). All of these, says Paul, they ought to render accordingly. This no doubt follows the teaching of Jesus in regards to these matters. (Mark 12:13-17, Matt. 22:15-21, Luke 20:19-25).
While many today express disgust and frustration (rightly so) at the immoral ways our own government spends tax money, the Christians in Rome could very well have expressed the same sentiments. Not only did tax revenue go towards basic infrastructure (among many other things), but as Craig Keener points out, “Also to support Roman armies and temples devoted to the worship of the emperor.” However, the immoral spending by the government is no excuse for disregarding the directives we have been given through Scripture. We must render honor and respect to whom it is due. Incidentally, Christians who live in nations that give the freedom to its citizens to influence governmental decisions and laws ought to advocate for godly laws and policies.
13:8- Paul’s command of “Owe nothing to anyone” likely refers back to the previous verses about rendering tax or tribute to whom it’s due. This could also be a general exhortation to simply pay what you owe to someone and shouldn’t be understood as a complete prohibition on borrowing money, per se. The NIV renders this verse “Let no debt remain outstanding.” As Douglass Moo comments: “The NIV rendering gets the sense of what Paul is saying. He is not prohibiting us from borrowing money but demanding we pay back what we owe.” This makes sense as Paul goes on to essentially say that the debt we should always have outstanding is the love we owe each other. There will never be a time in which we will have satisfied our “debt” of love to our fellow man. Paul has in mind here not just our brothers and sisters in the Lord (which is oftentimes the context of “loving one another” in the epistles), but he is speaking in a universal nature by using the word “neighbor,” harkening back to our Lord’s teaching (Matt. 22:39, Mark 12:31).
13:9- Paul aims to sum up the second half of the Ten Commandments into one action; love. We know that the greatest commandment as stated in the Old Testament is to love God with all our heart, soul and strength (Deut. 6:4-5) and is affirmed by Jesus in the New Testament (Matt. 22:36-38). Jesus goes on to quote Lev. 19:18 when He says, “The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” -Matt. 22:39-40. Bruce states, “Paul mentions the second here and not the first because the immediate question concerns a Christian’s duty to his neighbor–the subject matter of the commandments in the second table of the Decalogue.”
The first table (or half) of the Ten Commandments focus on our relationship to God, the second half centers on our relationship to others, which is Paul’s point of emphasis here. He doesn’t limit it to just those specific commandments as he goes on to add “whatever other command there may be.” Love necessarily entails doing no harm to your neighbor and is no less than that, but love also is more than that. What Paul means here is probably more eloquently explained in 1 Cor. 13:4-7. We are by nature very selfish creatures who care very deeply about our own comfort and welfare. The idea is that we ought to care for the welfare of others as we do ourselves. “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Love cannot be reduced down to feelings and emotions, but willful actions regardless of feelings. Ben Witherington III provides helpful insight when he writes: “Love in the NT is not mainly or merely a warm, mushy feeling or sentiment but a decision of the will to do what God commands in regard to the neighbor. It involves commitment and action, not just feelings or intentions of attitude. If the second table of Law is summed up as love for neighbor, we may assume that Paul saw the first five commandments as summed up and fulfilled in love for God.”
13:10-13- Verse 10 is a summation of the previous verses. Paul’s list of doing good to others in 12:9-21 (the dos) is now followed by the negative actions (the don’ts). That is, love doesn’t harm its neighbor. In this way we fulfill the intent of the Law, not only the letter. Robert Mounce says of verse 11, “Salvation, that is, our final deliverance at the second coming of Christ, is nearer to us than when we first believed.” Because of this, Paul wants his readers to be alert and intentional about their actions. The call isn’t to speculate on future events, but a warning not to be lulled into moral laxity. Instead, live like a servant who is expecting his master to return at any time (see Luke 12:35-38)!
Verse 12 continues the instructions. We ought to have nothing to do with sin, but instead everything to do with righteousness as “the day” is almost here. The day that is being referred to is “The day of the Lord” in which the enemies of God will be judged (Joel 1:15, Amos 5:18, Rom. 2:16, 16) and His saints will be vindicated (Joel 3:18, 1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 1:14, Eph. 4:30). Paul loves the imagery of “taking off” and “putting on;” parallels of which can be found in Eph. 4:22-25 and Col. 3:9-12. He then lists specific vices one should abstain from in verse 13. Interestingly, he groups these in three pairs: carousing and drunkenness; sexual promiscuity and sensuality; strife and jealousy. The first two pairs would often be the product of nighttime. That is, wild, drunken parties that led to sexual promiscuity (not unlike our culture today). Most translations will translate the Greek word aselgeia as “sensuality.”
This word doesn’t just describe the act of sexual immorality, but a giving oneself over to debauchery, to indulge excessively in sensual behavior. This is a lifestyle and a pursuit of wickedness and as Grant Osborne notes, “Nothing stimulates sexual excess so much as drinking and wild parties.” The third pair Paul mentions here is strife and jealousy. Although these can certainly manifest in overt ways, jealousy oftentimes can be something concealed within the heart and unlike blatant drunkenness or sexual immorality, can be subtle. Yet quarreling with one another and being jealous is important enough to mention here, though somewhat unsurprising given the theme of chapter 12 and the previous verses of chapter 13. Robert Mounce hits the nail on the head when he writes, “Unfortunately, the church is considerably more tolerant toward such sins. Quarreling and jealousy, while not especially polite, are more acceptable than sexual immorality. This is not to make a case for immorality, but to remind ourselves that Paul placed them together as deeds of darkness.”
13:14- Rather, we are as Paul says in verse 14, to “put on” the Lord Jesus Christ and not to entertain our natural, sinful desires. Not only are we to imitate our Lord, but we ought to have a close relationship with Him through letting Him speak to us through His word and constantly speaking to Him through prayer. When we are intentional about being close with Christ we will more deliberately avoid that which tempts us to yield to the desires of the flesh. Our motives, desires and actions should align with Christ. We have a tendency as humans to ask “What can I get away with?” A lot of times this is how we can approach Scripture and the Christian life in general. However, this is the wrong attitude to have. We should first and foremost ask ourselves, “What glorifies God?” Our union with Christ isn’t about what we can get away with or satisfying ourselves with base desires, but about conforming to the image of the Son and serving our Master well. I’ll end with a great summary from the early church father, Ambrosiaster: “Paul wants everything the law forbids not to be desired, or if it is desired, to be overcome… To put on Christ means to cut oneself off from every sin and wickedness, so that at the wedding banquet one will not be found without a new garment and be shamefully thrown out into the darkness.”
Bibliography (Works Cited):
-F.F. Bruce: The Epistle of Paul to the Romans, TNTC, 1983
-John Chrysostom: Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament Vol. 6 (Romans)
-Thomas Schreiner: ESV Study Bible, Romans
-Craig Keener: The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament (Romans)
-I. Howard Marshall: The Acts of the Apostles, TNTC
-Wayne Grudem: Christian Ethics: An Introduction to Biblical Moral Reasoning, 2018 (p. 507, 514)
-Robert Jamieson: Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Bible Commentary, Genesis
-Grant R. Osborne: Romans, IVPNTC, 2004
-Walter Kaiser Jr.: The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, Exodus, 1990
-Gary Burge: NIV Application Commentary, One-Vol. Edition, John
-Matthew Henry: Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible
-Douglas J. Moo: NIV Application Commentary, One-Vol. Edition (Romans)
-Ben Witherington III: Paul’s Letters to the Romans: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary
-Robert H. Mounce: Romans, NAC, 1995
-Ambrosiaster: Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament Vol. 6 (Romans)