Did Paul write Romans 13:1-7?
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2018 5:59 am
There are few texts in human history that have better served the purposes of cruelty and tyranny than Romans 13. Here it is in full King James splendor:
A common approach for liberal theologians such as John Howard Yoder (The Politics of Jesus), or more recently James Martin, is to put this text to sleep, to neutralize its tyrannical import by putting it "in context" of many other bits of scripture that contradict or soften it, and to deplore the practice of "taking it out of context." The problem, however, is that Romans 13: 1-7 is perfectly designed to be "taken out of context." It is forceful, unambiguous, lengthy, and carefully crafted for maximal impact. The final message is: SUBMIT! Don't question or oppose power unless you want to oppose God himself, and incur judgment ("damnation"!).
Scoundrels like Jeff Sessions will no doubt continue citing Romans 13 until doomsday, to defend the indefensible. The canon will always be the canon. But since the Pauline authorship of 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16 is generally doubted, why not Romans 13:1-7?
I have read that many German exegetes turned their pens against it after WW2, for obvious reasons. In 1965, James Kallas argued in New Testament Studies, from internal thematic considerations, that it is in fact interpolated. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... 6679C0E56D Today it seems as though very few Pauline scholars question its authenticity.
A few matters for discussion--
1) Is there textual evidence that this passage was interpolated?
2) It enters the historical record fairly early: Irenaeus in AH 5.24.1, and Basilides before him (Pagels, the Gnostic Paul).
3) It seems to interrupt the flow of Paul's parenesis in the preceding and following parts of Romans (the end of 12 and 13:8ff).
4) Can this account of the archons as God-ordained ministers of good (never evil!) possibly cohere with Paul's other account of them in 1 Cor 2:8 as the ones who "crucified the Lord of glory"? (Setting aside all questions about the human vs. divine status of such archons)
5) Are there any non-trivial hypotheses who might have written it, if not Paul?
Tyrant's Bible!1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.
For there is no power but of God:
the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power,
resisteth the ordinance of God:
and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation [krima = 'judgment'].
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.
Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power?
Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good.
But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid;
for he beareth not the sword in vain:
for he is the minister of God,
a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject,
not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
6 For this cause pay ye tribute also:
for they are God’s ministers,
attending continually upon this very thing.
7 Render therefore to all their dues:
tribute to whom tribute is due;
custom to whom custom;
fear to whom fear;
honour to whom honour. (KJV)
A common approach for liberal theologians such as John Howard Yoder (The Politics of Jesus), or more recently James Martin, is to put this text to sleep, to neutralize its tyrannical import by putting it "in context" of many other bits of scripture that contradict or soften it, and to deplore the practice of "taking it out of context." The problem, however, is that Romans 13: 1-7 is perfectly designed to be "taken out of context." It is forceful, unambiguous, lengthy, and carefully crafted for maximal impact. The final message is: SUBMIT! Don't question or oppose power unless you want to oppose God himself, and incur judgment ("damnation"!).
Scoundrels like Jeff Sessions will no doubt continue citing Romans 13 until doomsday, to defend the indefensible. The canon will always be the canon. But since the Pauline authorship of 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16 is generally doubted, why not Romans 13:1-7?
I have read that many German exegetes turned their pens against it after WW2, for obvious reasons. In 1965, James Kallas argued in New Testament Studies, from internal thematic considerations, that it is in fact interpolated. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... 6679C0E56D Today it seems as though very few Pauline scholars question its authenticity.
A few matters for discussion--
1) Is there textual evidence that this passage was interpolated?
2) It enters the historical record fairly early: Irenaeus in AH 5.24.1, and Basilides before him (Pagels, the Gnostic Paul).
3) It seems to interrupt the flow of Paul's parenesis in the preceding and following parts of Romans (the end of 12 and 13:8ff).
4) Can this account of the archons as God-ordained ministers of good (never evil!) possibly cohere with Paul's other account of them in 1 Cor 2:8 as the ones who "crucified the Lord of glory"? (Setting aside all questions about the human vs. divine status of such archons)
5) Are there any non-trivial hypotheses who might have written it, if not Paul?