How does Romans 13:2’s warning against resisting authority align with biblical accounts of resisting evil rulers (e.g., Exodus 1:17)? Romans 13:2 and the Question of Authority Romans 13:2 states, “Consequently, the one who resists authority is opposing what God has set in place, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.” Yet, the Bible also includes accounts of individuals and groups who resisted commands from ruling powers, such as the Hebrew midwives in Exodus 1:17, who disobeyed Pharaoh’s decree. This entry examines how these passages align and what principles guide believers when evaluating the authority of rulers. 1. The Context of Romans 13:2 Romans 13 addresses the Christian’s relationship to government. The overarching point is that legitimate governmental authority is part of God’s design to maintain order and restrain evil (Romans 13:3–4). Since authorities ultimately derive their authority from God, those who resist them can find themselves in opposition to the order God has established. • Paul’s writing context: Early believers faced varied forms of pagan rule. Despite potential persecution or injustice, Paul stresses that stability and some sort of public order—insofar as it serves justice—are preferable to anarchy. • Meaning of “resist”: The Greek term can imply an attitude or action that seeks to overthrow or undermine the authority itself, rather than a refusal to partake in specific morally corrupt commands. Thus, the text does not teach unquestioning blind compliance. 2. The Example of the Hebrew Midwives (Exodus 1:17) Exodus 1:17 states, “The midwives, however, feared God and did not do as the king of Egypt had told them; they let the boys live.” Pharaoh’s edict commanded the death of Hebrew baby boys, an order that clearly conflicted with God’s mandate regarding the sanctity of life. • Righteous disobedience: The midwives did not revolt against every aspect of Egyptian authority; instead, they specifically resisted a command that violated God’s moral law. Their action was not a general rebellion but a measured refusal to do evil. • Fear of God above fear of rulers: This account emphasizes a higher allegiance. In instances when a ruler’s edict contradicts God’s moral standards, believers must prioritize obedience to God. Archaeological discoveries such as the Ipuwer Papyrus and other ancient Egyptian documents (while debated in their connection to the Exodus) collectively paint a picture of turmoil consistent with a troubling period in ancient Egypt. This context underscores the plausibility of the biblical narrative in which oppressive conditions drove people to cling more closely to divine instruction. 3. Other Biblical Precedents for Disobedience Scripture offers multiple examples of believers who refused specific commands from governing figures because those commands violated God’s laws or worship: • Daniel 3 (Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego) Nebuchadnezzar’s demand to worship the golden image was refused. While they served under the king’s authority in daily matters, they drew the line at idolatry, choosing allegiance to God. • Daniel 6 (Daniel in the Lions’ Den) A prohibition on praying to anyone other than King Darius forced Daniel to either renounce worship of God or disobey the king. Daniel’s steadfast refusal illustrates civil disobedience for the sake of faithfulness. When the Apostles were forbidden to teach about Jesus, they answered, “We must obey God rather than men.” This underscores that God’s moral law supersedes any governmental edict. 4. Balancing Obedience and Righteous Resistance There is no contradiction between Romans 13:2 and examples of resisting evil rulers. Instead, Scripture presents a multi-layered view: 1. Submission as a General Rule: Believers are encouraged to respect institutions that maintain peace, punish wrongdoing, and provide a stable environment for communities. This principle fosters order rather than chaos. 2. Higher Obedience to God: When a law or directive contradicts core biblical commands (e.g., prohibiting worship of God, endorsing murder, forcing idolatry), believers must refuse to comply with that specific command while continuing to show respect and humility in other areas. 3. God-Given Authority vs. Abusive Power: Romans 13 presupposes that rulers fulfill a function to reward good and punish evil (Romans 13:3–4). When rulers morph into promoters of evil, Scripture’s examples show that devotion to God trumps compliance. 5. Practical Principles from Biblical Accounts • Obey Where Possible In daily life and lesser matters, Scripture urges cooperation with governmental structures, paying taxes (Romans 13:6–7), and seeking the welfare of the community (Jeremiah 29:7). • Disobey Where Necessary If rulers force immoral or idolatrous acts, believers must stand on moral conviction, even when the risk is great. Exodus 1:17, Daniel 3, Daniel 6, and Acts 5:29 illustrate this core principle. • Act from Reverence, Not Rebellion The biblical models of disobedience do not condone lawlessness or personal vengeance. Instead, they reveal a humble, reverent stance that honors the ultimate authority of God. The Hebrew midwives “feared God,” Daniel prayed openly in devotion to God, and the Apostles proclaimed the gospel for God’s glory. 6. Consistency of the Scriptural Manuscripts The accounts in Exodus and Romans, preserved through centuries of manuscript transmission, uphold a consistent teaching on authority. Early manuscripts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls (though primarily containing Old Testament texts) and numerous papyri of the New Testament demonstrate remarkable continuity in content. This consistency suggests that believers throughout history have understood the foundational principle: governmental authority is ordained by God, yet obedience to God transcends any earthly edict. 7. Historical and Behavioral Considerations • Historical Witness: Over the centuries, notable movements that sought justice—such as various Christian-led abolition efforts—based their advocacy on a conviction that certain governmental statutes contradicted God’s moral standards. Key writings and letters from these movements cite passages like Exodus 1 to justify resisting laws sanctioning evil. • Behavioral Insight: From a psychological and societal perspective, individuals generally thrive under order, yet moral cognition compels them to resist overt acts of injustice or tyranny. This aligns with the biblical view of humans as moral agents accountable to a just Creator. 8. Summary and Application Romans 13:2 urges believers to recognize that established authorities are intended as instruments for preserving order and righteousness. Resisting legitimate governance for selfish or lawless reasons opposes the structure God has allowed. However, Scripture also highlights that when a command from any human authority directly contravenes divine moral law, believers must respectfully but firmly refuse. In practical terms, this balance safeguards against anarchy while also preventing complicity in oppression. Believers strive to be good citizens, honoring rulers in what is right. Yet they also remain compelled to “obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29) if they encounter directives that subvert the authority of the One who rules over all. “In everything, then, do to others as you would have them do to you,” (Matthew 7:12) serves as an ethical keystone. When governmental commands violate that principle—requiring one to harm the innocent or suppress fundamental worship—scriptural precedent and conscience grounded in reverent fear of God guide believers to stand apart. |
    |