I enjoyed your chapter on Romans in the Scott McKnight edited Jesus Is Lord, Caesar Is Not. One possibility that few seem to consider about Romans 13 but which I grow in respect for over time is T. L. Carter's suggestion that Paul may have been writing ironically. This makes the most sense when you consider Paul's claim that one had nothing to fear from the magistrate if he does right--a claim which Paul knew full well was absolutely false. As you yourself correctly noted, Paul's quotation of Deuteronomy 32 actually subverts the authoritarian reading of Romans 12-13 (which in truth is the surface reading).
I was somewhat dissatisfied with the reading of Jesus' rejoinder to Pilate offered by Wright in the video. Jesus tells Pilate that he had been given authority from above, THEREFORE he that delivered Jesus over to Pilate bears the greater sin. The assumption Wright and others make is that the one who gave Pilate his authority is God; but in light of the consistent witness of the NT that political authority derives from Satan, not to mention the fact that Jesus' "therefore" makes little sense if God is the one who is giving Pilate authority, the more likely candidate for the one who gives Pilate his authority is Satan.
Cody, I'm not convinced Paul is being ironic, as if what he says is the opposite of what he means. But yes, Romans 13 is complex, esp in the history of interpretation, we talk about this a bit in the book.
Good general life rule- Don't ever trust a politician or leader who quotes Romans 13.
Also, two quick thoughts: Made respectfully and kindly, of course.
1/ Does ALL political power derive from satan ?
2/ How odd that 2000 yrs post St Paul writing this letter and the lack of consensus about what he actually was saying and meaning makes me ask this very basic and much broader question that could be applied to much of Romans.
If the Bible is supposed to be our sole and primary authority, why then is it so hard to understand and agree upon passages like this. ?? Or a multitude of others, for that matter.
In other words, why is our road map not clearer so that we don't have to waste lots of time debating and hypothesising what Paul meant 2 millennia ago??
LORD, WHY DID YOU MAKE THE BIBLE OPAQUE WHEN WE WANT TRANSPARENCY.??
We may end up just having to admit that we don't know a lot and then just trust in the Holy Spirit. Maybe thats what God wants from it at the end of it all.
Final thought- I have made great strides in knowing, loving, understanding St Pauls letters when I read them in the context of his day - and then they come alive and inspire my faith.
Thank you Wright and Bird, Mc Night et al. for helping me develop this understanding.
It was frustrating as an American Christian to watch Romans 13 get used as a club to wield against racial minorities then during COVID get cast aside as inconvenient. We love to use Bible verses when they fit with out preconceived ideological views then minimize them when they become inconvenient. It's part of why I'm a terrible American because I don't think there was any Biblical justification for the American Revolution, contrary to centuries of hagiography.
Thinking about the context of Romans 13, the Roman Empire was pretty brutal. Much more brutal than 18th century Britain or 2020 America. Yet Paul still said to obey a capricious, unjust ruler, even unto death. Why should we be any different?
I enjoyed your chapter on Romans in the Scott McKnight edited Jesus Is Lord, Caesar Is Not. One possibility that few seem to consider about Romans 13 but which I grow in respect for over time is T. L. Carter's suggestion that Paul may have been writing ironically. This makes the most sense when you consider Paul's claim that one had nothing to fear from the magistrate if he does right--a claim which Paul knew full well was absolutely false. As you yourself correctly noted, Paul's quotation of Deuteronomy 32 actually subverts the authoritarian reading of Romans 12-13 (which in truth is the surface reading).
I was somewhat dissatisfied with the reading of Jesus' rejoinder to Pilate offered by Wright in the video. Jesus tells Pilate that he had been given authority from above, THEREFORE he that delivered Jesus over to Pilate bears the greater sin. The assumption Wright and others make is that the one who gave Pilate his authority is God; but in light of the consistent witness of the NT that political authority derives from Satan, not to mention the fact that Jesus' "therefore" makes little sense if God is the one who is giving Pilate authority, the more likely candidate for the one who gives Pilate his authority is Satan.
Cody, I'm not convinced Paul is being ironic, as if what he says is the opposite of what he means. But yes, Romans 13 is complex, esp in the history of interpretation, we talk about this a bit in the book.
Good general life rule- Don't ever trust a politician or leader who quotes Romans 13.
Also, two quick thoughts: Made respectfully and kindly, of course.
1/ Does ALL political power derive from satan ?
2/ How odd that 2000 yrs post St Paul writing this letter and the lack of consensus about what he actually was saying and meaning makes me ask this very basic and much broader question that could be applied to much of Romans.
If the Bible is supposed to be our sole and primary authority, why then is it so hard to understand and agree upon passages like this. ?? Or a multitude of others, for that matter.
In other words, why is our road map not clearer so that we don't have to waste lots of time debating and hypothesising what Paul meant 2 millennia ago??
LORD, WHY DID YOU MAKE THE BIBLE OPAQUE WHEN WE WANT TRANSPARENCY.??
We may end up just having to admit that we don't know a lot and then just trust in the Holy Spirit. Maybe thats what God wants from it at the end of it all.
Final thought- I have made great strides in knowing, loving, understanding St Pauls letters when I read them in the context of his day - and then they come alive and inspire my faith.
Thank you Wright and Bird, Mc Night et al. for helping me develop this understanding.
Peace to all.
It was frustrating as an American Christian to watch Romans 13 get used as a club to wield against racial minorities then during COVID get cast aside as inconvenient. We love to use Bible verses when they fit with out preconceived ideological views then minimize them when they become inconvenient. It's part of why I'm a terrible American because I don't think there was any Biblical justification for the American Revolution, contrary to centuries of hagiography.
Thinking about the context of Romans 13, the Roman Empire was pretty brutal. Much more brutal than 18th century Britain or 2020 America. Yet Paul still said to obey a capricious, unjust ruler, even unto death. Why should we be any different?
Yes, the church has historically had a high threshold before resulting to revolution. There was a definite allergy to regicide.