1. THE WHY OF CHRISTIAN RESISTANCE

CAN A CHRISTIAN RESIST TYRANTS AND OBEY ROMANS 13?

Church shutdowns, Christians forbidden to meet, Christian businesses forced to close, weapons outlawed, sidewalk preaching banned, accusations of thought crimes — are today’s dystopian headlines a sign that the end is near?

Actually, this list is not from today’s headlines; it’s from the 1st century AD. This was Jesus’ own political landscape. This was the political climate in which He and the apostles stood before unjust judges, faced illegal arrest, navigated illegal weapons bans and gave the church concrete examples of the why, when, where, and how of godly resistance to tyranny.

As our own political situation gets hotter, the questions of how and when to resist become ever more practical and urgent. Is there anything I can do to stop my state’s slide into madness? What should I do if I’m arrested for singing psalms? Or when officers come into my church because we are meeting? How will I know how to respond to whatever the next election throws my way? Do I have to obey every state mandate except ones that require me to sin? Are “liberty or death” my only options? When is a ruler a tyrant? Doesn’t Romans 13 forbid resisting authorities at all?

These are not new challenges — not to God, or to the church. God has filled His Scriptures with principles that answer these questions, as well as hundreds of examples of ordinary men and women living out those principles in situations a lot like ours — when their civil rights were denied, when their magistrates were flaunting unlawful marriages, when weapons were banned, when they were forbidden to preach or meet together.

Tyrants have always used these same tactics (and worse) to try to wipe out or silence God’s people, and God’s people have a glorious history of overcoming “by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony” (Rev. 12:11). Of preaching in defiance to tyrannical Caesars. Of engaging in centuries of civil disobedience to occupying powers, like the saints praised in Hebrews 11:33-38 as “men of whom the world was not worthy.” Of calling kings to repentance (like Jonah and Nathan the prophet did) and seeing repentance actually happen.

Those biblical heroes and heroines kept the faith and fought the good fight by practicing the divine right of resistance to tyranny during tests just like ours. And it’s time for us to learn how to do the same.

Does Romans 13 Keep Us From Imitating Biblical Heroes?

If our theology is producing a different kind of Christian than we see God praise in the Bible, it’s worth taking another look. The current popular interpretation of Romans 13:1-7 would never produce men and women like the ones praised in the Hall of Faith in Hebrews 11.

What is the “authority” in Romans 13 that we are not to resist? Authority (ἐξουσία, exousia) is the freedom or the right to act within boundaries set by God. Only God has absolute authority, and any human that claims absolute authority is a tyrant. God delegates authority to individuals (see Adam and the dominion mandate), to families (see role relations in marriage, the authority to procreate, discipline, etc.), to churches (the authority to disciple, give or withhold sacraments, discipline, etc.), and to various branches of civil government (the authority to enforce limited penalties on the specific sins that Scripture defines as crimes). This authority to act within a God-authorized sphere is a right delegated by God and bounded by God’s law.

Most modern interpretations of Romans 13:1-7 say that God gives the state absolute authority in civil matters, and that we’re to be subject to all civil laws except those that command us to sin or renounce Christ.

This “submit-with-some-exceptions” view of Romans 13 fails to explain two things:

1. Scripture’s God-condoned examples of resistance, including Christ’s own example, go far beyond the typical exceptions allowed by this viewpoint.
2. The absolute and universal language found in Romans 13:1-7 (e.g. “let every soul be subject,” “there is no authority except from God”) leaves no room for any exceptions (including commands to sin).

There are only two views that take the absolute and universal language of these verses seriously:

• The Divine Right of Kings view, which says that the king’s law is as God’s law and the king’s authority is as binding as God’s authority, making any disobedience to the king or his officers automatically disobedience to God. This is sometimes summarized as Rex Lex (the king is law).
• The Regulative Principle of Government view (the dominant Reformed view in history), which says that the king can command and enforce no law other than the law of God contained in the Scriptures. Christ as the King (1 Tim. 6:15) and only Lawgiver (James 4:12; 2 Tim. 3:16-17) demands that civil magistrates neither add to nor subtract from His statutes (Deut. 5:32) and be subject themselves to all His statutes, not turning “aside from the commandment to the right or to the left” (Deut. 17:19-20). This is sometimes summarized as Lex Rex (the law is king).

I believe Romans 13:1-7 completely rules out every other view except the Regulative Principle of Government (Lex Rex). Let’s look at seven clauses in the text:

1. “Let every soul be subject…” (v. 1a).

Whatever type of obedience God is commanding here, He leaves no human exceptions. How then do we understand the example of Jesus, Who disobeyed direct orders of civil authorities on several occasions (Matt. 26:62-63; Matt. 27:13-14; Matt. 26:68) and commanded His disciples to disobey civil authorities on certain issues — like commanding them to illegally possess swords¹ (Luke 22:36-38) or commanding them to refuse to turn themselves in to magistrates who persecute them (Matt. 10:23)? What about the apostles, who when commanded to stop preaching, disobeyed, saying, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29)? Our interpretation of Romans 13 must be able to reconcile all such examples with the command that “every soul” must be subject.

The Regulative Principle view says that every soul must be subject to the civil government as it exercises the authority God has granted it within the pages of Biblical law, and that to disobey that rightful authority is indeed to disobey God. This verse commands submission to lawful authority, and forbids revolution.

2. “For there is no authority except from God” (v. 1b).

The Divine Right of Kings theory would insist that all authority exercised by Pilate, Caesar, Ahab, Pharaoh, and other civil magistrates was truly God-given authority. If so, why would God have authorized resistance to them? Would that not be authorizing resistance to Himself? When Christ gave Christians authority (ἐξουσίαν, exousian) over the nations to smash them with Christ’s rod of iron for their rebellion against Christ’s authority (Rev. 2:26-27 with Psalm 2), would that not be smashing God’s authority? If this verse means that all human authority, of all types, is from God — rather than that all legitimate human authority is delegated by God — why does God say it was “the dragon who gave authority to the beast”? (Rev. 13:4). Revelation explicitly says that civil tyrants exercise the authority (ἐξουσίαν, exousian) of demons. Revelation 6 describes Tiberius (vv. 1-2), Caligula (vv. 3-4), Claudius (vv. 5-6), and Nero (vv. 7-16) as all being ministers of the demons who controlled them (the demon-riders of the horses). The emperor of Rome at the time Revelation was written (cf. 17:10 for timing) was explicitly said to be serving the Beast and under the authority of this demonic “Beast” (Revelation 13:1-10; 17:1-18) who came up from the pit of hell (11:7; 17:8). “The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority (ἐξουσίαν, exousian)” (Rev. 13:2; cf. ἐξουσία, exousia in Rev. 13:4, 5, 7, 12; 17:12-13; etc.).²

The text of Romans 13:1 literally says, “there is no authority (ἐξουσία, exousia) if not (εἰ μὴ, ei mē) from God.” The word “authority” is in the feminine case. Paul was not referring to the people in charge (like Nero, Pilate, and Caiaphas). Instead, he must be referring to either the legal authority or the office in which the authority resides. It is not a reference to a particular emperor (such as Nero), but a universal application of a principle.

With James Willson I define ἐξουσία, exousia as “the institution of civil rule.”³ This includes the God-given offices and the legal authority that God has invested in those lawful offices.

The Regulative Principle interpretation interprets this passage to mean that there is no legitimate authority except the authority delegated from God in the pages of Scripture.

3. “…And the authorities that exist are appointed by God” (v. 1c).

This may actually be the strongest argument in favor of the Divine Right of Kings theory. Surely this clause means that the governmental officers that currently existed when Paul wrote this epistle were all appointed by God — and since each one was appointed by God, everything that follows applies to Nero and therefore to any other de facto king or ruler. Surely the word “exist” will rule out the Reformed theory that we respect and submit to the office, but not necessarily to every whim of the officer! But no, we will see that such an interpretation contradicts passages such as Hosea 8:4, Revelation 13:4; etc. Let’s tease this clause apart.

As already mentioned, scholars have taken the Greek word for “authorities” (ἐξουσίαι, exousiai) as either referring to the institutions of civil rule (as James Willson takes it — see above) or as referring “to the individuals who are in office.”⁴ The Divine Right of Kings view takes it to refer to all individuals who are in office. Second, the Greek word for “appointed” (τάσσω, tassō) has two definitions: “1. to bring about an order of things by arranging, arrange, put in place… [or] 2. to give instructions as to what must be done, order, fix, determine, appoint.”⁵ If the first definition is meant, then it would refer to God’s providential putting of the individual officers into position, and if the second definition was meant it would refer to the authority of God by which officers find their legitimacy. Divine Right of Kings viewpoints generally take the first definition — in other words, we are to submit because God placed those kings in government by His providence. But even if a Divine Right of Kings advocate were to say that it means that God approves of each and every civil magistrate, we have the same problems throughout clauses 4-7. Consider the following problems with the Divine Right of Kings viewpoint on this clause.

Does God set up kings in the first definition of τάσσω, tassō? Obviously yes. He ordains all things that come to pass, including Satan. He is sovereign over all things and His providence has raised up evil empires, sickness, plagues, and other calamities to punish Israel. As James Willson points out, “Even the devil has ‘power’ in this sense from God,”⁶ and though God allows Satan to be the “ruler of this world” (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11) for a time, that does not warrant our blind subjection to Satan, sickness, or other plagues. Willson points out that evil governments are providentially ordained in the same sense that “pestilence is God’s ordinance, existing in his providence, but to be shunned and banished as soon as possible.”⁷ But that does not seem to fit the context of submission that Paul is advocating. Providence alone does not warrant blind submission since providence even governs the sins of sinners (without involving God in sin).

Let’s consider the alternative definition: Does God ordain all kings in the second definition of τάσσω, tassō (“to give instructions as to what must be done, order, fix, determine, appoint”)? Hosea 8:4 said of the current rulers of northern Israel, “They set up kings, but not by Me; they made princes, but I did not acknowledge them.” It is clear that the rulers were duly chosen by the people (“They set up kings… they made princes”) yet God denied that He had set them up and He insisted that He would not acknowledge them to be legitimate authorities since “Israel has rejected the good” (v. 3). This was very similar to the situation of King Saul. God explicitly rejected Saul as king (1 Sam. 15:26; 16:1), and therefore the people should have impeached him as unqualified for office. Yet, until the people impeached Saul or until Saul was providentially removed by death, David felt that he could not resist any of Saul’s lawful orders. In other words, David honored the office, but did not have blind submission to the person. Likewise, with the bestial kingdom of Revelation 13:2, “The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority” and God fights against that empire in the book of Revelation.

The bottom line is that no matter which definition of either Greek word a Divine Rights of Kings advocate might apply, he will find his interpretation contradicted by other Scriptures. It is better to understand the phrase the way Andrew Melville, James Willson, and other Reformed greats have understood it. The word authorities (ἐξουσίαι, exousiai) should be seen as referring to the civic institutions (that is, the God-given offices and the legal authority that God has invested in those lawful offices) and the word “ordained” (τάσσω, tassō) should be seen as having the second definition. As Willson worded it:

God has willed the existence of a national organization and polity; and, in so doing, has fixed its ends, which it must subserve; has given it a supreme law, which it must observe; has bound it by limits which it may not pass over. In short, God has ‘ordained’ [his footnote says “ordered”] civil government as Christ has ordained the ministry of reconciliation, not by merely willing its existence, but by prescribing its duties, its functions, its ends, and its limitations.

No other meaning can be affixed to the language of the apostle, consistently with due reverence for Him who is the Holy One and the Just, the rightful and beneficent moral Governor.⁸

4. “Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God…” (v. 2a).

Would resisting Pharaoh, Saul, Ahab, or Caesar have counted as resisting God? If so, why were Moses, David, Jehu, Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego, and Paul praised or blessed for doing it? What authority is God forbidding us to resist? If He means all authority exercised by all magistrates, then this universal “whoever” leaves no exceptions for the resistance of Jesus, the apostles, or any of the others outlined in later chapters. However, as seen in the previous point, Revelation distinguishes between the de facto authority of demons (which some magistrates do exercise, and which God authorized His saints to resist) and the de jure authority of God.

5. “…And those who resist will bring judgment on themselves” (v. 2b).

Notice again that the verse leaves no room for exceptions. Why then, did the Holy Spirit stir up the entire church to pray with one voice that God would empower them to disobey Pontius Pilate, Herod, and the Jewish leaders (Acts 4:23-31 — after Peter and John had been arrested for disobeying preaching bans)? Biblical heroes who resisted even unto death are honored by God and not judged. This verse is describing those who resist God’s authority, not those who resist demonic authority.

6. “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same” (v. 3). “For he is God’s minister to you for good” (v. 4a).

Is God here describing all rulers — such as Caligula and Nero, who were a terror to good works, and practiced and supported evil? How about the “rulers (ἄρχοντες, archontes) [who] delivered Him to be condemned to death, and crucified Him” (Luke 24:20)? How about the emperor of Rome, of whom God said, when he was about to cast some of the saints of Smyrna into prison, “The devil is about to throw some of you into prison” (Rev. 2:10)? Were Pharaoh, Jezebel, and Herod God’s ministers for good?

Neither the Divine Right Theory nor the “submit with exceptions” theory can satisfy the absolute statements being made in this verse. God is either describing all rulers, or only those for whom these statements are actually true — rulers who rule in accordance with God’s Word, as they rule in accordance with God’s Word.

7. “But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil” (v. 4b).

Does this verse describe Herod and Pharaoh and their use of the magisterial sword to kill Hebrew babies?

Notice the lack of exceptions: All magistrates described in this verse 1) act as God’s ministers, 2) do not bear the sword in vain, 3) avenge wrath on those who practice evil (and on no others), and 4) instill fear in those who practice evil. Does this describe all magistrates?

Romans 13:1-7 only makes sense if the command to submit refers specifically to those magistrates who meet the qualifications it lays out. These descriptions simply are not true of the tyrants in Scripture. Romans 13 makes no sense as a tribute to all human authority, or a command to submit to all human authority. As John R. Stott worded it, Paul “is stating the divine ideal, not the human reality.”⁹ This passage actually demoted the authority of the Roman officials, clarifying that they stand under the authority of the one true God and have power and authority only insofar as he has given it to them.

In other words, I believe Romans 13 is describing what has been historically held as the Regulative Principle of Government: That the state has no powers except the powers given specifically by God, and is only divinely authorized to command and enforce what God specifically allows them to command and enforce. Christ as the King (1 Tim. 6:15) and only Lawgiver (James 4:12) defines the jurisdictions and powers of the magistrate. When kings transgress the limits of their authority, they stand in sin.

The text literally says, “there is no authority if not from God,” which means there is no legitimate authority if that authority does not come from God in the pages of Scripture. Civil officers have zero authority (“no authority”) to command anything of their citizens that the law of God has not authorized them to command. When Pilate claimed that he had authority to crucify Jesus or to release Him (John 19:10), Jesus absolutely denied that “Rex Lex” statement, saying, “You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above” (John 19:11 ESV). Let’s examine this latter verse in full:

Jesus answered, “You could have no authority (ἐξουσίαν, exousian) at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” (John 19:11)

It might be thought that Jesus was simply saying that Pilate could have no authority unless the emperor Tiberius (the authority directly “above” Pilate) had given Pilate that authority. Such an interpretation fails on several levels. I will just mention one. Jesus’s “therefore” in the second clause of John 19:11 shows a logical connection between the “greater sin” of Caiaphas¹⁰ who handed Jesus over to Pilate and the first sentence. If the first sentence means that Tiberius gave Pilate his authority over Jesus, then why does that logically necessitate that Caiaphas had greater sin? If, on the other hand, the first sentence (in parallel with the first B of the chiasm) shows that Pilate could have no authority over Jesus unless God had authorized that authority, then the next sentence makes perfect sense — especially if the “one who delivered Me to you” is Caiaphas, the high priest. The phrase “greater sin” shows that Pilate is in sin to a lesser degree. But how could that be true if Rex Lex were the standard? It only makes sense that Pilate is in sin if Rex Lex is false and Lex Rex is true. The first sentence affirms the Lex Rex statement that Pilate has no authority except the authority that God Himself gives. This would demonstrate Pilate’s sin in condemning Jesus. But Caiaphas is held in even greater sin since he had the Scriptures, and with greater knowledge comes greater guilt.¹¹

Psalm 94:20 says, “Shall the throne of iniquity, which devises evil by law, have fellowship with You?” God defines justice by a different standard than what a civic administration says is justice. Rulers who institutionalize injustice through their statutes are wicked; they do not have His approval. This whole psalm calls rulers to account for their refusal to submit to God’s wisdom in civics. Likewise, Psalm 2 clearly shows kings to be in sin when they throw off God’s laws (vv. 1-3), when they fail to be instructed by the Lord (v. 10), when they fail to serve Jesus with fear (vv. 11-12). Acts 4:25-28 makes it clear that Psalm 2 was predicting opposition to the kingship of Jesus in New Covenant times, putting sinful blame upon Herod, Pontius Pilate, and the rulers of Israel for casting off the bonds of Christ.

Put simply, Romans 13 does not forbid civil disobedience. It cannot. On the contrary, it lays the groundwork for why resistance is sometimes necessary. It’s not just instruction for us on how to respond to our magistrates — it’s also instruction for the magistrates themselves. It’s the divine definition of the role of ruler, and gives us the absolute standard we are to hold our magistrates to, so we can determine when a magistrate needs to be instructed, rebuked, resisted, or replaced.

Why Your Magistrate Is Your Business

Too many people take a passive approach to civics, as if it were a one-way relationship: Magistrates decree and we obey. Magistrates tax and we pay. Magistrates run and we vote (or don’t). But God calls us to be involved in the lives of magistrates on several levels. Godly rule is a team effort. Just as magistrates should praise and support upright citizens (Rom. 13:3), citizens should support and submit to godly magistrates (Rom. 13:1-8).

Our relationship with our magistrates is not — despite what secular views of government say — a civil contract. The kings of Romans 13 are not called servants of the people, but servants of God. In other words, the relationship is vertical and horizontal; it is a three-way covenantal relationship between magistrate, God, and citizen. God is the boss who defines their every duty and civil officers are the “servants” who obey their duty to their master. Magistrates and citizens alike are bound to duties to one another, under God, by this same covenant. The citizen and the magistrate both report first to God, and they each have responsibilities to hold each other to that obedience to God.

King Josiah and his people illustrated this covenantal reality of their relationship in 2 Kings 23:1-3, when King Josiah summoned “the priests and the prophets and all the people, both small and great. And he read in their hearing all the words of the Book of the Covenant which had been found in the house of the Lord. Then the king stood by a pillar and made a covenant before the Lord, to follow the Lord and to keep His commandments and His testimonies and His statutes, with all his heart and all his soul, to perform the words of this covenant that were written in this book. And all the people took a stand for the covenant.”

In this story, each party of the covenant had duties and authority, and God built this covenantal aspect into every institution He established. In biblical law, the family, church, and state were clearly defined and separated, and the leaders and followers in all three institutions were given mutual responsibility to make sure the covenant was kept intact. The authority of a father over his family, for instance, was not absolute; Deuteronomy 13:6-11 shows that if any family member became an idolater, the other family members could interpose and turn them over to the Lord. The same chapter said that if a city broke covenant with God, other magistrates could interpose and resist those apostates. No civil magistrate had absolute power to expect obedience, just as no father or priest had absolute power to expect obedience; the obedience required was always “in the Lord” (cf. Col. 3:18 and Eph. 6:1).

Romans 13 says that magistrates are to be God’s servants (Rom. 13:4) with the role of implementing the “ordinance of God” (Rom. 13:2), being a terror to what God considers evil, and praising what God considers good (Rom. 13:3). When they carry out their duty well, 1 Timothy 2:2 says that it will promote peace and godliness in society. Psalm 2 is a prophecy of Jesus in the New Covenant which Acts 1 applied to Herod, Pilate, and the rulers of Israel as all being accountable to God and about to be dashed with Christ’s rod of iron because they failed to kiss the Son. Psalm 2 is quite clear that all kings are responsible to covenant with Jesus and follow His laws, and that they will perish if they cast off His laws.

If, on the other hand, citizens break the covenant by being lawless, the state has authority to enforce the covenant if crimes have been involved, and the church has authority to enforce the covenant if public sins have been involved.

Before we look at what each party in this civil covenant should do when the covenant is broken, let’s look at the duties of the covenant.

The Magistrate’s Responsibilities to You

1. The state is authorized by God to execute murderers, kidnappers, and in special cases can give capital punishment as a maximum penalty for 19 other capital crimes (Gen. 9:5-7; Ex. 21:12-14; Numb. 35; etc.).¹²
2. A local, state, or national government can engage in defensive wars (Deut. 20:1-20). I say defensive because the whole tenor of the law is against offensive wars that meddled in the affairs of other nations (Deut. 2:5,19; 17:16). They were also able to have a selective draft for the military, though this was able to be avoided by citizens (Numb. 31:3-7).
3. Courts and executive branches of civil government were authorized to enforce restitution to a victim based on the guidance given in God’s law (Ex. 22:1-17; Lev. 6:5; Numb. 5:7). This includes loss from theft (Ex. 20:1-15; Deut. 23:24-25), moving of landmarks (Deut. 19:14), damages to private property due to fires and other direct damages (Exodus 21:19-36), and the use of unjust weights and measures (Lev. 19:35-37; Deut. 25:13-16).
4. Imposing Biblical penalties upon those who in any way harm others through physical assault (Ex. 21:18-27; Lev. 24:19-20). Those laws at least punish people who deliberately spread AIDS, Hepatitis, and other diseases. Connected to this there is the possible imposition of limited quarantine to protect the healthy from virulent life-threatening diseases (Numb. 31:19-24; Lev. 13-14).
5. To punish adultery (Ex. 20:14; Lev. 20:10; Deut. 5:18; 22:22-25), rape (Deut. 22:25-29), prostitution (Deut. 23:17 with Lev. 19:29; 21:9), seduction of a virgin (Ex. 22:16,17; Deut. 22:28-29), incest (Lev. 18:6-18; Deut. 22:30), and sodomy and bestiality (Ex. 22:19; Lev. 18:22,23; 20:13,15,16; Deut. 23:17)
6. Protecting the defenseless (Ex. 21:22; Deut. 10:18; 24:17-22; 27:19).
7. A very limited role in defining safety codes, but not policing them (Ex. 21:28-36; Deut. 22:8).
8. A very limited role in ensuring sanitation (Deut. 23:9-14).
9. A very limited role in building main-artery roads that interconnect the borders of the nation for defensive purposes and to allow citizens access to courts of justice (Deut. 19:3; see Judges 5:6; 20:31-32; 21:19; 2 Sam. 20:12-13; Isa. 33:8; cf. Isa. 11:16; 19:23; 49:11; 62:10 for God’s positive views about highways).
10. Collecting taxes for the purpose of carrying out the just mentioned civil functions (Rom. 13:6f.). This tax was a head tax of one half shekel of silver (about one-fifth of an ounce) per male adult once a year (Ex. 30:11-6).

You can search the Bible from cover to cover and you will be hard pressed to find anything beyond these things allowed in civics. There is no mention in the law for any role of the civil government in education, welfare, printing money, overseeing the nation’s economy, or any of the other myriad agencies, boards, and committees that control most nations today.

Note that the powers God gives to the state are explicitly enumerated (Deut. 17:19-20; cf. 5:32; Rom. 13:1). Everything the king could do was laid down in “this law and these statutes” (Deut. 17:19), and he was commanded to “not turn aside from the commandment to the right hand or to the left” of those laws (Deut. 17:20). This means that God’s laws were not simply general guidelines; they were limits on the king’s power. If the powers aren’t enumerated in the Bible, they don’t exist.

And even with the spheres God entrusted to the state, God also specified that he doesn’t want the state getting too big or powerful. So, the powers God gives the state are also limited in degree and scope¹³ (Deut. 5:32; 17:18-20; Rom. 13:1; 2 Kings 23:3; John 19:11). In Deuteronomy 17, God imposed three severe restrictions¹⁴ on state growth:

• Limits on kings’ military power (forbidding them to multiply horses, the offensive weapons of the ancient world, v. 16a).
• Limits on their political alliances by marriage (forbidding them to multiply wives to themselves, v. 17).
• Limits on the size of their financial war-chests (“nor shall he greatly increase silver and gold for himself,” v. 17). This restriction, plus the fact that the only tax allowed on citizens was the head tax (see above), would severely limit the powers of a civil government.

In other words, the state was responsible before God to protect and empower its citizens by protecting good and punishing evil, staying in its lane, and staying a manageable size.

Your Responsibilities to the Magistrate

Romans 13 shows that citizens, as subjects of this covenant, also have duties to their magistrates. Their duties to the magistrate involve submission to lawful authority (v. 5), paying lawful taxes that are owed (v. 7), giving fear and honor to those in authority (v. 7), and being responsible and loving citizens (vv. 8-10). They do this not as a social contract, but as a duty to God, and thus their conscience in this relationship is bound by God’s Word — not by the state’s requirements.

In more detail, our responsibilities as citizens are:

1. To pay all taxes owed. Biblical law allows for two taxes: a head tax (which amounts to one silver coin per year per male adult), and reparations owed due to broken treaties, government theft, or restitution for ungodly wars.¹⁵
2. If an adult male, to serve in the military in the event of a just war. Judges 5 pronounces God’s curses upon citizens who refused to join in a just war of defense. Even so, the law authorized several exemptions from military service, including for the fearful (Deut. 20:3-9). Knowing how to own and bear arms is a duty expected in God’s law (Numb. 1:45-46, Ex. 32:27).
3. To engage in jury duty in order to deliver a citizen out of the hands of an unjust civic officer (Numb. 35:24-25).
4. To support lower magistrates in interposition, and where possible, to engage in interposition oneself (Judges 5:23, Psalm 94:16).
5. To respect and honor civil officers (Ex. 22:28; Rom. 13:1-7; 1 Pet. 2:13f.). Anarchy and revolution would be a violation of these Scriptures.
6. To regularly pray for civil magistrates (1 Tim. 2:1-4; 2 Chron. 17:4; Jer. 29:7).
7. To help godly candidates into office (implication of Deut. 1:13; and the example of those who support David in 2 Sam. 2:3-4; 17:27-29; 1 Chron. 12:17-18; etc.).
8. To bring moral rebuke against tyranny (Mark 6:17f.).
9. To support the realm by faithfully living out the individual callings we have to the dominion mandate (Gen. 1:26-30).
10. To call the nation to come into covenant with Christ (Psalm 2) and to submit to Christ’s universal Lordship by observing God’s law (Matt. 28:18-20), saying, “Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach us His ways, and we shall walk in His paths” (Isa. 2:3).

Conclusion

2 Kings 11 shows the three-way nature of this covenant that gives civic responsibilities to both rulers and ruled: “Then Jehoiada made a covenant between the LORD, the king, and the people, that they should be the LORD’s people, and also between the king and the people” (v. 17). The Lord covenants with the king and the people; the king covenants with the Lord and with the people; and the people covenant with the Lord and with the king. They are bound in mutual dependence and mutual accountability. There are several things we can deduce from this three-way covenantal concept.

First, because this is a three-way covenant with God and mediated by God, we are always dealing primarily with God, and the results will always be determined by God. This means that God’s word, rather than pragmatics, has to be our rule of conduct, just as it must be for the magistrate. If they are not above the law, neither are we; if God’s law limits what they can do, it limits what we can do too.

Second, there are consequences to both ruler and citizen for breaking this covenant. If our magistrates break covenant, God will not hold them guiltless (Psalm 2). And if we break covenant, as (for instance) Israel did when they rejected God as king in 1 Samuel 8, God will deal with us too — possibly chastising us by giving us a tyrannical magistrate (as He did in response to the Israelites, 1 Sam. 8:9-18).

Third, since we are in covenantal relationship all the time, not solely during crises of liberty or justice, our responsibilities to civics continue as long as there are civil governments — even when civil governments are righteous, even during non-election years, even when our favorite candidate is in office, and even when our biggest personal hot-button issues aren’t at stake. Our relationship with our magistrates should be continuous, not be emergency-response only:

• Making sure rulers understand (or are reminded of) what the covenant requires.
• Praying for those in authority (1 Tim. 2:1-7), and asking God to judge rulers who refuse to kiss the Son (Psalm 2).
• Seeking to be faithful citizens as unto the Lord.

Christ’s Insistence That You Help Turn the Tide

But what if my magistrate isn’t a Christian, you might ask? How can I expect him to care about what God says about his job? Are you saying we need to work on the symptoms instead of the root? Isn’t evangelism a higher priority than political change?

Jesus answers all these questions in Matthew 28:18-20, in his final instructions to his disciples regarding their work on earth: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

The four uses of the word “all” in Matthew 28:18-20 — when we look at them closely — should revolutionize our lives and give us a fire and energy to be active and bold with our civil magistrates and our culture.

All Authority: Jesus said, “All authority has been given me in heaven and on earth.” It is especially the civil government that many think is exempt from Christ’s authority. But Psalm 2 commands kings and nations to serve the Lord with fear, and to kiss the Son lest He be angry and that nation perish in its way. We have to remind our magistrates that the power they wield is delegated authority from Christ (Rom. 13:1-7; Deut. 17:18-20). Jesus said to Pilate, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above” (John 19:11).

Issues of state overreach aren’t just about us and our rights; they’re first and foremost about Christ’s rights. When Christ’s magistrates are disobeying His words, rejecting His claims, and oppressing His people, we have responsibilities to disciple these kings and nations and teach them to observe what Christ has commanded. Representing God and His word to your magistrates is not just about your rights; it’s about making disciples of all nations.

All Nations: Christ commands us to make disciples of all the nations. Not just of a few individuals — the literal Greek reads disciple “all nations.” His goal is a comprehensive vision of victory: Christian nations. That makes sense if He has been given all authority on earth. Go therefore implies that the commission is as extensive as His authority. And if you’re tempted to wonder what one person could do, remember — He was talking about world conquest to twelve disciples!

All the Word: “…teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.” We are not authorized to pick and choose what we will teach. In Matthew 5 Jesus told us what to teach — the whole Bible. In Matthew 5:17-19, He says, “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Christ wants us to teach every one of the Old Testament laws relating to nations. Old Testament law teaches us stewardship principles of ecology, not socialistic green ecology. It teaches us principles of economics, politics, art, mathematics, and philosophy. In fact, it gives us every axiom needed to form the foundation for our nation, and our assignment from Christ is to teach these things to all nations — including the nations’ magistrates.

All the Days: The Greek says literally, “Lo, I with you all the days (πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας, pasas tas hēmeras), even to the end of the age.” We are not left on our own. It would have been a farce to think twelve disciples could conquer the world without Christ. Hebrews 13 calls us into the spiritual conquest with exactly the same stirring words God gave to Joshua just before His physical conquest: “I will never leave you nor forsake you” (Joshua 1:5-9). But here is an important point: God will not fight our battles in place of us. He has not promised to go instead of us; He has promised to go with us.

In other words, the Great Commission is the risen and conquering King commanding His foot-soldiers to advance His Kingdom until every individual in all nations are baptized and are obeying all things found in the Word of God. Those are our marching orders. We may not quit until that is accomplished. The same Jesus who has all authority and power both commands us and goes with us in His Great Commission.

Christ’s Promise That He Will Turn the Tide

There are many who feel like giving up on their civic duties during times of apostasy like ours. Why resist a specific overreach of government when everything is going downhill anyway? I can understand people’s discouragement when our efforts seem wasted. But I want to encourage you with Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 15:57-58. Because the cross reverses history, Paul said:

But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.

Your labor is not in vain. Some people argue that the Scripture itself says that it is too late for repentance. But we must never say it is impossible for God. Jonah’s message of repentance may have seemed impossible when he came to the wicked city of Nineveh, yet that entire city repented because he did what he was supposed to do, and Christ said that it was a genuine repentance. Can God do the same today? Yes, His hand is not too short that it cannot save. The question is, do we have faith?

Jeremiah 18:7-9 says that we should not give up on a nation as being too far gone. It says, “The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it.” He’s saying, “Don’t give up on a nation. Call it to repentance. Do something. There is always hope if there is still time for repentance.”

But aren’t we fighting against prophecy by trying to change civics? Doesn’t Jesus say that things are going to get worse and worse in the last days?

My response is twofold. First, regardless of results, the duty is ours. In Isaiah 6 God called Isaiah to the ministry and explicitly told him that he was to preach his heart out, but the nation would not listen. Was that wasted preaching? No. God was still glorified. And the remnant were benefited as well. And a later generation used his words to help rebuild civilization.

But second, the prophecy of things getting worse and worse in the last days is a reference to the last days leading up to AD 70. I explain why more fully in my Revelation sermon series,¹⁶ but if you examine every reference to the phrase “last days” you will see that it refers to the last days of Israel as a nation. Once Jerusalem was destroyed and Israel scattered among the nations, the last days were ended. And Christ had prophesied He would build His church and the gates of Hades would not prevail against it (Matt. 16:18).

People might respond, but doesn’t Paul describe Satan as “the god of this world”? Yes, he does (2 Cor. 4:4). And what happens to the god of this world? He is conquered. Revelation 12 says that the 1st-century saints overcame Him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony. Unlike the saints of the Old Testament, we are dealing with an enemy that has “fallen” and was “thrown down” (Luke 10:18; Rev. 12:9). His kingdom has been replaced by God’s (Dan. 7; Luke 11:20). He was “crushed” under the foot of the early church (Rom. 16:20). His works have been and are being destroyed (1 John 3:8). He is defeated, disarmed, and spoiled (Col 2:15; Rev. 12:7f.; Mark 3:27). His power is restricted and restrained (2 Thess. 2:6f.). He has been rendered “powerless over believers” (Heb. 2:14). He has lost “authority” over Christians (Col. 1:13). He must “flee” when “resisted” (James 4:7). His demonic hordes are subject to the authority of Christians (Matt. 10-12; Mark 6:7; Luke 9:1; 10:19; 1 John 4:4; Rev. 12:9; etc.)

Isaiah 9:6 tells us who is ruler over this world now, beginning in the 1st century. It says: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given… And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.” Notice that His kingdom doesn’t come in all at once with a bang — it starts at the first coming and grows gradually. It keeps increasing.

That doesn’t mean there won’t be resistance. Isaiah 42 promises, “He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles… He will bring forth justice for truth. He will not fail nor be discouraged, till He has established justice in the earth; and the coastlands shall wait for His law” (vv. 1-4). Isaiah acknowledges that there will be a long time of resistance to Christ’s purposes, but that Christ will not get discouraged until He establishes justice in the earth.

Psalm 22 prophesies the crucifixion of Jesus, and then goes on to say, “All the ends of the world shall remember and turn to the LORD, and all the families of the nations shall worship before You” (Psalm 22:27). Psalm 86:9 says, “All nations whom You have made shall come and worship before You, O Lord, and shall glorify Your name.” Zechariah 9:10 says, “He shall speak peace to the nations; His dominion shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth” (Zech. 9:10; cf. Psalm 72:8).

The expansion of Christ’s kingdom is a progressive redemptive act likened both to a tiny mustard seed that grows and grows until it becomes a large tree (Luke 13:19) and to leaven which permeates the whole loaf (Luke 13:21). No one can question that there has been progress from the 120 disciples in the upper room in Acts 1 to the hundreds of millions of Christians around the world today. The increase of Christ’s kingdom has been sure and steady. And the successful evangelism of the world will continue to the end of history “for He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet” (1 Cor. 15:25).

God has promised victory to us just as surely as He promised victory to the Israelites in taking the Promised Land. But the spies who went into the land of Canaan could only see the giants in the land, and were so discouraged they refused to take the conquest that had been promised to them. Joshua and Caleb saw the same giants, but their focus was not on the giants; it was on the greatness of God and the surety of God’s promises, and they triumphed. And when we’re faced with the giants of communism, Islam, the homosexual movement, the pornography and abortion industries, and others, we too can take hold of God’s specific promises — assured that if we fight, we’ll hear God’s “Well done” and He’ll grant the victory in His time.

Luke 24:47-49 promises that Pentecost will give us power from on high to accomplish the Great Commission. And the Great Commission is a call to disciple the nations. Do we really believe that Jesus’ last command will fail?