Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Romans 13:1-7

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: tmcos AT canada.com
  • To: corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: Romans 13:1-7
  • Date: 15 May 2002 14:00:22 -0700


Hi Robert,

I really don't see any problem here and it certainly would not appear to be
out of line with Paul. In the pastoral letters which are deemed for the most
part to be pseudo-Pauline, there are instructions to pray for the authorities
that be (1 Tim.2:1-3)to insure a peaceful existence and that such prayers are
acceptable to God. Moreover, I would also add that 1 Tim.6:13 mentions the
"good confession" that Christ gave to Pontius Pilate. What was this "good
confession"? If I may bring the Fourth Gospel into this discussion, there is
an interesting statement made there by Jesus that is related to the question
of authority in Rom.13:1-7. "So Pilate said to Him, 'You do not speak to me?
Do You not know that I have the authority(EXOUSIAN) to release You, and I
have authority (EXOUSIAN) to crucify You?' Jesus answered, 'You would have no
authority (EXOUSIAN) over Me unless it had been given you from above;...'"
(John 19:10-11; NASB)Certainly, if Jesus himself could acknowledge the
authority of the pagan Roman procurator Pontius Pilate as coming "from
above", ie.from God, then why would suchan an issue seem incongruent to Paul?
Best regards,

Tony Costa
University of Toronto


On Wed, 15 May 2002, RSBrenchley AT aol.com wrote:

>
> Hi All.
>
> Dick Horsley's seminar has got me thinking again about this much used
> (or
> abused) passage of Paul. I have a great many theological difficulties with
> the traditional interpretation, like many others; how can it be said that
> 'all authority is from God' when authority, then as now, so often becomes a
> manifestation of sheer evil. Having personally known a major war criminal,
> now thankfully dead, who was at one time Chief Secretary of State and
> minister of Mines in Sierra Leone, after a previous spell as
> Vice-President,
> I find this position impossible to accept. Given that Paul was so often in
> trouble with Jewish and probably Roman authorities, not to mention his
> controversies with the Jerusalem leadership, I find it difficult to imagine
> him believing this as traditionally understood.
>
> The main problem lies with the single phrase OU GAR ESTIN EXOUSIA EI MH
> APO QEOU and the following phrases which depend upon it: AI DE OUSAI
> EXOUSIAE
> UPO QEOU TETAGMENAI EISIN WSTE O ANTITASSOMENOS TH EXOUSIA TH TOU QEOU
> DIATAGH ANQESTHKEN; apart from this, it could be taken as advice to
> tolerate
> the existing order, which in Paul's view is doomed anyway, and avoid
> trouble.
> A lesser difficulty is found in v3; OI GAR ARCHONTES OUK EISIN PHOBOS TWN
> AGAQWN ERGWN; if this really means what it appears to mean, how can it be
> said by a Jew, with such a list of martyrs in his own history, including
> the
> very Messiah whose name he proclaims to the Gentiles? Paul must have known
> as
> well as anyone that authority can easily become a terror to good works, and
> an aid to the evil.
>
> Is there another explanation of Paul's words (assuming it really is
> Paul)
> that works without resorting to special pleading? There's clearly no
> consensus among scholars, and so far I find myself unconvinced by any
> approach I've come across.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert Brenchley
> RSBrenchley AT aol.com
> Birmingham UK
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to corpus-paul as: tmcos AT canada.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst('Email.Unsub')


__________________________________________________________
Get your FREE personalized e-mail at http://www.canada.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page