Chamburuka, A Theological reflection on Romans 13:1-7 in ...Cullmann (1955:26) who argues that, the word “authorities” (exousiai)
refer not to the state itself, but also to the “invisible angelic powers that
stand behind the state government”. This may appear a small distinc-
tion; in fact the difference is great, as appears if two questions are asked
(a) must Christians be in subjection to the magistrates, or to angelic
powers? (b) Are the angels or the magistrates of divine appointment?
However, it is plausible to conclude that Paul is here referring to the
state, or its administration rather than spiritual-angelic authorities.
The above delineation of the proposed possible factors that led Paul to
write this controversial passage indicates that the message suffices the
life setting of Paul’s audience. What baffles many scholars and some
Christians in modern and post-modern times is that Paul did not aug-
ment this passage with the requisite ethical instructions that guide rul-
ers or governments on how they should govern their citizens as the Old
Testament clearly states in Deut 17-21. Moreover, this is exacerbated by
the fact that he does not prescribe how Christians should react when
faced with terror, dictatorship, totalitarianism and tyrannical govern-
ments. Judging from a 21st century perspective, his message is one-
sided, incomplete, subjective, biased, exploitative and imperialistic. In
other words, Paul seemingly gave the Roman authorities and later gen-
eration of rulers a blank cheque, which is subject to gross abuse and
manipulation.
History has it that the same government that Paul exonerated became a
sponsor of persecution of innocent Christians. As alluded to above, Nero
was the first to torture and persecute Christians and it is alleged that
both Peter and Paul face martyrdom under him (Buttrick 1954: 599).
Many commentators on Romans argue that, Rom 13:1-7 is detrimentally
opposite to Revelation 13 which emphatically denounces the state or the
rulers of the day as diabolic beast, a monster and anti-Christ (Bornkamm
1986:213). Others contend that if Paul had lived a little longer than the
date of writing Romans(ca AD 56/58), could had probably regretted or
revoked his prior “state theology” in Rom 13:1-7 because the same Nero
who had appeared to be “politically friendly” to the Christians had be-
come a terror and a persecutor of Christians as attested above.
Manipulation of Romans 13:1-7 by selected “court” Prophets
To start with, after the signing of the Unity Accord (22 Dec 1987) be-
tween Patriotic Front: Zimbabwe African People’s Unity (P.F. Z.A.P.U.),