Unconditional Obedience to Government?

A reader has asked: "Was the late William Symington, theologian of the Free Church of Scotland, right when he stated, 'Without confounding all moral distinctions it is impossible to suppose that the lawfulness of a power depends solely on the fact of its existence.  People say, If a government exists them it must be of God.  The Bible says no such thing, and if the Bible did say such a thing, it would be contradicting its own principles of purity, equity and judgment'?"

This question is important.  If the mere fact of a government's existence does not mean it is from God, then there are certain governments that have no divine warrant for their existence.  And the injunction against resistance does not apply in such cases.  Against such governments we may rebel.

If the mere fact that a government exists means that it is of God, then there are no circumstances under which we may rebel or resist.  Then unconditional submission is required.  This, we believe, is what the Bible teaches.

Romans 13:1 clearly says that the "sole fact" of a government's existence means that it is ordained of God.  We know of no other way to interpret the reference to "the powers that be."  Indeed, the words could very well be translated "the existing powers."  We believe, therefore, that Symington was wrong. 

Trying to get around these words, some have insisted that they refer to the powers that existed when Paul was writing his epistle to the Romans.  If that is the case, then Romans 13:1-7 has nothing at all to say to us, for we are no longer under Roman rule, and that part of Scripture is made null and void today.

Nor as Symington suggests, does this contradict Biblical principles of purity, equity and justice.  The fact that these powers are ordained of God, that is, predetermined (Is. 45:1-4) and raised up (Rom. 9:17) by God does not mean He approves of them or of their wickedness.  The very government under which Paul wrote these words was corrupt and persecuting.

In fact, if the wickedness of a government means it cannot be ordained by God without "contradicting Biblical principles of purity, equity and justice" then there is NO government that is ordained of God, except acompletely Christian government.  When has there been such a thing?  Thus the teaching of the passage is voided, for a Christian is called to submit and pay taxes to those governments that are ordained of God.

Scripture here condemns resistance in any form and against any government.  We must submit unconditionally (I Pet. 2:13-15, 21-23).  Scripture threatens all resistance with damnation.  And  we should be far more afraid of damnation than of any government, no matter how depraved and ungodly it may be.

Nevertheless, we do not want to be misunderstood.  We speak deliberately of submission and not obedience.  Scripture demands unconditional submission (subjection in Rom. 13:1), but not unconditional obedience. There is a difference.

Submission is not rebelling and resisting (Rom. 13:2).  Obedience has to do with actually doing what the government says.  That we cannot always do.  We must always obey God rather than men.  But even in disobeying for God's sake and for conscience’ sake, we may not resist and rebel.  This the examples of Jesus (I Pet. 2:21-23), Paul (Acts 23:1-5), David (I Sam. 26:8-11), and others teach us.