Are kings, rulers and governments appointed by God?
Please always get the latest version of this document, from the Bible Pages web site, at this address: www.biblepages.web.surftown.se/ew02c.htm
Need larger text? Go to your browser's "View" menu and look for "Text size" or "Zoom".
Many preachers have claimed that the rulers of this world – kings, presidents and
so on – supposedly are "appointed by God". Is that true? Is God behind the governments
of this world? Some have claimed that, and many translations of the Bible make it
seem so, but is there any true biblical basis for that, or are those claims in fact
unbiblical and based on mistranslations or faulty interpretations of some scriptures?
In other words: What is there to all that talk about "royal authority"? Is that
a biblical concept? Are kings, rulers and governments appointed by God? Some have
claimed that, but is there true scriptural support for such claims? In short: The
so-called "divine right of kings" – is there such a thing?
This essay takes a closer look at what the Bible really says about the governments of this world, and it even considers the talk about the so-called "divine right of kings". Romans 13 is one of the passages that some quote in this context; that chapter will be especially studied. In order to find out what the biblical teaching really is, it is necessary to also study the Greek text of the New Testament; this is because bible-translations produced at the order of worldly rulers and under their control, are not very dependable, especially not in this regard.
Important: This is not about the kings of ancient Israel. In their case, things were slightly different. There, some men had been chosen by God (even though God did not force those kings on Israel but let them be appointed by the Israelites themselves).
Again, this essay is not about those kings in ancient Israel, but about other kings, rulers and governments.
But again, is there such a thing as a "divine right of kings"? Do the scriptures – the Greek text of the New Testament – really say that kings and rulers are "appointed by God"? And, does Romans 13 – or some other bible-passage – really say or mean that "God appoints the kings, rulers and governments of this world"?
At first glance, it might seem that Romans 13 could give support to that talk about "divine rights". Partially, that is because of the way Paul's words have been translated. However, when does a deeper study of that passage (including the Greek text), and of the whole matter, things begin to look quite a bit different.
Let us first see that passage, the way it is rendered in the KJ version – a translation which was ordered, controlled and then "authorised" by a worldly ruler who claimed that he had "a divine right to rule" and that he was "justly called god". Here is the text in question, as the original 1611 edition had it:
Romans 13:1 Let euery soule bee subiect vnto the higher powers: For there is no power but of God. The powers that be, are ordeined of God. 2 Whosoeuer therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist, shall receiue to themselues damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terrour to good works, but to the euill. Wilt thou then not bee afraide of the power? doe that which is good, and thou shalt haue praise of the same. 4 For hee is the minister of God to thee for good: but if thou do that which is euill, be afraid: for he beareth not the sword in vaine: for he is the minister of God, a reuenger to execute wrath vpon him that doeth euill. 5 Wherfore ye must needs be subiect, not onely for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For, for this cause pay you tribute also: for they are Gods ministers, attending continually vpon this very thing. 7 Render therfore to all their dues, tribute to whom tribute is due, custome to whome custome, feare to whome feare, honour to whom honour. (KJV-1611)
Here is a facsimile image of verses 1-2, with the added text at chapter start, as it was in the 1611 King James translation which was ordered, controlled and "authorised" by a man who claimed that he had a "divine right" to rule:
Again, that might look convincing, at first glance. But, Romans 13 is a passage for a deeper study. One must consider also (and especially) the Greek text, and then, there are other, related passages to consider as well. And, one must not allow oneself to be lured by the added text at chapter start, either. There is more on these things, below.
The question is this: Do the governments of this world make up a "rule of God" here on Earth? Are they appointed by God? Is this God's world? Do this world's countries and governments serve and obey God, today? Or – is this world in fact ruled and controlled by forces of a different kind and not by the true God who is in Heaven? (That is, before Jesus comes.)
This essay takes a closer look at these questions, in order to find out what the Scriptures really say about this world's rulers, and whether or not there is any true biblical support for the concept of "divine right of kings".
The KJ translation was written in the early 1600s. It was produced "by his majesty's special command" – that is, at the orders and under the control of king James of England who claimed that "kings are justly called gods" and promulgated the age-old dogma about a supposed "divine right of kings".
There was no real need for a new bible-translation. The Geneva Bible (an English translation of 1560) was very similar to what the 1611 KJ version came to be, and, there were other English versions as well, such as the Bishops' bible (1568). Apparently, the Geneva Bible was the mostly used translation – but it contained a problem for James. Some of its marginal notes or comments were not favourable to dictators. That disturbed James. So, he ordered a new translation to be made, one that did not have marginal notes of that kind. Also, James gave specific orders regarding how certain things were to be translated (or twisted, to use a clearer expression). Even earlier English translations had been written so that certain passages were in favour of worldly rulers, but that was not enough for James of England.
James had a parliament, but in reality he acted as a dictator. He claimed that he had a "divine right" to rule, or a "heavenly right to rule". In a speech to his "parliament", he claimed that
"kings are iustly called Gods", and that "they haue power of raising, and casting downe: of life, and of death: Iudges ouer all their subiects, and in all causes, and yet accomptable [accountable] to none but God onely", and even, "I conclude then this point touching the power of Kings, with this Axiome of Diuinitie, That as to dispute what God may doe, is Blasphemie; but quid vult Deus [what God wants], that Diuines may lawfully, and doe ordinarily dispute and discusse; for to dispute A Posse ad Esse [from 'may be' to 'is'] is both against Logicke and Diuinitie: So is it sedition in Subiects, to dispute what a King may do in the height of his power".
The bible-translators whom James put to work, and perhaps more the final editor who revised their work, dutifully saw to it that support for James' claims about kings having a "divine right", was written into that new translation. Other bible-versions have followed that pattern. (The essay es03c.htm has more on the KJ version.)
In the English-speaking world, the doctrines regarding a "divine right of kings" are largely connected with the early House of Stuart in Britain and the "theology" of the certain clergymen whose income was dependent of James I of England (and Charles I and Charles II of England). In the late 1500s, textbooks were written on "the divine right of kings", and on related subjects. James himself produced some of them, such as the Basilikon Doron, a treatise on government in which he wrote that, "a good king"
"... acknowledgeth himself ordained for his people, having received from God a burden of government, whereof he must be countable. The idea of the divine right to rule Has appeared in many cultures Eastern and Western spanning all the way back to the first God king Gilgamesh."
And yes, it is true that many ancient rulers, from Babylon and onward, have claimed that they supposedly have a "heavenly right to rule". Many of them, including James, have even claimed that "kings are gods". But, regarding those in Babylon originating claims – are they true, or are they false?
In order to see what the apostle Paul was talking about in "Romans 13", one must go back a few verses, to "Romans 12", ignoring that misleading chapter break. (The verse- and chapter-division systems that many bibles have, are not original; they are Catholic things, from the Middle Ages).
Romans 12:17 Repay no one evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. 18 If it is possible, as far as is in you, seeking peace with all men. 19 not avenging yourselves, beloved, but giving place to wrath; for it is written, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, says the Lord." 20 Therefore if your enemy hungers, feed him. If he thirsts, give him drink. For in so doing you shall heap coals of fire on his head. 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (MKJV)
Many preachers and commentators want people to think that those words had "nothing to do with the situation in Rome". But, it seems they had much to do with the saints' situation in that city.
Romans 12:17 records how Paul told the saints in Rome, "recompense to no man evil for evil" (KJV-1769). Now, who was the one that did evil to the saints? And, regarding Romans 12:18, "As far as it is possible for you, be at peace with all men": Who was prone to disturb the saints' peace? Regarding Romans 12:19, "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves" (KJV-1769): What things had been done against the saints, and by whom, that the Lord would have to avenge? Or Romans 12:20, "Therefore if your enemy [...] in so doing you shall heap coals of fire on his head": On whose head was it that those coals were to be heaped? And, who was the saints' enemy here on Earth? Or, Romans 12:21, "Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good": Who did evil to the saints in Rome?
Again: Who persecuted and hurt the saints in Rome? Why, the Roman rulers and government did. It is obvious that Paul was writing to the saints in Rome, regarding their very troublesome situation in that city (and perhaps in the entire Roman empire).
Apparently, Paul wrote that letter during the reign of Nero, the Roman emperor who (later) even had believers tarred and put on poles and lit afire as decorations in his garden parties, and who did much more of the same kind of extreme evil, such as feeding believers to lions as "public entertainment", in the circus arenas of Rome.
Also: In Palestine (Israel), the Roman empire was a ruthless occupying power. The Roman empire had kidnapped the Jewish nation and enslaved it and forced it under their military rule and taxation. The Roman empire slaughtered the Jews in great numbers. It is said that in the days when the Romans destroyed the temple in Jerusalem, the Roman army killed approximately three million Jews.
Consider this: Did that bloody, ruthless and wicked Roman empire have "God's appointment" to do that? Is that really what "Romans 13" says? No, it is not. Thus, the 1769 KJ version's rendering appears quite a bit strange. Were the Roman caesars and proconsuls and so on, and their destroying armies, really "appointed by God", and "continually in his service", as some have claimed and as the 1769 KJ version makes it seem? No, they were not. Did God really "appoint" the Roman empire and its rulers and give them a "right" for their tyrannical rule and for all the horrible slaughter they produced? No. Were they "in his service"? No, of course not; all know that the Roman emperors served totally different "gods" – idols.
A note: The essay ew01b.htm considers the question, why does God allow evil, wars, pain and suffering?
Herod also had the head of John the Baptist placed on a platter and presented as a gift to his daughter. Was that butcher appointed by God? No. Was the Roman ruler Pilate, who ordered his soldiers to kill Jesus, appointed by God and "in his service"? No. Or the Roman troops who defiled the temple in Jerusalem and then destroyed it, and at the same time slaughtered millions of Israelites? No. Or, the Roman caesars who used believers as garden lights, and fed them to lions in order to provide entertainment for the citizens of Rome? No, of course not.
Again, was that horrible Roman government "ordained by God"? No. Or others, such as Nimrod, the Pharaohs of Egypt, the Aztec and Inka rulers, Genghis Khan, Attila, Hannibal? No. Or, the "popes" of Rome who often were emperors of Europe as well? No. Or, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin or Mao Tse Tung? No. Or Pol Pot or Idi Amin, or other tyrants and workers of terror of the past and of our day? No; it is very clear that they all were and are enemies of God.
Consequently, one must consider Romans 12-13 in more depth, in order to find out what Paul really might have been talking about.
A note, regarding the use and meaning of the Greek word theos in those days: That word was not a personal name of God. It was also used of angels and of men, and of course, especially of the numerous Greek idols. The early Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX), used the word theos of men also; of judges and the like.
And then: The Roman emperors were called theos. (The Greek language was commonly used in many parts of the Roman empire.)
Here is a different interpretation of Romans 13:1 (verse 2 and onward will be considered later in this essay):
Romans 13:1 Let everyone be subject to powers above him. For there is no "authority" except God's, and those "authorities" who [really] have been appointed by God. (Author's tr.)
Does this mean that the forcible rule by the caesars of Rome was "of God"? No. This only means that there is no true authority (exousia) except that which really is of God and those whom he in fact has appointed as his representatives. That is: It is Jesus who has true "royal authority", and then also those (saints) whom Jesus would appoint.
Today, this planet is in the hands of spirit rebels and their fleshly cronies. It will be freed from them only when Jesus comes. The Bible shows that at Jesus' coming, this world's rulers will fight against him, but he will conquer them.
Again, regarding Romans 13:1, it is obvious that Paul was saying that only those who really have been appointed by God, are true "authorities". All other "authorities" (including the Roman rulers of those days) are rebels and usurpers. God has no "deputies" or "vice-rulers" here on Earth, neither "mundane" nor "spiritual" ones. The Roman rulers who occupied the land of Israel and who persecuted the saints also in Rome, were not of the true God; they were of the evil one.
A note: It could well be that Paul on purpose wrote that letter to the believers in Rome, with words that could be understood in different ways. So that, if that letter came into the hands of Roman officials, they would not have much to complain regarding its contents. (That letter was written in Corinth in Greece, and would have to pass through Roman customs and controls, before reaching the saints in Rome.)
But, the saints in Rome would very well understand what Paul really was saying – or, it could also be that Paul had instructed the one who carried that letter, to explain its real meaning to the saints and believers in Rome.
Adding one verse:
Romans 13:1 Let everyone be subject to powers above him. For there is no "authority" except God's, and those "authorities" who [really] have been appointed by God. 2 So, those who opposes that Authority, have opposed the ordinance of God. And, those who oppose, will receive judgment upon themselves. (Author's tr.)
Now, what was Paul really saying here? It seems that he was saying that the saints were not to avenge themselves for the evils the rulers of Rome did to them, because God would do that avenging, in his good time. (Consider the wider context, all the way from Romans 12:19. Romans 13:3 to 7 will be discussed below.)
Point: The Roman rulers were enemies of God. They persecuted and killed God's people. They were to be judged and punished by God, for their evil works. That time of Judgment will come.
Let us consider Romans 13:3 also.
Romans 13:1 Let everyone be subject to powers above him. For there is no "authority" except God's, and those "authorities" who [really] have been appointed by God. 2 So, those who opposes that Authority, have opposed the ordinance of God. And, those who oppose, will receive judgment upon themselves. 3 For those rulers are not a terror to doers of good, but to doers of evil. Would you not want to fear that Authority? Do good, and you will receive praise from him. (Author's tr.)
Verse 3, "those rulers"; Greek, oi archontes. That is, the ones who really have an appointment by God. Clearly, Romans 13:1-3 must refer to righteous rulers in Heaven, and not to the wicked Roman rulers who in fact were enemies of God.
Jesus is the Righteous Ruler who has been appointed by God. He in his turn appoints other rulers. Jesus will come and avenge his own. He is the one who will repay the rulers of this world for the evils that they have done to his people.
In contrast to the true Authority (see verse 3, as translated above), the Roman rulers and the Roman government certainly were a terror to those with good works. They were especially a terror to the saints, and to the Jewish nation.
It was the Roman rulers who opposed the true ordinance of God (Romans 13:2). It was a Roman ruler who gave the order that Jesus was to be murdered. It was Roman soldiers who tortured and crucified him, and it was a Roman soldier who killed him by thrusting a spear into his side. That same empire also killed numerous saints, and around 3,000,000 Jews (year 70).
A note, regarding Romans 13:2-3: In the Roman empire, people were demanded to swear allegiance to the caesar. In fact, people were demanded to worship the caesar as a god. Again, it could be that Paul, for that and other reasons, on purpose wrote his letter with words that could be understood in different ways, so that if it came into the hands of Roman officials, they would not have anything to complain regarding its contents. But, the saints in Rome would understand what Paul really meant – or, Paul may have instructed the one who carried that letter to Rome, to explain what Paul meant by his words.
Adding one more verse:
Romans 13:1 Let everyone be subject to powers above him. For there is no "authority" except God's, and those "authorities" who [really] have been appointed by God. 2 So, those who opposes that Authority, have opposed the ordinance of God. And, those who oppose, will receive judgment upon themselves. 3 For those rulers are not a terror to doers of good, but to doers of evil. Would you not want to fear that Authority? Do good, and you will receive praise from him. 4 for [he] is a Servant of God, for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is a Servant of God, an Avenger, for wrath upon the evildoer. (Author's tr.)
In verse 4, the Greek text refers to a "he", a single Servant of God. That is, obviously, Jesus.
That verse also mentions a sword. Consider this: In prophecies regarding the time when Jesus will come to destroy the rulers of this world, Jesus is sometimes pictured as carrying a sword – see especially Revelation 19. The Bible shows that the rulers of this world will fight against Jesus when he comes, but he will put them to nothing.
Revelation 19:15 And out of His mouth goes forth a sharp sword, that with it He might smite the nations. And He will shepherd them with an iron rod. And He treads the winepress of the wine of the anger and of the wrath of God Almighty. 16 And He has on His garment and on His thigh a name having been written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. 17 And I saw one angel standing in the sun. And he cried with a great voice, saying to all the birds flying in mid-heaven, Come and gather together to the supper of the great God, 18 that you may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of commanders [...] (LIT)
Indeed, the Bible vividly describes how God's wrath (vengeance) will be poured upon the rulers of this planet, and how the Lord will avenge the blood of his own people. (See also Revelation 19:18.)
Point: Romans 13:4 talks about a Servant of God with a sword. That Servant of God bears the name Jesus.
Considering the facts, including the saints' situation in Rome, this wording in the 1769 KJ version is a bit strange:
Romans 13:5 Because of this, it is necessary to be subject, not only on account of wrath, but also on account of conscience. (KJV-1769)
One thing is clear: It is inconceivable that the Roman caesars, vice kings or governors would have had been appointed by God. God allowed those power-usurping butchers to do their evil, but, he did not "appoint" them. God does not "appoint" those who work for his enemy, for the diabolos. (The essay ew01b.htm considers why God allows this world to be run and controlled by rebels.)
Now, a closer look at the Greek text of verse 5 shows that many translators have failed to translate the word anankê (αναγκη) in that verse, leaving it out. That word meant such things as "force", "constraint", "necessity", "violence", "torture", "bodily pain", "anguish", "distress", and so on. The related verb anankazô (αναγκαζω) meant such things as "to necessitate" or "to compel" (by the means of force, threats and so on.) The word anankastôs (αναγκαστως) meant "by force or constraint".
Here is a suggested translation:
Romans 13:1 Let everyone be subject to powers above him. For there is no "authority" except God's, and those "authorities" who [really] have been appointed by God. 2 So, those who opposes that Authority, have opposed the ordinance of God. And, those who oppose, will receive judgment upon themselves. 3 For those rulers are not a terror to doers of good, but to doers of evil. Would you not want to fear that Authority? Do good, and you will receive praise from him. 4 for [he] is a Servant of God, for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is a Servant of God, an Avenger, for wrath upon the evildoer. 5 On account of violence, it is necessary to be subject. Not only because of their violent power, but also because you know these things. (Author's tr.)
Romans 13:5, "violence" (Greek, anankê): The saints were forced to do what the Roman rulers told them to do, and pay taxes to them, because of the violent power the Roman rulers wielded. But, that did not mean that the Roman rulers were of God.
A note: Other bible-passages show that the saints were to obey the worldly rulers "only in the Lord". Only within limits.
Regarding verse 5 and the translation "because you know these things" (Greek, alla kai dia tên suneidêsin). The Greek-English Lexicon by Liddell and Scott shows that the noun suneidêsis meant "knowledge shared with another", with such additional meanings as "communication", "information", "knowledge", "consciousness" and "awareness", and also "complicity", "guilt", "crime" and even "consciousness of right or wrong doing", "conscience".
A note: Actually, the English word "conscience" (con-science) has the same literal meaning as the Greek noun sun-eidêsis; that is, "knowledge shared with others". But, the present-day meaning of the English word "conscience" is something quite different and obviously not what Paul's words in verse 5 refer to.
Now, what knowledge did the saints in Rome share in common? Paul told them to hold their peace and not fight back against the oppressing Roman rulers, because they knew something. What was that? Well, at least those saints knew that God would avenge the evil that the caesar and his soldiers had done and did to them. The saints were not to do that avenging, themselves; they were to leave that to God (see Romans 13:4, as translated above, regarding Jesus as the Servant of God with a sword, who would avenge).
That is what Paul had referred to, before the misleading chapter break:
Romans 12:19 not avenging yourselves, beloved, but giving place to wrath; for it is written, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, says the Lord." 20 Therefore if your enemy hungers, feed him. If he thirsts, give him drink. For in so doing you shall heap coals of fire on his head. 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. (MKJV)
We read:
Matthew 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you (MKJV)
That is not a mere "beatitude" about being nice to others. Nor was the "sermon on the mount" mere "beatitudes"; it seems that it really was about the time when Jesus comes to put an end to the rule of evil ones here on Earth.
Jesus also gave advice regarding how to live and act, while the wicked ones still control this planet.
Who were the Jews' main enemies in those days? Why, the Roman rulers and soldiers were. The context of Matthew 5:44 is clear:
Matthew 5:38 You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth." 39 But I say to you, Do not resist evil. But whoever shall strike you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. (MKJV)
Who hit the Jews, and later the saints, on the cheek? The Roman soldiers did, of course.
The next verse:
Matthew 5:40 And to him desiring to sue you, and to take away your tunic, let him have your coat also. (MKJV)
That translation makes it seem that someone sued someone else, for the purpose of getting his tunic. But, let us face the facts: In those days, it was the Romans who were in power, and handled the "matters of law". They were not interested in some Jewish fight over a shirt or a tunic. (The Greek word is chitôn, normally used of things worn under a coat, such as a tunic, something like a shirt.)
So, what does that verse mean? Again, it is clear that the Roman judges would not have taken up a case regarding a tunic or a shirt. The Roman soldiers and officers were likely to deprive a Jew of something they laid their eyes on, such as a tunic, but such robbery was done without any help from a court of law. The Greek text of Matthew 5:40, considering its context, does not really indicate taking someone to court. The Greek word in question, krinô, had many meanings, such as "to separate", "to pick out", "to choose", "to determine", "to dispute", "to contend", and so on. It is quite clear that that "contending" regarding a tunic was not done in some court of law but rather out on the streets and roads. Jesus must have meant, "If someone comes and demands your tunic, give it to him, and give him your coat as well". And then – who was likely to plunder the Jews in that way, and had the power to do that? Well, the Roman soldiers and officers, of course.
More:
Matthew 5:41 And whoever shall compel you to go a mile, go with him two. (MKJV)
Who compelled the Jews to "walk a mile"? The Roman soldiers, who were too "noble" to carry burdens themselves. They forced the locals to do that carrying for them.
More:
Matthew 5:42 Give to him who asks of you, and you shall not turn away from him who would borrow from you. (MKJV)
Again, who came to the Jew and said, "Can I borrow that coat of yours?" Or, "Can I borrow that donkey of yours?" That must have been "borrowing" in quotation marks, a euphemism, used instead of saying, "Give me that thing right away, or I'll smash your teeth." That is what occupying soldiers have done through the ages, and still do in our day also. It seems clear that Jesus' words which are recorded in Matthew 5:42, referred to the plundering Roman soldiers.
More:
Matthew 5:43 You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy." 44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you (MKJV)
Regarding the last part of verse 44: Who did persecute and despitefully use the Jews? Why, the Roman rulers and troops did.
Acts 4:26 The kings of the earth came near, and the rulers assembled together against the Lord and against His Anointed.'" (WEY)
1 Samuel 2:10 The adversaries of the LORD shall be broken in pieces; From heaven He will thunder against them. The LORD will judge the ends of the earth. "He will give strength to His king, And exalt the horn of His anointed." (NKJV)
Psalms 2:2 The kings of the earth set themselves, And the rulers take counsel together, Against the LORD and against His Anointed, saying, 3 "Let us break Their bonds in pieces And cast away Their cords from us." 4 He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; The Lord shall hold them in derision. (NKJV)
Psalms 76:12 He will cut off the spirit of princes; He is feared by the kings of the earth. (NASB-95)
Isaiah 24:21 It shall come to pass in that day That the LORD will punish on high the host of exalted ones, And on the earth the kings of the earth. (NKJV)
Zephaniah 3:8 "Therefore wait for Me," says the LORD, "Until the day I rise up for plunder; My determination is to gather the nations To My assembly of kingdoms, To pour on them My indignation, All my fierce anger; All the earth shall be devoured With the fire of My jealousy.' (NKJV)
Matthew 6:10 Let Your kingdom come; let Your will be done, as it is in Heaven, also on the earth. (LIT)
Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great ones, and the rich ones, and the commanders, and the powerful ones, and every slave, and every freeman hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains. 16 And "they said to the mountains" and to the rocks, "Fall on us," and hide us from the face of the One sitting on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb (LIT)
Revelation 17:2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the ones inhabiting the earth became drunk from the wine of her fornication. (LIT)
Revelation 18:3 because of the wine of the anger of her fornication which all the nations have drunk, even the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her; and the merchants of the earth became rich from the power of her luxury. (LIT)
Revelation 19:19 And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth, and their armies being assembled to make war with the One sitting on the horse, and with His army. (LIT)
If the kings (rulers) mentioned in those passages were "appointed by God" and "servants of God", as some have claimed this world's rulers to be, then why would Jesus destroy them when he returns? But he will destroy them.
The Bible shows that the kings and rulers of this world are usurpers. They are not appointed by God.
But: Jesus, Peter, Paul and the others told the saints, for avoiding unnecessary trouble, to do what the worldly rulers demanded (but not all things; only "in the Lord").
In short: This planet was then, and still is, in rebel hands. That is why Jesus will come again: To put an end to that rebellion, and to free this world from the wicked rulers who control it today.
Paul wrote to the saints in Rome:
Romans 13:6 For because of this you also pay taxes [...] (NASB-95)
"Because of this" – because of what?
The 1769 KJ version makes it seem that the Roman caesars (who in the Greek language were called theoi, and their servants leitourgoi), supposedly were "God's servants":
[...] for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. (KJV-1769)
Is that correct?
The Greek wording was leitourgoi theou. What did the word leitourgos mean, in old Greek? And, who really was the theos of that passage?
The word leitourgos had many meanings, but those that are relevant in this context are "a public minister", "a servant of the state" and "the servants of a king". Even the Roman lictors were called leitourgoi. And again: The Roman caesars were called theos (theoi).
Point: It seems that the apostle Paul used the phrase leitourgoi theou as a reference to the Roman officials, perhaps especially to the tax collectors.
Even in those days, the tax-man "attended continually" to his job, without ever giving up. If necessary, they used soldiers as help. So, what could the saints do, except pay the Roman taxes? Trying to avoid the unavoidable would only have caused trouble for them. That is the reasonable way to understand Romans 13:6. But also, once again: It could well be that Paul who was wise with words, on purpose wrote that letter with words that could be understood in different ways. Thus, if the Romans officials got hold of it, they would not have had anything to complain about. They would have seen that Paul told the believers to pay their taxes, and they would have seen (thought) that he called the caesar theos and his tax-collectors leitourgoi – which is what they were called, in the Greek language. In the Roman empire, people were demanded to swear allegiance to the caesar. In fact, people were demanded to worship the caesar as a god (theos). But the saints in Rome, on the other hand, would understand what Paul really meant – and, it could also be that Paul had instructed the person who carried that letter, to tell the believers in Rome what he really was saying.
Here is that verse, as it was in the original KJ version (1611):
In plain text:
Romans 13:7 Render therfore to all their dues, tribute to whom tribute is due, custome to whome custome, feare to whome feare, honour to whom honour. (KJV-1611)
Taxes and custom dues were to be given to the caesar. But what about the fear (Greek, phobos) which is mentioned in Romans 13:7? What did Paul mean? Perhaps the answer is found in Jesus' words here:
Matthew 10:28 Be not be afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot destroy the future life, but rather fear him who can destroy both life and body in gehenna. (Dia-BW)
The Roman rulers and their soldiers were of the kind who "kill the body".
The saints were to put their trust in God. They were not to fear the worldly rulers, not even when they threatened to take the saints' life or actually did that. Those rulers could take the saints' earthly lives only.
So, the saints were not to fear the Roman rulers and soldiers who could kill their bodies. Instead, they were to fear the true God in Heaven. ("Fear", in the meaning that they were to obey God, instead of obeying men.)
Then there is the matter of "honour to whom honour", in Romans 13:7. Now, were the saints to worship the caesar, as was normal in the Roman empire? Of course not. And anyway, no honour was due the ruthless, ungodly Roman rulers. The honour the saints were to give, was due to the heavenly Ruler, Jesus, and his Father.
But, Paul explained that as far as possible, the saints were to avoid trouble:
Romans 12:18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men. (NASB-95, highlighting added)
In other words, is Jesus nevertheless the chief of the kings of this world, and they his servants?
This has to do with the following wording in the 1769 KJ version:
Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood (KJV-1769)
Now, what kings does that passage refer to? Perhaps those among whom Jesus is the Chief and Firstborn. That is: The saints.
It seems that Revelation 1:5 refers to the saints in their changed form, as immortals, in their future role as rulers or judges here on Earth (together with Jesus, when he returns with his holy ones). Jesus is their "prince". But, the present-day rulers of this world are enemies of Jesus.
(The essay ew01b.htm considers why God allows evil, pain and suffering.)
The 1769 KJ version has this wording:
Revelation 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. (KJV-1769)
What kings are these? The obvious answer: Saints who have become immortals. Revelation 21:24 cannot be about mortal kings, because the Bible shows that only saved ones (read: saints who have been resurrected/changed and become immortals) are able to enter the heavenly, spiritual City which that verse refers to. The saints, who now are immortals in the heavenly sphere, will in the future function as "rulers of the earth". They bring their "glory" into that heavenly City, in that way honouring God. ("Glory": That is, praise, as the Greek word in question could also mean.)
A note: At this web site, the word "saints" refers to spirit-filled people of the apostles' day, just as it does in the New Testament. Regarding eventual "sainthood" for people who live here on Earth today, see the essay eg03c.htm.
Many (Freemason-inspired) preachers have claimed that the "throne" (kingly lineage) of the ancient king David would still be in existence here on Earth, with an active ruler. That is sometimes used as a part of "the divine right of kings" (or "heavenly right") and "blue blood" deception. A note: The phrase "blue blood" does not refer to the colour of the blood, but to the blue colour of the sky, heaven. That has to do with the claim of having a "heavenly right to rule", and being of a "heavenly bloodline".
But, who really has "David's throne", today? The Bible has the answer: Jesus does. The essay ey12b.htm has more on that subject.
Table of contents – What's new here? – Key-word index – Search function – Goal and purpose – Contact, comment, question
If this page did not contain what you were looking for, see the links below, and the key-word index and the table of contents, or use the search function.
Additional reading at the Bible Pages, on related as well as other issues:
A clarifying explanation of the short names for the bible-versions quoted or mentioned at this site, such as that NKJV stands for New King James Version, YLT for Young's Literal translation, HCSB for Holman Christian Standard Bible, NRSV for the New Revised Standard Version, and so on. → es09c.htm
Jesus warned his disciples about false prophets, teachers of falsehood, deceivers and deception. He said that many would be deceived. → eo09e.htm
The King James bible, the Authorised Version – is it somehow "the inspired Word of God", better than other translations, or a particularly "holy" bible-version, or the best or most exact or accurate one as some have claimed? Also: In what way or sense is it authoritative, or, who "authorised" it? This essay has some details of the story behind the King James translation or KJV, including the men who were involved in producing it. Two examples of pages in KJV-1611 are included as well; one is an image showing the page with Hebrews 1, the other is a PDF-file containing a facsimile, picture format copy of the book of Matthew in the year 1611 edition of the King James version. There are also some brief remarks on the so-called "Received Text" or Textus Receptus, the Greek NT text compilation produced by the Catholic priest Gerrit Gerritszoon ("Erasmus"). → es03c.htm
Many people wonder, why does God allow evil, sickness, pain, war and suffering? What is the biblical answer – does the Bible explain that matter, or in some way make it understandable? → ew01b.htm
Some notes regarding the ancient Greek word theos, including its eventual origin and meaning. → eo15c.htm
The concepts "saint" and "sainthood" analysed. Does the Bible define or clarify who is a saint and what sainthood consists of? Also: Are there saints here on Earth, in our day? What do the Scriptures say concerning these things? Further: What is the etymology of the word "saint", and what does it really mean? → eg03c.htm
Gentiles, pagans and heathen or heathens – what do those words mean? This exposition makes it plain and clear what the concepts "gentile", "pagan" and "heathen" actually refer to, in the Bible. → eg01c.htm
What does the Bible say about Satan the Devil? Various things regarding mankind's arch-enemy. → ed04c.htm
Freemasonry and Freemason halls – things believers should know about them. → ew04d.htm
The line of David the king of Israel – is it still ruling somewhere on Earth, with a mortal king on the throne? → ey12b.htm
The lost ten tribes of Israel in prophecy. What happened to Israel's northern tribes? Where are they today? Does the Bible give any clues regarding their fate? → ey01b.htm
What does the Bible say about authority? Who has biblical, spiritual or religious authority on the mundane, human level? Who can speak for God? Knowing the answers to those questions is a vital key to understanding the Bible in a better and deeper way. → es06d.htm
A challenge for all believers, regarding something very important. → ew06b.htm
Check your bible knowledge. A basic self-test with 15 biblical questions (with answers and commentary). → es04b.htm
Power among Jesus' disciples. What powers were given to the apostles, and to the saints in general? Also: Did the apostle Peter receive some special powers? → ea09b.htm
On Jesus' teaching regarding "the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven" or "the keys of the Reign of Heaven". Bible study notes on Matthew 16 verse 19, with context. What did the word "keys" depict or symbolise? What is the interpretation of that passage – what was it that Jesus was saying to his disciples? Also, a general overview and comments on the subject of "binding and loosing". → eb08c.htm
The Babylon of the book of Revelation, what or where is it? What about the Beast, or beasts, that are mentioned in the book of Daniel and in the book of Revelation? → ew03b.htm
How to understand the Bible. Easy keys to interpreting and understanding Scripture in a better and deeper way, by avoiding certain fundamental but common mistakes and errors in bible study. These vital keys are really the basics for objective bible study. Knowing these keys will make many things easier to interpret and comprehend, and one will see several central matters in the Bible from a new and different perspective, especially in connection with the Gospels and the Epistles. → eg02c.htm
What is the Kingdom of God? Where is it located? Does it exist already, or is it only going to be established in the future? Or, is it only something "in the hearts of men" as some have claimed, quoting the translation "within you" in Luke 17:21? → eo01b.htm
What does the Bible say about the antichrist or antichrists? The meaning of the Greek word antichristos. Also: The apostle John spoke about multiple antichristoi, plural, not a singular one only. → eo02d.htm
Matthew 6:33, "But seek first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you". What did Jesus mean? How were the disciples to go about "seeking the Kingdom"? Also, what did the expression "all these things" really refer to, and when and where were those things to be "added" to those disciples? → eo10d.htm
Info on the goal and purpose of this site, and a contact address.
→
purpose.htm
Table of contents for this site, including a synopsis or a short, summary description
of each essay or article. →
filename.htm
Search for specific words, phrases or bible passages at this site. →
search.htm
An alphabetical bible topic keyword index of the essays and articles at this site:
1-9
– A
– B
– C
– D
– E
– F
– G
– H
– I
– J
– K
– L
– M
– N
– O
– P
– Q
– R
– S
– T
– U
– V
– W
– X
– Y – Z –
Detailed index overview
If you find any of the essays or treatises at this site interesting and helpful, please provide a copy to other people as well. But before printing or distributing anything, make sure to get the very latest version, exactly as it is, directly from this web site. In regard to printable copies of these pages, for example as PDF-format papers, booklets or brochures or so – there are no specially printer friendly variants (except some bible puzzles), nor is there a need for that – simply, when you print an essay, set the margins and the text size to fit your needs and the paper you use, in the program you use for viewing these pages, and then send it to your printer. (This varies in different browsers and word processing programs. In web browsers, for setting the margin size and headers and footers, look for "Print Format" in the File menu; to set the text size for print-out, look under "Preview" or "View" in the same menu.)
Important: You are welcome to quote the documents at this site – the Bible Pages – provided that you mention the source, by giving the full web address to the page in question. Please link to these essays and give copies to friends. However, you may not re-publish any part of the contents of this site, as a booklet, brochure or on the Internet or in other ways, without a permission from the author; he retains the copyright. For more on copying and quoting, and a few words about the author and his religious education and credentials, see the page purpose.htm.
The essays at this site are not in "bible lesson" or "bible study course" format, nor are they meant as on-line "bible study classes" of some kind. Even though this site gives ready answers to biblical questions of many kinds, its main goal is providing food for thought on a variety of biblical subjects, and challenging and encouraging people to get started with deep personal bible study and then continue with that. (Many religious organisations and denominations have their bible lessons and correspondence courses; they are ready-made "studies" which are shrewdly constructed and written in such a manner that they lead the reader to conclusions that fit the dogmas of the group in question.) A careful, closer study of the books of the Bible with proper tools will help a believer to gain better and deeper biblical understanding. In that way, one will find out more about what the Bible really says, means and teaches. One can then, with wisdom, use that knowledge as a guide for one's life, instead of accepting as "biblical truths" whatever commercial religion – churches and their ministers (preachers) – have taught and want people to believe.
A more thorough, bible-based study with care and with thought will, not only help one to learn more, but also show one how many a popular belief has no scriptural basis or support but is altogether false and not biblical at all. This applies, not only to prophecy and "end time" related things, but also to many other subjects where prevailing dogmas are often taken "for granted". For this reason, it is extremely important for believers to personally study the Writings, and to thoroughly analyse them down to the smaller details, in order to find out the real facts. For doing that, it is not necessary to know the Hebrew, Greek or Latin languages (even though learning their letters and alphabet can be a good idea); there are modern, advanced tools which can help one to study in an effective way – see the pages es01d.htm and es02c.htm for more on this. The essay eg02c.htm supplies a number of easy, elementary keys to acquiring a better and deeper understanding of the Bible, simply by consciously and methodically avoiding certain usual errors and pitfalls.
This site is non-denominational and non-sectarian. It is not connected to any church, sect or religious organisation or movement. This site looks at things from a biblical perspective, and not from a dogmatic one. It does not claim to be without error or to "know it all" or to have a perfect or complete explanation to all things – it consists of an ongoing bible study that has been made public, and as the study goes on, the contents of these pages are revised and also expanded, with new topics and themes being addressed. Readers are invited and welcome to write to the author with thoughts and comments, or to ask questions or to point out a mistake if they feel that they have found one. For more on this, see the page purpose.htm.
The address to this page is www.biblepages.web.surftown.se/ew02c.htm
Please send or mention the address to this site to others, and link to these pages.
This page was created or modified 2010-02-25.