Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Romans Commentary Chapters 9-16  /  Romans 13:1-7 Submit to the Governing Authorities Part Two  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 5
Paul’s command to be subject “not only on account of wrath, but also for conscience sake” is applied to things like taxes and avoiding fraud; what does this reveal about God as the one who watches even when the state cannot detect wrongdoing, and how might that challenge loophole-hunting or “technically legal” behavior Christians justify today?
Another way to ask: Paul says obey not just to avoid punishment, but for conscience, and he connects this to paying taxes and not cheating. What does that say about God watching us even when the state can’t, and how should it affect “legal but shady” choices Christians make?

Direct Answer Based on the transcript, “for conscience sake” means Christians obey not merely to avoid punishment but because God is watching and disobedience to the state (where lawful) is also disobedience to God. That challenges “loophole” thinking because the true issue is integrity before God, not whether the government can prove wrongdoing.

Support from Transcript:

  • Romans 13:5 is quoted: “subject not only on account of wrath, but also for conscience sake.”
  • Bercot explains: Christians don’t obey “merely to avoid the wrath of the government,” but to avoid “the displeasure of God.”
  • Key point: “Even if they can’t avoid the detection of the government, Christians know God is observing them.”
  • He says: “If they disobey Caesar, they are also disobeying God.”
  • Tertullian connects taxes with honesty: paying taxes is “a matter of conscience… the same as the faithfulness that keeps us from committing fraud upon a brother.”
  • Ambrosiaster warns that those who avoid tax “by some subterfuge…will not escape God’s judgment.”
Discussion Follow-ups Where do Christians justify behavior as acceptable because it is “legal” even when it’s evasive or dishonest? How would decisions change if we acted as people who believe God sees what the state cannot?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10
Back Questions Next