Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The Audit of Romans 13:1
Friends, we stand today at a critical juncture, ready to engage in a profound excavation of a single verse, Romans 13:1, using the surgical tools of the Another Gospel Detection System. This system is designed not to read into the text, but to fish out what is actually there, revealing the often-subtle shifts in posture that have been introduced over centuries of institutional translation. Our mission is to move beyond the surface reading of “subjection” and recover the dimensional, covenantal logic that the apostle Sha’ul (Shä-ool) — Paul originally transmitted to the assemblies in Romí (Rō-mē) — Rome. We will trace the journey of the verse from the ancient source codices—the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus—through the academic tools of BDAG, and finally into the institutional English of the NASB, exposing any reversal of agency and restoration along the way. Our goal is to uncover whether the current rendering qualifies for the indictment of “another gospel,” as warned against by Sha’ul (Shä-ool) himself. This is not a quick audit; it is a deep immersion into the fidelity of the Creator’s word.
The initial presentation of the verse under scrutiny is: “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.” This institutional English rendering serves as our target, the final product that the assembly receives, which we must now superimpose upon the original covenantal voice. Our inputs for this audit are the Source Texts: the Aleppo and Leningrad codices for the Hebrew context, though our primary focus here is the Greek of the New Testament drawn from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Our tools are the Literal Interlinear Translation and the BDAG (Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich) Lexicon for Greek, utilizing the target of the Institutional English, specifically the NASB.
The audit process begins with a meticulous scan of Romans 13:1, extracting and parsing every single word. The extraction uses the Literal Interlinear to preserve the most minimal copulative context in a vertical format, allowing us to see the original, uncompromised components. For instance, the opening phrase contains Πᾶσα ψυχὴ (Pah-sah psy-khē), which literally translates to “Whole life-force” or “Every soul,” not merely “Every person.” This single word, ψυχὴ (psy-khē), carries the full weight of the dimensional being, the very thing that the messiah came to restore. When we parse this using BDAG, the institutional lens immediately begins to soften the nuance; while BDAG may offer “soul, life,” its common institutional usage flattens it into “person,” effectively reducing the scope of the covenantal command from the entirety of one’s being to a simple social unit. Likewise, the crucial verb ὑποτασσέσθω (hy-po-tas-ses-thō), which is rendered in the NASB as “be in subjection,” is a command rooted in τάσσω (tassō), meaning “to set in order, arrange, or array.” The literal covenantal translation is a much more active “Let it be arrayed under” or “set in order beneath.” BDAG’s parsing, “To subject, submit oneself,” abstracts the active, intentional arraying into a more generalized, passive submission. This careful, vertical parsing is essential, for it preserves the phonetic, grammatical, and covenantal nuance before the final sentence structure is even considered, guarding the active role of the life-force.
Moving to the superimposition phase, we perform a line-by-line comparison, specifically looking for where the essential posture, agency, or covenantal logic has been altered. We see an immediate shift in the three translations presented horizontally. The Literal Interlinear Translation yields: “Whole life-force let it be arrayed under the surpassing delegated-powers, for not it is delegated-power if not from God, and the ones now existing under God having been set-in-order they are.” This is the covenantal voice. The Institutional Translation, reconstructed from the generalized BDAG definitions, presents: “Every person let it be submitted to the superior powers, for there is not authority if not from God, and the existing ones by God have been appointed.” Finally, the Compromised Translation (NASB) states: “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.” When viewed simultaneously, the shift is visible. It moves from an active, relational command addressed to the ψυχὴ (psy-khē) concerning a detailed arraying (ὑποτασσέσθω) beneath a set-in-order (τεταγμέναι – teh-tag-me-naī) agency, to a passive command directed at the generic “person” for simple “subjection” to an “established” authority. This subtle erosion of precision is our first sign of compromised fidelity.
The tagging of discrepancies brings these shifts into sharp focus. We find three subtle but potent alterations. The first is the flattening of ψυχὴ (psy-khē) from the covenantal “life-force/being” to the less dimensional “person.” This is a subtle substitution that minimizes the scope of the command. The second is the softening of ὑποτασσέσθω (hy-po-tas-ses-thō), where the active, positional alignment of “Let it be arrayed under/set in order beneath” is weakened to the passive “be in subjection,” implying mere passive obedience rather than an intentional self-ordering. The third is the flattening of τεταγμέναι (teh-tag-me-naī) from “Having been set in order/arrayed,” which speaks of a precise, systemic, and relational divine structure, to the general declaration “established.” An analogy here would be the difference between a finely tuned timepiece with every gear meticulously arrayed for synchronous function, and a simple rock structure merely “established” on the ground. The difference is one of relational complexity and dimensional requirement. The shift is always away from complexity and toward simplicity, away from relational fidelity and toward institutional abstraction.
We now extract the Audit Stack, beginning with the Literal Interlinear and the Institutional English, which we have already reviewed, and moving to the Posture Audit. This is where the descriptive and elaborate commentary details how covenantal agency and dimensional fidelity are altered. The core finding is a Substitution and Flattening of the term ψυχὴ (psy-khē). The command is to the entire life-force to actively self-order. The English rendering reduces this obligation from a full covenantal alignment of one’s entire being—the ψυχὴ—into a purely social-political obligation of the individual “person.” This is followed by a dramatic Agency Reduction in the verb ὑποτασσέσθω. The covenantal logic demands a conscious, intentional, and ordered self-positioning within God’s pre-existing, arrayed structure—an active covenantal agency, akin to a soldier choosing to align precisely with the ranks for battle (Romans 6:13, “and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God,” NASB). The institutional translation shifts the posture to one of passive, generic obedience to the civil authority, thereby diminishing the believer’s active, dimensional role in the ordering process. The emphasis is moved from the believer’s self-ordering for covenantal fidelity to the external authority’s control. The subtle but effective Relational Logic Softening in τεταγμέναι from “set in order/arrayed” to “established” completes the shift, making God’s action a simple founding event rather than an ongoing, precise, and positional ordering that demands a responsive, arrayed posture from the believer. The high-fidelity covenantal requirement is swapped for low-fidelity social compliance.
The Dimensional Consequence section is where the true cost of this posture shift is exposed. The most significant consequence is the Compromise of the Believer’s Role. By reducing the obligation from the ψυχὴ (whole being) being arrayed/set in order to the person being passively subjected, the mandate shifts from a dimensional, internal work of covenantal self-ordering to a two-dimensional, external political duty. The restoration of the ψυχὴ—the core life-force—is bypassed. An analogy is found in the Tabernacle: the original text demands the covenant member to be one of the precisely measured and arrayed curtains or vessels, each in its correct τάξις (taxis – order) within the complex. The translation, however, asks only that the member simply sit quietly outside the structure. The result is the Compromise of Yehoshua’s Cure. The cure delivered by Yehoshua (Yod-Heh-Waw-Shin-Ayin) is relational and dimensional, designed to restore the ψυχὴ to its original ordered place under YHWH. When the required response is flattened into passive subjection to an external political body, the unique, restorative function of the messiah’s blood offering—which enables the internal and external self-arraying in truth—is sidelined in favor of an institutionalized civic submission. The gospel becomes a system of civil loyalty rather than a dynamic of internal, covenantal restoration. This leads to the Withholding of Covenantal Restoration because the posture shift obscures the specific kind of subjection (self-ordering) required. The original text demands a dimensional alignment (the ψυχὴ under the τάξις of the ἐξουσίαις of YHWH), not just a legal one. The shift to “be in subjection” allows the believer to compartmentalize this duty, failing to bring their entire ψυχὴ into the active, arrayed fidelity necessary for dimensional restoration and priesthood, as detailed in Romans 6:4, “Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life,” (NASB). The final determination is clear: the systematic flattening of dimensional, covenantal terms into two-dimensional, institutional/civic concepts fundamentally alters the believer’s required internal posture and agency, replacing the active, ordered positioning of one’s entire being with a passive, external, political obedience. This shift in requirement qualifies the rendering for the indictment of “another gospel.”
The Teaching Module is titled: Romans 13:1 — Arraying the Soul: How Passive Subjection Erases the Covenantal Order. The reversal of covenantal agency is the qualifying evidence for “another gospel.” The difference in posture is the smoking gun. Sha’ul (Shä-ool) warned the Galatians against those who would shift the gospel: “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!” (Galatians 1:8, NASB). The posture of the believer is everything. The original Greek calls for a full dimensional alignment of the ψυχὴ (psy-khē) under the τάξις (taxis – order) of the delegated powers. This active, self-arraying is the very mechanism of spiritual growth and relational fidelity. When the verse is rendered as a simple, passive political compliance, the original covenantal requirement—the doing of the priesthood—is replaced by mere civic performance. The institutional rendering preaches a path that can be walked without the full forensic cure of Yehoshua (Yod-Heh-Waw-Shin-Ayin). The messiah’s offering was not just to cure the disease of sin, but to restore the ψυχὴ to a state capable of this precise, ordered self-alignment. When the translation removes the requirement for the arraying of the soul and replaces it with the simple subjection of the person, it offers a solution that is less than the cure, a mechanism of social conformity that falls short of covenantal restoration.
In conclusion, the audit of Romans 13:1 using the Threefold Superimposition method reveals a powerful and consistent pattern of compromise. The covenantal voice, which requires the ψυχὴ (the very core of the life-force) to be arrayed (ὑποτασσέσθω) into the precise order (τεταγμέναι) of YHWH’s delegated powers, is systematically obscured. The institutional gloss and the final English translation replace this active, dimensional, and relational mandate with a passive, external, and purely political one—the “person” being put into “subjection” to an “established” authority. This substitution is not benign. It represents a fundamental reversal of covenantal agency, shifting the burden of response from the believer’s active, ordered self-presenting to the civil authority’s passive acceptance of one’s compliance. This compromise functionally detaches the requirement of civil obedience from the internal, restorative work of the messiah, thereby creating a standard of relationship with God that is less than the full, dimensional cure. Because the translation creates a mechanism of supposed righteousness—political obedience—that operates independent of the full restoration and self-arraying of the soul, it meets the threshold for indictment. It preaches a functional gospel of civil loyalty, an ethical shadow that falls far short of the relational reality of the covenantal order established and restored by Yehoshua (Yod-Heh-Waw-Shin-Ayin). The posture shift is the evidence, and the resulting compromised agency is the consequence. The audience must be fully aware that in this rendering, they are being asked to pursue only external compliance, while the true, internal, dimensional command of the Father for the arraying of the ψυχὴ remains unaddressed and obscured.
