Is this kind of ad hoc interpretations dishonest?

[Justin108]

Romans is pretty precise here - "there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God". There is a marked difference between allowing something and establishing something.

It seems to me like you're selectively interpreting Romans 13:1 in a way to absolve God of any responsibility. A bit dishonest, wouldn't you say?

According to the NWT (you know, the translation Jehovah's Witnesses use)

Romans 13:1 Let every person be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God.

We interpre the word "placed" to mean allowed. Each one can interpret scripture as they see fit, I'm just sharing ours.

[Zzyzx]

.
It appears as though when people fervently desire to believe Bible stories they allow themselves to accept STRANGE definitions of words in order to make seemingly irrational statements make sense to them.

Not everyone is willing to re-define words to bail out Bible stories.

[theophile]

See a response I gave in another thread...

• I think you're playing a dangerous (albeit traditional) game with Romans 13 and missing the subversive intent of it. You should really read Jacob Taubes on Romans - see the Political Theology of Paul.
  
  To summarize, on the surface, Romans sounds, well, pro Roman! But this is precisely because Paul's writings (and readers) would have to survive the Censors... Paul knew that, and so cloaked his teachings in a pro Roman front. That makes them extremely dangerous, that we will miss the point and be fooled like the Censors were and see them as pro Roman.
  
  But here is the point: there is a deep, subversive undercurrent in Romans for those with ears to hear it. In this case, Romans 13, you'll notice that Paul is not speaking of Caesar (or Pharaoh) as the true governing authority, but rather Christ. Christ is the true authority on earth, the one established by God that we need not fear so long as we do what is right... Pivotal line is Romans 13:4, which states who the authority is as the very essence of Christ: "For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good."
  
  That is Jesus. The leader who serves. Not himself, but others. A servant for the good of others. (That is decidedly not Pharaoh or Caesar... Pharaoh is clearly not serving Israel's good but only his own good, as the context setting of Exodus and Pharaoh's hardening heart makes clear...)
  
  So yes, pay taxes to this true authority, to Christ, because Christ is an authority that serves the good of others. For those with an ear for the subversiveness of Romans, they would not have heard it saying to pay taxes to Rome at all. But to oppose these false authorities in the world.