Bible Laws on
Righteous Judgment
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Slander
Stumbling Blocks
Perjury
The Law of the Double Witness
The PTL Scandal
The Supreme Court of God
Equal Weights and Measures
The Woman Caught in Adultery
The Benjamite War
God's Sovereignty; Man's Authority
The Saints Shall Judge the World
Discerning True Justice
God's True Method of Subduing the Earth
Download
a Free PDF Copy of This Book
“Thou shalt not bear false witness
against thy neighbor.”
(Exodus 20:16)
The ninth commandment (above)
is a summarized statement, a brief heading under which we find a number
of laws governing court procedure. More specifically, this commandment
regulates such things as slander, perjury, lying, double witnesses needed
to convict anyone of any sin, and the principles of justice and mercy
in general. Knowing these laws are critical in order to discern correctly
and render righteous judgment, both in the divine court and in our personal
lives.
5
Whoever secretly slanders his neighbor, him I will destroy; no one who
has a haughty look and an arrogant heart will I endure. (Psalm 101:5,
NASB)
In general, slander is falsely accusing another with the intent of destroying
his reputation. It is usually done when the slanderer has no real proof
of his victim’s guilt. (If he did have proof, he would not be afraid to
follow the biblical procedure, in which case, it would not be slander
at all.) Thus, he tells others his opinions of that person in hopes that
others will come to share his opinion. By definition, slander is always
wrong because (1) it is accusation that is implemented improperly, and
(2) it is devoid of love and is not intended to restore the victim in
any way to full fellowship.
Dr. Dungoody, pastor, had a problem. A Bible teacher in his congregation
was getting too popular, a little too popular, due to his knowledge, eloquence,
and personality. The problem was that if he were ever to disagree with
the pastor, a large share of the congregation might agree with him, and
there could then be a danger of splitting the church.
Fearing a church split over an issue in the future that might arise, Pastor
Dungoody viewed this Bible teacher with some suspicion and jealousy, watching
him for signs that might indicate trouble.
It was not long before this Bible teacher committed an offense. The pastor
immediately seized the opportunity to protest against the teacher. He
got up into the pulpit the following week and “exposed the sin in the
camp,” complete with Scripture and denunciation, and all the tears and
“love” that he could muster.
The Bible teacher was shocked by the fact that he had been given no private
hearing, but was accused in public first. The lack of love left him hurt
and embittered, and so he left the church never to return again. The pastor
was then delighted to give a follow-up sermon entitled, “Wolves in Sheep’s
Clothing Never Repent.”
This is the story of many people outside the Church today, people who felt
the full “wrath of God” pronounced upon them by an unloving church whose
philosophy was to “cut the cancer from their midst,” with no real desire
to restore the sinner or come to any understanding with the offender or
sinner.
This is but one example of slander that occurs far too frequently today
in churches that preach love but know not how to put it into practice.
Such preachers (and others) disguise their slander with Scripture and
hide their true inner motives—in this case, fear—by masking it with concern
for the church.
The purpose of God is that all sinners should be brought back into full
fellowship with God and men. As God sees it, the real purpose of the law
is to teach righteousness. Isaiah 26:9 says,
9.
. . For when the earth experiences Thy judgments, the inhabitants of the
world learn righteousness.
Thus, the divine law is to be implemented in a positive way to bring about
the restoration of the sinner. This can be done only when the law
is applied by one motivated by the spirit of love and meekness. Gal. 6:1
says,
1
Brethren, even if a man is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual,
restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking
to yourself, lest you too be tempted.
The slanderer is malicious in that he aims to provoke his victim into outright
rebellion. Our Pastor Dungoody was bright enough to realize that if he
approached the problem scripturally and restored him, the Bible teacher
would remain in the church, be a better person for the correction, and
would continue to gain in popularity. Thus, the pastor’s problem would
still be there. But if he could provoke the teacher into reacting to the
false accusation, the law would then have grounds by which to judge him.
And so the obvious solution was to attack him from the pulpit by slander,
knowing that his victim would then react to this lack of love by fighting
back in like manner.
Slander cannot bring God’s lawful judgment upon the victim of slander.
But when the victim’s reaction to the slander is unlawful, he too falls
into condemnation to some extent, and the slanderer rejoices in his heart
for a job well done, while crying outwardly for the benefit of the public.
Most of the people, though hurt, remain unaware of the underlying motives
and political games that are being played in their midst, using them as
pawns.
14
You shall not curse a deaf man, nor place a stumblingblock before the
blind, but you shall revere your God; I am the LORD. (Lev. 19:14)
Most people view this law as largely irrelevant to Christians today, because
few would abuse the handicapped like this. But “the law is spiritual”
(Rom. 7:14), and the spirit of this law is violated more often than we
realize.
Pastor Harshly has studied the Bible carefully and has discovered that
many Christian denominations are in grave error, teaching false doctrines,
practicing the traditions of men, and leading millions astray. So he stands
in the pulpit and denounces them heartily, calling them “prophets of Baal”
and proving every point from the Scriptures. He even manages to prove
that his motive in denouncing these “prophets of Baal” is out of love
for their deceived congregations.
The “offending church” hears about the denunciation and reacts immediately
with a tirade of its own. Each believes the other to be blind to “the
truth.” Neither church can hear the other amid the din of war.
Every church believes the “other denomination” is teaching falsehood. It
will ever be so. But the manner in which these doctrinal differences are
handled will reveal the true heart of the people, particularly the leadership.
Each considers the other to be both deaf and blind. Yet they freely denounce
and curse the deaf. It is sad enough that many people are blind to the
truth, but then we so easily put a stumblingblock in front of them by
our lack of love. Every time we beat people over the head with our “truth,”
we ensure that they will NEVER believe the truth, because we have put
a stumblingblock in front of them.
A new clock radio can make a wonderful gift, but if it is hurled at someone,
it may be perceived as a lethal weapon!
The word stumblingblock also means “an offense,” and it is thus
translated many times in Scripture. It is so easy to offend people by
beating them over the head with our truth. This is not only the wrong
way to do it, it is outright sin. It violates the spirit of Leviticus
19:14, quoted earlier. We should instead be speaking the truth in love
(Eph. 4:15). This is the only way we can hope to heal the blind and the
deaf.
How often have I heard people complain that their friends or their church
will not listen to them when they try to teach them some truth. There
are many possible causes for their not listening, of course, but I have
found that when truth is given in genuine unconditional love, most people
will listen (no longer deaf), and many will see it and believe.
The Hebrew word for stumblingblock is mikshole, an obstacle or
enticement. In the New Testament, the Greek word used is usually skandalon,
a snare or trap. There are at least two ways we lay traps for others.
The first is by offending someone to the place where that person will
not believe anything we say, including the truth. In Matthew 18:6, 7 Jesus
said,
6
But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble,
it is better for him that a heavy millstone be hung around his neck, and
that he be drowned in the depth of the sea.
7
Woe to the world because of its stumblingblocks! For it is inevitable
that stumblingblocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumblingblock
comes!
Jesus considered it a very
serious matter when men put a stumbling-block in front of someone else
to cause them to fall, or to trap them in their sin or unbelief by our
unloving attitude toward them. The Apostle Paul warned the church also
about such people in Romans 16:17,
17
Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions
and hindrances [skandalon]
contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them.
On occasion I have had people play such games with me, attempting to trap
me by my own words. A more “friendly” example of this is as follows: On
December 1, 1985 Jesus revealed to me that a pastor friend was going to
resign the church on December 30 (that is, 29 days later). Being disturbed
by this, knowing this was not God’s will, I called a few intercessors
together the next day to pray and see if we could do anything about the
situation. Jesus confirmed to the whole group my discernment.
A week later, in the course of conversation, I mentioned this discernment
to a friend who enjoyed playing little games of “Trap Jones.” He had heard
that there were some who believed me to be a prophet, and since he did
not believe in prophets, he used these little games to prove his point.
(He was also under the mistaken idea that anyone who hears from the Lord
is a prophet.) It soon became obvious that he had made note of my discernment
in order to use it to poke some friendly fun at me after December 30—when
the event did not come to pass. He continually reminded me over the next
few weeks of what I had said.
On the evening of December 29th, the discernment was very powerfully
confirmed to me once again, and so I called for a day of prayer and fasting
for the next day. Three of us participated in the fast.
The evening of the 30th came, and we held our usual church men’s
meeting. After about two hours, the pastor suddenly stood up and left
the house abruptly, obviously very upset, saying only that he was quitting
the church. As he left, everyone else was in a state of shock. They all
looked at me wide-eyed and open-mouthed. My disbelieving friend was sitting
across the room from me. He was so astonished that he could only blurt
out: “Now I know that you’re a prophet!”
It is hard to protest the label in such situations, so I did not try. Most
people have the mistaken belief that anyone who hears God’s voice must
be a prophet, especially if it takes the form of a prediction. Yet God
intended that all would hear His voice. So there is a difference between
prophesying and the office of a prophet. Many can prophesy in the sense
of hearing and then speaking what they heard God say; but not all who
do so hold the office of a prophet.
Anyway, this situation did make a believer out of my friend—at least for
a week or so. I was hardly impressed by his confession, knowing that men’s
persuasions are subject to change with the next perceived failure of a
Word to turn out in the manner one expects. Sure enough, about a week
later, he returned for round two. He walked into the room where I was
working and asked me with a friendly chuckle, “Well, Mr. Jones, what’s
the next big event, and when will it take place?”
Frankly, I had given it little or no thought. But suddenly God stepped
in and took up the challenge. I gave him the answer before I even knew
it myself. I said that this same pastor was going to receive the baptism
of the Holy Spirit, and that it would come through a pastor named Joe
MacReynolds who had a church in Searcy, Arkansas, about 50 miles away.
[I had met this pastor a few months earlier.] Further, I told him that
this would occur the evening of January 26, 1986 (i.e., in about three
weeks).
Well, this time my friend really thought he had me in a trap. Pentecostal
friends had been trying unsuccessfully to get this pastor to receive the
baptism of the Holy Spirit for over twenty years. He had consistently
refused it on the grounds that he already believed in the Holy Spirit.
My friend was astonished and said, “Not in a million years! You really
think he will get the Holy Spirit baptism?”
In the wake of my other work,
I quickly forgot this incident until the big day arrived. As I was working
that afternoon, I suddenly received a telephone call from my friend, Jerry,
informing me that Pastor Joe MacReynolds was in town and had requested
to meet with us that evening. After glancing at the calendar, I immediately
consented, knowing that God had sent him. He was precisely on schedule
without any help from me.
I then called the other pastor and told him very frankly that if he wished
to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit, this was the time and place,
and the one called to administer it to him was now here. I was up front
with him, so that he would decide ahead of time and not feel like he had
been coerced or tricked in any way. He said he would come, and he did.
As we prayed, we could see the fire come down from heaven in a powerful
manner, and this pastor received the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Once again, my friend was stunned, for the trap had once again been foiled
by the power of the Living God of heaven.
As I said, this was a more “friendly” game of “Trap Jones,” yet it serves
to illustrate the second way in which men lay traps for others. Though
the trap was foiled, yet it was a violation of the law against putting
a stumblingblock before the blind.
16
If a malicious witness rises up against a man to accuse him of wrongdoing,
17
then both the men who have the dispute shall stand before the LORD, before
the priests and the judges who will be in office in those days.
18
And the judges shall investigate thoroughly; and if the witness is a false
witness and he has accused his brother falsely,
19
then you shall do to him just as he had intended to do to his brother.
Thus you shall purge the evil from among you.
20
And the rest will hear and be afraid, and will never again do such an
evil thing among you. 21
Thus you shall not show pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth,
hand for hand, foot for foot.
The justice of the law of God
says that if any man bears false witness against his neighbor, accusing
him falsely, then that false witness shall receive the full penalty of
the very sin he had accused his brother of committing. It is the “Do Unto
Others” principle in reverse, and the judgment always fits the crime.
False accusation is a very serious matter. The more serious the accusation,
the more serious is the penalty of the law. And yet, we are so quick to
accuse others, sometimes on the most circumstantial of evidence, even
though we know we cannot prove our charges lawfully.
For instance, Christians sometimes think it is their calling and Christian
duty to “expose” as many other “false preachers” as possible to rid the
church of all the “wolves in sheep’s clothing.” They go on crusades to
dig up all the dirt they can, any past indiscretion, any misstatements
that can be twisted into “proving” that they are not true Christians.
And then they go directly into their pulpits and denounce those “wolves.”
Do they have the love of God in their hearts? Hardly. One should not love
a “wolf,” after all; hence, once one has “proved” the man to be a wolf,
there is no further need to treat him with love. Do they ever go to the
accused to verify the accusations or the evidence? Usually not.
This is comparable to hanging a man without a trial because we all know
he is guilty anyway. But Nicodemus knew the law and even confronted the
religious leaders on this issue in John 7:50 and 51,
50
Nicodemus said to them (he who came to Him before), being one of them,
51
Our Law does not judge a man, unless it first hears from him and knows
what he is doing, does it?
To do otherwise is another form of perjury. It is committed daily in Christian
pulpits across the land. It is masked in love, perfumed with Scripture,
dressed up in sincerity, but it still smells like dung. What does the
law say about perjury? The accuser shall receive the law’s penalty for
being a wolf in sheep’s clothing—the very thing the accuser attempted
to lay upon the other person. It is a very serious matter to accuse someone
of not being a true Christian, particularly when we judge by appearance,
rather than knowing the person’s heart by Holy Spirit revelation.
It is only by such revelation that we can truly know if a man is a Christian
or not. I have personally met many heart-Christians which the church has
condemned and judged by appearances. Some judge by the length of their
hair, or by how well they dress, or their denominational affiliations.
I have also met many outward Christians who were well respected in the
church, whose hearts were in total rebellion against God. With every such
revelation, I have been surprised and caught off guard.
Suppose a well-known television evangelist (who we shall not name) commits
a sexual sin. A few years later, it becomes generally known. Millions
of people could point their fingers at him and condemn him, thinking they
are doing God a service. Yet if that same evangelist has already repented
and received God’s forgiveness, then the evangelist is innocent in the
sight of God, and the people are thus guilty of perjury!
If a thief pays the penalty for sin and receives forgiveness for it, then
he is under grace, and anyone who condemns him for the past sin is guilty
of perjury. It is the same with television evangelists. God has no double
standards. Sin is sin; and grace is grace.
It is dangerous to pronounce guilt and accuse on the basis of hearsay.
Even newscasters are not always fully aware of the truth, nor do they
always tell the truth. They are interested in a news story and selling
newspapers or advertising time. They usually do not care if the person
has paid the penalty for sin, or if he has been forgiven by God. We may
expect such perjury from nonchristians, but this ought not to be done
by Christians. What does the Scripture say about forgiven sinners? Romans
8:33, 34 says,
33
Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies;
34
who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather
who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for
us.
Only a few people would dare to stand up and deliberately accuse another
man falsely. But untold millions of people over the centuries have been
quick to commit perjury unwittingly. This is the great tragedy of the
church. We are so quick to accuse and have no fear that we might be accusing
falsely. In so doing, we ourselves come under judgment by the divine law.
Deuteronomy
19:15 tells us the basic law of the double witness,
15
A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any
iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence
of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed.
This law has so many applications,
it is impossible to list them all here. Yet the heart of it is to protect
the innocent from being accused and condemned on the word of a single
witness or piece of evidence.
Witnesses need not be people. Moses said that if Israel sinned, “heaven
and earth” would bear witness against them (Deut. 30:19). Paul wrote two
letters to the Corinthians in order to establish this double witness,
and he came to them three times in person (2 Cor. 13:1).
In setting up this law, God
knew that men would place too much confidence in their own opinions, their
own evaluations or character judgments—and in this pride, they would often
condemn the innocent or judge the sinner too harshly. If men were truly
spiritual and had the gift of discerning spirits (1 Cor. 12:10), there
would be no problem in judging, as we see in the case of Ananias and Sapphira
(Acts 5:1-10). Yet most of the church is still soulish, judging by appearances
and the physical witnesses, and so they need these guidelines of the law
to prevent injustice in judgment.
The ideal situation, of course, is that all men would judge by divine revelation,
where the hearts of men would be fully revealed. Judges would then determine
guilt or innocence in the way Jesus said in John 7:24,
24
Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.
A good example of how this works is found in Acts 15, where the apostles
met to judge the question of circumcision for non-Jews. Peter gives testimony
in verse 8 and 9 drawing upon his past experience where he had seen Cornelius
and others receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit without first being
circumcised:
8
And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, giving them the Holy
Spirit, just as He also did to us;
9
and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts
by faith.
Peter was able to look past the appearance, because he had received divine
revelation revealing the heart and mind of God in this matter.
We must note also that this double-witness law applies to “any iniquity”
and to “any sin.” This takes it outside of the courtroom into our
own churches and living rooms and places of business. We are not to believe
gossip or slander without first investigating the case. If there are multiple
witnesses which compel us to believe the evidence, then we should follow
the procedure that Jesus set in Matthew 18:15,
15
And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private; if he listens
to you, you have won your brother.
It is assumed here that your
brother is indeed guilty, or at least he appears to be guilty from your
point of view. In other words, if you truly believe that your brother
has wronged you, then “reprove him in private.” The emphasis is
not upon the reproving, but upon the privacy of the reproof. More often
than not, we do not follow Jesus’ instructions, but rather tell everyone
else about it first. So often the guilty party is the last to hear of
the accusations against him! Even among Christians who are supposed to
have the law written on their hearts, this is too often the case.
The purpose of going to your brother on a one-on-one basis in private is
to protect him and his reputation from others who would judge him. Also,
it gives that brother a chance to answer the charges against him. It may
be that our own evaluation was incorrect. There might be other evidence
or mitigating circumstances that would change everything, if only we knew
what they were. It is important that we know all sides of an issue before
passing judgment.
Hopefully, whatever the offense was, it could be settled in that private
atmosphere. As for the manner of our reproof, if we approach our brother
in a spirit of meekness and love (Gal. 6:1), the chances are very small
that it would need to go any further than that first step. But if we go
with a haughty attitude, assuming that we already know everything about
the situation that needs to be known, the chances are good that we will
simply drive him away and perhaps harden his heart.
On November 30, 1984 Jesus gave me this bit of advice about how to approach
a brother about any sin or misunderstanding:
“If you would restore a brother
to Christian unity and fellowship in the spirit of love, then let this
be your guide: Give him not the word of accusation cloaked in love, as
a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but rather give him My true love. Come with
an apology in hand for causing the brother to stumble . . . Your brother
shall reflect your attitude, and Christ shall be seen in him as well as
in you.”
STEP ONE: It is important that we not approach our brother with
an accusation, but with an apology. So often we attempt to follow Matthew
18:15 by going straight to the brother to “tell him his faults” or to
“straighten him out.” There is no love in that approach, and I have yet
to see it work toward a true reconciliation without resentment.
Give him the benefit of the
doubt, for at this point, his guilt is still undetermined properly and
will remain undetermined until the procedure has run its full course.
If we truly love our brother, we will find it hard to believe that he
has sinned against us, and if he has, then surely he must have been driven
to it under very trying circumstances. Our brother will see immediately
our level of love by the manner in which we approach him. Do we assume
guilt or assume he is innocent?
STEP TWO: If by some chance the dispute remains unresolved after
talking it over with your brother, and if you find it necessary to pursue
the case rather than just forgive it, then step two is in order. Matt.
18:16 says,
16
But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you,
so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed.
This does NOT mean we are to
witness to everyone else and see how many people we can convince of our
point of view. It means we are to take all the evidence or witnesses we
have and once again go to the brother IN PRIVATE. Once again, this must
be done in a spirit of love.
If we do not have enough evidence to establish the charge, then the matter
should be dropped immediately for lack of evidence, and we should forgive
our brother in our heart. This is very important, for if we hold our brother’s
sin against him (and if he is indeed guilty of it), then we are in effect
appealing to the Supreme Court of God, and He will take the case and judge
all sides impartially. This can be dangerous for both the accused and
the accuser, and if you love your brother, you may not want him to fall
into such judgment. We will deal more with this in a later section dealing
with God’s Supreme Court.
If you feel that you have the proper evidence in hand to establish the
brother’s guilt, and the accused simply disregards the evidence or refuses
to repent, then you have the right to go to court in step three. Jesus
tells us in Matthew 18:17,
17
And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he
refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and
a tax-gatherer.
STEP THREE: The church in this case is the congregation or their
representatives, today known as a jury, whether civil or religious. It
is their duty to determine guilt or innocence on the basis of evidence.
If the appeal is made to the church, both parties become bound by the
law to submit to the decision of the church on pain of being of contempt
of court, bringing the death penalty (Deut. 17:11, 12).
By strict or literal interpretation of the law, contempt of court is a
capital crime. However, in Jesus’ day only the Romans could authorize
executions. Thus, Jesus advocated a lesser, yet valid, interpretation
of the law. It was to be put out of the church, or disfellowshipped.
In the Old Testament this was how God applied this same death penalty to
the nation of Israel after they refused to hear the verdict of God. For
example, when Jeremiah told Judah to submit to king Nebuchadnezzar of
Babylon (Jer. 27:12), they refused to hear the Word of the Lord (Jer.
28:10). They decided to fight Babylon, rather than view Babylon as the
judgment of God upon them for their sin. This was contempt of court. Yet,
instead of destroying them as a nation, He sent them into exile into Assyria
and Babylon among the heathen. This was a merciful substitute for the
death penalty, brought about by intercession by the prophets and others.
Jesus also recognized that the priests in His day seemed to know little
of the principles of mercy, love, or grace. They only knew how to use
the law to accuse and destroy sinners. Thus, by their unrighteous judgments
they had created a class of “publicans and sinners,” people who had been
excommunicated from the temple. In fact, if the Romans had not been there
to restrain their zeal, most of these probably would have been executed.
Briefly, here is the scenario: a man is starving, and so he finally steals
a loaf of bread for his children to eat. He is caught, confronted angrily
with accusations, and all his friends forsake him. Hurt by his friends’
rejection, he refuses to repent, not believing that God would ever judge
him like this. So they drag him to the church for judgment, and they disfellowship
him immediately. After all, they “love” the law. No love for the sinner,
no grace, no forgiveness. Just create one more excommunicant thrown on
the trash pile with other publicans and sinners.
Jesus befriended those same “sinners.” He understood that they had been
driven from the temple by unloving, prideful, and accusatory priests and
Pharisees, who had put a stumblingblock in front of the blind. Then, when
the “sinner” rebelled against the temple for their bad attitude, the priests
felt justified in putting them out of the temple. There is a large class
of such “sinners” today in America as well, and we would do well to befriend
them as Jesus did, bringing them His love, rather than just more accusations.
The night of January 26, 1987, as I was praying, I was suddenly caught
up in the spirit and encountered about six horsemen with armor. I immediately
perceived that these were enemies of God and of the church, attempting
somehow to “move in and take over” the church. In the vision, when the
horsemen saw me suddenly appear in front of them to oppose them, they
stopped abruptly, wheeled around, and fled. It all happened so quickly
that I only got a good look at the horseman in the middle, who appeared
to be the leader. He was wearing an old-style helmet and was somewhat
disguised with a little “Hitler mustache,” but I took note that he had
a distinguished double chin and looked like Jerry Falwell. I also knew
that he was a political figure, so I did not suspect that the one I saw
was actually Jerry Falwell.
In praying about this, God showed me that what I had seen would manifest
in the world on March 18 or 19, 1987. Consequently, I began to look for
someone in the news who looked like Jerry Falwell that was trying to take
over the church or some part of the church.
I was as shocked as anyone when the PTL scandal hit the news on March 19,
and that Dr. Jerry Falwell “took over” the PTL, supposedly as a friend
to keep Jimmy Swaggart from doing the same. The Lord had showed me nearly
two months earlier what was the true heart of this matter and who was
the real enemy. Falwell had posed as Bakker’s “friend,” convincing him
to turn the PLT over to him for thirty to ninety days until the danger
passed. Yet his true motives were given on audio tape dated April 26,
1987 in the words of Falwell’s personal friend, Dr. Bob Gray.
Bob Gray is very much against the Charismatic movement, as is Dr. Falwell.
Thus, Dr. Gray was shocked when Falwell took over an openly Charismatic
organization. So he made an appointment to talk with Falwell about this,
and in his words, this was how the conversation proceeded. (See I was
Wrong, Jim Bakker, p. 69, 70)
“I knew that you’re
not charismatic, and unless you’ve changed since the last time we’ve talked,
in your doctrine, I know that you certainly have not changed to embrace
the charismatic position.
“He said, ‘You’re absolutely
right. I haven’t changed one iota. I’ve always been against it, and I
still am. Let me explain to you what my motive is and where I am going.
When I received word that this was about to happen, I determined that
if at all possible I would try to get the PTL network for The Old Time
Gospel Hour, and this is the only way that I felt like I could do
it.’
“I said, ‘Well, I personally
don’t agree with your methods, and I don’t agree with your philosophy.
But that’s between you and the Lord. But I do feel that it was wrong for
you to identify with this movement.’
“He said, ‘My whole
purpose—I don’t care what happens to the country club down at Charlotte
and all of the jamboree stuff that goes on there. I’m only interested
in the PTL cable network. It’s the largest Christian cable network in
the nation, and I’d like to get that for The Old Time Gospel Hour.’
“I said, ‘Well, I feel
that you have placed your friends in an indefensible position, and I’m
one of them. . .’
“Then he said, ‘I think
that you would also like to know that this coming Tuesday I’m having a
press conference, and at that time we plan to expose Jim Bakker, not
only for immorality with a woman, but homosexual immorality. Not only
him, but Dortch, and all of those in a leadership position on PTL.
I plan to fire 1,600 workers on Tuesday and probably it will be in bankruptcy
before too long, and the sooner the better. All I want out of it is the
cable network for the Lord.’
“I said, ‘Well, that’s
between you and the Lord, but again, I do not agree with your philosophy
of getting it. I do not agree with what you had to do to get it. . .’
“He also said that
he thinks the sooner the organization goes bankrupt, the better off it
will be because the assets will then be auctioned and disposed and the
network will then be free for purchase, and they hope to purchase it and
go on from there. . . .”
I personally watched Dr. Falwell interviewed on television in which he
admitted promising to Jim Bakker on March 18, 1987 that he would give
him his resignation papers ahead of time, so that whenever Jim wanted
to return to the PTL, all he had to do was fill in the date. Dr. Falwell
then admitted that he had not done as he had promised. He justified his
actions on the grounds that when he discovered “corruption” in the PTL,
he could not “with good conscience” keep his word and give it back to
Bakker. In other words, he admitted to breaking his word. The details
of this are also recorded in Jim Bakker’s book, I was Wrong, p.
53.
This book also shows in his own words how Dr. Falwell would deliberately
falsely accuse Jim Bakker and the entire Board of Directors of homosexuality
in order to further his own goals of bringing the PTL into bankruptcy
as quickly as possible.
While all these things were making headlines in the newspapers, I and my
friends knew that Jim Bakker was not the real culprit. In fact, I knew
that God was using unscrupulous men to chastise him and bring him low,
so that when he rose again, he would be a new creature. He sat in prison
for years for accusations that were later proven to be false. I often
thought of him and wished that I could visit him and give him some words
of comfort. I knew that God had not forsaken him. I also believed that
some day I would see him personally and be able to share my simple vision
with him as a belated confirmation to him that he still had a calling
before God.
I finally had that opportunity on December 16, 1997. I was on my way to
the Philippines to teach for a week at a Bible Institute graduation. At
the Los Angeles airport, as I rode the shuttle bus to the international
terminal, I sat across from Jim Bakker and struck up a conversation with
him. We each had over an hour to wait for our flights, for he was flying
to Singapore. It probably did me more good than it did him, but there
was something very satisfying in having the opportunity to share my story
with him. Before we parted, he gave me a copy of his book, I Was Wrong,
and I gave him a copy of my book, Secrets
of Time. Each of us had been led to carry a copy of our respective
books.
I learned from reading his
book on that flight that Bakker’s whole perspective regarding the “prosperity
message” had changed. His experience in prison had had a positive effect
upon him, and even though he may never reach the giddy heights of television
evangelism again, he is a better Christian minister now than he ever was.
He has a much better knowledge of God’s sovereignty in all things, especially
in tribulation, knowing that God—not the devil—is the real Power behind
the scenes, even when bad things happen. With this understanding, he has
been able to forgive the many people who grievously sinned against him.
He can even now thank Dr. Falwell, the vessel of dishonor that God used
in his life.
Everyone has the right to go
before God’s Court, even Satan himself or those people through whom this
adversarial spirit manifests. All are judged according to the law of God,
for all are subject to it. The difference is that some use the law to
save; others to accuse and destroy.
There are times when justice
is not possible here on earth. Sometimes false witnesses rise up against
the innocent. Other times there are no witnesses to convict the lawbreaker.
Still other times the judges are corrupt or are compelled to judge according
to the unrighteous laws of men. Whatever the case, we all have the right
to appeal to God’s Supreme Court, which stands above all human courts.
The divine law makes provision
for all circumstances relating to judicial matters. It even makes provision
for cases that cannot be proven—that is, “suspicion of guilt.” If a man
knows or suspects that his brother has wronged him in any way, but yet
he has no double witness to establish the truth in court, he may appeal
his case to God’s Supreme Court. That is, he may call upon God to provide
the double witness, for God sees all things properly.
Numbers 5:6-10 tells us how to deal with a repentant sinner who confesses
his sin voluntarily, even though there are no witnesses against him. He
is to return the stolen item, of course, but he only has to pay one-fifth
its value in restitution, rather than the usual double that is specified
in Exodus 22:4. We have given a fuller study of this one-fifth restitution
in our book, God’s Law on Restitution.
After this example in Numbers 5, we are given a second example of a case
where there is not enough evidence to convict the sinner. This is found
in Numbers 5:11-31. It is called “the law of jealousies” in verse 29.
In brief, the specific example is given of a man who suspects his wife
of having an affair but has no proof or witnesses by which to accuse her.
The Bible says he may bring her to the Supreme Court of God to determine
guilt or innocence. He is not compelled to do so, but the law upholds
his right to do this in order to determine the truth.
The priest was to remove the covering from her head, signifying that her
husband was permitting his wife to come under God’s direct cover, or authority.
In doing this, he was relinquishing his authority to another and was agreeing
to abide by the decision of the court, whichever way the verdict should
be decided.
Then the priest was to take some of the dust from the floor of the tabernacle
and mix it with a cup of water, placing the cup in her hands. She was
then charged with an oath that would place her under God’s curse if she
were to lie to God. All of this assumes, of course, that she continued
to deny guilt, for if at any point she were to confess her sin, the procedure
would be rendered unnecessary. She was then to drink of the water, saying,
“Amen” in agreement with the terms of the oath. Num. 5:23-28 says,
23
The priest shall then write these curses on a scroll, and he shall wash
them off into the water of bitterness.
24
Then he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings
a curse, so that the water which brings a curse will go into her and cause
bitterness. . . . 27
When he has made her drink the water, then it shall come about, if she
has defiled herself and has been unfaithful to her husband, that the water
which brings a curse shall go into her and cause bitterness, and
her abdomen will swell and her thigh will waste away, and the woman will
become a curse among her people. 28
But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, she will then be
free and conceive children.
If the woman remained unharmed by the water and continues to conceive children,
she was presumed innocent of the charges. If guilty, she would become
sterile in judgment for her sin. The matter was thus placed in God’s hands
for judgment. This principle of law has been known as “trial by ordeal.”
During the Middle Ages, the Church corrupted this type of trial by tempting
God. If they suspected someone was guilty of certain crimes, often condemned
them to be burned at the stake or to be bound and thrown into the water.
They assumed that God would save the suspected criminals if they were
innocent. In other words, they presumed guilt and forced God to perform
a miracle to prove the suspect’s innocence. Of course, not many miracles
occurred, and no doubt many innocent people lost their lives.
Those people did not understand the divine law or the mind of God. In God’s
system of law, people are presumed innocent unless proven guilty by God’s
judgment. When a woman was suspected of committing adultery, she was to
drink a cup of water mixed with a few minerals from the dust of the floor
of the tabernacle. Normally, this would be quite harmless. If she were
guilty, God would have to perform a miracle to make her barren.
America’s founders understood this principle and made it an integral part
of the American system of law. People are innocent unless proven guilty.
They got it directly from the Bible.
The biblical principle here can be used in any case whereby true justice
is not possible. Every nation has its own judicial system, and some are
better than others. No court in the world can establish perfect justice.
There are always cases where the innocent are proven guilty, and the guilty
are set free. There are also many cases where the guilty are sentenced
to unjust sentences. For example, if a man is guilty of stealing $1,000,
he may be sentenced to some months or years in prison. This is not justice
as God views it. True justice is that the thief pay his victim double
restitution (Ex. 22:4), and if he has no money to pay this, he must be
put to work to pay his victim. He is then said to be “under the law” until
such time as the victim is fully paid what is owed him.
There are also cases where justice cannot be implemented by men’s court
system because there is not enough evidence to convict the criminal. There
are millions of such cases in every country. This problem has caused many
nations to believe that they must convict suspected criminals even if
the proper evidence does not exist. But this merely compounds the problem.
If there is a lack of evidence, the victim has the right to appeal to
the divine court and receive justice in the time and manner that God deems
to be appropriate. Yet once such an appeal has been made, the victim must
leave it in God’s hands for judgment. He must forgive and forget it, for
if he does not do so, he removes the case from God’s hands and should
not expect God to implement His justice.
There are also many cases where false witnesses pervert justice. These
either lie to free the guilty or to convict the innocent.
In all cases where injustice has been done, men may appeal their cases
to the Supreme Court of God. The only real requirement is that men believe
that God actually hears their case. If they have no faith in God, then
they will not do this at all.
In appealing cases of injustice
to the Divine Supreme Court, Christians should be aware that this should
be done only with some serious thought, prayer, and knowledge of the implications
of such an appeal. Each valid appeal directed against the government for
its injustice raises its level of iniquity that will ultimately bring
about its demise. The Bible alludes to this in Genesis 15:16, which says
of Abraham’s seed,
16
Then in the fourth generation they shall return here, for the iniquity
of the Amorite is not yet complete.
God had determined to bring judgment upon the “Amorites,” but God was telling
Abraham that this would not occur for another four generations. There
were many Amorites who suffered injustice at the hands of their leaders,
for the leaders knew little about the divine law. And so when the victims
of injustice cried out for justice, God heard their cries, even if it
appeared that He was ignoring them for generations.
The lesson to be learned here is that when citizens of a nation appeal
to God against injustice perpetrated by the officials of government, their
petition raises the level of iniquity of that nation. If the nation does
not repent and return to obedience to God’s law, the nation will ultimately
be destroyed. Hence, each victim of injustice must ask himself if he wishes
to be part of the petition to overthrow the nation, keeping in mind that
many innocent people may be killed in that generation.
There are also valid appeals to God that are directed at individuals, rather
than against whole governments. Once again, the victims must ask themselves
if they really want God to bring that person to justice. In the case of
the jealous husband in Numbers 5, the husband may not want to subject
his wife to the judgment of God. In fact, if he truly loves his wife,
he may not want her to become sterile. He may want to give her a time
of grace (like God does with us), praying for mercy and repentance, rather
than for justice.
The victim always has the right to appeal for mercy, rather than justice.
The judge does not. Thus, if the case is brought before God, He will uphold
the lawful rights of all parties and will judge righteously. God knows
the hidden things of every court case, for He is witness to all things.
It may be that the suspicious husband neglected his wife’s needs, whether
physical or emotional needs. Perhaps he did not really love her, and this
left a void in her life that caused her to commit adultery. Perhaps he
oppressed her and treated her like a slave, and the only way she felt
she could escape this was to run away with the help of another man who
had compassion upon her.
There are many possibilities. God judges each case with a complete knowledge
of all circumstances. If a jealous husband appeals to God for justice,
he may find himself judged along with his wife. In fact, he may be judged
more harshly than his wife for causing her to fall into sin.
Thus, before we appeal any case before God’s Supreme Court, it would be
wise to do an internal inventory, knowing that God judges all sides with
equity and with the same standard of measure that we judge others.
In Matthew 7:1 and 2 Jesus advised,
1
Do not judge lest you be judged.
2
For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard
of measure, it will be measured to you. 3
And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do
not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4
Or how can you say to your brother, “Let me take the speck out of your
eye,” and behold, the log is in your own eye?
5
You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will
see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
Jesus was referring to the
biblical law about equal weights and measures when He said, “by
your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.”
The laws says in Deuteronomy 25:13-16,
13
You shall not have in your
bag differing weights, a large and a small.
14
You shall not have in your
house differing measures, a large and a small.
15
You shall have a full and
just weight; you shall have a full and just measure, that your days may
be prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you.
16
For everyone who does these
things, everyone who acts unjustly is an abomination to the LORD your
God.
In
those days food, money, and many other things were sold by weight on a
scale. If a man used deceitful weights on the scale, he could cheat the
buyer. This was (and still is) unlawful in the sight of God.
But
this law is also applicable in a spiritual way. If I were to measure my
own sins using a heavy weight, my sins would appear to be “light” in comparison.
What would God think if I weighed those same sins in other people, using
a lighter weight that would make their sins seem “heavy” in comparison?
This is unlawful in the sight of God. It is unlawful to use “differing
weights” in our measurement of sin.
Jesus
makes it clear that God will judge us according to the standard by which
we measure other men’s sins. If we judge others by a harsher standard
than we measure ourselves, it is a false witness. It is an attempt to
impose a harsher sentence of the law upon others than we would want imposed
upon ourselves for the same sin. The result is that if we appeal to God’s
divine court for injustice that has been perpetrated upon us, God will
judge the case according to our own standard of measure.
Hence,
at the very least, we ought to have a just weight and measure in our “bag.”
That way, God will judge us according to the true righteous standard of
measure. If we are in submission to the divine law in our hearts, we have
the right to appeal to its provisions of grace and mercy as well. Yes,
the law contains those principles. Every sacrifice for sin was a provision
for grace and mercy. As Christians, we have the right to appeal to the
blood of Jesus Christ as the covering for all sin (1 John 1:9; 2:2).
The
Woman Caught in Adultery
In
the eighth chapter of John, we see a very specific example of how Jesus
handled a case of a woman accused of adultery. Numbers 5 applied to this
situation, because in the eyes of God’s law, she was only a suspected
adulteress until proven guilty. The scribes and Pharisees brought the
woman to Jesus, claiming to have caught her in the very act of adultery.
They were the witnesses, and they wanted Jesus to be the judge. They also
informed Jesus of the law of Deuteronomy 22:22, which commanded that those
caught in adultery ought to be stoned. This verse reads,
22
If a man is found lying with
a married woman, then both of them shall die, the man who lay with
the woman, and the woman; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel.
It
is presumed here that the woman caught in adultery was married. Since
Jesus did not dispute them on this point, we will also concur. We must
ask, however, why the man was not brought before Jesus as well. This law
specifies that BOTH of them were to die.
Jesus
did not refuse to hear the case, but He did something strange at that
moment. John 8:6 says,
6
. . . But Jesus stooped down,
and with His finger wrote on the ground.
Few
people understand why Jesus did this. I have heard many different theories.
Some say that he was simply ignoring them. Perhaps the most popular theory
is that Jesus began to write down the names of all those who had committed
adultery with this woman. But once we understand the law principle involved
here, it becomes clear what Jesus was writing. The answer is to be found
in Numbers 5:23,
23
The priest shall then write
these curses on a scroll, and he shall wash them off into the water
of bitterness.
In
the law of jealousy, the priest (who acted as the judge) was to write
the curses (or judgments) of the law upon a scroll. Jesus did not have
a scroll with him at the time, so He began to write the judgments of the
law upon the ground. The woman’s accusers did not realize at first what
He was doing, because normally, these would have been written upon a scroll.
Secondly, they were appealing to the law of Deut. 22:22, because they
assumed that the woman was guilty even before the trial. Jesus, however,
judged her by a different law—that found in Numbers 5—because He was appealing
the case to the Supreme Court of God.
Jesus
recognized that the witnesses against her were hardly credible, if for
no other reason, they did not bring the man for judgment as well. Jesus
knew that it would be impossible for the woman to receive a fair trial,
and that the Scribes and Pharisees had ulterior motives in this. They
were using this woman to entrap Jesus Himself, and they were willing to
sacrifice her very life to accomplish this end.
In
addition to this, it was unlawful at that time for anyone to be put to
death without the consent of the Roman authorities. Thus, Jesus could
not have sentenced her to death even if that had been the correct judgment.
So He appealed to the only principle of law applicable at the time. He
appealed her case to the Supreme Court and judged her according to Numbers
5, rather than according to Deuteronomy 22:22.
At
first, the Scribes did not understand what he was doing, and so they pressed
Him for a judgment. He silenced them in John 8:7, 8,
7
But when they persisted in
asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without
sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."
8
And again He stooped down,
and wrote on the ground.
In
other words, He told them that He was appealing to the only One who was
perfect enough to judge this case. If anyone in the crowd felt that he
was as perfect as God, then let him cast the first stone. After all, the
law said that the witnesses were supposed to be the first to stone the
one guilty of a capital crime (Deut. 17:7). Of course, they all knew that
if they did so, it was NOT because Jesus had authorized it. Nor could
they execute anyone without being in danger of penalty from the Roman
authorities.
That
got their attention, and soon they understood the law by which He was
judging the woman—or rather, the law by which He was appealing to the
Supreme Court. When Jesus had written enough for them to read, they recognized
what He was doing, and they knew that He could not pass judgment upon
her once He had appealed the case to God. Since their entire purpose was
to entrap Him, they knew that they had failed. One by one, they went away.
Perhaps
they knew that when a man appeals to the Supreme Court, God always judges
the accusers before judging the accused. He takes the entire situation
and judges all sides impartially and completely. The Scribes and Pharisees
knew that they had been using this woman unjustly in their attempt to
entrap Jesus. Thus, the woman also had a legal case against them. Perhaps
they knew they had better drop all charges quickly, or else God would
judge them first.
Whatever
their understanding was, it was not long before all those who had brought
the woman to Jesus had left the court room. Jesus and His disciples were
left alone with the woman. He asked where her accusers were. There were
none. This ended the court case, because there were no witnesses against
her. It would have been unlawful to continue the case, as we read in Deut.
19:15,
15
A single witness shall not
rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has
committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be
confirmed.
If
there are no witnesses, there is no case. Neither Jesus nor His disciples
had witnessed her adultery, even if they believed her to be guilty. The
witnesses were gone, and we are not told where her husband was. If her
husband did not witness her sin, but felt that she could be guilty, he
was free to go to the Supreme Court and make her drink of the water of
bitterness as prescribed in the law of jealousy. But only he had the lawful
right to do this, for he was the potential victim of adultery.
What
a masterpiece of wisdom and expertise in handling the law! The Scribes
and Pharisees were no match for Him, particularly because the law itself
makes every provision to ensure that justice will be done—if men will
but take heed and know the law. And so, once again, Jesus beat them at
their own game.
The
Benjamite War
Another
good biblical example of the Supreme Court is found in Judges 19-21. In
this case, a few men of the tribe of Benjamin were guilty of rape and
murder. The victim’s husband, a Levite, brought charges against the men,
but the Benjamite tribe itself refused to give up the guilty men to be
tried in court. Thus, the entire tribe of Benjamin became guilty and worthy
of judgment.
Anyone
who prevents justice from being done assumes liability for the injustice.
This includes judges who pervert justice and false witnesses.
Unfortunately,
the whole situation then went from bad to worse. The accusing tribes approached
the tribe of Benjamin with pride and accusation, instead of in meekness
and love. They came essentially as an army of 400,000 to execute the criminals
before trial (Judges 20:2). They assumed guilt before they had even heard
the case. Judges 20:12, 13 says,
12
Then the tribes of Israel
sent men through the entire tribe of Benjamin, saying, "What is this
wickedness that has taken place among you?
13
Now then, deliver up the men,
the worthless fellows in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and remove
this wickedness from Israel." But the sons of Benjamin would
not listen to the voice of their brothers, the sons of Israel.
The
actual guilt of the Benjamites is clear, for the Bible tells us specifically
that this rape/murder took place, and the tribe itself refused to do justly
in the case. However, we also see underlying this story the self-righteousness
of the rest of the tribes. It is not enough to seek justice. One must
seek justice in a prescribed manner in order to judge and not be judged
as well.
In
their self-righteous zeal, the tribes went to God for answers. They received
the right answer, but they asked the wrong question, as we read
in Judges 20:18,
18
Now the sons of Israel arose,
went up to Bethel, and inquired of God, and said, "Who shall go up
first for us to battle against the sons of Benjamin?" Then the LORD
said," Judah shall go up first. "
In
asking God who was to lead the charge against Benjamin, they assumed beforehand
that they were to do battle. They should have asked God first how to handle
the situation. If they had done so, I believe God would have told them
to go to the Benjamites in love and meekness, perhaps after a time of
prayer and fasting, making sure that they were not putting any stumblingblocks
in front of the Benjamites.
If
that appeal did not work, they still should not assume that they were
to go to war. War is the option of last resort. First they should have
appealed to the Supreme Court for justice to be done. Then they would
have been ready to ask God if He wanted them to go to war to actually
enforce God’s judgment upon the tribe of Benjamin.
But
Israel had already make up their minds to do battle, because the Levite
had enflamed their emotions. So God said for Judah to go first into battle
against Benjamin. They were obedient. Judges 20:20 says,
20
And the men of Israel went
out to battle against Benjamin, and the men of Israel arrayed for battle
against them at Gibeah.
21
Then the sons of Benjamin
came out of Gibeah and felled to the ground on that day 22,000 men of
Israel.
Judah
obeyed the Word of the Lord, but Judah still lost the battle. How is this
possible? Obviously, God planned to judge the accusers first. Judah must
have been the prime accuser here. That tribe was always the most zealous
and most religious of the tribes of Israel. It is not surprising that
many years later in Jesus’ day, the tribe of Judah was so zealous, but
also so self-righteous (pharisaical).
Judah
could hardly believe they had lost 22,000 soldiers in this battle. After
all, they were only “being obedient to God.” So Israel immediately set
themselves up to do battle once again. Judges 20:22, 23 says,
22
But the people, the men of
Israel, encouraged themselves and arrayed for battle again in the place
where they had arrayed themselves the first day. 23
And the sons of Israel went
up and wept before the LORD until evening, and inquired of the LORD, saying,
"Shall we again draw near for battle against the sons of my brother
Benjamin?" And the LORD said, "Go up against him."
We
see here that Israel now finally asked the correct question, “Shall
we again draw near for battle?” Having lost the first battle, they
wondered if they should be fighting them at all. But by this time the
law had been set into motion, and God’s verdict was that 40,000 men of
Israel must die for their own sin before God would judge Benjamin for
their sin. So in the next battle, another 18,000 soldiers of Israel died,
as Judges 20:24, 25 says,
24
Then the sons of Israel came
against the sons of Benjamin the second day.
25
And Benjamin went out against
them from Gibeah the second day and felled to the ground again 18,000
men of the sons of Israel; all these drew the sword.
This
completed the judgment that God had decreed upon Israel. Only then did
the Israelites begin to recognize that God was judging them for their
own sin first. So they set aside the next day as a day of fasting and
prayer, offering burnt offerings to God to atone for their own sins. It
is a tragedy that they did not think to do this in the first place, for
then they could have averted much if not all of the judgment upon themselves—and
probably would have averted the civil war altogether.
After
prayer and fasting, Israel returned to ask God once again if they should
do battle. This time it was the right question and with the right motive.
Judges 20:28 says,
28
and Phinehas the son of Eleazar,
Aaron's son, stood before it to minister in those days, saying,
"Shall I yet again go out to battle against the sons of my brother
Benjamin, or shall I cease?" And the LORD said, "Go up, for
tomorrow I will deliver them into your hand."
This
time the tide of battle turned against the Benjamites, as God began to
judge them for their sin. Keep in mind that the Israelites had prayed
and fasted and had offered up sacrifices on behalf of their own sins—but
they had done nothing on behalf of the sins of Benjamin. Thus, there was
very little mercy available to the tribe of Benjamin. Judgment came, and
there was no one to stand in the gap, no intercessor to plead their case.
This too was a great tragedy—as great then as it would be today.
Nearly
the entire tribe of Benjamin was destroyed. Over 25,000 Benjamites were
killed, and only 600 men remained before the Israelites finally—at last—forgave
and released Benjamin. Only AFTER that final battle did Israel intercede
for their brother tribe by offering up sacrifices for them. Judges 21:2-4
says,
2
So the people came to Bethel
and sat there before God until evening, and lifted up their voices and
wept bitterly.
3
And they said, "Why,
O LORD, God of Israel, has this come about in Israel, so that one tribe
should be missing today in Israel?"
4
And it came about the next
day that the people arose early and built an altar there, and offered
burnt offerings and peace offerings.
Once
the tribe was nearly destroyed, the rest of Israel began to play the role
of Defense Attorney, or the Advocate of Benjamin. Now they stopped being
the Prosecutor, or Adversary. Only then did they search the law to use
it as an instrument of mercy, rather than for judgment (Judges 21:16-24).
What a terrible way to learn to restore your brother in a spirit of meekness
and humility!
Christians,
too, must learn this lesson. John 14:16 speaks of the Holy Spirit using
the term “comforter.” The Greek word is Paraclete, which is the
word for a Defense Attorney, one who gives aid and comfort to a person
being charged with a crime in a court of law. If we do the works of our
Father, our major role in life will be to use the law for the good of
the people. If your “client” has sinned and is in danger of God’s judgment,
the Christian’s role is not to put away the law, but to show the sinner
how to utilize the proper lawful provisions for sin, in order that he
might be justified in the divine court.
Yet
many assume the role of the Adversary in the court room—that is, the Prosecutor.
The Greek word for Adversary is Diabolos, or “devil.” All devils,
by definition, are Prosecuting Attorneys who accuse men of sin in an attempt
to destroy them. Christians ought not to be “children of the devil,” doing
the works of their father (John 8:44).
If
Israel had understood these basic principles, Biblical history would be
quite different. Yet 65,000 Israelites died, not only because of sin,
but because the “righteous” people did not know the basic principles of
love, mercy, and judgment. Just as the ancient kingdom was lost for want
of a nail for the shoe of the horse for the king for the army for the
kingdom—so also the tribe of Benjamin was destroyed for want of a little
love in approaching the tribe with the accusation of sin. For lack of
love, mercy was lost; for lack of mercy, 65,000 lives were lost.
Judgment
is also coming to America because of her sin that she allows in her midst.
Will she have any to stand in the gap for her, that lives will be spared?
Or will the church continue to call down fire from heaven upon the sinners?
Are we doomed to repeat the ignorance of Israel in times past? There is
no way we can underestimate the importance of learning this lesson BEFORE
the dead litter our own streets. Remember, the life you spare may be your
own.
God’s
Sovereignty; Man’s Authority
God
is sovereign, yet He has chosen to given man authority in the earth. This
was first given in Genesis 1:26-28,
26
Then God said, "Let Us
make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule
over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the
earth…."
28
And God blessed them; and
God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth,
and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds
of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth."
The
King James version says, “let them have dominion.” This is the first delegation
of authority in the earth. The Apostle Paul says of this in Romans 13:1,
1
Let every person be in subjection
to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from
God, and those which exist are established by God.
All
authority is ultimately established by God, even the worst examples of
its abuse. King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon was a great king from a political
standpoint, but he was as cruel as any ungodly king. God used him as an
example to show that He was sovereign even over such ungodly rulers. In
Daniel 4 we have Nebuchadnezzar’s testimony how God showed him His sovereignty
by overthrowing him for “seven times” (Dan. 4:32). The lesson he learned
is given in Daniel 4:24, 25, where Daniel told him,
24
this is the interpretation,
O king, and this is the decree of the Most High, which has come upon my
lord the king:
25
that you be driven away from
mankind, and your dwelling place be with the beasts of the field, and
you be given grass to eat like cattle and be drenched with the dew of
heaven; and seven periods of time will pass over you, until you recognize
that the Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and bestows it
on whomever He wishes.
This
all came to pass, and even the ancient histories of Babylon show a “silent”
period in Nebuchadnezzar’s reign during the time of his madness. But at
the end of this time, the king tells us in verse 34,
34
But at the end of that period
I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven, and my reason returned
to me, and I blessed the Most High and praised and honored Him who
lives forever; for His dominion is an everlasting dominion, and His kingdom
endures from generation to generation.
35
And all the inhabitants of
the earth are accounted as nothing, but He does according to His will
in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of earth; and
no one can ward off His hand or say to Him, “What hast Thou done?”
36
At that time my reason returned
to me. And my majesty and
splendor were restored to me for the glory of my kingdom, and my counselors
and my nobles began seeking me out; so I was reestablished in my sovereignty,
and surpassing greatness was added to me. 37
Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise,
exalt, and honor the King of heaven, for all His works are true and His
ways just, and He is able to humble those who walk in pride.
True
reason is knowing that God is sovereign in the earth. “He is able” to
humble and overthrow even the greatest of kings. Consequently, if God
does NOT humble these cruel rulers, it is because they have been set over
us to judge the people for their sins. We see this here with the case
of the Kingdom of Judah, whom God put under Nebuchadnezzar.
By
His sovereignty, God has established authority in the earth and has distributed
it to certain men and women according to His will. Not only does this
include governmental authorities, but also “spiritual gifts and callings”
that we exercise in life. 1 Corinthians 12:28 says,
28
And God has appointed in the
church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles,
then gifts of healings, helps [antilepsis],
administrations, various kinds of tongues.
Apostles,
prophets and teachers are three of the governmental authorities God has
established in the Church. These are, in part, to teach Christians and
help them go before the Supreme Court of God in order to establish righteous
government first in the Church and secondly in the world in general.
Others
have spiritual authority in the area of healing or administrations and
even “helps.” The Greek word for “helps” is antilepsis, which carries
the meaning of understanding and perception, or discernment, which is
helpful to others. It is one of the most important gifts to the Church,
and is perhaps the most lacking of all. Perhaps this is because this gift
is not as glamorous as some of the other gifts.
Any
time God has called someone to do a job, it is a divine appointment and
is an example where God has established authority in the earth. From the
least to the greatest, none of these should be despised.
The
Saints Shall Judge the World
In
1 Corinthians 6:2 and 3, Paul tells us,
2
Or do you not know that the
saints will judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are you
not competent to constitute the smallest law courts?
3
Do you not know that we shall
judge angels? How much more, matters of this life?
When
God wants kingdoms to be overthrown, He raises up men and women and anoints
them with the spiritual authority to depose kingdoms. This is first accomplished
by prayer warriors, whom God trains in the use of spiritual authority.
At the appointed times, they are led to make certain decrees before the
divine court. Shortly afterward, the nations fall, often by military men
who have no idea that their authority has been derived from God through
the decrees of the spiritual prayer warriors.
In
Nebuchadnezzar’s prophetic dream in Daniel 4, where he saw himself as
a tree cut down and cast away for “seven times,” it was THE WATCHERS who
decreed that the tree be cut down. Daniel 4:13, 14 says,
13
I saw in the visions of my
head upon my bed, and, behold, a watcher and an holy one came down
from heaven;
14
He cried aloud, and said thus,
Hew down the tree, and cut off his branches, shake off his leaves, and
scatter his fruit: let the beasts get away from under it, and the fowls
from his branches (KJV)
The
phrase underlined above reads, “watcher, even a holy one”
in the original Hebrew. The watcher is the holy one, often translated
“saint.” (Compare Deut. 33:2 with Jude 14.) The verse is not speaking
about two different beings. The watcher is a believer who is awake or
watchful and knows the times and seasons. He hears the voice of God and
knows when to speak forth such decrees in the name of God. He is seen
in the vision as coming down from heaven, not because this saint is an
angel, but because his spirit has been in the Divine Court and is now
rendering its judgment.
The
saints, or holy ones, shall judge the world, Paul says.
This
watcher, I believe, was none other than Daniel himself. He decreed the
temporary overthrow of Nebuchadnezzar, which set the pattern for the temporary
overthrow of Babylon. It was temporary, because the stump was left intact,
and later, it returned to life as Mystery Babylon, which arose in the
20th century in 1914 approximately 2,520 years after Babylon
had become an empire in 607 B.C.
The
year 1987 was 2,520 years from the fall of Babylon in 537 B.C.
The
year 2001 was 2,520 years from the beginning of Haggai’s ministry to urge
the people to complete the building of the temple.
The
year 2006 is 2,520 years from the actual completion of the second temple
in Jerusalem.
Incidentally,
the numeric value (gematria) for “seven years” in Hebrew is 2,520, according
to page 157 of Bonnie Gaunt’s book, Time and the Bible’s Number Code.
The seven years it took for Nebuchadnezzar to acknowledge God as the King
of the Universe prophesied of a 2,520-year period. When he made his proclamation
in Daniel 4:34-37, essentially declaring Babylon to be under God, he set
the prophetic pattern for a future event. Revelation 11:15-17 speaks of
this event, saying,
15
And the seventh angel sounded;
and there arose loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world
has become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He will
reign forever and ever.”
16
And the twenty-four elders,
who sit on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped
God,
17
saying, “We give Thee thanks,
O Lord God, the Almighty, who art and who wast, because Thou hast taken
Thy great power and hast begun to reign.”
By
inspiration, Daniel, the watcher, issued the decree from the courts of
heaven, and twelve months later the first phase of fulfillment occurred.
The king was put off his throne for a time. We are now in the generation
of the second fulfillment of this prophetic Word, and in fact the double
witness has already gone forth for the overthrow of Mystery Babylon. It
has again been done by the mouths of the watchers. The Word was decreed
Nov. 29, 1993 at the climax of the Jubilee Prayer Campaign. Perhaps it
may take twelve YEARS this time to see Babylon’s final overthrow, even
as it took twelve MONTHS in Daniel’s day (Dan. 4:29). We shall be watching.
In
this way God exerts His power over the affairs of men. God does it through
the agency of man. God seldom does things directly. He nearly always accomplishes
His will by using men. This is simply because He gave man authority over
the earth in Genesis 1:26-28. In doing so, He intended to limit Himself,
instead of doing everything Himself. His purpose was to train men and
women to be His children, doing the things that they saw their Father
do. If God were to do all things Himself, there would be no purpose for
mankind, no learning, and no need to establish authority in the earth.
Paul
tells us that the saints will judge the world. While that is true, it
is also true that Jesus Christ was appointed as the Highest Judge. The
only way Jesus could be eligible as a Judge in the earth was if He would
come to earth as a man, for God delegated all authority over the earth
to man. We read of this in John 5:22 and 27, where Jesus Himself said,
22
For not even the Father judges
anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son. . . .
26
For just as the Father has
life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself;
27
and He gave Him authority
to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man.
Take
note that Jesus was given this authority BECAUSE He is the Son of Man
(Adam). As the Son of God, He had all authority in heaven, but as the
Son of Man, He had all authority in earth. Jesus could rule the angels
of heaven as the Son of God; but He had to become the Son of Adam in order
to be the lawful ruler of the earth.
In
fact, Adam the individual had been given the dominion mandate to rule
as king over the earth. This mandate was passed down to his descendants
as a birthright from generation to generation until it came to Jesus Christ.
There
was a lawful order here that could not be bypassed. This is why the genealogy
of Jesus is written in the Scriptures. His genealogy to King David established
His lawful right to be the King of Judah. But His genealogy back to Adam
through the birthright lineage established His lawful right to be the
King over all the earth.
History,
then, is the story of how Jesus Christ and His children will “subdue”
the earth (Gen. 1:28) and become its judges. People expect God to judge
the earth directly, but in fact, He has committed all judgment to man—and
the foremost Judge is Jesus Christ. He is the One who sits upon the throne
in God’s Supreme Court. He is the One who speaks to men who can hear His
voice. He is the One who tells certain men and women what His judgment
is, and they are expected to speak it into the earth in order to make
it effective.
In
this way, the double witness law is observable, for when Jesus Christ
speaks from the heavens, and men echo His decrees on the earth, it is
heaven and earth bearing witness to the truth. This is what establishes
all things that God is doing in the earth. He has truly committed all
judgment to the Son, because He is the Son of Adam. This is not
only applicable to Jesus, but also to His Body.
As
the Scriptures develop this theme of judging the earth, we see early examples
of military-type conquest, such as in the days of Joshua and David, the
warrior king. But by the time of Jesus Christ, the method seems to change
to a more peaceful form of conquest. The people in Jesus’ day could not
understand this, because they did not know the mind of God. Today we have
the benefit of hindsight and have a clearer view of the progression of
God’s methods.
Discerning
True Justice
All
judgment belongs to Jesus Christ. We are not to judge any man apart from
Him. In fact, without hearing God speak first, we have no authority to
speak at all, and o
