THE RULE OF LAW AND RIGHTEOUSNESS
AMONG CHRISTIANS
(Including an exegesis on 1 Cor
6:1)
By Lim Seng Hoo
In recent times, the rise of
extremist teachings and of dishonest, conscience-hardened
teachers, have resulted in confusion, division
and the trampling upon of God's ordained rule
of law and righteousness, in turn fuelling a rise
in legal suits among Christian individuals and
organisations
In a case settled in October
2001, Gail A. Riplinger’s extreme KJV views
promoted at the Canadian branch of the Trinitarian
Bible Society (“TBS”) resulted in
TBS UK suing TBS (Canada) to recover and protect
the TBS name. TBS (Canada) launched a frivolous
counter-claim for alleged defamation and breach
of fiduciary duty, but finally had to agree to
stop using the TBS name and regrouped as “GraceWay
Bible Society”. TBS did not ask for costs
as their chief stated concern was "to preserve
its good name (Proverbs 22.1), which was felt
to be one of the most valuable assets that the
Society owns. The legal action was taken with
great regret, but with a concern for justice and
with an eye to the future prosperity of the work
in Canada."
The rise of legal means to settle
church disputes is indicative that we are living
in the "last days" of which the Scriptures say,
some would depart from the faith and give heed
to deceiving spirits and false doctrines, and
speak lies in hypocrisy, with a conscience seared
as if by a hot iron; "without natural affection,
trucebreakers, false accusers, fierce, despisers
of those that are good, heady, high-minded, having
a form of godliness but denying the power thereof;
creeping into houses, leading captive silly women
laden with sins, led away with various lusts."
They also have Diothrephes-like leaders, who love
pre-eminence, refuse to receive believers from
other churches and forbid their members doing
so on the pain of ex-communication. (1Tim 4:1-3,
2Tim 3:1-7, 3John:9-10)
Are such victims allowed as a
last resort to appeal to the civil courts for
better justice (our common law courts being tempered
as they are by Christian-Westminster principles
of equity, and carrying over into its civil laws
facets of the 5th to 10th Commandment such as
responsibilities to care for our elderly and prohibition
and penalties against murder, theft, adultery
and perjury)? Or are they proscribed from seeking
redress just because the other party goes by the
name "Christian" (1Cor 6:1)? The following review
discusses God's ordained rule of law and righteousness
for Christians
I. God's Ordained Laws, Statutes
and Judgements
God, being by nature just and
righteous, ordained unto Israel some 613 laws,
including the Ten Commandments, which can be classified
as moral, ceremonial and judicial laws, stated
as commandments, statutes and judgements, for
the conduct of worship and for the rule of law
and righteousness, including a just penal code
for infringements against our fellow men.
"And the LORD said unto Moses,
Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and
I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and
commandments which I have written; that thou mayest
teach them." (Ex 24:12)
"Remember ye the law of Moses
my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb
for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments."
(Mal 4:4)
"For as many as have sinned
without law shall also perish without law: and
as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged
by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are
just before God, but the doers of the law shall
be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have
not the law, do by nature the things contained
in the law, these, having not the law, are a law
unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law
written in their hearts, their conscience also
bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while
accusing or else excusing one another;)In the
day when God shall judge the secrets of men by
Jesus Christ according to my gospel." (Rom2:12-16)
"Wherefore the law is holy,
and the commandment holy, and just, and good."
(Rom7:12)
And they cried with a loud
voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true,
dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them
that dwell on the earth?" (Rev 6:10)
II. God's Ordained Rules of Judicial Process
Almighty God also ordained
procedural rules of justice and the law of evidence
for the conduct of hearings, to ensure that trials
are carried out fairly and without fear or partiality.
These Divinely ordained procedural rules (also
known in our civil courts as the rules of natural
justice) include the requirements of: - 1) at
least two witnesses for a conviction, 2) providing
a prior hearing, 3) allowing the accused to face
his accusers, and 4) the indictment of false witnesses.
"At the mouth of two witnesses,
or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of
death be put to death; but at the mouth of one
witness he shall not be put to death". (Deut 17:6)
"One witness shall not rise
up against a man for any iniquity, or for any
sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth
of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses,
shall the matter be established. If a false witness
rise up against any man to testify against him
that which is wrong; Then both the men, between
whom the controversy is, shall stand before the
LORD, before the priests and the judges, which
shall be in those days; And the judges shall make
diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness
be a false witness, and hath testified falsely
against his brother; Then shall ye do unto him,
as he had thought to have done unto his brother:
so shalt thou put the evil away from among you."
(Deut 19:15-19)
"Doth our law judge any man,
before it hear him, and know what he doeth?" (Jn
7:51)
III. God's Ordination of the Judiciary
God ordained that chiefs of tribes
and wise men be appointed as judges to judge the
people. In monarchical days, the king was the
final appellate. In one of King Solomon's earliest
cases after assuming the throne, a dispute between
two harlots as to who was the real mother of a
surviving baby was brought before him. His wisdom
in solving this case earned him wide fame and
respect, "for they saw that the wisdom of God
was in him, to do judgement." (1 Ki 3:16-28).
"And it came to pass on the
morrow that Moses sat to judge the people: and
the people stood by Moses from the morning unto
the evening" (Ex 18:13)
"So I took the chief of your
tribes, wise men, and known, and made them heads
over you, captains over thousands, and captains
over hundreds, and captains over fifties, and
captains over tens, and officers among your tribes."
(Deut 1:15)
Under theocratic Israel, the
Jews were able to bring all their disputes before
their own elders, and not before a Gentile judge.
This ceased to be the absolute case during the
Babylonian captivity and thereafter, under the
subsequent Medo-Persia, Greek and Roman rule.
For Christians, this is not the
case, as we are not a nation. However, the Scriptures
reveal that all secular powers are ordained of
God for wrath and for conscience sake. We thus
have confidence before God to lead a disciplined,
law-abiding life and to do good always and in
every place,
"Let every soul be subject
unto the higher powers. For there is no power
but of God: the powers that be are ordained of
God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power,
resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that
resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but
to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the
power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have
praise of the same: For he is the minister of
God to thee for good. But if thou do that which
is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword
in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger
to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore
ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath,
but also for conscience sake. For for this
cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's
ministers, attending continually upon this very
thing. (Rom 13:1-6)
IV. Paul's Use of His Civil Rights and His Appeal
to Caesar
Given that all laws, rules of
hearings and the powers that be, are ordained
of Almighty God, Christians who are free men (Act
22:28, 1Cor 7:21, 12:13) are entitled to the free
use of their civil liberties and rights, even
for the promotion of truth and the propagation
of the Gospel.
In Act 16, Apostle Paul and Silas
were ignominiously treated, beaten and imprisoned
by the authorities in the Roman colony of Philippi.
As they prayed and praised God from the inner
dungeon cells, a great earthquake opened all the
prison doors. In the moments that followed, the
Philippian jailor and his family were converted
and baptized. The next day, the magistrates sent
to let Paul and Silas go free. Realising the potential
impact upon the relatively poor new converts,
who would otherwise fear the magistrates unduly,
affecting their freedom of religious conscience,
Paul and Silas invoked their Roman citizen rights
to demand that the magistrates come personally
to release them publicly, fully vindicating them
in the eyes of all people. Paul later wrote to
the same Philippians of their common joy and freedom
as the sons of God and citizens of heaven
Other occasions when Paul resorted
to his Roman citizen rights, helped opened the
way for him to address an unruly Jewish crowd,
avoid a wrongful severe beating, and escape a
plot by the Jewish religious leaders (who were
supposed to be brethren) to have the Roman governors
bring him down to their council at Jerusalem,
where more than 40 Jews had bound themselves under
a curse to neither eat nor drink until they had
killed him (Act 21:39, 22:25-28 and 23:12-35).
Paul also found himself constrained to appeal
to Caesar when the Jews pressed their requests
before Festus (Act 25:1-12). Later, from his detention
home, he explained to the Jewish leaders in Rome
that his appeal was due to his true innocence
and not because he wished to accuse his own nation,
"And it came to pass, that
after three days Paul called the chief of the
Jews together: and when they were come together,
he said unto them, Men and brethren, though I
have committed nothing against the people, or
customs of our fathers, yet was I delivered
prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the
Romans. Who, when they had examined me, would
have let me go, because there was no cause of
death in me. But when the Jews spake against it,
I was constrained to appeal unto Caesar;
not that I had ought to accuse my nation of. (Act
28:17-19)
V. What About 1Corinthians 6:1?
"Dare any of you, having a
matter against another, go to law before the unjust,
and not before the saints?"
This verse is frequently cited
in suits between Christians. As a general rule,
a Christian should not sue another Christian over
small matters, especially not so as to defraud
one who is weaker than himself. A US Christian
law professor suggests an exception for road accidents
involving two Christians, where the insurance
companies covering the damages may routinely enter
into legal suits in the name of the insured parties,
to determine the correct claims adjustments.
This verse however is apt to
be misunderstood and subject to abuse as being
a proscription that binds a fellow Christian against
filing complaints of wrongful acts to the authorities,
which it cannot be. There were cases where pastors
had defamed (i.e. to kill and bear false witness
against a person's name, against the 6th and 9th
Commandments) their church members and then threatened
them that if they sued or reported to the authorities,
they would be subject to "church discipline" for
breaching 1Cor 6:1! One pastor who ordered the
hacking of a computer, despite being told that
this was a crime under the Computer Misuse Act,
later told his victims to the effect, "How dare
you use ungodly means and report to the police,
against 1Cor 1:6!" These are gross misapplications
of 1Cor 6:1, are they not? When the Apostle Paul
wrote 1Cor 1:6, was his main goal in his mind
to create a blanket-immunity from all civilian
penalties for crimes committed by Christians?
This cannot be when the Scriptures itself teach
a duty to report any crime that we had witnessed,
"And if a soul sin, and hear
the voice of swearing, and is a witness, whether
he hath seen or known of it; if he do not utter
it, then he shall bear his iniquity." (Lev 5:1)
An Exegesis based on Proper Hermeneutical Principles
If the popular interpretation
of 1Cor 6:1 is unbalanced, what is the correct
and proper meaning of this verse? What was the
Apostle Paul trying to convey when he penned this
under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? An exegesis
based on proper hermeneutics would yield as follows:
-
1. The first hermeneutical
principle of verse interpretation is the 2Cor
13:1 rule: "In the mouth of two or three witnesses
shall every word be established."
What is striking about 1Cor
6:1 is that it has no parallel Scripture anywhere,
either in the OT or NT, to establish and confirm
it as a universal principle to be applied in every
case. Unlike the Commandments such as "thou shalt
not kill", or "thou shalt not commit adultery",
which are repeated several times throughout the
Bible, 1Cor 6:1 is never repeated. This indicates
that it is not given as a commandment but is rather
a unique statement made in a particular context
for a particular people or situation.
2. The Historical - Geographical
Context: Acts 18:11-17 gives us the account
of Paul's experience when he sojourned in Corinth
for 18 months, teaching the word of God among
them,
"And he continued there a
year and six months, teaching the word of God
among them. And when Gallio was the deputy of
Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one accord
against Paul, and brought him to the judgment
seat, Saying, This fellow persuadeth men to worship
God contrary to the law. And when Paul was now
about to open his mouth, Gallio said unto the
Jews, If it were a matter of wrong or wicked lewdness,
O ye Jews, reason would that I should bear with
you: But if it be a question of words and names,
and of your law, look ye to it; for I will be
no judge of such matters. And he drave them
from the judgment seat. Then all the Greeks
took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue,
and beat him before the judgment seat. And
Gallio cared for none of those things."
Wikipedia: "Corinth was
destroyed by the Romans under Lucius Mummius in
146 BC. Julius Caesar refounded the city as Colonia
laus Iulia Corinthiensis in 44 BC. According to
the Greek historian Appian, the new settlers were
drawn from freedmen (former slaves given their
freedom) of Rome. Under the Romans, this city
state became the seat of government for Southern
Greece or Achaia. It was noted for its wealth,
and for the luxurious, immoral and vicious habits
of the people. It had a large mixed population
of Romans, Greeks, and Jews."
From the Scriptures and from
historical accounts, we learn that the Corinthians
comprising the prosperous descendants of former
slaves, were unabashed at taking up small, non-judicial
matters before the Roman pro-consul; who was however
in turn nonchalant towards justice, did not allow
Paul to speak, roughly drove away the people and
did not care when Sosthenes, a Jew, was beaten
up in front of him (albeit this may have worked
out for the good of Christianity at Corinth, such
an act nevertheless is unjust). Paul perhaps vividly
remembered this when he used "unjust" to describe
the judges at Corinth, in contrast to say Festus,
whom he later confidently addressed as "most noble
Festus" in Act 26:25.
3. The Greek word for "unjust"
(per Vine's Expository Dictionary): adikos
- "not in conformity" with dike, "right,"
is rendered "unjust" in the AV and RV in Matt.
5:45; Luke 18:11; Acts 24:15; Greek dike
- primarily "custom, usage," came to denote "what
is right;" then, "a judicial hearing;" hence,
"the execution of a sentence," "punishment," 2
Thess. 1:9, RV; Jude 1:7, "punishment," RV (AV,
"vengeance").
Adikos would indicate
that the judges at Corinth did not act in conformity
to right in judicial hearings and in the execution
of sentences.
4. The Greek word for "saints"
(per Vine's Expository Dictionary of Greek NT
words): hagios - " for the meaning
and use of which see HOLY, B, No. 1, is used as
a noun in the singular in Phil 4:21, where pas,
"every," is used with it. In the plural, as used
of believers, it designates all such and is not
applied merely to persons of exceptional holiness
or to those who, having died, were characterized
by exceptional acts of "saintliness." See especially
2 Thess. 1:10, where "His saints" are also described
as "them that believed," i.e., the whole number
of the redeemed. They are called "holy ones" in
Jude 1:14, RV. For the term as applied to the
Holy Spirit see HOLY SPIRIT. See also SANCTIFY.
The saint before whom one may
go to for judgement is to be a genuine believer,
not perfect in exceptional holiness perhaps, but
clearly not unruly or evil-intending,
"But now I have written unto
you not to keep company, if any man that is called
a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner;
with such an one no not to eat." (1Cor 5:11)
5. The Literal-Grammatical
Context: a consideration of verses proximal
to that being interpreted,
"Do ye not know that the saints
shall judge the world? and if the world shall
be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the
smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge
angels? how much more things that pertain to this
life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining
to this life, set them to judge who are least
esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame.
Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you?
no, not one that shall be able to judge between
his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother,
and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore
there is utterly a fault among you, because ye
go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather
take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves
to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud,
and that your brethren." (1Cor 6:2-8)
First, Paul tells the Corinthians
that since the saints shall judge the world
and angels, it was unbelievable that there was
not a wise man among them, able to judge between
his brethren
Second, the subjects are the
smallest matters, (in verse 1, "a matter"
singular). Matthew Henry's Commentary here says:
"Here is at least an intimation that they went
to law for trivial matters, things of little value;
for the apostle blames them that they did not
suffer wrong rather than go to law (1Cor 6:7),
which must be understood of matters not very important.
In matters of great damage to ourselves or families,
we may use lawful means to right ourselves. We
are not bound to sit down and suffer the injury
tamely, without stirring for our own relief; but,
in matters of small consequence, it is better
to put up with the wrong."
Third, Paul had present justice
in view as seen in the term, "things pertaining
to this life". Almighty God is interested
in justice in this world here and now! In Rev
6:9-11, we have a glimpse of martyrs who cry to
the Lord for judgement and vengeance on their
blood taken away in injustice. God expects that
church decisions should be "just" so that justice
is upheld in His house according to His ordained
laws, statutes and judicial procedures (see above
I., II. and III.)
Fourth, Paul reveals that when
the Corinthians took their brethren to court,
they went beyond mere relief from being
defrauded, into undue profiting so that
they themselves "do wrong and defraud their brethren",
i.e. obtain from the courts more that what is
rightfully theirs. A T Robertson says of 1 Cor
6:8, Nay, but ye yourselves do wrong and defraud
(alla humeis adikeite kai apostereite). "But
(adversative alla, on the contrary) you
(emphatic) do the wronging and the robbing"
(active voices) "and that your brethren" (kai
touto adelphous)."
If such is the case, Paul would
much prefer that these Christians allow themselves
to be defrauded rather than exceed what they should
recover in the courts. He reminded them that before
they were saved, some of them were thieves, covetous
and extortioners, who had no inheritance in the
kingdom of God. Now however, washed, sanctified
and justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ
and by the Spirit of our God, they should no longer
live in the old way.
Avenues of Appeal
During the Apostolic times, the
churches could appeal to the apostles for help
or clarification on matters that concern individuals
in the churches. Paul evidently wrote out a number
of judgements and advice for the Corinthians in
1Cor 5, 7 and 8, dealing with issues ranging from
one taken in gross immorality, issues of marriage
and divorce and of foods offered to idols.
In modern times, appeal avenues
may be to a presbytery or a Synod in the case
of Presbyterian and Methodist churches. For Bible
Presbyterians in Singapore, unfortunately its
Synod was dissolved in 1988 at the instance of
leaders unwilling to submit themselves to the
wisdom of the majority.
VI. Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Sceptre of
Righteousness and Law
There are those who think
that since our Lord Jesus taught His disciples
to turn the other cheek, He is not concerned about
the rule of law. The Psalmist as well as the prophet
Isaiah however both foretold of our Lord's zeal
for righteousness. When Jesus Christ comes again
to rule and reign in His millennial kingdom, He
shall bring in everlasting righteousness and make
the law honourable.
"Thy righteousness is an
everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the
truth." (Ps 119:142)
"Behold my servant, whom I
uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth;
I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring
forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not
cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard
in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break,
and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall
bring forth judgment unto truthˇ" (Is
42:1-3)
"The LORD is well pleased
for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the
law, and make it honourable." (Is 42:21)
CONCLUSION
Going to court against another,
whether brethren or not, is unpleasant for any
normal person, and a thing all would wish to avoid.
At times however, due to the wilful intransigence
of the other party, a court process cannot be
avoided, and we have as Matthew Henry's Commentary
says, "to stir for our own relief" as a matter
of principle and conscience. I know a man who
had to go to court to overturn a defamatory ex-communication.
He was mindful that as David twice spared Saul,
(1Sam 24:3-6, 26:7-12) he too did not wish to
be the means to destroy those who had been unjust
towards him. In the end, the Lord gave him all
that he wanted: the ex-communication was withdrawn,
he spared the perpetrators and provided them a
face-saving way to continue in their ministry,
and he did not ask for damages or costs. In such
a case, 1Cor 6:1 cannot be the guiding verse,
to prevent the seeking of truth and justice and
allowing the perpetuation of wrong. When there
is a higher cause and principles of righteousness
and innocence involved, a Christian can appeal
to Caesar.
Concluding Prayer - "Wherefore
we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved,
let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably
with reverence and godly fear." (Heb 12:28)
|
