JUDGING!
I have read & heard enough nonsense about "Don't Judge!".
Judging is one of the most difficult subjects in the Bible to grasp, but it is also very important. Multitude of Christians, partly through ignorance and partly through disobedience, often contrary to scriptures do not judge when they should!
In human society, in various areas and various levels, God has appointed men as judges. Even in the history of Israel, judging and ruling were never divorced from each other. In the Old Testament, the sacred word for God, ELOHIM is actually applied to men who were judges. Why were they called ELOHIM (gods)? - because their function as judges was to take God's place and to judge His people. Their authority came from God AS LONG AS THEY WALKED RIGHT BEFORE GOD.
When God announced to Abraham His intention to judge Sodom, Abraham objected i.e., he questioned God's judgement! . He said " Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous should be as the wicked;, far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?"
Abraham established an important principle in the beginning of the Bible: It is contrary to justice to treat the righteous as the wicked. Abraham as a son (note small 's') questioned God. The reason why Abraham was bold to do this was because he knows God intimately.
How much more, we who have the Spirit of God living in us - also sons of God and Royal Priests must act righteously and judge when there is injustice done against the innocent and society.
God judges in the temporal arena, and the eternal. In this life God will judge a person's actions, but always (except when the person has irrevocably rejected Him) holds out the chance for turning back and repenting. Only on the Last Day, at the great white throne judgment will God pronounce eternal judgment on a person, forever determining his or her destinies. From this judgment, there is no appeal or second chance.
We Christian, on the other hand, is never given the right or the responsibility of eternally judging anyone (unless they have clearly rejected Christ permanently). Christians cannot correctly weigh action, motives, opportunities, nor know all things about any individual: God alone is capable to do so.
However, Christians are to make decisions (appraisals, discernments, and even take corrective actions). But even judging in this aspect is intended to be remedial, and leaves the door open to the person for repentance and reconciliation. Any judging on the part of a Christian which does not, is a false aspect of Christian judgement clouded by sentimental love and not agape (righteous) love. We are called upon to ''judge righteous judgment'' (John 7:24) and failure to do so is to be negligent in a crucial aspect of our Christian calling.
We need to be Christians of conscious. As long as Christians maintain a pacifist attitude and continue to parrot "Let God be God", justice will never be served because we have failed to protect the innocent. In fact I dare say that those who hold on to such 'false truths' have DONE NOTHING FOR THE PRESERVATION OF JUSTICE. Even if they did they had not exploited the full potential of FAITH but played along the shore line and never ventured into the deeps that God's TRUTH may prevail. While they say 'FAITH' they forget "WORKS" never realising they are two sides of the same coin!
We all can learn from William Wilberforce. For two decades, William Wilberforce (1759-1833) led the struggle in the English Parliament to abolish slavery, and it was his principal concern as a Christian politician and a reformer. He rightly judge that slavery was wrong and did something about it.
JUDGING - REFERENCES
For those who wish to know more, please refer to the references below.
1. Accountability: The Way To Touch God's Anointed Often, criticism of certain Christian teachers is condemned by those who claim Christians should not ''touch God's anointed.'' Clete Hux, of Watchman Fellowship, uses scripture to show where this argument goes wrong.
2.Are "God's Annointed" Beyond Criticism? Do Christians who judge "touch the Lord's Anointed"? By Hank Hanegraaf, of the Christian Research Institute http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/crj0148a.txt
3.To Judge Or Not To Judge by Richard Fisher, of Personal Freedom Outreach http://www.pfo.org/notjudge.htm
4. Who are we to judge? by Lewis B. Smedes, professor emeritus of theology and ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California. Published in Christianity Today, Oct. 1, 2001 http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/october1/29.70.html
5. Should Christians Judge (Jewish perspective) http://ezinearticles.com/?Should-Christians-Judge?&id=105276&opt=print
6. Judging - When? Why? and How? Derek Prince.
Submitted By Vijayan
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Spiritual Abuse from John Mark Ministries
Thanks to a sister-in-Christ who blogs as MessyChristian : http://messychristian.com/?cat=31
Who recommends that we, as "battered sheep" in the Kingdom of God, read this helpful article taken from John Mark Ministries : http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/2108.htm
*******************************************
Every week, as a counselor, I come across victims of 'spiritual abuse.' The following is offered as a first-draft attempt to promote discussion on a very common problem...
'Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction' (Pascal). 'If the divine call does not make us better, it will make us very much worse. Of all bad men, religious bad men are the worst' (CSLewis, 'Reflections on the Psalms', NY: Harcourt Brace, 1958, pp. 31-32). 'The smarter you are, the better your reasons for doing the wrong things' (Grandma Sophie to her precocious grandson Allen, in an episode of the CBS TV show 'Brooklyn Bridge'). 'Hurt people hurt people' (old proverb).
'The greatest threat to the church today is not from without but from our own leadership within' (Philip Keller, p.12).
'Don't you ever be called Doctor, Reverend or Master, for you have but one Master and you are all brothers and sisters' (Ken Blue's paraphrase of Matthew 23:8; p. 80).
'Keep watch over yourselves and over all the flock... savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock... Therefore be alert... And now I commend you to God and to the message of his grace, a message that is able to build you up...' (Acts 20:28-32).
....
'In the motion picture 'Sleeping with the Enemy', Julia Roberts's character is married to a controlling, tyrannical, high-powered business executive. Like all conscientious Pharisees, he is obsessed with detailed performance. He demands that his wife hang the bathroom towels straight and that she perform perfectly in public. When she accidentally trespasses one of his rules (read "laws"), he verbally, emotionally and physically punishes her. His abusive power over her is virtually total and makes her life unbearable.
'She must break free of him. Divorcing him is out of the question; he is too possessive and powerful to allow that. One of them must die if her freedom is to be secured, so she fakes her own death. Successfully accomplishing this, she flees to another city hundreds of miles away and assumes a new identity. By her "death" she apparently delivers herself from a life of torment.' (Blue, 124).
.....
A woman who was having difficulties in her marriage (mostly due to unresolved childhood sexual abuse from her father) answered the 'phone. It was her pastor, wondering why she wasn't in church. She replied that she was having difficulty relating to crowds these days. His response: 'That's probably because you yourself don't go out of your way to be interested in people.'
This is a true story - and an example of fairly common spiritual and emotional abuse. The pastor did not attempt empathetically to 'resonate' with the woman's feelings, but rather scolded her. Of course, technically (and speaking as a 'church growth motivated church-builder) he may have been 'right'. But he displayed gross insensitivity. And, indeed, a lack of wisdom: if he had connected with the woman's pain and fear, he would certainly have won her back...
.....
*Spiritual Abuse* is sometimes difficult to define. But in general it happens when
# 'a leader with spiritual authority uses that authority to coerce, control or exploit a follower, thus causing spiritual wounds' (Blue, p.12)
# one or more persons in a relationship is damaged spiritually and such wounding or scarring affects their relationship with God so that they develop a distorted image of God and of themselves
# a person is disempowered rather than spiritually empowered - instead of the relationship being 'safe' it becomes 'unsafe'; the abused person becomes dependent on the abuser, who imparts subtle or not-so-subtle messages that 'you won't survive without this relationship'
# someone with authority blames the person for a problem rather than empathetically working towards healing; leveling judgment where support is needed; using their power to attack another to subtly gratify themselves
# a pastor or leader or authority figure regards themselves as having supreme authority *because* of their status ('I'm the pastor, that's why!'); their word is final, and not to be challenged; they regard others as 'too immature to handle truth on their own' (and like the scribes and pharisees often quote Scripture to bolster their views); to disobey the leader may even be tantamount to disobeying God; the leader/s are involved in many/most people's important decisions
# people go along with 'authority' whether or not one agrees with the authority, or whether the authority is right; people in the system must deny any thought or opinion contrary to the leaders'; the leaders overtly and covertly remind others regularly of their authority; 'obedience' and 'submission' are preached virtues
# the leader is plagued by unacknowledged doubts and/or feels inferior or insignificant, and compensates by gaining power over others. Or the abuser is narcissistic, and is obsessed with a desire to do something grandiose for God
# a church and its leaders become legalistic rather than affirming the Christian good news about grace; there is an adherence to formulas rather than freedom in Christ; peoples' lives are governed by rules and 'measures of commitment' (frequent attendance at meetings, tithing, etc.)
# young idealistic people want a 'charismatic' leader to follow, a community to join, or simple answers to complex questions
# shame is induced because a person feels they rarely 'measure up'
# a congregation is berated for low attendances, poor giving etc. - focusing away from a pastor's defective leadership style
# a person is not healed following prayer is blamed for having a defective faith: in these situations the person is 'revictimized' to excuse the leader (and perhaps that leader's lack of faith!)
# this- or next-worldly scare tactics are employed to keep people in line; or promises of this- or next-worldy health and wealth if the 'ministry' and its beliefs are supported
# a person's 'boundaries' are not respected
# there is not a free flow of communication within the group: the leader/s control vital knowledge
# leaders appeal for 'unity' to protect themselves from scrutiny/ appraisal
# attending meetings regularly is most important - even at the expense of family life
# people feel guilty for feeling critical of the abusing authority - they have been warned frequently about 'disloyalty' (Some abusing systems require members to sign 'loyalty statements'). Often they want to leave the abusing system but they feel trapped - and they will have a significant chance of being trapped in future abusive relationships, unless they get help.
.....
Notes:
# The key NT text for spiritual abusers is Hebrews 13:17: 'Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as those who must give an account'. Ken Blue comments: 'The NT word here for "obey" (peithomai) does not refer to the obedience that may be demanded by right or imposed by decree' (p.35).
# Ken Blue notes seven symptoms of abusive religion from Jesus' diatribes against the Pharisees in Matthew 23: '
1. Abusive leaders base their spiritual authority on their position or office rather than on their service to the group. Their style of leadership is authoritarian.
2. Leaders in abusive churches often say one thing but do another. Their words and deeds to not match.
3. They manipulate people by making them feel guilty for not measuring up spiritually. They lay heavy religious loads on people and make no effort to life those loads. You know that you are in an abusive church if the loads just keep getting heavier.
4. Abusive leaders are preoccupied with looking good. They labor to keep up appearance. They stifle any criticism that puts them in a bad light.
5. They seek honorific titles and special privileges that elevate them above the group. They promote a class system with themselves at the top.
6. Their communication is not straight. Their speech becomes expecially vague and confusing when they are defending themselves.
7. They major on minor issues to the neglect of the truly important ones. They are conscientious about religious details but neglect God's larger agendas.' (pp. 134-135).
# 'We must have the courage to follow Christ's example and overturn the system, be it a marriage or an organization, if that system is wrong. Silent submission in the face of violence, dishonesty and abuse will only enable that abuse to be passed on to generations' (Arterburn and Felton, p.72).
# Not all strong leaders are abusive; not all 'black-and-white' fundamentalists are abusive; perhaps (though I have my doubts) not all 'we alone are right / all the other churches are dead' groups are abusive; not all 'hell-fire' preachers are secret adulterers etc. (unlike the high-profile American televangelist who in the midst of a sermon series about Rahab the harlot was visiting one himself)
# 'Abusive spiritual leaders gain followers because they are, in one way or another, attractive. Their attractiveness may very well be their genuine commitment to the work of God and their sincere desire to train mature disciples... [Some of these leaders] are not deliberately abusive' (Blue, p.97).
# Watchman Nee has influenced many with his views about hierarchy, rank and subordination: 'Hence you recognize not only the head but also those whom God has set in his body to represent the head. If you are at odds with them, you will be at odds with God.' ('The Body of Christ', NY: Christian Fellowship Publishers, 1978, pp. 20-21) '...Insubordination is rebellion and for this the one under authority must answer to God' ('Spiritual Authority', NY: Christian Fellowship Publishers, 1972, p.71).
# Often in spiritually abusive situations external 'worldly' behaviors are castigated (can you name some?), but not materialism, greed, lovelessness, injustice etc. And there is more 'sternness' than joy.
# Abusive leaders rarely say 'I'm sorry', 'I wonder how I could have done better...', 'I don't know', 'You were right', 'I need help'.
# Abusive leaders usually insist on special privileges, honours, titles, honorary degrees etc. to bolster their insecurity.
# Mark Twain once said, 'A cat that sits on a hot stove lid won't ever sit on a hot stove lid again. But it probably won't sit on a cold stove lid either.' Spiritually abused people find it difficult to trust authority-figures after their experience.
# 'So, Ken, what you are saying in a nutshell is that if we know for sure that we are really OK with God and other people because Jesus makes us OK, then no one can manipulate and control us ever again. And if the abuser realizes that he too is fully loved and accepted by God, he will never need to lord it over anyone ever again.' Radio host, summarizing a three-hour program on Spiritual Abuse with Ken Blue (p.120).
.....
I have been helped by some of the insights from Ken Blue, 'Healing Spiritual Abuse: How to Break Free from Bad Church Experiences', Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1993; Philip Keller, 'Predators in our Pulpits' Eugene Ore: Harvest House, 1988; David Johnson & Jeff VanVonderen, 'The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse: Recognizing and Escaping Spiritual Manipulation and False Spiritual Authority Within the Church', Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1991; Ronald Enroth, 'Churches That Abuse', Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 1992; and Stephen Arterburn and Jack Felton, 'Toxic Faith', Nashville: Oliver-Nelson Publishers, 1991.
© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium, without applying for permission (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)! Click here: http://jmm.aaa.net.au/index.htm
Who recommends that we, as "battered sheep" in the Kingdom of God, read this helpful article taken from John Mark Ministries : http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/2108.htm
*******************************************
Every week, as a counselor, I come across victims of 'spiritual abuse.' The following is offered as a first-draft attempt to promote discussion on a very common problem...
'Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction' (Pascal). 'If the divine call does not make us better, it will make us very much worse. Of all bad men, religious bad men are the worst' (CSLewis, 'Reflections on the Psalms', NY: Harcourt Brace, 1958, pp. 31-32). 'The smarter you are, the better your reasons for doing the wrong things' (Grandma Sophie to her precocious grandson Allen, in an episode of the CBS TV show 'Brooklyn Bridge'). 'Hurt people hurt people' (old proverb).
'The greatest threat to the church today is not from without but from our own leadership within' (Philip Keller, p.12).
'Don't you ever be called Doctor, Reverend or Master, for you have but one Master and you are all brothers and sisters' (Ken Blue's paraphrase of Matthew 23:8; p. 80).
'Keep watch over yourselves and over all the flock... savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock... Therefore be alert... And now I commend you to God and to the message of his grace, a message that is able to build you up...' (Acts 20:28-32).
....
'In the motion picture 'Sleeping with the Enemy', Julia Roberts's character is married to a controlling, tyrannical, high-powered business executive. Like all conscientious Pharisees, he is obsessed with detailed performance. He demands that his wife hang the bathroom towels straight and that she perform perfectly in public. When she accidentally trespasses one of his rules (read "laws"), he verbally, emotionally and physically punishes her. His abusive power over her is virtually total and makes her life unbearable.
'She must break free of him. Divorcing him is out of the question; he is too possessive and powerful to allow that. One of them must die if her freedom is to be secured, so she fakes her own death. Successfully accomplishing this, she flees to another city hundreds of miles away and assumes a new identity. By her "death" she apparently delivers herself from a life of torment.' (Blue, 124).
.....
A woman who was having difficulties in her marriage (mostly due to unresolved childhood sexual abuse from her father) answered the 'phone. It was her pastor, wondering why she wasn't in church. She replied that she was having difficulty relating to crowds these days. His response: 'That's probably because you yourself don't go out of your way to be interested in people.'
This is a true story - and an example of fairly common spiritual and emotional abuse. The pastor did not attempt empathetically to 'resonate' with the woman's feelings, but rather scolded her. Of course, technically (and speaking as a 'church growth motivated church-builder) he may have been 'right'. But he displayed gross insensitivity. And, indeed, a lack of wisdom: if he had connected with the woman's pain and fear, he would certainly have won her back...
.....
*Spiritual Abuse* is sometimes difficult to define. But in general it happens when
# 'a leader with spiritual authority uses that authority to coerce, control or exploit a follower, thus causing spiritual wounds' (Blue, p.12)
# one or more persons in a relationship is damaged spiritually and such wounding or scarring affects their relationship with God so that they develop a distorted image of God and of themselves
# a person is disempowered rather than spiritually empowered - instead of the relationship being 'safe' it becomes 'unsafe'; the abused person becomes dependent on the abuser, who imparts subtle or not-so-subtle messages that 'you won't survive without this relationship'
# someone with authority blames the person for a problem rather than empathetically working towards healing; leveling judgment where support is needed; using their power to attack another to subtly gratify themselves
# a pastor or leader or authority figure regards themselves as having supreme authority *because* of their status ('I'm the pastor, that's why!'); their word is final, and not to be challenged; they regard others as 'too immature to handle truth on their own' (and like the scribes and pharisees often quote Scripture to bolster their views); to disobey the leader may even be tantamount to disobeying God; the leader/s are involved in many/most people's important decisions
# people go along with 'authority' whether or not one agrees with the authority, or whether the authority is right; people in the system must deny any thought or opinion contrary to the leaders'; the leaders overtly and covertly remind others regularly of their authority; 'obedience' and 'submission' are preached virtues
# the leader is plagued by unacknowledged doubts and/or feels inferior or insignificant, and compensates by gaining power over others. Or the abuser is narcissistic, and is obsessed with a desire to do something grandiose for God
# a church and its leaders become legalistic rather than affirming the Christian good news about grace; there is an adherence to formulas rather than freedom in Christ; peoples' lives are governed by rules and 'measures of commitment' (frequent attendance at meetings, tithing, etc.)
# young idealistic people want a 'charismatic' leader to follow, a community to join, or simple answers to complex questions
# shame is induced because a person feels they rarely 'measure up'
# a congregation is berated for low attendances, poor giving etc. - focusing away from a pastor's defective leadership style
# a person is not healed following prayer is blamed for having a defective faith: in these situations the person is 'revictimized' to excuse the leader (and perhaps that leader's lack of faith!)
# this- or next-worldly scare tactics are employed to keep people in line; or promises of this- or next-worldy health and wealth if the 'ministry' and its beliefs are supported
# a person's 'boundaries' are not respected
# there is not a free flow of communication within the group: the leader/s control vital knowledge
# leaders appeal for 'unity' to protect themselves from scrutiny/ appraisal
# attending meetings regularly is most important - even at the expense of family life
# people feel guilty for feeling critical of the abusing authority - they have been warned frequently about 'disloyalty' (Some abusing systems require members to sign 'loyalty statements'). Often they want to leave the abusing system but they feel trapped - and they will have a significant chance of being trapped in future abusive relationships, unless they get help.
.....
Notes:
# The key NT text for spiritual abusers is Hebrews 13:17: 'Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as those who must give an account'. Ken Blue comments: 'The NT word here for "obey" (peithomai) does not refer to the obedience that may be demanded by right or imposed by decree' (p.35).
# Ken Blue notes seven symptoms of abusive religion from Jesus' diatribes against the Pharisees in Matthew 23: '
1. Abusive leaders base their spiritual authority on their position or office rather than on their service to the group. Their style of leadership is authoritarian.
2. Leaders in abusive churches often say one thing but do another. Their words and deeds to not match.
3. They manipulate people by making them feel guilty for not measuring up spiritually. They lay heavy religious loads on people and make no effort to life those loads. You know that you are in an abusive church if the loads just keep getting heavier.
4. Abusive leaders are preoccupied with looking good. They labor to keep up appearance. They stifle any criticism that puts them in a bad light.
5. They seek honorific titles and special privileges that elevate them above the group. They promote a class system with themselves at the top.
6. Their communication is not straight. Their speech becomes expecially vague and confusing when they are defending themselves.
7. They major on minor issues to the neglect of the truly important ones. They are conscientious about religious details but neglect God's larger agendas.' (pp. 134-135).
# 'We must have the courage to follow Christ's example and overturn the system, be it a marriage or an organization, if that system is wrong. Silent submission in the face of violence, dishonesty and abuse will only enable that abuse to be passed on to generations' (Arterburn and Felton, p.72).
# Not all strong leaders are abusive; not all 'black-and-white' fundamentalists are abusive; perhaps (though I have my doubts) not all 'we alone are right / all the other churches are dead' groups are abusive; not all 'hell-fire' preachers are secret adulterers etc. (unlike the high-profile American televangelist who in the midst of a sermon series about Rahab the harlot was visiting one himself)
# 'Abusive spiritual leaders gain followers because they are, in one way or another, attractive. Their attractiveness may very well be their genuine commitment to the work of God and their sincere desire to train mature disciples... [Some of these leaders] are not deliberately abusive' (Blue, p.97).
# Watchman Nee has influenced many with his views about hierarchy, rank and subordination: 'Hence you recognize not only the head but also those whom God has set in his body to represent the head. If you are at odds with them, you will be at odds with God.' ('The Body of Christ', NY: Christian Fellowship Publishers, 1978, pp. 20-21) '...Insubordination is rebellion and for this the one under authority must answer to God' ('Spiritual Authority', NY: Christian Fellowship Publishers, 1972, p.71).
# Often in spiritually abusive situations external 'worldly' behaviors are castigated (can you name some?), but not materialism, greed, lovelessness, injustice etc. And there is more 'sternness' than joy.
# Abusive leaders rarely say 'I'm sorry', 'I wonder how I could have done better...', 'I don't know', 'You were right', 'I need help'.
# Abusive leaders usually insist on special privileges, honours, titles, honorary degrees etc. to bolster their insecurity.
# Mark Twain once said, 'A cat that sits on a hot stove lid won't ever sit on a hot stove lid again. But it probably won't sit on a cold stove lid either.' Spiritually abused people find it difficult to trust authority-figures after their experience.
# 'So, Ken, what you are saying in a nutshell is that if we know for sure that we are really OK with God and other people because Jesus makes us OK, then no one can manipulate and control us ever again. And if the abuser realizes that he too is fully loved and accepted by God, he will never need to lord it over anyone ever again.' Radio host, summarizing a three-hour program on Spiritual Abuse with Ken Blue (p.120).
.....
I have been helped by some of the insights from Ken Blue, 'Healing Spiritual Abuse: How to Break Free from Bad Church Experiences', Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1993; Philip Keller, 'Predators in our Pulpits' Eugene Ore: Harvest House, 1988; David Johnson & Jeff VanVonderen, 'The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse: Recognizing and Escaping Spiritual Manipulation and False Spiritual Authority Within the Church', Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 1991; Ronald Enroth, 'Churches That Abuse', Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 1992; and Stephen Arterburn and Jack Felton, 'Toxic Faith', Nashville: Oliver-Nelson Publishers, 1991.
© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium, without applying for permission (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)! Click here: http://jmm.aaa.net.au/index.htm
Saturday, October 24, 2009
CHRISTIAN LAWSUIT by Dr. Paul Nah
Professor Dr. Paul Nah is a Retired Lecturer. He was an Associate Professor in the University of Malaya.
He spends his time doing research and studying on topics that are affecting churches today in Malaysia. This is his view after going through the following 27 Articles written by different individuals.
A REVIEW OF 27 ARTICLES
References:
1. A Manual on Christian Conflict Resolution, Wong K K. 2. Christians and Lawsuits, G. O. Wood, Superintendent, AOG, USA. 3. INAPPROPRIATE LEGAL ACTIONS by D. Goins 4. 1 Cor 6:1-11 by D. Chadwell 5. 1 Cor 6 – No Shield for Lawbreakers, W. JACKSON. 6. Exegetical Paper/1 Corinthians 6 1-8 7. Litigation between Brethren, W. W. Blue 8. 1 Cor 6:1-11, An Exegetical Study 9. 1 Cor 6 “Scriptural Litigation 10. 1 Cor 6:1-11, Dealing With Spiritual Immaturity, G. DeLashmutt. 11. 1 Cor - "Revelation Or Litigation? Pastor D. Legge 12. CHRISTIANS AND LAWSUITS "TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT" by Matthew Tozer 13. Christians and Lawsuits 14. What is your view of lawsuits between Christians? 15. Christians and Lawsuits 16. W. Nee on Christians Filing Lawsuits 17. Should Christians Sue in Court? M. Fairchild 18. 1 Cor 6:1-11 - Avoiding Lawsuits with Christians 19. How to Resolve Legal Issues Biblically, T. Morgan, 20. When Do You Need to See a Lawyer? Crown Financial Ministries 22. When Can Christians Sue? R. Ross 23. Opinion: should Christians sue? L. Burkett 24. AN EXPOSITION OF 1 CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 6. C. Hodge 25. Adam Clarke Commentary, 1 Corinthians 6:1-11 23. 26. Joseph Beet Commentary: SOME OF THEM GO TO LAW, AND THAT BEFORE UNBELIEVER 27. 1 Corinthians CHAPTER 6:1-11 24. Law and Justice in New Testament Times, J. R. Albrektson.
Ways of resolving Christian disputes:
1. Love & Forgive Matthew 5:44 – 48, 18:21-22
2. Suffer wrong & bear cost. 1Corinthians 6:7, Matthew 5:39 – 42
3. Christian Mediation Matthew 18: 15 – 17
4. The Corinthian Christian Lawsuit. 4. 1Corinthians. 6: 1 – 8
5. Paul’s acceptance of the Roman Govt as established by God 5, Romans 13: 1 – 5
6. Paul appealed to the Roman Legal system to for justice, Acts 16: 37-39, 22:25, 25:11
1. Love & Forgive Matthew 5:44 – 48, 18:21-22
Christians are often badgered by pastors into believing that Christian disputes can only be resolved by loving and forgiving the perpetrator. However the truth is, if Christian love is to be a healthy one it must be balanced by firm discipline. Many remember Jesus as sweet and mild, forgetting that once He used the whip to clear in His Father’s temple of the many thieves and robbers lurking there.
Just L-O-O-O-V-E and FORGIVE even our enemies? (Mat 5:44.)
Why don’t we heed the advice of Dr. James Dobson, a famous Family Life teacher and Personal Advisor on American Family to the President of the USA and author of the widely-read book entitled “Love and Discipline” where he strongly recommended that we should ALWAYS BALANCE LOVE WITH DISCIPLINE in the bringing up of our children.
What does God have to say about this?
“....Because the Lord corrects everyone he loves, and punishes everyone he accepts as a child." (Heb 12:6)
"But if you are WITHOUT CHASTISEMENT… then you are BASTARDS and not sons." (Heb 12:8 MKJV)
Dr Richard D. Dobbins, a Christian Psychologist and Family Life Teacher has this to say – “if you ONLY love your child you will end up with a spoilt person whom nobody likes. If you JUST DISCIPLINE you will get a person who cannot love himself.”
2. HOW MUCH SUFFERING OF WRONG MUST WE BEAR ?
“But I say to you, do not resist him who is evil. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, LET HIM SLAP YOU LEFT CHEEK ALSO. And if someone takes you to court to sue you for your shirt, LET HIM HAVE YOUR COAT ALSO. And if one of the occupation troops forces you to carry his pack one mile, CARRY IT TWO MILES.” (Mat 5: 39 – 42)
Note that cost demanded in the three situations are ALL quite small – a slap, a coat, a mile (and some pride.) They are affordable or manageable so you can live with it. What if you can’t afford the demands e.g someone defrauds you of RM One million or all of your life’s saving and you are already 70 years old. Are you going to forgive and forget? Can you?? You would be most stupid not to go to court! Furthermore, by bringing that person to court you are protecting another Christian of a possible fraud.
So THE PRINCIPLE IS: if you can AFFORD it, then overlook the matter and move on with your life. If you can’t then don’t feel guilty by 1 Cor 6, if you have to go to court.
Furthermore, in 2 COR 11: 19 & 20 PAUL REBUKED the Corinthians for allowing false teachers to SLAP THEM ON THEIR FACE.
3. CHRISTIAN MEDIATION
“But if your brother shall trespass against you, (first) go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear you, (second) take one or two more with you, so that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established and if he shall neglect to hear them, (third) tell it to the church. But if he neglects to hear the church, (fourth or lastly) let him be to you as a heathen and a tax-collector.” (Mat 18: 15–17)
Once the church has been consulted and there is no admission of guilt then we are asked to treat the brother as a heathen and a tax-collector. This means we can now take the person to the SECULAR LAW COURT because all avenues have already been exhausted (Wong Kim Kong, Advisor, NECF & George O. Wood, Surperintendent, AOG Council, Misouri. USA)
4. THE "1 COR 6: 1 – 8" LIABILITY.
I describe this as a liability because it often read in such a shallow fashion that impression it gives is that Paul is against Christians going to the secular law court. NOTHING IS FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. Let’s read through 1 COR 6: 1 – 8.
v1 - If any of you have a dispute with another Christian, how dare you go before heathen judges instead of letting God's people settle the matter?
v2 - Don't you know that God's people will judge the world? Well, then, if you are to judge the world, aren't you capable of judging small matters?
v3 - Do you not know that we shall judge the angels? How much more, then, the things of this life!
v4 - If such matters come up, are you going to take them to be settled by people who have no standing in the church?
v5 - Shame on you! Surely there is at least one wise person in your fellowship who can settle a dispute between fellow Christians.
v6 - Instead, one Christian goes to court against another and lets unbelievers judge the case!
v7 - The very fact that you have legal disputes among yourselves shows that you have failed completely. Would it not be better for you to be wronged? Would it not be better for you to be robbed?
v8 - Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
Background of the Corinthian church.
The Corinthians were extremely immature and carnal (1Cor 3:1,2). Disputes resulted in the church being divided into at least four factions (1 Cor 1:12). They indulged in all sorts of sins including sexual sins and cheating one another (1Cor 5:11). From their behaviour you could barely distinguish them from a non-believer!
Now, lets go to verse 1 of 1Cor 6.
It states clearly that the Corinthian Christians were settling their disputes before heathen judges instead of coming before their fellow Christians in the church. The disputes that were generally trivial - in different translations given as a matter, a complain, and in 1Cor 6:2 as insignificant cases (GW, ISV), smallest matters (ASV, KJV, MKJV, GNB), small problems (CEV), small judgments (LITV). The disputes didn’t really require them to go to the secular courts.
But why couldn’t they resolve it within the church? It likely that they were so divided, into at least four factions (1Cor 1:12), that it becomes impossible to find someone who could be a neutral mediator. So by going to the secular judges an even more horrendous predicament resulted - a shameful Christian testimony before the heathen Judges and all the many non-believers who attended the law courts. The very people whom the Corinthian Christians were supposed to reach with the gospel were the very people they were scrambling to get help to resolve their PETTY PROBLEMS. The Corinthian Christians failed miserably in their CHRISTIAN MISSION!
Can you now understand why Paul was so angry that he used words like “how dare you?’ (1Cor 6:1) and “shame on you” (1Cor 6:5), However, Paul’s strong emotional reaction was NOT DIRECTED AT THE CORINTHIANS GOING TO THE LAW COURTS but to the FAILURE OF THE CHRISTIAN MISSION. Furthermore the disputes were SO TRIVIAL!
Wong Kim Kong, Advisor, NECF, in his article “CHRISTIAN CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND LITIGATION” says PAUL in 1Cor 6:1-11 IS NOT CONDEMNING the secular law courts. In another part he states “There may be times when Christians could morally use legal opportunities”.
George O. Wood, Superintendent, Assemblies of God, Springfield, Missouri, USA., in his article “Christians and Lawsuits” said Paul never addressed the theme of whether a lawsuit would be appropriate once the church had declared a party to be a "pagan and a tax collector.“ (Mat 18:15 – 17) Perhaps such would be permitted under the teaching of Rom 13:1–5 that the secular government exists to uphold justice and to prevent lawlessness.
5. IF WE GO TO COURT TODAY WILL IT BE VERY DAMAGING TO OUR CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY?
CHURCH-RELATED DISPUTES and some SELECTIVE CIVIL CASES should be settled through CHURCH MEDIATION by Godly Christian leaders. (If the church cannot settle it, the dispute may have to be referred to the LAW COURTS because there is no other recourse).
ALL OTHER CIVIL CASES and ALL CRIMINAL CASES are REQUIRED BY LAW to be settled in the LAW COURTS. Christians have no choice here even if it brings about a bad testimony.
So in answer to the question, IF WE GO TO COURT TODAY WILL IT BE VERY DAMAGING TO OUR CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY, the answer is IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE! Christians who have to go to the law courts will have to go to the law courts.
6. GOD’S REPUTAION IS OF LESSER IMPORTANCE TO HIM THAN HIS DESIRE FOR HIS PEOPLE TO LIVE RIGHTEOUSLY.
In 2 Chronicles 36:11 …17 recorded that Zedekiah, King of Judah :
1. Sinned against the LORD
2. Stubbornly refused to repent
3. Caused the people to sin.
So the LORD brought the King of Babylonia to attack the Israelites.
God’s people were totally defeated by the Babylonians. Isn’t that a BAD TESTIMONY FOR GOD?
The Babylonians could then say their gods were greater than the Almighty God of Israel. Isn’t that a BAD TESTIMONY FOR GOD?
BUT WHO BROUGHT THE KING OF BABYLONIA TO ATTACK ISRAEL? GOD HIMSELF !
What is God trying to tell us? – God’s reputation is important to Him
BUT MORE IMPORTANT IS THAT WE LIVE RIGHTEOUSLY BEFORE HIM!
Some Christians express concern that going to the Law Court will be a bad Christian testimony.
HOWEVER, THE TIME TO BE CONCERN ABOUT BAD CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY IS ALREADY PAST.
THE BAD CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY IS ALREADY KNOWN WORLDWIDE.
WHAT THE WORLD IS NOW WAITING FOR IS, TO SEE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT !
IF A CRIMINAL OFFENSE HAS BEEN COMMITTED, DO WE HAVE THE GUMPTION TO MAKE OR BRING THE CASE TO COURT? THAT IS A GOOD CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY !
OR ARE WE GOING TO JUST SWEEP IT UNDER THE CARPET? – WHICH WILL BE A HORRENDOUSLY BAD TESTIMONY !
“For the time has come that JUDGEMENT must begin in the HOUSE OF GOD” (1 Pet 4:17)
7. PAUL SAYS CHRISTIANS SHOULD SUBJECT THEMSELVES TO THE ROMAN (SECULAR) LEGAL SYSTEM (Romans 13: 1 -7)
"EVERYONE MUST OBEY state authorities, because NO AUTHORITIES EXIST WITHOUT GOD’S PERMISSION, and the EXISTING AUTHORITIES have been PUT THERE BY GOD." (Rom 13:1) This clearly states that we must subject ourselves to the Secular Law Courts as Paul subjected himself to the Roman Secular Legal System.
8. PAUL HIMSELF APPEALED TO THE ROMAN LAW TO GET JUSTICE
In Acts 16, Paul and Silus were thrown into jail for casting out a demon from a slave-girl. They were publicly beaten and thrown into jail. They prayed and sang hymns and an earthquake occurred that led to the salvation of the jailer. Later in Acts 16:37, PAUL TOLD THE GUARDS, "… WE’RE ROMAN CITIZENS”.
“When the Roman officials heard that Paul and Silas were Roman citizens, THEY WERE AFRAID." (Acts 16:38 – 39) So the officials went to the jail and APOLOGISED to Paul and Silas.”
We can see here how Paul, because of his understanding of Roman (secular) Law was able to bring the Roman Officials to near submission! There are two other examples of Paul using the Roman Legal System to seek justice for himself, Acts 22:15 – 19 and 25: 9 -11.
IF, THEREFORE, PAUL COULD SEEK JUSTICE FROM THE ROMAN LEGAL SYSTEM IN HIS TIME, THEN WHY CAN’T CHRISTIANS DO THE SAME THING FROM THE MALAYSIAN LEGAL SYSTEM TODAY?
IT IS IMPORTANT FOR CHRISTIANS TO APPRECIATE CERTAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MALAYSIAN LEGAL SYSTEM IN ORDER TO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN WHAT IT CAN OFFER:
1. They are religiously neutral. It has nothing to do with the Syariah Court.
2. They carry out their functions with high professionalism.
3. The Malaysian Legal System is based on English Law which has its roots in the Biblical Teachings. It is totally separate from the Syariah Laws.
4. It is compulsory for ALL Criminal and many Civil cases to go to court whether or not you like it as a Christian.
5. The proceeding are quite private and unlikely to give rise to bad publicity. In the past several years there have been at least about 5 cases of “church members vs pastors” lawsuits that were brought to the attention of the Malaysians Courts and practically no one knew anything about them. Furthermore, they did not attract any media attention whatsoever.
He spends his time doing research and studying on topics that are affecting churches today in Malaysia. This is his view after going through the following 27 Articles written by different individuals.
A REVIEW OF 27 ARTICLES
References:
1. A Manual on Christian Conflict Resolution, Wong K K. 2. Christians and Lawsuits, G. O. Wood, Superintendent, AOG, USA. 3. INAPPROPRIATE LEGAL ACTIONS by D. Goins 4. 1 Cor 6:1-11 by D. Chadwell 5. 1 Cor 6 – No Shield for Lawbreakers, W. JACKSON. 6. Exegetical Paper/1 Corinthians 6 1-8 7. Litigation between Brethren, W. W. Blue 8. 1 Cor 6:1-11, An Exegetical Study 9. 1 Cor 6 “Scriptural Litigation 10. 1 Cor 6:1-11, Dealing With Spiritual Immaturity, G. DeLashmutt. 11. 1 Cor - "Revelation Or Litigation? Pastor D. Legge 12. CHRISTIANS AND LAWSUITS "TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT" by Matthew Tozer 13. Christians and Lawsuits 14. What is your view of lawsuits between Christians? 15. Christians and Lawsuits 16. W. Nee on Christians Filing Lawsuits 17. Should Christians Sue in Court? M. Fairchild 18. 1 Cor 6:1-11 - Avoiding Lawsuits with Christians 19. How to Resolve Legal Issues Biblically, T. Morgan, 20. When Do You Need to See a Lawyer? Crown Financial Ministries 22. When Can Christians Sue? R. Ross 23. Opinion: should Christians sue? L. Burkett 24. AN EXPOSITION OF 1 CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 6. C. Hodge 25. Adam Clarke Commentary, 1 Corinthians 6:1-11 23. 26. Joseph Beet Commentary: SOME OF THEM GO TO LAW, AND THAT BEFORE UNBELIEVER 27. 1 Corinthians CHAPTER 6:1-11 24. Law and Justice in New Testament Times, J. R. Albrektson.
Ways of resolving Christian disputes:
1. Love & Forgive Matthew 5:44 – 48, 18:21-22
2. Suffer wrong & bear cost. 1Corinthians 6:7, Matthew 5:39 – 42
3. Christian Mediation Matthew 18: 15 – 17
4. The Corinthian Christian Lawsuit. 4. 1Corinthians. 6: 1 – 8
5. Paul’s acceptance of the Roman Govt as established by God 5, Romans 13: 1 – 5
6. Paul appealed to the Roman Legal system to for justice, Acts 16: 37-39, 22:25, 25:11
1. Love & Forgive Matthew 5:44 – 48, 18:21-22
Christians are often badgered by pastors into believing that Christian disputes can only be resolved by loving and forgiving the perpetrator. However the truth is, if Christian love is to be a healthy one it must be balanced by firm discipline. Many remember Jesus as sweet and mild, forgetting that once He used the whip to clear in His Father’s temple of the many thieves and robbers lurking there.
Just L-O-O-O-V-E and FORGIVE even our enemies? (Mat 5:44.)
Why don’t we heed the advice of Dr. James Dobson, a famous Family Life teacher and Personal Advisor on American Family to the President of the USA and author of the widely-read book entitled “Love and Discipline” where he strongly recommended that we should ALWAYS BALANCE LOVE WITH DISCIPLINE in the bringing up of our children.
What does God have to say about this?
“....Because the Lord corrects everyone he loves, and punishes everyone he accepts as a child." (Heb 12:6)
"But if you are WITHOUT CHASTISEMENT… then you are BASTARDS and not sons." (Heb 12:8 MKJV)
Dr Richard D. Dobbins, a Christian Psychologist and Family Life Teacher has this to say – “if you ONLY love your child you will end up with a spoilt person whom nobody likes. If you JUST DISCIPLINE you will get a person who cannot love himself.”
2. HOW MUCH SUFFERING OF WRONG MUST WE BEAR ?
“But I say to you, do not resist him who is evil. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, LET HIM SLAP YOU LEFT CHEEK ALSO. And if someone takes you to court to sue you for your shirt, LET HIM HAVE YOUR COAT ALSO. And if one of the occupation troops forces you to carry his pack one mile, CARRY IT TWO MILES.” (Mat 5: 39 – 42)
Note that cost demanded in the three situations are ALL quite small – a slap, a coat, a mile (and some pride.) They are affordable or manageable so you can live with it. What if you can’t afford the demands e.g someone defrauds you of RM One million or all of your life’s saving and you are already 70 years old. Are you going to forgive and forget? Can you?? You would be most stupid not to go to court! Furthermore, by bringing that person to court you are protecting another Christian of a possible fraud.
So THE PRINCIPLE IS: if you can AFFORD it, then overlook the matter and move on with your life. If you can’t then don’t feel guilty by 1 Cor 6, if you have to go to court.
Furthermore, in 2 COR 11: 19 & 20 PAUL REBUKED the Corinthians for allowing false teachers to SLAP THEM ON THEIR FACE.
3. CHRISTIAN MEDIATION
“But if your brother shall trespass against you, (first) go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear you, (second) take one or two more with you, so that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established and if he shall neglect to hear them, (third) tell it to the church. But if he neglects to hear the church, (fourth or lastly) let him be to you as a heathen and a tax-collector.” (Mat 18: 15–17)
Once the church has been consulted and there is no admission of guilt then we are asked to treat the brother as a heathen and a tax-collector. This means we can now take the person to the SECULAR LAW COURT because all avenues have already been exhausted (Wong Kim Kong, Advisor, NECF & George O. Wood, Surperintendent, AOG Council, Misouri. USA)
4. THE "1 COR 6: 1 – 8" LIABILITY.
I describe this as a liability because it often read in such a shallow fashion that impression it gives is that Paul is against Christians going to the secular law court. NOTHING IS FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH. Let’s read through 1 COR 6: 1 – 8.
v1 - If any of you have a dispute with another Christian, how dare you go before heathen judges instead of letting God's people settle the matter?
v2 - Don't you know that God's people will judge the world? Well, then, if you are to judge the world, aren't you capable of judging small matters?
v3 - Do you not know that we shall judge the angels? How much more, then, the things of this life!
v4 - If such matters come up, are you going to take them to be settled by people who have no standing in the church?
v5 - Shame on you! Surely there is at least one wise person in your fellowship who can settle a dispute between fellow Christians.
v6 - Instead, one Christian goes to court against another and lets unbelievers judge the case!
v7 - The very fact that you have legal disputes among yourselves shows that you have failed completely. Would it not be better for you to be wronged? Would it not be better for you to be robbed?
v8 - Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
Background of the Corinthian church.
The Corinthians were extremely immature and carnal (1Cor 3:1,2). Disputes resulted in the church being divided into at least four factions (1 Cor 1:12). They indulged in all sorts of sins including sexual sins and cheating one another (1Cor 5:11). From their behaviour you could barely distinguish them from a non-believer!
Now, lets go to verse 1 of 1Cor 6.
It states clearly that the Corinthian Christians were settling their disputes before heathen judges instead of coming before their fellow Christians in the church. The disputes that were generally trivial - in different translations given as a matter, a complain, and in 1Cor 6:2 as insignificant cases (GW, ISV), smallest matters (ASV, KJV, MKJV, GNB), small problems (CEV), small judgments (LITV). The disputes didn’t really require them to go to the secular courts.
But why couldn’t they resolve it within the church? It likely that they were so divided, into at least four factions (1Cor 1:12), that it becomes impossible to find someone who could be a neutral mediator. So by going to the secular judges an even more horrendous predicament resulted - a shameful Christian testimony before the heathen Judges and all the many non-believers who attended the law courts. The very people whom the Corinthian Christians were supposed to reach with the gospel were the very people they were scrambling to get help to resolve their PETTY PROBLEMS. The Corinthian Christians failed miserably in their CHRISTIAN MISSION!
Can you now understand why Paul was so angry that he used words like “how dare you?’ (1Cor 6:1) and “shame on you” (1Cor 6:5), However, Paul’s strong emotional reaction was NOT DIRECTED AT THE CORINTHIANS GOING TO THE LAW COURTS but to the FAILURE OF THE CHRISTIAN MISSION. Furthermore the disputes were SO TRIVIAL!
Wong Kim Kong, Advisor, NECF, in his article “CHRISTIAN CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND LITIGATION” says PAUL in 1Cor 6:1-11 IS NOT CONDEMNING the secular law courts. In another part he states “There may be times when Christians could morally use legal opportunities”.
George O. Wood, Superintendent, Assemblies of God, Springfield, Missouri, USA., in his article “Christians and Lawsuits” said Paul never addressed the theme of whether a lawsuit would be appropriate once the church had declared a party to be a "pagan and a tax collector.“ (Mat 18:15 – 17) Perhaps such would be permitted under the teaching of Rom 13:1–5 that the secular government exists to uphold justice and to prevent lawlessness.
5. IF WE GO TO COURT TODAY WILL IT BE VERY DAMAGING TO OUR CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY?
CHURCH-RELATED DISPUTES and some SELECTIVE CIVIL CASES should be settled through CHURCH MEDIATION by Godly Christian leaders. (If the church cannot settle it, the dispute may have to be referred to the LAW COURTS because there is no other recourse).
ALL OTHER CIVIL CASES and ALL CRIMINAL CASES are REQUIRED BY LAW to be settled in the LAW COURTS. Christians have no choice here even if it brings about a bad testimony.
So in answer to the question, IF WE GO TO COURT TODAY WILL IT BE VERY DAMAGING TO OUR CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY, the answer is IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE! Christians who have to go to the law courts will have to go to the law courts.
6. GOD’S REPUTAION IS OF LESSER IMPORTANCE TO HIM THAN HIS DESIRE FOR HIS PEOPLE TO LIVE RIGHTEOUSLY.
In 2 Chronicles 36:11 …17 recorded that Zedekiah, King of Judah :
1. Sinned against the LORD
2. Stubbornly refused to repent
3. Caused the people to sin.
So the LORD brought the King of Babylonia to attack the Israelites.
God’s people were totally defeated by the Babylonians. Isn’t that a BAD TESTIMONY FOR GOD?
The Babylonians could then say their gods were greater than the Almighty God of Israel. Isn’t that a BAD TESTIMONY FOR GOD?
BUT WHO BROUGHT THE KING OF BABYLONIA TO ATTACK ISRAEL? GOD HIMSELF !
What is God trying to tell us? – God’s reputation is important to Him
BUT MORE IMPORTANT IS THAT WE LIVE RIGHTEOUSLY BEFORE HIM!
Some Christians express concern that going to the Law Court will be a bad Christian testimony.
HOWEVER, THE TIME TO BE CONCERN ABOUT BAD CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY IS ALREADY PAST.
THE BAD CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY IS ALREADY KNOWN WORLDWIDE.
WHAT THE WORLD IS NOW WAITING FOR IS, TO SEE WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT !
IF A CRIMINAL OFFENSE HAS BEEN COMMITTED, DO WE HAVE THE GUMPTION TO MAKE OR BRING THE CASE TO COURT? THAT IS A GOOD CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY !
OR ARE WE GOING TO JUST SWEEP IT UNDER THE CARPET? – WHICH WILL BE A HORRENDOUSLY BAD TESTIMONY !
“For the time has come that JUDGEMENT must begin in the HOUSE OF GOD” (1 Pet 4:17)
7. PAUL SAYS CHRISTIANS SHOULD SUBJECT THEMSELVES TO THE ROMAN (SECULAR) LEGAL SYSTEM (Romans 13: 1 -7)
"EVERYONE MUST OBEY state authorities, because NO AUTHORITIES EXIST WITHOUT GOD’S PERMISSION, and the EXISTING AUTHORITIES have been PUT THERE BY GOD." (Rom 13:1) This clearly states that we must subject ourselves to the Secular Law Courts as Paul subjected himself to the Roman Secular Legal System.
8. PAUL HIMSELF APPEALED TO THE ROMAN LAW TO GET JUSTICE
In Acts 16, Paul and Silus were thrown into jail for casting out a demon from a slave-girl. They were publicly beaten and thrown into jail. They prayed and sang hymns and an earthquake occurred that led to the salvation of the jailer. Later in Acts 16:37, PAUL TOLD THE GUARDS, "… WE’RE ROMAN CITIZENS”.
“When the Roman officials heard that Paul and Silas were Roman citizens, THEY WERE AFRAID." (Acts 16:38 – 39) So the officials went to the jail and APOLOGISED to Paul and Silas.”
We can see here how Paul, because of his understanding of Roman (secular) Law was able to bring the Roman Officials to near submission! There are two other examples of Paul using the Roman Legal System to seek justice for himself, Acts 22:15 – 19 and 25: 9 -11.
IF, THEREFORE, PAUL COULD SEEK JUSTICE FROM THE ROMAN LEGAL SYSTEM IN HIS TIME, THEN WHY CAN’T CHRISTIANS DO THE SAME THING FROM THE MALAYSIAN LEGAL SYSTEM TODAY?
IT IS IMPORTANT FOR CHRISTIANS TO APPRECIATE CERTAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MALAYSIAN LEGAL SYSTEM IN ORDER TO HAVE CONFIDENCE IN WHAT IT CAN OFFER:
1. They are religiously neutral. It has nothing to do with the Syariah Court.
2. They carry out their functions with high professionalism.
3. The Malaysian Legal System is based on English Law which has its roots in the Biblical Teachings. It is totally separate from the Syariah Laws.
4. It is compulsory for ALL Criminal and many Civil cases to go to court whether or not you like it as a Christian.
5. The proceeding are quite private and unlikely to give rise to bad publicity. In the past several years there have been at least about 5 cases of “church members vs pastors” lawsuits that were brought to the attention of the Malaysians Courts and practically no one knew anything about them. Furthermore, they did not attract any media attention whatsoever.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Christian Involvement in Law Suits by Dr George Wood
This is an article written by Dr. George O. Wood, the general superintendent of the Assemblies of God, USA, http://ag.org/top/General_Superintendent/index.cfm
This article is taken from : http://www.ag.org/TOP/Beliefs/charctr_14_law_suits_.cfm
This document reflects commonly held beliefs based on scripture which have been endorsed by the church's Commission on Doctrinal Purity and the Executive Presbytery.
__________________________________________________
Should Christians be involved in lawsuits? Are there biblical principles that apply to Christians in these matters? Is it permissible for Christians to sue others who harm them?
Paul’s main concern in advising believers not to bring lawsuits against other believers (1 Cor. 6:1-8) is the discredit such action brings on the reputation of the church and the cause of Christ. With this understanding in mind, it is appropriate to ask when legal action is appropriate and when it is not. Since the Bible is our authoritative rule for conduct we must study Scripture to see if it permits or prohibits such action.
The Old Testament clearly indicates there should be compensation or satisfaction for injuries or losses. The Mosaic Law of retaliation (eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life—Ex. 21:23,24), while seeming cruel or barbaric by today’s western-world standards of justice, actually worked to limit vengeance and eliminate inter-family feuds. No one could exact as penalty more than one life for a life or more than one eye for an eye. In less serious cases, money could be paid by the guilty party to compensate the loss suffered by the injured party (cf. Ex. 22:12 to 23:9). Prior to the monarchy under Saul and his successors, judgment was often administered by the elders of a town (Ruth 4:1-12). Under the monarchy, punishment for civil and criminal wrongs was left to the king and his administration (1 Kings 3:16-28).
Jesus held His disciples to a higher standard of behavior than required under Old Testament law. Instead of retaliation toward a wronging party, He directed the injured or offended person to turn the other cheek, to give up one’s cloak, and to go the second mile. Enemies were to be loved, prayed for, and forgiven (Matt. 5:38-48, 6:14,15). Such behavior overcame evil with good and had the intended effect of shaming the wrongdoer into reforming his ways (Rom. 12:17-21). This "new righteousness" forced the injured party to be more concerned with his own inner attitude and the eternal destiny of his "enemy" than with a wrong to be corrected, an injury punished, or a loss compensated. This does not mean that an offended person was left without any practical recourse for righting a wrong, but the first act was to be an attempt to achieve personal reconciliation. If reconciliation was not successful, a third-party believer might be asked to arbitrate. If that failed, the matter was to be presented before the entire church. When an offender refused to obey the judgment of the church, he was to be treated as a pagan (Matt. 18:15-20).
In 1 Corinthians 6:1-8 the apostle Paul addressed the problem of a believer who brought a lawsuit against another believer in the secular courts. Since most of the believers in Corinth were poor (1 Cor. 1:26-31), and the lawsuit dealt with one financially cheating another, it is likely that the suit involved two of the more prominently wealthy persons in the Corinthian church. It appears that the plaintiff had filed the suit rather than following the admonition of Jesus (Matt. 5:38-48) or involving the church according to Matthew 18:15-20). Unfortunately, the Corinthian church had done nothing while the Christian community was scandalized by the airing before a secular court of a struggle between two believers. Here was a church recognized for its "wisdom" (2 Cor. 11:19), but which had not had "anyone wise enough to judge a dispute" (1 Cor. 6:5). Paul chastised the plaintiff by telling him it would have been better to have suffered wrong rather than to disgrace the church (1 Cor. 6:1-7); he chastised the defendant for having cheated and done wrong (1 Cor. 6:8); and he chastised the church for not taking care of the matter (1 Cor. 6:2-6).
Paul never addresses the question of whether a lawsuit would be appropriate if the church had declared the offending party to be "a pagan and a tax collector" (Matt. 18:17). Perhaps such a lawsuit would be permitted under the teaching of Romans 13:1-5 that the secular government exists to uphold justice, prevent lawlessness, and punish the wrongdoer.
So when a believer is wronged by another believer, the offended believer must seriously consider whether or not he or she should simply drop the matter, leaving the judgment to God alone. If the believer, following prayer and careful consideration, determines the matter should be pursued, then a face-to-face meeting with the offending party should be the first step. Failing that, one should seek out a believer mediator. If that does not provide resolution, the dispute should be brought to the church (the pastor, the recognized board of elders or deacons, and if need be the membership).
Sometimes the legal conflict does not pit believer against believer, but believer versus unbeliever. What is the Christian response then? Paul himself exercised the right of defending himself under Roman law (Acts 16:37-40; 18:12-17; 22:15-29: 25:10-22). Clearly, Paul did not interpret "turning the other cheek" to include forfeiture of all legal rights pertaining to citizenship. No doubt he exercised those rights consistent with his Spirit-given understanding that the function of government is to uphold justice and punish wrongdoers (Romans 13). Punishing wrongdoers also means protecting the innocent. Thus the question for a believer is never "How do I get personal vengeance?" Instead, the proper question is "Which action on my part (filing or not filing a lawsuit) will best promote justice in society, punish the one who does wrong, protect the innocent, and bring the least possible negative reflection on the cause of Christ?
If all avenues of settling a matter between believers have been exhausted, and the offending party refuses to correct the wrong, then the injured believer must balance Matthew 5:38-48 and 6:14,15 with Romans 13:1-5. The following questions, to check personal motivation, should be asked.
1. Is my desire for a redress of injury motivated simply by personal gain, or am I involving the secular power of the court in order to uphold justice and prevent lawlessness?
2. If I bring action before a secular court, will that, in the context of American rather than Corinthian society, bring harm to the Church and the cause of Christ?
3. Am I totally honest with my claim (or defense), or am I seeking through self-deception to gain (or avoid) a compensation that is more (or less) than the injury suffered?
4. Since the Holy Spirit will never counsel a believer contrary to the Word He has inspired, after a thorough season of prayer, what course of action "seems good to the Holy Spirit"?
5. As an additional safeguard, what is the counsel of other believers who are in a position of leadership or eldership in the body of Christ?
CONCERNS:
In American society, another matter needs to be considered: liability and other forms of insurance. Public policy has established insurance as a means of compensating an individual for a wide variety of injuries suffered. In many cases, while a litigant may be the legal defendant in a suit, the actual payer for the injuries may be an insurance company. Suppose, for example, that a Christian is severely injured by the bad driving of another believer. A suit between the two really does not stem from personal malice, but is an effort on the part of the injured person to reclaim financial losses stemming from the accident, which will be compensated by the insured’s automobile liability policy. In such a case, the believers have not brought the church into censure before a worldly court (as was the situation in Corinth), but have simply availed themselves of a legal system which seeks, as a matter of public policy, to help victims to be made "whole" from their injuries.
In many American communities, attorneys who are believers have formed Christian conciliation or mediation groups that a wronged person may also seek out. The legal advantage to seeking mediation from such an organized group is that, upon proper stipulation by the parties, the judgment of the Christian conciliation group may be recognized by the secular course as a substitute for the court’s involvement
____________________________________________
The above statement is based upon our common understanding of scriptural teaching.
All Scripture quotations are from the New International Version (NIV) unless otherwise specified.
This article is taken from : http://www.ag.org/TOP/Beliefs/charctr_14_law_suits_.cfm
This document reflects commonly held beliefs based on scripture which have been endorsed by the church's Commission on Doctrinal Purity and the Executive Presbytery.
__________________________________________________
Should Christians be involved in lawsuits? Are there biblical principles that apply to Christians in these matters? Is it permissible for Christians to sue others who harm them?
Paul’s main concern in advising believers not to bring lawsuits against other believers (1 Cor. 6:1-8) is the discredit such action brings on the reputation of the church and the cause of Christ. With this understanding in mind, it is appropriate to ask when legal action is appropriate and when it is not. Since the Bible is our authoritative rule for conduct we must study Scripture to see if it permits or prohibits such action.
The Old Testament clearly indicates there should be compensation or satisfaction for injuries or losses. The Mosaic Law of retaliation (eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for a life—Ex. 21:23,24), while seeming cruel or barbaric by today’s western-world standards of justice, actually worked to limit vengeance and eliminate inter-family feuds. No one could exact as penalty more than one life for a life or more than one eye for an eye. In less serious cases, money could be paid by the guilty party to compensate the loss suffered by the injured party (cf. Ex. 22:12 to 23:9). Prior to the monarchy under Saul and his successors, judgment was often administered by the elders of a town (Ruth 4:1-12). Under the monarchy, punishment for civil and criminal wrongs was left to the king and his administration (1 Kings 3:16-28).
Jesus held His disciples to a higher standard of behavior than required under Old Testament law. Instead of retaliation toward a wronging party, He directed the injured or offended person to turn the other cheek, to give up one’s cloak, and to go the second mile. Enemies were to be loved, prayed for, and forgiven (Matt. 5:38-48, 6:14,15). Such behavior overcame evil with good and had the intended effect of shaming the wrongdoer into reforming his ways (Rom. 12:17-21). This "new righteousness" forced the injured party to be more concerned with his own inner attitude and the eternal destiny of his "enemy" than with a wrong to be corrected, an injury punished, or a loss compensated. This does not mean that an offended person was left without any practical recourse for righting a wrong, but the first act was to be an attempt to achieve personal reconciliation. If reconciliation was not successful, a third-party believer might be asked to arbitrate. If that failed, the matter was to be presented before the entire church. When an offender refused to obey the judgment of the church, he was to be treated as a pagan (Matt. 18:15-20).
In 1 Corinthians 6:1-8 the apostle Paul addressed the problem of a believer who brought a lawsuit against another believer in the secular courts. Since most of the believers in Corinth were poor (1 Cor. 1:26-31), and the lawsuit dealt with one financially cheating another, it is likely that the suit involved two of the more prominently wealthy persons in the Corinthian church. It appears that the plaintiff had filed the suit rather than following the admonition of Jesus (Matt. 5:38-48) or involving the church according to Matthew 18:15-20). Unfortunately, the Corinthian church had done nothing while the Christian community was scandalized by the airing before a secular court of a struggle between two believers. Here was a church recognized for its "wisdom" (2 Cor. 11:19), but which had not had "anyone wise enough to judge a dispute" (1 Cor. 6:5). Paul chastised the plaintiff by telling him it would have been better to have suffered wrong rather than to disgrace the church (1 Cor. 6:1-7); he chastised the defendant for having cheated and done wrong (1 Cor. 6:8); and he chastised the church for not taking care of the matter (1 Cor. 6:2-6).
Paul never addresses the question of whether a lawsuit would be appropriate if the church had declared the offending party to be "a pagan and a tax collector" (Matt. 18:17). Perhaps such a lawsuit would be permitted under the teaching of Romans 13:1-5 that the secular government exists to uphold justice, prevent lawlessness, and punish the wrongdoer.
So when a believer is wronged by another believer, the offended believer must seriously consider whether or not he or she should simply drop the matter, leaving the judgment to God alone. If the believer, following prayer and careful consideration, determines the matter should be pursued, then a face-to-face meeting with the offending party should be the first step. Failing that, one should seek out a believer mediator. If that does not provide resolution, the dispute should be brought to the church (the pastor, the recognized board of elders or deacons, and if need be the membership).
Sometimes the legal conflict does not pit believer against believer, but believer versus unbeliever. What is the Christian response then? Paul himself exercised the right of defending himself under Roman law (Acts 16:37-40; 18:12-17; 22:15-29: 25:10-22). Clearly, Paul did not interpret "turning the other cheek" to include forfeiture of all legal rights pertaining to citizenship. No doubt he exercised those rights consistent with his Spirit-given understanding that the function of government is to uphold justice and punish wrongdoers (Romans 13). Punishing wrongdoers also means protecting the innocent. Thus the question for a believer is never "How do I get personal vengeance?" Instead, the proper question is "Which action on my part (filing or not filing a lawsuit) will best promote justice in society, punish the one who does wrong, protect the innocent, and bring the least possible negative reflection on the cause of Christ?
If all avenues of settling a matter between believers have been exhausted, and the offending party refuses to correct the wrong, then the injured believer must balance Matthew 5:38-48 and 6:14,15 with Romans 13:1-5. The following questions, to check personal motivation, should be asked.
1. Is my desire for a redress of injury motivated simply by personal gain, or am I involving the secular power of the court in order to uphold justice and prevent lawlessness?
2. If I bring action before a secular court, will that, in the context of American rather than Corinthian society, bring harm to the Church and the cause of Christ?
3. Am I totally honest with my claim (or defense), or am I seeking through self-deception to gain (or avoid) a compensation that is more (or less) than the injury suffered?
4. Since the Holy Spirit will never counsel a believer contrary to the Word He has inspired, after a thorough season of prayer, what course of action "seems good to the Holy Spirit"?
5. As an additional safeguard, what is the counsel of other believers who are in a position of leadership or eldership in the body of Christ?
CONCERNS:
In American society, another matter needs to be considered: liability and other forms of insurance. Public policy has established insurance as a means of compensating an individual for a wide variety of injuries suffered. In many cases, while a litigant may be the legal defendant in a suit, the actual payer for the injuries may be an insurance company. Suppose, for example, that a Christian is severely injured by the bad driving of another believer. A suit between the two really does not stem from personal malice, but is an effort on the part of the injured person to reclaim financial losses stemming from the accident, which will be compensated by the insured’s automobile liability policy. In such a case, the believers have not brought the church into censure before a worldly court (as was the situation in Corinth), but have simply availed themselves of a legal system which seeks, as a matter of public policy, to help victims to be made "whole" from their injuries.
In many American communities, attorneys who are believers have formed Christian conciliation or mediation groups that a wronged person may also seek out. The legal advantage to seeking mediation from such an organized group is that, upon proper stipulation by the parties, the judgment of the Christian conciliation group may be recognized by the secular course as a substitute for the court’s involvement
____________________________________________
The above statement is based upon our common understanding of scriptural teaching.
All Scripture quotations are from the New International Version (NIV) unless otherwise specified.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Inspirational Short Story for September
There once was a girl who hated herself. You see, she had become blind in her early teens from a rare disease. Not only did she hate herself but she hated everyone else too. She was angry at the world, angry at God, angry at everyone.
There was one person, however, who had known her for years and stood by her side through all this. It was her childhood friend, who loved her ever since grade school. Now in their 20’s, he wanted to marry her.
One day he worked up the nerve to ask her for her hand in marriage. Her reply was that if she could only see the world, she would marry him.
Soon after, someone donated a pair of eyes and she went to surgery to have her malfunctioning ones replaced. It was a miracle. After a few weeks, she took off her bandages and she could see once again. And who was standing by her side, as always? Of course, it was the man who loved her.
"Now that you can see the world, he said, “Will you marry me?" The girl was shocked to discover that he too was blind, and sadly, still refused his hand in marriage. Undeniably, he was devastated.
Sometime later, she received a letter from him, sharing his undying love for her. He signed it, "Please, my love, just take care of my eyes."
[Hmmm. A sweet story. But few of us remember what life was like when we were yet blind to the truth of our salvation in Yeshua (Jesus) -- and who to thank for their labor in love and prayer and boldness in sharing that truth with us, no?]
John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
From Worthy News
**************************************************
Thanks Bro Paul G for this story.
There was one person, however, who had known her for years and stood by her side through all this. It was her childhood friend, who loved her ever since grade school. Now in their 20’s, he wanted to marry her.
One day he worked up the nerve to ask her for her hand in marriage. Her reply was that if she could only see the world, she would marry him.
Soon after, someone donated a pair of eyes and she went to surgery to have her malfunctioning ones replaced. It was a miracle. After a few weeks, she took off her bandages and she could see once again. And who was standing by her side, as always? Of course, it was the man who loved her.
"Now that you can see the world, he said, “Will you marry me?" The girl was shocked to discover that he too was blind, and sadly, still refused his hand in marriage. Undeniably, he was devastated.
Sometime later, she received a letter from him, sharing his undying love for her. He signed it, "Please, my love, just take care of my eyes."
[Hmmm. A sweet story. But few of us remember what life was like when we were yet blind to the truth of our salvation in Yeshua (Jesus) -- and who to thank for their labor in love and prayer and boldness in sharing that truth with us, no?]
John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
From Worthy News
**************************************************
Thanks Bro Paul G for this story.
Friday, August 28, 2009
WHEN IT'S RIGHT TO GO TO COURT
This article was sent in by a regular reader of CT. Please visit http://www.pbc.org/ for the original source of this article
by Doug Goins
Peninsula Bible Church
Let me briefly address the issue of when we do legitimately need to get involved in the justice system. I will not try to be at all comprehensive. We are citizens of the nation, and we do have civil obligations. If we're required to answer a charge or to testify, we have to respond, because as Christians we live under the law of the land just as much as anyone else. There are times when we need legal clarification of different kinds of agreements such as contracts, real estate deals, and insurance coverage. There are some things that only a court of law can provide interpretation of. Sometimes, tragically, the quarrels or disagreements between Christians over financial issues and property issues get so tangled that they do have to have a secular court step in to render an expert legal judgment.
My own conviction is that in a criminal matter, a believer may need to sign a complaint against another believer who has broken the law, because sometimes failure to do so would condone the lawlessness. Any time that a Christian is being divorced by his or her spouse, the law requires a secular court to be involved. That may also be the case for child abuse, spousal abuse, financial irresponsibility, or child neglect. In those kinds of situations a parent or spouse may be forced to seek court protection.
But with all those exceptions to the principles of 1 Corinthians 6, going to court should always be seen as the last resort. And our motive must be to glorify God, never to gain selfish advantage. We must be concerned about the cause of Christ in the life of the other party; that must be central. Dr. Gordon Fee, in his commentary on 1 Corinthians, talks about this issue of the motivation, the spiritual issues in being involved in litigation: "Litigation will hopefully be the last resort even with non-Christians. If it is out of concern for the one defrauded and for all others who might be taken in, then it is fully justified."
by Doug Goins
Peninsula Bible Church
Let me briefly address the issue of when we do legitimately need to get involved in the justice system. I will not try to be at all comprehensive. We are citizens of the nation, and we do have civil obligations. If we're required to answer a charge or to testify, we have to respond, because as Christians we live under the law of the land just as much as anyone else. There are times when we need legal clarification of different kinds of agreements such as contracts, real estate deals, and insurance coverage. There are some things that only a court of law can provide interpretation of. Sometimes, tragically, the quarrels or disagreements between Christians over financial issues and property issues get so tangled that they do have to have a secular court step in to render an expert legal judgment.
My own conviction is that in a criminal matter, a believer may need to sign a complaint against another believer who has broken the law, because sometimes failure to do so would condone the lawlessness. Any time that a Christian is being divorced by his or her spouse, the law requires a secular court to be involved. That may also be the case for child abuse, spousal abuse, financial irresponsibility, or child neglect. In those kinds of situations a parent or spouse may be forced to seek court protection.
But with all those exceptions to the principles of 1 Corinthians 6, going to court should always be seen as the last resort. And our motive must be to glorify God, never to gain selfish advantage. We must be concerned about the cause of Christ in the life of the other party; that must be central. Dr. Gordon Fee, in his commentary on 1 Corinthians, talks about this issue of the motivation, the spiritual issues in being involved in litigation: "Litigation will hopefully be the last resort even with non-Christians. If it is out of concern for the one defrauded and for all others who might be taken in, then it is fully justified."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
