David wasn't in office yet, when he learned of King Saul's death in battle. However, he knew how to administer justice. II Samuel 1 explains the details of an execution ordered by David. It shows us that his view of "the anointed of the Lord" was not a mere personal conviction but was a law applicable to all persons, both Israelite and strangers, within the jurisdiction of "the Lord's anointed."
A man came to David's camp to report Saul's death. He was an Amalekite, a foreigner or stranger in Israel - one strike against him already. Here's part of the conversation:
"And David said unto the young man that told him, How knowest thou that Saul and Jonathan his son be dead? And the young man that told him said, As I happened by chance upon mount Gilboa, behold, Saul leaned upon his spear; and, lo, the chariots and horsemen followed hard after him. And when he looked behind him, he saw me, and called unto me. And I answered, Here am I. And he said unto me, Who art thou? And I answered him, I am an Amalekite. He said unto me again, Stand, I pray thee, upon me, and slay me: for anguish is come upon me, because my life is yet whole in me. So I stood upon him, and slew him, because I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen: and I took the crown that was upon his head, and the bracelet that was on his arm, and have brought them hither unto my lord."
II Samuel 1:5-10. David then mourned for Saul, even though they had been enemies. Then David said to the man:
"And David said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy the LORD'S anointed? And David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died. And David said unto him, Thy blood be upon thy head; for thy mouth hath testified against thee, saying, I have slain the LORD'S anointed."
II Samuel 1:14-6. Even though Saul requested that he be killed, it was wrong for this Amalekite to comply. This passage has been used at times as an argument against assisted suicide. It is that, but more importantly, it is an argument in favor of a special legal status for civil rulers. It does not argue in favor of a special status that allows them to act contrary or outside the law, as the proponents of the "Divine Right of Kings" used it. For a biblical refutation of the "Divine Right of Kings," see Rutherford, Samuel, "Lex Rex" (Colorado Springs, CO: Portage Publications, 2009), accessed at http://www.portagepub.com/dl/caa/sr-lexrex17.pdf?.
The law of Moses clearly shows that the civil and ecclesiastical rulers are delegated authority from God and that to act contemptibly toward them is punishable by death. "And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the LORD thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die: and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel." Deuteronomy 17:12. If disobedience or contempt toward officials is punishable by death, how much more the murder of them is a capital offense?
David defended Saul's status as the chief civil ruler of Israel, even though Saul had sought to kill David and even though David had already been anointed to replace Saul and even though Saul's line of succession after him was not that of the Messiah and even though Saul had been defeated in battle and was dead. Therefore, this law could not possibly apply only to the genealogical line of Jesus Christ. It applies to all civil rulers for all time.
Such a viewpoint is anathema to the Left in the legal community and the society at large. Why? Because it means a permanency to law, and permanency in law means a permanency to the issuer of that law. Without permanency, there is no law, merely the opinion of some person who is in power at the time the opinion is issued as law. If the status of the person in power could be helped by stating that no one can disobey with impunity, then the Left will use it. However, civil disobedience is all the rage with the Left when someone with whom they disagree is in power.
In other words, they disobey the law in the name of the people's right to protest and disobey what they consider an illegitimate law, but then turn around and demand the enforcement of the laws in which they believe and which they support. They are like those whom Jesus criticized, stating:
"To what then shall I compare the people of this generation, and what are they like? They are like children sitting in the marketplace and calling to one another,
‘We played the flute for you, and you did not dance; we sang a dirge, and you did not weep.’ For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by all her children."
Luke 7:31-5. This position does not represent law, no matter how much they contest that they stand for the rule of law; they do not, they stand for the rule of their own personal opinion over the rest of us. The Christian who agrees that their word is the law, when it contradicts God's law and only because they are in power, will not have victory. He is standing with those who rebel against God and His law. God cannot bless that Christian.
Jesus submitted to the illegitimate who were in power, not because they represented "the law," but only because God allowed them to have power and the sovereign God was using them to advance His own purposes. Jesus did not admit that Pilate represented the law. John 18:33-8. Jesus exposed the fact that Pilate did not stand for the law, for Pilate did not even know what the Truth is. See post in Biblical Judicial System blog, titled "Jesus' Not So Subtle But Gentle Rebuke of Pontius Pilate."
Jesus allowed those in power to put Him to death, in part, to show their denial of God's law in putting an innocent man to death. If Pilate had let Jesus go free, saying, "You're free if you deny that you're a king of any kind," Jesus, not being a liar, would have disobeyed him. There's a God-ordained limit to the civil ruler's power, and that limit is clear in the word of God - the Truth. Deny that Word, that Truth, and there is no limit to man's tyrannical power!
The Christian has victory in office when he stands for the permanent law of God and the God-ordained limits on the civil ruler's power, not because he compromises with those who think their word is law. The Christian standing on the law of God earns the full certification of God Almighty and can faithfully and fearlessly enforce that law, knowing God is supporting him. As David confidently executed the man who violated God's law and killed the former king, the Christian in office can confidently enforce God's law.
Summing up, this passage demonstrates that true law has permanency, it is not something personal that we can impose just because we are in power; the civil ruler's position while in power is not something that can be treated with contempt with impunity; and as demonstrated in other parts of scripture, the death penalty can be used for offenses not involving murder.
No comments:
Post a Comment