It Sounds Good...But Is It True?
©FOUNDATION Magazine, May-June 1997
Clever "one-liners"
lever "one-liners" and
biblical phrases lifted out of context are heard on every hand today. More often than not,
they tend to encourage what God has forbidden, or discourage what God’s Word has
commanded. As Bible-believers, we must exercise great care when we speak to an issue. Our
response must be with the correct application of Truth and not with a commonly used idiom
that unwarily pops into the mind and rolls easily off the tongue. We will mention a few
that are especially deceptive.
"Touch not the Lord’s anointed!" Time and
again we hear this cry parroted as a counter to those who attempt to alert the
unsuspecting of the dangerous, unbiblical teachings of a particular ministry. As a result,
key religious figures fall into a category that is apparently safe from scriptural
examination. Since their ministries influence millions, they must be God’s
anointed—don’t you dare "touch" them!
If you give a warning concerning doctrinal inconsistencies within the programs led by
men such as Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Paul Crouch, the pope, and more recently, John
Kilpatrick, pastor of the Brownsville Assembly of God, you can be sure that in the
estimation of many, the moment your word of caution is uttered, you become guilty of
"touching the Lord’s anointed." This indictment sounds ominous to say the
least, but the question still remains, "What does God’s Word have to say about
this?" That is the only consideration that really matters.
A look at the actual context from which this phrase is lifted provides clear proof that
scriptural reproof and rebuke does not constitute "touching God’s anointed"
at all. In fact, God made sure that Saul was forced to face up to his compromise. The
ministry of the King of Israel was judged according to the Lord’s commandments, and
no man today is exempt from this same kind of biblical scrutiny.
David refused to slay King Saul with the sword, even though in doing so he could have
rid himself of his arch enemy and cleared the way for his own ascent to the throne of
Israel (1 Samuel 24:1-15). God, not David, removed Saul in His own time and in His own way
(1 Samuel 26:8-10). Some claim there is a "secondary application" found in this
text that also bars any negative comment about another’s influential ministry, for
this too would constitute "speaking against" one of God’s servants and
would, in essence, be "touching God’s anointed." Is this a viable,
secondary application? Absolutely not! Samuel certainly "touched God’s
anointed," if by that, one means speaking out against disobedience. God told Saul to
"Smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not…"
(1 Samuel 15:3). But under a pretext of pious intention, he "…spared the best of
the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the Lord…" (v. 15). Samuel said
this partial obedience was tantamount to witchcraft and idolatry. To obey is better than
sacrifice. It is not "unloving" to speak out against error as our Lord requires.
King Saul had a public, visible testimony that affected all God’s people. When he
failed to minister according to the absolute standard, God’s faithful prophet was
commanded to cry out against the error. Was Samuel to take Saul’s life? No. Was
God’s prophet to rebuke King Saul’s sins? Yes! Let us correctly understand what
the Bible forbids in this account and what It demands. Scriptural reproof and rebuke of a
disobedient brother who is leading others astray is not "touching God’s
anointed." It is compliance with God’s order to warn the unwary.
"Judge not that ye be not judged" is another
example of a frequently misapplied scripture. It is invariably quoted as a response to any
attempt at exercising spiritual discernment in situations involving doctrinal error or
compromise. But when the rest of the passage from which the phrase is taken in Matthew
seven is considered, one finds that it is hypocritical judgment that is disallowed, not
the act of judging itself. On the contrary, spiritual judgment is required by this text,
not forbidden (Matthew 7:1-23). If judgment is forbidden, then how can one "see
clearly to cast out the mote" (v. 5), discern what is the broad way that
"leadeth to destruction" (v. 13), be wary of false prophets and "wolves in
sheep’s clothing" (v. 15), and determine whether or not a supposed religious
worker is doing the will of God or is in fact a "worker of iniquity" (vv.
21-23)? We are to "judge righteous judgment" (John 7:24; Hebrews 5:13, 14). But
again, the Word must be the Standard, and we must apply the same judgment to ourselves
prior to looking at others.
It is true that much "judging" today by Christians is displeasing to the
Lord, for it is often carried out in a censorious, critical spirit bent on causing injury
rather than edification; it is set on character assassination rather than doctrinal
clarification. That kind of judgment is wrong, and the Bible warns about such fleshly
behavior. Also concerning matters of conviction where sound doctrine is not diminished or
the questioning of one’s motives, God’s Word tells us to leave them alone
(Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 4:1-5; 10:23-33; Colossians 2:16, 17). But in no way does this
preclude the believer’s responsibility to judge, or discern, what is acceptable to an
all-holy God as revealed in His holy Word. A circumspect walk requires the identification
of those teachings and practices to be avoided. One simply cannot do this without judging.
"We will either stand together or we will hang separately"
is often advanced by the new-evangelical, and sad to say, even by some supposed
fundamentalists in an effort to justify compromised fellowships while opposing common
enemies. Some fundamentalists today join in common cause not only with disobedient
brethren, but also with liberals and cultists to fight immorality, abortion or other
evils. But has God suspended His guidelines for separation from whatever is contrary to
doctrinal purity for the sake of added political or theological clout? Absolutely not.
The fact remains that God will bless the testimony of a separated witness and will
perform His will in and through it rather than condone an alliance built upon compromise.
The notion that a visible unity wields more influence with the powers of this world is
humanistic reasoning, not divine revelation. Stand true! Stand alone if need be! In so
doing, a believer need never fear being "hung" by anyone as long as his sole
confidence is in God and not in the strategies and arguments of men.
God’s Word still declares that the source of power in opposing the evil of our day
comes from absolute dependence on the arm of God and not on the concerted efforts of men.
The biblical doctrine of separation is based upon the premise that the holiness of God
will never allow for the joining together of that which is true to the Word and that which
is contrary to the Word in a common cause, regardless of how pious or needful the cause
might appear to be. The end does not justify the means in Christian ministry.
"The Christian army is the only one that shoots its
wounded." We have heard this last phrase all too often in recent years.
What is usually implied by this statement is that a Christian should never speak in a
negative way about any other brother, regardless of what error the latter may be involved
in. In covering major evangelical, charismatic and ecumenical meetings through the years,
we have heard this slogan used time and again in an effort to stem any criticism. A
concerted effort to silence any form of Scriptural rebuke is always put forth whenever a
forced unity is placed before the revealing light of doctrinal purity.
It is terribly sad when biblical exhortation is equated to "taking pot shots"
at another. God’s Word tells the faithful servant to "reprove, rebuke, exhort
with all longsuffering and doctrine" (2 Timothy 4:2); with respect to the disobedient
brother, we are to "note that man, and have no company with him…yet count him
not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother" (2 Thessalonians 3:6,14-15). This
admonition is not "shooting the wounded"; it is employing God’s method for
healing the breach caused by straying from the divine Standard. The most loving and most
caring help any believer can do for an errant brother is to speak the truth, not as to an
enemy, but "admonish[ing] him as a brother." The most edifying thing a faithful
servant of Christ could ever do for another believer who is being taken in by false
teaching is to sound a faithful warning.
We must endeavor, by God’s grace and through the light of His Word, to answer all
that concerns our walk and witness with correctly applied truth. Satan is the master
deceiver, and his desire is to waylay the servant of the Lord from pursuing a course of
godliness and fruitfulness. Satan’s purpose is greatly enhanced when he is able to
convince the believer that his actions are right when all along they are contrary to
God’s Word. Quaint, trite sayings and expressions allow for easy responses, but if
the responses themselves are unbiblical, then we can be easily deceived.
Misrepresentations of truth are difficult to dispel. On the other hand, speaking the truth
in love and in its proper context will bring to pass God’s appointed purpose. May we
rededicate ourselves to the faithful proclamation of the Word of God—apart from
pious-sounding pretense.
Dennis W. Costella
