Today we come to the next passage in 1 Corinthians
as we've been going through this book and it
is in chapter 6 verses 1 through 8. Our subject
today is on disputes and lawsuits between believers.
Let's turn to this passage and read the word
and then we'll pray and ask for God's blessing
on it as we look at this passage and seek to
understand it. 1 Corinthians 6, verse 1. Do you
not know that we shall judge angels? How much
more things that pertain to this life. If then
you have judgments concerning things pertaining
to this life, do you appoint those who are least
esteemed by the church to judge? I say this to
your shame. It is so, is it so, that there is
not a wise man among you, not even one, who will
be able to judge between his brethren? But brother
goes to law against brother, and that before
unbelievers. Now, therefore, it is already an
utter failure for you that you go to law against
one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong?
Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated?
No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat and do
these things to your brethren. Let's pray. Father,
we thank you for this passage today. Help us
to understand it, Lord. To understand it as you
have given it through the mouth of the Apostle
Paul in their context and help us to understand
how we are to apply it today. For this is your
word and we seek to be obedient to it. So we
pray, open up our hearts, open up our minds and
our understanding that we might know and that
we might fear you and serve you in it. We pray
in Jesus name. Amen. This chapter begins with
a third problem that the Apostle Paul is dealing
with as he writes this letter to the Corinthians.
First was the issue of factiousness. Second was
the issue of church discipline and sexual immorality
that was tolerated within the church. And now
this one is concerning litigation between believers
or disputes and lawsuits. Throughout this section
of 1 Corinthians, the Apostle Paul is teaching,
He is rebuking and he is showing the Corinthians
how to act as the holy temple that they are through
Christ. For not only is the church of Jesus Christ
a holy temple, but their bodies are also individually
a temple of the Holy Spirit, as we'll see in
verse 19 of chapter 6 in a later time. Thus it
is so with each one who has trusted in Christ.
You are a temple of the Holy Spirit as a believer.
Even though you and I may be yet unsanctified
in a whole number of ways, we are still a temple
of the Holy Spirit. And this is the case. With
the Corinthian church. There were many areas
where they needed to be sanctified. They had
a lot of problems. As we've been reading about.
But so or thus Paul writes a letter. And this
letter includes encouragement. Warning. Rebuke.
And instruction to them as believers. As believers.
being a temple of the Holy Spirit corporately
and as being temples of the Lord in their bodies
individually. He writes for their sanctification
so that they might live out and act out the gospel
as a temple of the Holy Spirit. Now, last Sunday,
we looked at the situation requiring church discipline.
In this case was that of sexual immorality of
a very bad sort. And the man was to be turned
over to Satan and expelled from the church. We
learn from this that this is necessary when the
sin is such that it cannot be one named among
the body of believers. And later, Paul says that
if you live in them, you cannot be a part of
the kingdom of Christ and of our God. Now later
in this chapter, we're going to see much more
about the temple of the Holy Spirit in another
sermon. But here for today, Paul's going to speak
very straightforwardly to them again about something
that they are doing. And it is something that
is shameful, as we will see in verse 5. What
is that that is shameful? It is that Christian
believers, when they have a personal matter against
one another, They go before the unrighteous for
adjudication rather than dealing with it in the
church. But before we begin going through the
passage, I do want to point something out that
is important for us to understand as we look
at this text. I do not think that the apostle
is speaking about criminal law. In this passage,
that is like murder or rape or committing a crime
against your neighbor. I say this because the
church has not been given as an institution the
sword of the civil government. Christians can
serve as a magistrate, yes, but it's not part
of the duties of the church to carry out civil
punishments for crimes, criminal, matters of
criminal extent. The church has not been given
the sword of civil government. It is exclusively
for the civil magistrate, as Paul brings out
in Romans 13, verses 1 through 7. For he, that
is the civil magistrate, is God's minister to
you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid,
for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he
is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath
on him. Who practices evil. The civil magistrate
does not bear the sword in vain. He is a minister
of God. So therefore this passage is most likely
dealing with civil or financial law. Or what
we would call today tort law. Things pertaining
to personal injury. Anthony Thistleston brings
out that Roman criminal law. in this time period,
was relatively fair and objective. But this was
not the case with civil law. Here, judges and
even juries expected to receive some quid pro
quo for a favorable verdict. This might come
in terms of a straight financial gift with strings,
or what we would call a bribe, or a promised
payment. or a debt to be paid by using economic
or social influence, or by proving new business
opportunities and openings. In other words, it
was extremely corrupt. Tort law is primarily
to hold the wrongdoer legally liable and to compensate
the victim, usually through monetary damages
rather than with a criminal punishment. Tort
law is generally broken down into three main
categories. That is negligence, where you fail
to do something that you should have. Where it's
intentional, that is you did something against
your neighbor and you caused him to lose financially
or to have other problems. And that is simply
strict liability, where we are simply liable
because of something that we did or did not do.
It's very clear from this passage. That the adjudication
that needs to take place is something that the
church is equipped by God in his word and is
able to do so. They're able to discern and to
bring a judgment in the matter and bring accountability
to the church member who is at fault. This is
because they understand the law of God. The church
understands this and they're able to speak to
erring brethren and to bring accountability and
require restitution or make a financial settlement
between brothers. Now there are options for this,
both directly in churches, but also there are
also some additional parachurch Christian organizations
that assist in this today. For example, in some
of the businesses that I'm a partner in, we have
written into our operating agreement an understanding,
an agreement not to take each other to the law,
to the civil magistrate. But if we have a dispute...
and of course we're involved in various churches,
if we will then go to an organization called
Institute of Christian Conciliation, which is
a division of Ambassadors of Reconciliation,
which settles matters between brothers with an
impartial third party. These are all things that
are available to us as we seek to resolve disputes.
So with the scope of the argument understood,
let's go to the passage and understand what the
Apostle Paul is writing to the Corinthian church
and to the church of all time. We'll begin, number
one, with the problem, and that is in verse 1.
Christians are going to law before the wicked
and unjust against their brethren. He says, dare
any of you, having a matter against another,
go to law before the unrighteous and not before
the saints. The word dare is a very strong word.
It's like, how dare you do this? This is unthinkable.
This is shameful. How dare you do this? Such
a thing should not be endured. The word used
for unrighteous also bears the meaning of being
heathen, wicked, and unjust. So what he's saying
here is, how dare you, when you have an issue
between brothers, go to law before the unrighteous,
the heathen, the wicked, and the unjust person
or court. Paul boldly confronts them for daring
to do this, to take these civil matters to a
corrupt and unjust and an unrighteous law court
or a magistrate in order to receive satisfaction.
As Thistleton pointed out, this would likely
require paying bribes or some other type of injustice.
Instead, Paul says, they should be taking this
before the saints. How dare you do this? And
you go over here and you don't go before the
saints. So that is, it is not the worldly wise
that have understanding in such matters unless
they're borrowing from a Christian worldview.
Go anywhere in the world to see and to observe
those who have not been influenced by a Christian
civilization and you will see how evil and how
wicked and how corrupt the courts are. Go to
Pakistan today or any other Islamic nation and
see how unjustly they treat Christian believers
and even their own people. Bribery is rampant
among them. Look at Paul's experience before
Felix in Acts chapter 24. Felix, as he testified,
kept him bound for two years, unjustly held in
prison for no crime because, quote, he hoped
that money would be given him by Paul, that he
might release him. That's how unjust they were.
That's in Acts 24, verse 26 and 27. There is
little justice, if any at all. I'll give you
one example. Now, this isn't a matter of criminal
law, but in most Islamic countries, if there
is a rape, the way that they deal with the rape
instead of punishing the perpetrator is they
will then go and rape his sister, the perpetrator's
sister. It's an absolutely awful and despicable
way of dealing with such things. There is no
justice regarding these things. Now, another
thing then that we must consider in looking at
this prohibition, that is this question. Is this,
is Paul teaching a prohibition for all time and
in all places? In other words, is it wrong to
go to a court of law to deal with disputes between
brethren at all times and in all places? Would
Paul be saying this if he were living in, say,
early America or maybe even in the 1800s? I think
probably not. He certainly would not be saying
this in ancient Israel. Remember how God through
Jethro instructed Moses on how to establish judges
who would bring justice to the land in situations
exactly like this. They were to establish judges
in the land so that they could do this very thing
among the millions of the Israelites. In Exodus
18, verse 19 through 26, Jethro says to Moses,
stand before God for the people that you may
bring the difficulties to God. And you shall
teach them the statutes and the laws and show
them the way in which they must walk and the
work they must do. Moreover, you shall select
from all the people, able men, such as fear God,
men of truth, hating covetousness, and place
such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers
of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of
tens, and let them judge the people at all times.
And then Moses heeds. the voice of his father
-in -law, he did all that he said. And Moses
did indeed choose able men out of Israel and
made them heads over the people in this way.
And they judged the people at all times, the
hard cases they brought to Moses, but they judged
every small case themselves. So when you have...
a Christian government, civil government, or
largely so, then I don't think that this passage
applies in the same way as it did right here
because, as he mentions here, you do this before
the unrighteous. This whole argument is framed.
Why are you doing this and going to the wicked,
unrighteous, and unjust people or judges? It
is clear that God is the one who has instituted
justice, he has set up judges, and he gave the
parameters and standard for them. Paul says elsewhere
that the law is good if a man uses it lawfully.
The Romans were not using the law lawfully, but
were rather turning it into injustice. When a
society is upholding righteous law, then it is
my opinion that the shame and prohibition here
does not apply. It is clear that the problem
was not seeking to resolve issues or even to
seek redress. That wasn't the problem. There
was an issue. Somebody wasn't doing what they
had committed to do. Such a matter needs to be
fixed. It needs to be solved. Somebody needs
to adjudicate. That's not the problem. That's
not the issue. It is that of going before the
unjust and the wicked in order to do so. When
one has a matter, they are then to go before
the saints, those who uphold justice and who
understand God's law. Now, Paul uses the word
saints here. He uses this several times in this
passage, and he simply means the people of God,
the church people who are part of the church
of Jesus Christ. We are saints before the Lord.
This is not some special holy person who's been
canonized in some way often after being dead
no saints here simply means the people of god
the christian church secondly then he makes his
point of how the saints are qualified to do this
because the saints will judge the world and they
will judge angels This is verse 2 and 3. He says,
Do you not know that the saints will judge the
world? And if the world will be judged by you,
are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How
much more things that pertain to this life. Excuse
me. Paul gives biblical proof of two facts that
will happen in the future. The first is that
in some way believers in Christ will judge the
world. And the second is that believers in Christ
will judge angels, which we'll look at in just
a moment. And he draws from that that Christian
believers are not unworthy. to judge the smallest
matters. In other words, he argues from the greater
to the lesser. If you all are going to be judging
angels and the world someday, how much more you
should be able to judge these smaller matters
here on earth. The world pales in comparison
to... Now what is Paul referring to? In that
the saints will judge the world. It is not explicitly
clear here in this passage. There are two basic
understandings of this and interpretations of
what he is saying. and probably the most popular,
is that in some way the saints will accompany
Christ in judgment on the sinners on the great
judgment day. That on that day, they will aid
our Lord in bringing judgment, or at least be
in agreement with him. We get perhaps a possible
glimpse of this in Matthew 19, verse 28. So Jesus
said to them, Assuredly, I say to you that in
the regeneration, When the Son of Man sits on
the throne of his glory, you who have followed
me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the
twelve tribes of Israel. Now, so there's a judgment
with God. It's not over the whole world, though.
It's that of judging the twelve tribes. There's
also the prophecy of Enoch that Jude quotes in
Jude verses 14 and 15. He says, Now Enoch, the
seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men
also, saying, Behold, the Lord comes with ten
thousand of his saints to execute judgment on
all, to convict all who are ungodly among them
of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed
in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things
which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
So if this is the meaning, then it would simply
mean that Christian believers are first judged
themselves before God. They are found to be acquitted
and to stand before Christ. And then they advance
to the bench to approve and applaud the righteous
judgment of Christ, both on men and angels. This
would answer both of the statements in verse
2, that Christians will judge the world and will
judge angels. So this is something in the future.
The problem is that we don't have any clear statement
in the scriptures. detailing how that is or how
that will work. And perhaps we just simply need
to accept that that's what's going to happen,
that we're going to do this in some way. A second
option though, and that is taking the fact that
when Christ ascended, he was given dominion and
glory and a kingdom that all peoples and nations
and languages should serve him. In Daniel 7 verse
18, after the great beast arrives out of the
earth, he says, the saints of the most high shall
receive the kingdom and they shall possess the
kingdom forever, even forever and ever. A little
later on in verse 22, he says, the time came
for the saints to possess the kingdom. Now this
was written in the context of the days of Rome.
When Christ ascended and the kingdom and dominion
and greatness of all the kingdoms under the whole
heaven was given to the saints, as he says in
verse 27, his kingdom, that is Christ's kingdom,
is an everlasting kingdom and all dominion shall
serve and obey him. So through this we understand
that Christ's kingdom will expand. It will fill
all the earth as Jesus speaks of many times.
It's like a little leaven and it's going to leaven
the whole lump. It's going to be a small tree
like that of a mustard seed and it's going to
fill the earth. The kingdom of Christ will fill
the earth from sea to sea, from shore to shore.
So we understand Christ's kingdom in that way,
and that kings and nations will bow before Christ,
they will indeed kiss the sun, as Psalm 2 says,
and therefore in that way, Christians will judge
the world that is under the authority of Christ
in them ruling on the earth, and as Christianity
overspreads the world. So in other words, this
is a restatement of the post -millennial vision.
This view fits in nicely with Psalm 149, verse
5 through 9, that says, Let the saints be joyful
in glory, let them single out on their beds,
let the high praises of God be in their mouth,
and a two -edged sword in their hand to execute
vengeance on the nations and punishments on the
peoples, to bind their kings with chains and
their nobles with fetters of iron, to execute
on them the written judgment, this honor. Have
all his saints praise the Lord. So there are
two possibilities. There's one of the third that
is a little bit just more just that this is saying
here that through Christ we have the authority
to cast out evil spirits and so that we're in
that way judging the world. But that one I don't
find in many places. I myself lean toward the
second opinion, but I'm not dogmatic about it.
There's much to be said for the first one. In
favor of the first one is that there are many
post -biblical Jewish writings that also hold
to this view. And Paul, being a Jew, could have
been referring to all of the scriptures which
we've just looked at, as well as the tradition
of understanding it in that way by his Jewish
forefathers. And that is that we will accompany
Christ in judgment in some way. Certainly we
cannot know for sure. Either way, the contrast
is very clear, that because saints judge the
world and we will judge angels, then we should
be eminently qualified to judge things pertaining
to this life, especially some of these petty
grievances or the smallest matters that they
were going to law about. Now on the subject of
judging angels, we have no other scripture to
compare this to or to clarify what Paul says.
It is very clear, we shall judge angels. Presumably,
he's talking about judging evil angels, and obviously
their judgment is foretold, as in Jude chapter
1, verse 6 and 7, which says, The angels, which
did not keep their proper domain, but left their
own abode, he has reserved in everlasting chains
under darkness for the judgment of that great
day. As Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around
them in a similar manner to these, having given
themselves over to sexual immorality and going
after strange flesh, are set forth as an example,
suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. But
that's really all we can tell about this matter
of Christians judging angels. Therefore, we simply
need to leave it here. The scripture teaches
this, that in some way, we will judge angels.
This understandably would occur at some time
in the future, at the future judgment day or
some day in which God appoints us to do so. Thirdly
then, let's look at verse 4. It is more likely
that those esteemed in the congregation would
judge more righteous judgment than by going to
the unbeliever. Here again we have some challenges
of interpretation. This passage is... It's one
that's not the easiest to preach through because
there's just some things here that we're trying
to really get the sense of this, and there's
a few challenges in it. The grammar is quite
challenging in this verse. On one hand, it seems
to be kind of an ironic statement. It would be
better for even the least esteemed in the church
to serve as a judge rather than to go to the
wicked or the unjust. But it could also be a
question. I'm going to give you an example from
three different translations as to how they translated
it. First of all, the King James. If then you
have judgment of things pertaining to this life,
set them to judge which are least esteemed in
the church. This is more like a command or an
ironic thing. Set the ones who are the least
esteemed, the lowest, the... The ones who possess
the least wisdom in the church, it's better for
them than for the unjust to have judgment. That's
the King James. The new King James, which I've
read, if you then have judgments concerning things
pertaining to this life, do you appoint those
who are least esteemed by the church to judge?
And then the ESV says, so if you have such cases,
why? do you lay them before those who have no
standing in the church? So you can see there,
there's really various meanings there, and that's
because of the difficulty of the grammar of this
text. Some think that Paul means it is better
for the least esteemed in the congregation to
judge instead of an unbeliever. Others think
that Paul's referring to the fact that when something
needs judged in the church, we look for someone
with wisdom and not the least esteemed. And the
unrighteous are even less than the least esteemed.
Either way, the interpretations still make the
point that Christian believers should be able
to have judgments concerning things pertaining
to this life and that it is far better than to
go to unjust and wicked unbelievers. Number four,
we come then to verse five through the beginning
of seven. And here Paul gets really to the heart
of it. This is a shameful matter, he says. He
says, I say this to your shame. Is it so that
there is not a wise man among you, not even one,
who would be able to judge between his brethren?
But brother goes to law against brother, and
that before unbelievers. Now therefore, it is
already an utter failure for you that go to law
against one another. There are only two places
in the scripture where this word shameful is
used. Both of them are in 1 Corinthians. The
second time is when he speaks about those who
were questioning the resurrection. So you can
see here, this is a really big matter that the
apostle is making. This is shameful behavior.
It should not be named among them. We must conclude
this issue was a matter of very high importance.
Now, think of this in light of the professed
wisdom that the Corinthian church thought they
had. They thought that they were wise, they were
rich, they were well endowed with goods and with
much wisdom. And the human wisdom was better
than the wisdom of the cross. And Paul says,
do you not even have one wise man among you?
Is there not anyone who can judge between you?
If so, then this is shameful. Where's all your
high and mighty wisdom that you profess? He states
the proof of this, this lack of wisdom in verse
6. Brother goes to brother, goes to law against
brother, and not before unbelievers. It continues
in verse 7. It's an utter failure among you.
So we conclude from that that to initiate a lawsuit
and take our matters before a wicked and unbelieving
and unjust judge is a shameful thing and that
we ought not to do it. The challenge for us today,
as we consider these words for us, is that in
our context, It's a mixed bag. Many of our judges
are not in the same state as what they were in
Rome. In other words, there are a good number
of good judges where they fear the Lord and they
just... And they adjudicate just judgment. But
on the same token, there are many others that
are not like that. And so it requires wisdom
for us as we think about that in our current
context. We're not like the country of Pakistan
or other Islamic countries in that way. We have
a rich Christian heritage about law and jurisprudence
that the effects of it are still here with us.
In many ways. We have inherited much. But alas.
There are also many unjust judges. Who are corrupt
and evil. So we must conclude from this. In light
of that. That the church must still be able to
provide wise men. Who can judge between matters.
That they do so with skill. That is with a good
understanding of God's law. With a knowledge
of good. A knowledge of jurisprudence, the ability
to give close attention to detail, and to understand
the biblical law requiring multiple witnesses.
That is needed in our day just as much as ever.
There are many things that could be adjudicated
and could be settled simply by dealing with brothers
in the church rather than taking it to a law
court, even if the law court. is somewhat good.
We can still do it here. He moves on then in
the latter part of verse 7. He says, Why do you
not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather
let yourselves be cheated? No, you yourselves
do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to
your brethren. This seems like a hard saying
here. Saying it's better to accept wrong and
let yourself be cheated. Rather than to do this
shameful thing. Well that's number one. It shows
the importance of which he attaches this. This
is a big matter. But it also goes along with
the words of Jesus. In Matthew 5 verse 14 and
41. If anyone wants to sue you and take away
your tunic. Let him have your cloak also. And
whoever compels you to go one mile. Go with him.
There are times when wrong is done that we must
accept it and trust in the judge of all of the
earth who will do right and who will take care
of the matter and judge the offender in the great
judgment day and in his own time. the offender
is actually judged even before the great judgment
day simply by other curses falling on him or
things that are taken away. And so Paul is saying
here, this is such a shameful matter that it's
better for you to accept the wrong, to accept
the damages, rather than to go before the unjust
person. That's what he's saying. But remember
though, That God's word, both here and in other
places, is not saying that it is wrong to seek
redress. It's not wrong to look for a judgment.
Here's some examples. And all of these kinds
of things have happened. It's to the shame, obviously,
of the perpetrators who do this. But these things
have happened within Christ's church. A brother
hires another brother to construct a building
and refuses to pay the bill. He says, I'm not
going to pay you. Another brother might buy a
car from somebody else, put 50 % down, and says
that he promises to pay the rest in a year, but
then when that time comes, he refuses to pay.
Or someone borrows a piece of machinery, and
they abuse and misuse it. They ruin it, but refuse
to give compensation to the owner. There are
many stories like this. of professing Christians,
taking advantage of other Christians. I have
heard that in some places, I'd rather deal with
an unbeliever than with a fellow Christian because
they seek to get the very last dollar out of
me and they refuse to act in a fair way. This
is shameful. This should not be named among us
in this way. And yet these things happen. I've
even heard of these. This is coming secondhand.
of those who even taught, I'm going to do this
to you, I'm not going to pay you, and you're
a Christian and you won't sue me, and I know
that. Those kinds of things have happened. These
matters must be dealt with and they must be confronted
with redress for damages. But the issue addressed
here, again, is that of going before the just.
the heathen and unbelievers, and it's better
to accept the wrong and let yourselves be cheated
rather than to take your brother before the unjust.
Furthermore, by taking such matters to a corrupt
court, everyone loses, factions develop, and
Christ is not honored. The church is called to
intervene and to find a God -honoring way to
resolve the disputes. in the context of the church.
This should generally follow the Matthew 18 approach
of first going to the man who has done wrong
and confronting him, and then following it up
with witnesses, the man or the person who has
done wrong, confronting them, then following
it up with witnesses, and then bringing it to
the elders, and then finally, if he still will
not hear, then to the whole church. I know of
some situations where the church will appoint
a committee of a couple of men to research the
matter, find a solution, and then render a judgment.
And if the offender will not listen, then it
will come to the church and they will render
church discipline. Because a lot of these things
end up being in the form, in some way, of theft
or of robbery in some way. But in all of these
cases, these principles, though, must be kept
in mind. Romans 12, verse 17 to 21. Repay no
one evil for evil. Have regard for good things
in the sight of all men. If it is possible, as
much as depends on you, live peaceably with all
men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather
give place to wrath. For it is written, vengeance
is mine. I will repay, says the Lord. Therefore,
if your enemy is hungry, feed him. And if he
is thirsty, give him a drink. For in so doing,
you will heap coals of fire on his head. Do not
be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
That really applies to this whole sense here
of it's better for you to suffer the loss rather
than to take this person to the unjust judge.
1 Peter 2, verse 19 to 21. Also gives us the
example of Christ. He says, For this is commendable,
if because of conscience toward God one endures
grief, suffering wrongfully. For what credit
is it if when you are beaten for your faults
you take it patiently? But when you do good and
suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable
before God. For to this you were called because
Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example
that you should follow in his steps. In closing
this out though, Paul then addresses the offender.
He says, no, you yourselves do wrong and cheat
and you do these things to your brethren. This
is where it's like, this is unthinkable. why
would you cheat your brother in Christ from what
belongs to him? And yet sadly, it happens far
too often. To you who defrauds and cheats your
brother or your sister, it's as if he's saying,
how can you do this? You're doing wrong. You're
hurting your brother in Christ and you must repent
and cease and desist. Let's give just a few final
applications as we consider all of this. First
of all is that justice and wisdom are found in
God -fearing courts. Outside of that, well, there
might be occasional times of justice, but they
don't have it like faithful Christians do. And
this is something that we must evaluate and discern
as we deal with wrongs. But at the same time,
When it comes election time, we must also seek
to promote faithful Christian legislators and
judges and courts. For that is what we desire
to see. It is the righteous who understand God's
judgments. Secondly, in order for this to happen,
though, the church must understand good jurisprudence.
That is, how... Evidence works. How witnesses
work. How God lays out the plans for justice
in a society. In order to understand God's standards
of justice, we must study in the whole word.
This requires a belief in the authority of the
whole scripture. For it is in the Old Testament
that many of God's standards of justice and jurisprudence
are revealed. And we need to be studying that.
In order to understand how to bring judgment
or justice. We read the law of God and we seek
to understand it in our own context. For example,
here's one, a liability one. Deuteronomy 22 and
verse 8. When you build a new house, then you
shall make a parapet for your roof that you may
not bring guilt of bloodshed on your household
if anyone falls from it. Does that mean that
we here today, we're all to go put these parapets
around all of our roofs? No, that certainly would
not work in the country that we live in. We don't
have flat roofs that we go to sleep on or we
go up there in order to relax like they did in
their countries. But we can learn from this,
though, that we are liable for an injury that
happens from our negligence. And we must... remember
that and that we seek to promote safety and that
we're also liable if we neglect that and then
someone is hurt many times that's a financial
liability that we need to accept somebody gets
hurt because we failed to do something that should
have been done then we have to take a look at
that the lives of people are precious in the
sight of god and And this means that we should
take care of preventing hurt from coming to any
person. So for example, we don't want to dig
a deep pit in the yard and leave it uncovered
when little children wander around and could
fall in. Or we could take and apply this in many
ways. That we should seek to look out for the
good of our neighbor. And be liable if we are
neglectful in it. One final note as we draw this
to a conclusion. Beware of a retaliatory or revengeful
spirit when you are wronged. Vengeance belongs
to God. Even if you're going to seek redress
and things, you still should not have a vengeful
spirit about you. Vengeance belongs to God. As
God says in Deuteronomy 32 verse 35, vengeance
is mine and recompense. Their foot shall slip
in due time. for the day of their calamity is
at hand and the things to come hasten upon them.
Now this is quoted several times in the New Testament,
such as we have read in Romans 12 and verse 19.
In all of this, though, we should seek and long
for justice, for right dealings, not with hatred
or vengeance or malice, but to seek the Lord
and seek to promote those kind. of wise individuals,
both in the church for matters that can be handled
here, as well as in our communities for all the
community around us. I hope that this is instructive
to you from this. This is one that's a little
different than what we've looked at in all of
the others before, but the word of God does speak
to it clearly, and so I give it to you. In the
name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy
Spirit. Amen. Let's pray.