Systematic Theology – Authority

Authority, Justice, and Men

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Systematic Theology

Genre: Speech

Lesson: 17 of 19

Track: #17

Year:

Dictation Name: 17 Authority, Justice, and Men

[Rushdoony] Thus saith the Lord “Ye shall seek Me and find Me when Ye shall search for me with all your hearts.” Jesus said “blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.” Let us pray.

Oh Lord our God whose grace and mercy we’ve all been made rich. We give thanks unto Thee for the joy and happiness of our lives, for the blessings with which Thou dost daily surround us. For the land of our birth, for the homes in which we live, and for our fellowship one with another. Make us ever mindful how rich we are in Thee. Give us grateful hearts that we might praise Thee with all our heart, mind, and being and serve Thee with gladness and thanksgiving. Make us ever mindful of all that Thou hast given to us, chiefly Jesus Christ Thy Son our Savior, who came to be made sin for us, destroyed the power of sin and death, and now sitteth at Thy right hand ever to intercede for us. Therefore we praise Thee, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. In Jesus name, amen.

Our scripture this morning is from Deuteronomy 17 verses 8-13, and our subject Authority, Justice, and men, Deuteronomy 17 beginning with the eighth verse.

“8 If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy within thy gates: then shalt thou arise, and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose; 9 And thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days, and enquire; and they shall shew thee the sentence of judgment: 10 And thou shalt do according to the sentence, which they of that place which the Lord shall choose shall shew thee; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee: 11 According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall shew thee, to the right hand, nor to the left. 12 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. 13 And all the people shall hear, and fear, and do no more presumptuously.”

God in His law stresses repeatedly the untrustworthiness of men. As a result in the courts of law according to scripture, which has set a pattern for many nations, corroboration of evidence was necessary for conviction. According to Deuteronomy 17:6-7 there had to be two or more witnesses, this law is very strongly stressed, more than once, as witness in Numbers 34:30 and in Deuteronomy 19:5 it is made clear that it applies in any case for any crime. The New Testament also stresses this requirement of corroboration. In cases Ecclesiastical as well as civil and criminal, as witness Matthew 18:16, John 8:17, II Corinthians 13:1, I Timothy 5:19, and Hebrews 10:28. In other words the Bible makes clear that no man, however important, however great his position and authority in the realm, can convict anyone by his testimony alone.

This distrust of authority goes through the law. In our text the law deals with appeals in courts. First these appeals were up to Moses, later to the governing judge, and then to the king. In Exodus 18:21-23, Numbers 11:16 & 17, and Deuteronomy 1:12-17 are some of the texts that deal with this matter. But there was more to this, beside the system of appellate courts the Supreme Court, final court of appeal, had to have sitting on the bench at least three men of three classes. One, a priest who knew the law and ruled in terms of it; another a Levite, also one who was the educator of Israel, and knowledgeable in the law, and the third the civil judge. Moreover the priest and the Levite dealt with the problem cases and the application of God’s law to the particular case. For example verse eight cites cases between blood and blood, in other words was it man slaughter, or was it murder? Between plea and plea and stroke and stroke Exodus 22:1-15 for example gives us illustrations of these: theft, embezzlement, and other cases involving restitution, what kind of restitution. Moreover the decision of the Supreme Court was always final, and failure to obey was punishable by death. This was a Supreme Court as God provided for it in Israel.

The court as we have seen had to include three classes, priest, Levite, and judge.

Now in modern terms we would call this checks and balances, and of course it was clearly the influence of Old Testament law that led to our system of checks and balances, however we have a more radical kind of check and balance then the constitution provides. In the constitution it is between three separate branches of government, but here within the judiciary as elsewhere, (but that’s not our concern now) there were checks and balances. Three types of judges had to sit on the court. The judges also were covenant men, as were the priests and the Levites. Now it is true this law was often disobeyed in the history of Israel. In fact it was later ruled that disobedience to the words of the scribes was more serious then disobedience to the words of the Torah. In other words, the lawyer had greater weight than God. This was the development of Phariseeism. As George Horowitz in the Spirit of Jewish Law points out, in fact Horowitz says that Psalm 119 verse 126 which reads “it is time for Thee Lord to work, for they have made void Thy law” was totally reinterpreted and turned upside down to mean “it is time to do something for the Lord, so make void the Torah.” In other words, the plain meaning was set aside pragmatically by the Sanhedrin, and yet the Torah was formally held to be beyond tampering with. Now it was this development that gained the wrath of our Lord, it was the heart of Phariseeism. Of course we have had like developments in this country with regard to our constitution.

Thus when God gives us the provision of Deuteronomy 17 verse 8 – 13 he does not give us an infallible means of preventing injustice. What we do get is a dilution of human authority to protect the judicial process. Now in terms of these things we must make certain observations. First, as we have already seen even a God provided law cannot prevent injustice. On the human level there is no infallible justice, man is a sinner and he perverts the best possible law structure as Phariseeism did. The Sanhedrin turned the law upside down and gave man’s word priority, the rational was “well God’s in heaven and we’re here, and we see the situation better than God does.” But a yardstick which is a rubber yardstick is no yardstick at all.

Second, having said that we must observe that the history of Israel is without equal in antiquity; in fact is compared to a great deal that has followed since, it is without equal. Despite periodic dereliction it had a remarkably long history of justice. God’s law was a break on the sin of man. The Sanhedrin which condemned Jesus met illegally; pragmatism had by then become the order of the day. All the same, even given that the high point of injustice in all history, there was still a residue of sound thinking and justice in the Sanhedrin because when the apostles shortly after Pentecost were brought before the authorities, Gamaliel spoke judiciously and gained the release of the apostles as Acts 5:33-40 tells us. The tyranny of the pagan states was constant because they did not have God’s law, and that respect in Israel, having this law it was always possible and it happened. But man stood up to the authority and said as our Lord supremely did that they were wrong, that there was a higher law than their word.

Then third we have called attention to the fact that this law provided a form of checks and balances. The three kinds of justices made sure that the perspective of God’s law was maximized. But this was not all, the work of the prophets was as a spokesmen for the covenant law, as the defenders of the covenant people in terms of the word of God. And so the word of the prophets was “Thus saith the Lord” to kings and to people, to judges and to priests. To this day where the church exercises its prophetic task there is a check on injustice, and we have to say that our condition is largely due to the failure of the church to be prophetic. The Bible tells us that where priest and prophet go astray, there too will the people go astray. We read for example in Isaiah 28:7&8 concerning false priests and prophets, that they also have erred through wine and through strong drink are out of the way. The priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink, they err in vision, they stumble in judgment, for all tables are full of vomit and filthiness so that there is no place clean. The very people who should lead the nation in righteousness or in justice are filthy pigs Isaiah says. The tables which should be places to eat and to keep strong in God’s service are tables of filth. Jeremiah makes a like indictment. He says that instead of justice the priests and prophets manifest sin, according to Jeremiah 23:11 that the false leaders give the people what they want to hear.

The prophet Micah also makes the same statement. For example in Micah 2:11 “11 If a man walking in the spirit and falsehood do lie, saying, I will prophesy unto thee of wine and of strong drink; he shall even be the prophet of this people.” Again in Micah 3:11 Micah says “The heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for money: yet will they lean upon the Lord, and say, is not the Lord among us? none evil can come upon us.” The leaders Micah said are mercenary, and they put their advancement above God’s justice. At the same time they invoke God’s name and the covenant as their security from evil. They say that because of our historic faith and position God will be for us.

However such evil authorities flourish because the people want them. God told Isaiah 39 and 10 that “this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the Lord which say to the sears ‘see not’ and to the prophets ‘prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits.’” In other words what scripture tells us is that people will get the kind of leaders (in church, and state, and education, in every sphere) that they want. God says that men want leaders to speak smooth things and to prophesy lies. We saw in Micah 2:11 what God says of a false and traitorous people. That if a man who walks in the spirit of falsehood lies and says “I’m going to prophesy that the best solution for all problems is wine and strong drink, he shall be the favored prophet of the people.” The lower the message the greater the appeal Micah says. People get the leaders they want. People want leadership in terms of their character, and the same is true everywhere and in all generations. A people will be ruled by an authority which confirms to their faith and character. The attempts to resolve the matter by legislative and judicial reform, however good those reforms, without a like reform in the faith of the people will always be futile. In other words God’s appellate court was not designed to eliminate justice, rather it offers justice to a people who want justice.

The world today is plagued as it has so often been by injustice. People talk about wanting justice, but they only want it when it suites them, when it’s for them. They find it much easier to live in an unjust world. Their attitude is one of hypocrisy. Men agree that justice is good, but they are more comfortable without it. We have the kind of leadership we deserve. In fact one may say as I often have, we have better leadership most of the time then we deserve. All over the world our leadership is weak, some of it is outright evil, but the tyranny of evil is not strength, and all over the world we have weak leaders because we have weak peoples; they prefer people of a like character to theirs. They prefer people who give forth the kind of message, of strong drink as salvation. Now that’s a caricature, but it’s the truth also. Anyone who heard some of the campaign oratory at the convention knows that anyone with any common sense knew the fallacious nature of what was said. But people loved it, the media loved it, and they will demand more because people want leadership in terms of their character.

If the people truly wanted justice, we would have it. If the people want a strong president we would get one. Men least of all desire a just social order, because it would require them first of all to be just.

Thus in the world today we have the prevalence of exactly what people want. S

C.S. Lewis once said heaven is the habitation of those who say to God “Thy will be done” and hell is the habitation of those to whom God says “thy will be done.” A beautiful statement of the case which I love to repeat because it is so true; and God is saying to men today “thy will be done. You want the kind of leadership that you are creating? Very well, I shall give it to you, and you will have injustice and tyranny with it.” In brief God’s law provides justice and authority for those peoples who want it. Let us pray.

Oh Lord our God Thy word is truth and Thy word makes provision for those who seek Thy face; who hunger and thirst after righteousness, who love Thy kingdom and are ready to say “Thy will be done.” Oh Lord our God give us grace day by day so to move that Thy will may be done in our lives and through us in our communities and nations. Bless us to this purpose, in Jesus name amen.

Our announcements this morning, work on our monthly mailing will begin tomorrow morning here at 9 a.m. and continue until 5 p.m. and resume at 7 to continue until 10 p.m.

Please remember Ken Thurston in your prayers he is better, the blood clot is healing but he may be in the hospital for some time yet.

I’d like to call your attention again to the situation in Nebraska. We have in the past so often spoken about what has happened to Silabin {?} that we tend to neglect that there are others in that state who have been in trouble with the law.

Are there any questions now on our lesson? Yes?

[Audience member] You have two concepts here, that of the Supreme Court as defined by God’s law and also the idea of God giving a reprobate people and their leaders what they want. There seemed to be an interesting case of this in 1 Kings, Ahab had 400 prophets that God pout a lying spirit in, and gave him what he wanted to hear, the good news go against {?} and then there was one man, Micah, who said “No, you’re not going to make it.”

[Rushdoony] Elijah.

[Audience member] No, I think it was Micah was it not?

[Rushdoony] No, oh in Micaiah, yes in one instance.

[Audience member] Micaiah, that’s right, I didn’t pronounce it right. In any event point to the supreme court structure, he had only one witness not to go and four hundred provided by God deliberately to deceive him into going, so God used apparently the supreme court structure of the concept of more than one witness as a tool against the evil king, did he not?

[Rushdoony] Yes. And God brought judgment upon them because they didn’t want to hear God’s word, they were hostile to it, they despised it. So the net result was judgment.

[Audience member] What do we do in a situation where we have one witness, or one prophet who speaks apparently “thus saith the Lord” and a multitude who contradict him, contravening his testimony. Do we go by the standard of God’s law, or do we possibly entertain the idea that this one man in fact is speaking the will of God, like it was true for Micaiah? What do we do in this situation, how can we measure, or do we just sit and wait for God’s judgment on the king?

[Rushdoony] Well of course we have the word of God as the test. Who is speaking the word of God? And we go in terms of the word because the one true prophet is going in terms of that. And today of course we can rejoice that there are more and more who are raising the standard of God’s law word, and we can rest assured that it is going to apply, that there will be judgment on men and nations for their departure from it; and that we are in fact in the midst of a time of judgment very emphatically.

[Audience member] When was the last time Israel actually held the Deuteronomy style supreme court historically?

[Rushdoony] It maintained this through the entire Old Testament, but it was often perverted. And of course in the time of our Lord it had reached the kind of situation that Horowitz described where what the lawyer said was more important than God’s law, because the lawyer was on the scene and he supposedly knew more than God.

[Audience member] I’ve heard it said that the greatest victory of Christian self-government in our country was to {?} of a jury of peers, but according to Deuteronomy that would not necessarily be the right way in which to deal with the situation.

[Rushdoony] No and we forget that in the early years of the republic the jury decided cases out of the Bible. So this was the standard and the judge moved in terms of this standard and occasionally Erelic {?} calls attention to one case, reminded the jury of a verse they had forgotten about.

Yes?

[Audience member] Rush this work by Horowitz does it, does he go into the guidelines for distinguishing between supreme and appellate court functions, in so far as the Old Testament’s concerned?

[Rushdoony] No, doesn’t particular stress it, it just refers to it. Horowitz’s book by the way has often been used by our courts, and particularly at the points where it’s, we would say, the weakest.

[Audience member] Was there some works of recommendation that you could recommend which deal with the legal structure, primarily establishing the Biblical basis for a legal structure?

[Rushdoony] H.B. Clarke’s Biblical Law is an old work by a lawyer who deals with the Biblical law in American history and cites the cases in terms of the particulars of Biblical law. Unfortunately it’s not in print and difficult to locate.

Yes?

[Audience member] {?} There’s a death penalty in verse 13 for not abiding by the decision of this court, and the court deals with blood against blood. Is this why there was a necessity for the cities of refuge to be established? In so far as someone might not agree with the decision of the council that it was a manslaughter and seek after vengeance. Is this the motivation behind the cities of refuge?

[Rushdoony] No, the cities of refuge were pending a decision of a court.

[Audience member] A waiting vestibule for the accused?

[Rushdoony] Yes. Any other questions or comments? Well if not let us bow our heads in prayer.

Oh Lord our God we thank Thee that Thy word is truth, that Thy judgments are righteous altogether and shall prevail. Give us grace to wait on Thee day by day knowing that Thou wilt bring all things to pass. Give us strength to work patiently and zealously all the days of our life; to the end that Thy kingdom may be established upon earth. And now go in peace God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit bless you and keep you guide and protect you this day and always, amen.