New Moon Meeting: March 2005, 3:25 EST
The Principle of ResistanceZahakiel: Almighty Father in Heaven,
We thank you for the opportunity to gather in your name, in a time of relative peace. We thank you that your angels are holding back the winds of conflict, so that we may have a chance to seal your servants in their foreheads. We thank you also for your enduring presence among us, by which we are ministers of your glory, and we invite you to guide and lead everyone who is here, as we examine yet another aspect of your Word on this New Moon day. In Yahshua’s name I pray.
Amen.Crystle: Amen.
Barb: Amen.
Qinael: Amen.
Pastor “Chick”: Amen.Zahakiel: No one made any suggestions for a topic this month, but that’s okay... Yah had one of His own He would like us to examine. Today we’re going to be looking at the subject of “Resistance” in the Bible. It appears in a couple of different settings, and so there is some potential for confusion. In some cases, we are told to resist something, and in others we are told NOT to resist. Apparently, therefore, there is a time for each, and we will see what those times are.
First, I’d like to draw an interesting parallel for you. Many of us, being Adventists, have seen this quote from Mrs. White’s writings: “The gospel of health has able advocates, but their work has been made very hard because so many ministers, presidents of conferences, and others in positions of influence have failed to give the question of health reform its proper attention. They have not recognized it in its relation to the work of the message as the right arm of the body. While very little respect has been shown to this department by many of the people, and by some of the ministers, the Lord has shown His regard for it by giving it abundant prosperity. When properly conducted, the health work is an entering wedge, making a way for other truths to reach the heart. When the third angel’s message is received in its fullness, health reform will be given its place in the councils of the conference, in the work of the church, in the home, at the table, and in all the household arrangements. Then the right arm will serve and protect the body.” [Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 327]
Zahakiel: Say when you’ve read it.
Qinael: Finished.
Crystle: Finished.
Barb: Done.
Dumah: Yeah.
Pastor “Chick”: Finished.Zahakiel: Ok. That was written in 1900. Here is another one: “Medical missionary work is in no case to be divorced from the gospel ministry. The Lord has specified that the two shall be as closely connected as the arm is with the body. Without this union neither part of the work is complete. The medical missionary work is the gospel in illustration.” [Counsels on Health, page 524]
Zahakiel: Now, when we think of the medical ministry, we see that there is an obvious benefit in providing healing for people. Many of the people in the 1st century were made believers because of the acts of healing performed by Christ and His apostles. In the last days, we expect that many will come to us when they hear of our ability to heal physical ailments... and in this way they will hear of a greater healing. Thus, as Mrs. White stated, it is a “wedge” to get people interested in the Gospel.
But what about that other statement in the second quote? She said that “medical missionary work is the gospel in illustration.” This can be seen in two ways – first, that those who take healing to others AS missionaries are performing a work that parallels with the Gospel workers, and second that physical health has a lot to do with spiritual health.
My premise is this: the way in which you fight disease in the physical world can teach you a lot about how to fight sin in the spiritual world. In fact, there are three levels in which this principle may be applied: the spiritual body, the physical body, and the corporate body. I’ll demonstrate what I mean by that.
Zahakiel: First, some background... let’s look at a few Scriptures about resistance. Here is one of the best known: “Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.” (James 4:7)
There are a few more that are like this. Peter gives this advice, again about Satan – “Be sober, be vigilant, because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour; whom resist steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.” (1Pet 5:8, 9)
As Christians have done to the devil, so some have done to Yahweh and His attempts at influence. To the Sanhedrin Stephen said this, “Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost; as your fathers did, so do ye.” (Acts 7:51) In the vision of Zechariah we find this, “And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of Yahweh, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.” (Zech 3:1)
Now, there are two things that believers are told to resist. One is the devil, as we have seen from the verses in James and Peter. Another target for resistance is given in an indirect fashion. “Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.” (Heb 12:4)
The author here is encouraging the Christians to stand fast, encouraging them indeed to be MORE fervent in their resistance, and telling them that rebuke and reproof from Yah is a sign of His favor. (verse 6) So then, these are the two things we are told to resist: Satan and sin. Of course these two cannot be disconnected; to resist Satan is to resist the sins he is attempting to encourage in us.
Zahakiel: The confusion has some potential entrance here, because there is a quotation from Christ Himself that appears to be telling us to do just the opposite: “Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” (Mat 5:38, 39)
In fact, He elaborates on that idea quite a bit, and introduces some concepts that I also want to discuss in this study. The remaining verses of that passage read: “And if any man will sue thee at the law and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.” (Mat 5:40 – 42)
So here we are told NOT to resist evil. But... isn’t Satan evil? And sin and evil are almost interchangeable in the Scriptures. So what do we do with this? Some of you may already know, or have figured it out just by having it brought to your attention... but let’s take it slowly and make sure everyone gets it. So we will start by looking at the settings.
First, Christ’s example of evil is set as a commentary on the commandment in Exodus, repeated in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. The shortest verse is the first of these: “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.” (Exo 21:24) Essentially, if someone has caused you damage, under the Law of Yah you could inflict equal damage upon him. This kept things “fair” so to speak, and it also built a hedge of protection around the society. For example, if someone cut off my hand, I was not allowed to take his life. If he put out one of my eyes, I was not allowed to make him lame. In most forms of employment, particularly back then with no wheelchairs, having both your legs intact was far more important than having both your eyes.
But what the Messiah says in Matthew’s record shows us that there is a greater way to live than to just make sure that other people are hurting as much as yourself – even those who may have wronged you. We can choose not to retaliate at all, for as Paul tells us, “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith Yahweh.’” (Rom 12:19) So Matthew 5’s “resist not evil” is speaking about retaliating against things that are done to you by others; essentially, it’s about not reacting negatively to outside influences.
Dumah: This is a good study.
Zahakiel: Everyone following so far?
Barb: Yes.
Qinael: <nods.> I am.Zahakiel: Ok :) So now we have seen what the verse from Matthew is talking about – reacting to things coming in from the outside. Let’s look at the context of the statements by James and Peter.
The passage from James that begins with the verse we saw above is this: “Submit yourselves therefore to Yah. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to Yah, and He will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of Yahweh, and He shall lift you up. Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the Law, and judgeth the Law: but if thou judge the Law, thou art not a doer of the Law, but a judge.” (James 4:7-11)
If you read the entire passage, you see that James is saying exactly the same thing Christ was in Matthew 5. He was saying “resist the devil,” not brothers, or bad things coming from the “outside.” From the verses there, it appears part of the problem being addressed was that the brethren were saying bad things about each other; so while Christ speaks of “physical” injuries (an eye for an eye), James is speaking of emotional injuries: gossip, rumors, slander, things like that. The same rules apply to any kind of “evil.”
We find that Peter’s passage repeats the very same thought. I’ll begin two verses up from the one that contained the word “resist,” and you will see what I mean: “Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of Yah, that He may exalt you in due time, casting all your care upon Him; for He careth for you. Be sober, be vigilant, because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour; whom resist steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world. But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Yahshua, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.” (1Pet 5:6-10)
Zahakiel: Say when you’ve read it.
Pastor “Chick”: OK.
Qinael: Done.
Crystle: Finished.Zahakiel: Ok. Now, that is a very precious promise :) But we see a common theme here... being humble before Yah as a part of resisting the devil. And you notice that Peter does not say to resist outside “evil” either, because he acknowledges that the brethren will have “afflictions” in the world, and that we will all have “suffered a while” before we are made perfect in the absolute (complete) sense.
So then, the principle may be stated simply in this manner:
We are to resist “evil” that comes to us from within, or through directly spiritual forces.Remember, spiritual forces affect a person, or attempt to affect a person, by appealing to those tendencies already in “the flesh.” As Paul tells us, “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing.” (Rom 7:18a) While Paul was speaking here of his unconverted state specifically, as we covered in the Romans study, this remains true after conversion. “I thank God [for salvation] through Yahshua the Messiah, our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.” (Rom 7:25)
Now, the difference between those who are “born of Yah” (1John 3:9) and those who are “of the devil” (1John 3:8) is that the first set “walk not after the flesh.” They still have flesh, and it is still equipped and ready to do evil, but as Paul goes on to say in Chapter 8 of Romans, “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Yahshua, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Rom 8:1) We are justified by faith, but our actions (the way we “walk,” to use the Bible’s language) reveal that faith to others – like fruit on a tree.
An apple tree is known because it bears apples; and likewise a Christian is known because he “beareth fruit.” (John 15:2) In fact, all that verse is relevant; it reads, “Every branch in me that beareth not fruit [the Father] taketh away; and every branch that beareth fruit, He purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.” So Satan works through our “flesh” to tempt us to do evil, and to corrupt our fruit from within.
I remember something that is relevant to this. I was speaking with a gentleman on the phone that was opposed to the Righteousness by Faith message as we teach it. His objection was that he believed A.T. Jones to be in error regarding the nature of Christ on earth. The man with whom I was speaking was saying that Christ could not actually be “tempted” with evil during the three temptations... You all remember these, I’m sure. First He was tempted to turn stones into bread, and then to throw Himself off a high temple, and finally to receive all the kingdoms of the world from Satan if He would consent to bow and worship.
Zahakiel: Now, his objection to our message was that Jones pointed out the following: The temptations to Christ were true temptations, because there was something in His flesh that responded TO the temptations. Jones and we say, in other words, that the temptation to turn stone into bread was a true temptation because, after fasting for 40 days, He was hungry. He was tempted by the idea of throwing Himself off the tower, because it would be an “easy” way to prove to others that He was truly sent by Yahweh, and He knew that.
He was tempted with the kingdoms of the world because, in His flesh, He knew that the life of a ruler was more pleasant than the life of a martyr.
Now to some people, including the one about whom I’m speaking, this doesn’t sit well. The idea that Christ had desires, had ambitions, had tendencies that He suppressed, somehow lessens (they say) His divinity.
Dumah: Tendencies?
Zahakiel: Yes. Well, depending on how you use the word.
Dumah: Oh, yeah. He liked to eat.
Zahakiel: If you mean “tendencies” in terms of the habit of actually DOING something wrong, then no. Right :)
Actually, that is an rather important point, because this guy’s argument centered around the word “propensity.” When I said tendency I really meant the simple ability to be tempted... but that’s more detail than we need right now. Hopefully you all see and understand what I’m meaning here.
Dumah: <nods.>
Zahakiel: So, while others might think that because Yahshua had desires that tempted Him to resist His mission this somehow “lessens” His Godhood, to Jones (and to me) this is what makes His life a true Sacrifice.
If the Messiah wanted nothing but to die for mankind, where is the suffering in that, outside of the obvious physical discomfort of being nailed to a cross?* He gave up His LIFE, and everything that goes along with it... plans, dreams, hopes, desires. There were things He wanted, and this is in no passage more carefully explained than in those describing Gethsemane, wherein He said, even with a perfect Character, “Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me. Nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.” (Mark 14:36)
[*Note: There was also the spiritual suffering of having all the world’s sins imputed to Him, a procedure His entire being resisted due to His perfect, sin-hating Character.]
He was being tempted, and it was because His “flesh” did not like the knowledge that it was about to be shed. But here we have the perfect example of resisting evil. It was coming from Satan working on a spiritual level. Of course, the devil was not “inside” Him, for He said, “the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.” (John 14:30) Nevertheless, and yes, this can be a tricky business, Satan has access to our senses, and so he can work with those things that ARE inside us to try and turn us away from the path of righteousness.
Dumah: Gnostics believe that He enjoyed dying... really weird...
Zahakiel: Right, that He did not truly suffer.
But now, though Christ resisted this evil on an internal level, winning the victory within Himself, look at how He reacted to evil coming from outside sources, the very distinction I am drawing in this study:
“And Yahshua stood before the governor; and the governor asked Him, saying, ‘Art thou the King of the Jews?’ And Yahshua said unto him, ‘Thou sayest.’ And when He was accused of the chief priests and elders, He answered nothing. Then said Pilate unto Him, ‘Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee?’ And He answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.” (Mat 27:11-14)
This really is another perfect example, because He was doing just what He said, turning the other cheek in the face of external abuse of both a physical and verbal nature.
Dumah: What did the guy who disagreed with you think about all of this? Does he think that Christ’s suffering is only physical?
Zahakiel: We never really got this deeply into it. And I didn’t ask him any more details, because he wasn’t really looking to learn.
But now looking at the way Christ dealt with temptations of both types, the principle is established at the mouth of two or three perfect witnesses:
Resist evil tendencies within yourself, to walk in the Spirit. But, do not resist external attacks, accusations, verbal abuse – at least, not in the sense of retaliating.Everyone understand this distinction, and this idea in general?
Qinael: <nods.>
Pastor “Chick”: Where do “reproofs” come into play?
Zahakiel: I’ll deal with reproofs in a moment :) That’s actually the next thing to look at. This is why I specify the sense of “retaliation” here.
Pastor “Chick”: Thanks.
Barb: Ok.
Crystle: I have a question. I have never really understood why Yahshua did not respond when Pilate asked him if He had heard the things against him? How is that abuse?
Zahakiel: The abuse came from the ones who were accusing Him, as you read from the passage I posted. “And when He was accused of the chief priests and elders, He answered nothing.”
Crystle: Then why did Yahshua not answer Pilate?
Zahakiel: He had already answered Pilate :)
Dumah: He did. Pilate wasn’t wanting to hear.
Crystle: Oh, I see now. Thanks :)
Zahakiel: Ok. So everyone clear on this idea?
Qinael: Yes.
Barb: Yes.
Crystle: Yes.
Dumah: <nods.>Zahakiel: Okay, now we need to make a few more distinctions before we are perfectly clear on Resistance. There are differences among the ideas of stating your case, reproofs and retaliating. Christ did not “retaliate” but we find this passage when He was being questioned:
“The high priest then asked Yahshua of His disciples, and of His doctrine. Yahshua answered him, ‘I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort, and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them. Behold, they know what I said.’ And when He had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Yahshua with the palm of his hand, saying, ‘Answerest thou the high priest so?’ Yahshua answered him, ‘If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me?’” (John 18:19-23)
Zahakiel: Say when you’ve read this.
Qinael: Finished.
Barb: Done.
Crystle: Finished.
Pastor “Chick”: OK.Zahakiel: He was saying, in effect, “Look at what you are doing. You are not acting correctly.” This is “answering a fool according to his folly,” as the Proverbs tell us, (26:5) and perfectly consistent with the character of a Lamb being led to the slaughter. But, of course, He did not try to hit the soldier back. This is following the advice, “Answer NOT a fool according to his folly (i.e. in the same way), lest thou also be like unto him.” (Pro 26:4)
This is an interesting distinction; and I want everyone understand the difference between resisting evil and speaking your part, and then... between retaliation and defending yourself in a non-vengeful way.
In the first we “resist” evil in ourselves, but not coming from outside. But we can “speak our part” if we are defending ourselves in a Christian manner. What we must avoid is attempting to take an “eye for an eye,” or acting like the very person attacking us. Does everyone see these things?
Dumah: Yeah.
Qinael: <nods.>
Crystle: Yes.
Pastor “Chick”: Yes.Zahakiel: I’ll give a couple of examples to demonstrate this point. The same chapter in James I quoted before says this, “God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.” (James 4:6b) Notice, it doesn’t say “God destroyeth the proud.” Now, there will come a day when the proud are allowed to be destroyed by their own sin; but Yahweh is not up there smiting people who displease Him. No, He seeks to lead them to repentance... (Rom 2:4, 2Pet 3:9) and so must we.
Zahakiel: We may “resist” them in the sense of speaking the truth and seeking to correct them (this is reproof), and we “resist” all evil tendencies in ourselves, but we cannot attack others. If anyone has the right to do it, the Almighty does; but rare indeed are the times when He actively causes the deaths of men. Such occasions are called “strange works,” and with good reason. (Isa 28:21, Job 31:3)
Here’s another example of the same general idea. In the following passage, the apostle Paul is falsely accused of starting a riot and “stirring up trouble” in the Temple. Here is a little bit of what happened:
“And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove. While he answered for himself, ‘Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.’
But Festus, willing to do the Jews a pleasure, answered Paul and said, ‘Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem, and there be judged of these things before me?’
Then said Paul, ‘I stand at Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be judged: to the Jews have I done no wrong, as thou very well knowest. For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die; but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar.” (Acts 25:7-11)
Say when :)
Qinael: Done.
Barb: Done.
Crystle: Finished.Zahakiel: Paul did not need to “defend himself” in a worldly sense. The charges were false; he knew it, and Yah knew it. In the history of the CSDA Church, there are certainly enough stories (pastor can tell you a few) of Yah’s servants simply letting an accuser speak, and seeing the spirit of the attack revealed to everyone. Yet in this case Paul not only “answered for himself” as the passage tells us, but when this failed he appealed to Caesar, meaning he demanded an audience before the high-court of the land, which he had the right to do, being a Roman citizen.
Now, and I will go over this idea again when we discuss “corporate body” resistance at the end of the study, there is a difference between taking someone to court and defending yourself.
There’s someone I have spoken with online a few times, and Rachel knows him as well... He’s a member of the SDA Conference Church, and he actually thinks the Trademark law is a good idea. He’s told me that “the Church should defend itself” against “people like us,” and though I’ve pointed it out to him several times, (through the Bible, and Ellen White’s writings) he has NO idea of the wicked spirit motivating his opinions – even if you ignore who “the Church” truly is.
Dumah: That’s kinda how Gabe feels. He uses this story about Paul to conclude that.
Zahakiel: But what’s even more amazing to me is that, try as I might, I can’t get the fellow to see the difference between taking someone to court and speaking on your own behalf. One of our email exchanges basically consisted of the following:
He asked, “So you think the Conference is evil for taking people to court?”
My reply, “It is obvious from the Bible, the Spirit of Prophecy writings, and plain Christian reasoning, that it is a most evil thing.”
His next question was, “So if you get sued, are you going to hire a lawyer to defend your Church?”
My reply, “If we can find the funding.”
His conclusion, “Then you’re just as bad as the Conference; how can you judge us?”I’m still trying to figure out how he manages to so consistently ignore the examples from the Scriptures... but the nature of sin is that it blinds people; it dulls the mind. Unless one is living the Victory, he’s always going to be a little insane – some more clearly than others. Sin is really insanity, if you get right down to it. What “thinking” person would smoke a cigarette? You get no benefit except fewer years on this wicked earth... but our job is to stay here as long as possible and preach the Word.
Zahakiel: Anyway, not to spin too far a field :) But I wish to demonstrate, with Biblical clarity, the difference between attacking and defending. Paul saw a difference; so did the Savior, so did early Adventists, and so do we. Paul’s action of appealing to Caesar did not violate Christ’s command to “resist not evil” (even in terms of lawsuits) in Matthew 5:40, because Paul did not wish to attack his accusers; he wanted only to ensure that he was honestly heard. Paul understood the true “Sabbath rest,” and to use his example to justify BRINGING a lawsuit (particularly for an Adventist to do so) is evidence of an unstable and weakened mind.
Now, even though we are looking at physical results: not striking back, appealing to the court, etc. we are really looking at the spiritual body. You remember, I said we can apply this principle on three levels. Though we are looking at physical acts, it is still relating to the spiritual body, because these actions spring forth from either having the right or the wrong spirit. Striking back is motivated by the wrong spirit. Seeking true justice, even for one’s self, is motivated by a Christian spirit. “If I have not done evil, why did you strike me?”
There is a “physical body” application to this as well, and this is where Ellen White’s statements about the health message find some relevance. The medical ministry is really the Gospel acted out, not only because we serve and heal others, but we teach them how to “resist” injury and sickness. Tell me, then, what are some of the differences between a Christian view of health, and the world’s?
Qinael: The Christian view is preventative, and treats the cause or root of the problem... the worldly view takes care of it after it has been contracted, and generally only covers the symptoms.
Zahakiel: Right. And that is a big difference :)
The Christian way is preventative; the world’s is reactionary, as Luke said... looking to get rid of the symptoms.
Dumah: Most of the world thinks you can’t control your health; all disease comes form heredity, etc.
Zahakiel: <nods.>
The Christian way is by using the body’s natural tendency to be well to it’s own advantage; the world’s way is to attack the invading microbe and actively destroy it, usually by means of a chemical poison or by cutting out the disease with a scalpel.
Now, it is true that sometimes you have to cut things out, or off... and this is true even in regard to the spiritual body, “if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out,” (Mat 5:29) meaning avoid the occasion to sin. And it is also true regarding the corporate body: “but if [the offender] neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.” (Mat 18:17) The end of “Gospel Order” is disfellowship, when “the souls that commit [abominations] shall be cut off from among their people.” (Lev 18:29)
I’m not going to say we should be opposed to all medical procedures; many are quite beneficial. In general, however, by the use of the 8 Laws of Health, we can both avoid disease and recover quickly if it strikes. You see, we are teaching the body to “resist” evil within itself, but we are not attacking the accuser (in this case, the illness).
Dumah: Building up the immune system.
Zahakiel: Exactly. When the body is healthy, the offending organism dies out naturally; and it is the same with the spiritual body. If you do not resist someone who is attacking you, he will eventually have to give up – or destroy you if he can. In either case, you are the one who has truly won the victory.
Zahakiel: So the principle applies to health as well as individual relationships. Resist the evil by strengthening the body – letting it “speak up” for itself, but you do not need to give an “eye for an eye” by taking antibiotics when you come down with the flu. We don’t need drugs to fight germs :)
You don’t need chemotherapy or surgery when you come down with cancer. We have carrot juice :)
Dumah: Yummy.
Zahakiel: :)
We have now seen the correct application of the principle of “Resistance” on a spiritual level and a physical one. What about corporate? I have already given you an example with the Trademark discussion I had online, so let’s go with that a while.
When people attempt to use worldly means to cure a disease, the possibility exists that they are going to get even sicker. Antibiotics, for example, kill off the “weak” germs, but may leave the stronger ones alive. You end up with a much more vigorous population of bugs. You know that when a Church is persecuted, historically, this is when people line up for baptism. The spirits are awakened, and people realize what is really going on. Similarly, when people use worldly means to avoid sin you get a system of Pharisees, trying to obey God’s laws of freedom by burdensome commandments of their own devising. But if a Church misapplies the principle of resistance on a corporate level, it forms an Image of the Beast.
When the unbelieving leaders of the Jewish nation appealed to Caesar, they did it for an entirely different reason than did Paul. Paul was trying to be heard, and that was an attempt to seek justice. The leaders of the Synagogues were attempting to subvert justice; they wanted to control others, and their aim and spirit was therefore quite the opposite. They were “resisting” Christ’s ministry, yes... but by attacking, not by defending.
They should have been resisting the evil within themselves, then they would have been humbled before Yah, as the verses above showed, and would have found the narrow road to life. The principle works the same way all down through time.
When the Roman Catholic church attempted to “resist” enemies on the OUTSIDE (not the inside) of themselves they armed a bunch of knights and commoners and told them they would get a free pass into Heaven if they would “crush the heathen,” the Jews, and the Muslims. Christianity has had that stain on its record ever since, though the men who participated in those Crusades were not “Christians” in any sense that the Savior intended.
Dumah: It seems that to know the difference between self-defense and offense one needs to understand the spirit of the law of love.
Zahakiel: That’s very true.
A more modern example... When the Sundaykeeping Protestants in North America of the 1800s enacted those blue laws, and began to put Sabbathkeepers in prison, confiscating their property and imposing fines, they did it because they said, “America is a Christian nation.” They reasoned that if they could establish a universal day and system of worship (Sunday) then there would be peace. Violence and crimes would grow more rare, (because church-goers are nice people) and the quality of life would increase. They did not understand the principle of Resistance.
Those results they wanted are good goals, and we should work toward them... but we must teach people to resist the evil in themselves (by the Gospel), not to beat each other into obedience. And, of course, we can’t break the Law of God in the process.
Nowadays, we have a new manifestation of this Image to the Beast to deal with: the Trademark lawsuits.
The Bible tells us, “be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” (Matthew 10:16) Remember that verse; an obedient, sanctified Christian is as wise as a serpent, but as harmless as a dove.
But I want you to see how completely the General Conference of SDAs, and all these other ecclesiastical organizations that I mentioned before, have reversed this idea... and I mean perfectly reversed it. The Bible says that when Israel went to the worldly nations for help, it became... well, you may read it for yourself: “Ephraim also is like a silly dove without heart: they call to Egypt, they go to Assyria.” (Hosea 7:11)
Second, the Bible says that the second beast of Revelation, the U.S. government with which the GC SDA church has committed adultery, “had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.” (Rev 13:11) We know that the “dragon” there is “the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan.” (Rev 20:2)
More directly, Christ called those who were opposing Him, and who were about to slay Him using the Roman government’s authority, “Ye serpents! Ye generation of vipers! How can ye escape the damnation of hell?” (Mat 23:33)
So then, while Christ tells His followers to be “wise as serpents, and harmless as doves,” organizations that go to the world for their power, and use it to attack others, are “wise as doves, and harmless as serpents!”
Zahakiel: If you misunderstand the principle of Resistance as a corporate body, you end up doing, in the words of Mrs. White, “the very thing” that Yah has commanded you not to do.
You may have noticed, when you read Ellen White’s works, that this statement does NOT appear: “The Lord has a people, a chosen people, His church, to be His own, His own fortress, which the United States government protects in a sin-stricken, revolted world.”
No, what you find is the correct quote: “The Lord has a people, a chosen people, His church, to be His own, His own fortress, which He holds in a sin-stricken, revolted world.” [In Heavenly Places, page 284 – emphasis mine]
How does the Church – the true Church of Yahshua – resist evil? By submitting itself to Yahweh, and making sure (by use of Gospel order) that it is working properly internally as a Body. It does NOT resist evil by going against that order, or by using civil power or personal force to get its way. The two principles are entirely opposites, and we must learn that there is a time and a place to resist... but more importantly, that there is a MANNER in which Christians resist evil.
It begins by submitting yourself, in humility, to the will of the Almighty.
This true resistance works against spiritual evil, biological evil, and corporate evil. It is an eternal principle, “the Gospel in illustration,” and one by which we will be blessed more and more as we grow into a mature understanding of what it all means.
This was not, perhaps, our longest study, but I believe the matters examined here are vital to our understanding of a great deal of things. So then, does anyone have any questions before we close with a prayer?
Dumah: Sounds good.
Crystle: No, and I really liked this study!
Barb: No questions here.Zahakiel: All right. Pastor, will you please give us a closing prayer?
Pastor “Chick”: Dear Father in Heaven...
We thank you for the principle of “resistance” in light of the Gospel. We thank you for the “balance” of “resistance” and “submission”... We are truly humbled each time we “see” this “balance” worked out in the perfect and sinless life of our Savior. Today, may we be re-committed to this experience as we continue “the walk of victory” by the “faith of YAHshua.”
Dismiss this meeting, leaving us with your love, peace, and mercy... In YAHshua’s holy name,
AMEN.Zahakiel: Amen :)
Barb: Amen.
Qinael: Amen.
Crystle: Amen.
Dumah: Amen.Zahakiel: Thank you all for coming out. I want you to know that this topic really blessed me as I was researching it... and I hope you will continue to meditate on it, because there is a lot there that can’t be covered in a single sitting.
I’ll be around if anyone has further thoughts and questions... and I will try to have the transcript ready by the close of the day :)
