The Truth in Print Vol. 22 Issue 9, Oct. 2016
A Publication of the Valley church of Christ,
2375 W. 8th Street, Yuma, AZ 85364 (928-782-5058)
Website
Address ~ http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com
People who reason if I don’t know then I won’t
be held accountable — forget “Sin.”
You can close your
Bible right now preferring ignorance, never open it again, and you will still
be lost because what people tend to forget about is that Sin is a violation of
God’s law (cf. 2 Thes. 1:6-9). The violation of God’s
law has always existed with “mankind” — spiritual death being the penalty
without forgiveness.
During that period
often referred to as the Patriarchal Period — from the Creation to Moses — “spiritual”
death is said to have reigned from Adam until Moses, even after those who had
not sinned in the likeness of Adam’s sin (Cf. Rom. 5:12-14).
It also true that
while the Jews were under the Old Testament given only to them (De. 5:1-5f) —
the Gentiles were still held accountable to God being under His law given to
them. The law God gave to the Gentiles was never written, as was the Jew’s
which was recorded in the Old Testament.
Today those who are
not Christians, Jews and Gentiles who makeup all of mankind, are held
accountable to Christ’s law, the New Testament which is for all men (Mk.
16:15-16; Rom. 1:16-17).
Bear in mind that
“all have sinned” as Paul stated in Rom. 3:23; the wages of sin is spiritual
death (Rom. 6:23). Paul is showing this
is also true of the Gospel Age with “all” including those not yet Christians —
among Jews and Gentiles. There is no sin without there being a violation of
God’s law —for sin is defined as the transgression of God’s law (I Jo. 3:7).
Sinners in need of salvation cannot be judged as sinners unless they have
transgressed God’s law (Rom. 3:9). It is the Gospel, the New Testament, that is
the power of God unto salvation today for all men — Jews and Gentiles (Mk.
16:15-16; Rom. 1:16-17; 6:23). The law of God that all men transgress today is
the New Testament, the Gospel (I Tim. 1:10; 1 Tim. 4:3-4). What too many don’t
realize as they read the New Testament is that “the faith” (Jude 3) is
synonymous with “the Gospel” and these with “sound doctrine” that contains
God’s “Do’s” and “Do Not's” for all men.
People who
reason that you don’t know my “intent” –
I’m sincere in what I do – often also forget “Sin.”
Here is the definition of sin: 1Jn
3:4 “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth
also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” There is nothing in
it that remotely suggests that “sincerity” has anything to do with whether or
not a thing is the Truth according to God’s law. Consider the following:
1. The Gospel is the
power of God unto salvation for all men everywhere (Rom. 1:16-17).
2. Faith comes by hearing
God’s word (Rom. 10:17); you can know the truth that saves (Jo. 8:32).
3. Prov. 14:12 is a
useful verse to point out false standards of authority men will use in their
own religion, i.e. feelings and conscience (cf. Acts 23:1, 26:9.
4. 2Ti. 1:13 Hold fast the
form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in
Christ Jesus.
People are led
to believe if you can’t prove my “intent” then you must accept my actions.
Here one must ask
what ignorance has to do with whether or not a thing is true according to God’s
law, the New Testament? A transgression of His law
though one be ignorant is still a sin. This is quickly proven by comparing “If
you sin unintentionally…” (Nu. 15:22) with “And if a person sins
unintentionally…” (Nu. 15:27). The first
applied to the congregation; the second to just individuals. Now consider the
sacrifices that must be offered for such sins (Nu. 15:25, 27).
Error that
stems from ignorance never leads another or others in the right way.
For every high
priest under the Old Covenant it was true that each could have compassion on
the ignorant and going astray, “since he himself is also subject to weakness”
(Heb. 5:1-2). Because of his own sins he was required “as for the people, so
also for himself, to offer sacrifices for sins.” This included his own sins
done in ignorance (Nu. 15:27-29). But “willful sin” was punishable by death
(Nu. 15:30-31). Overriding these sins is man’s accountability: Heb. 4:13 “And
there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open
to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account.” God always knows one’s
intent.
Here are
two important applications:
1. People will lie to
cover their intent - Eph. 4:14 “That
we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with
every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness,
whereby they lie in wait to deceive;”
2. Your protection is
that you can know false prophets by their fruits / works (Matt. 7:15-16). Some
of which are words / teaching (cf. v. 22 “prophesied” in this context); the import of Christ’s teaching is such are "false”
(known to be) “prophets” (by their words). So much for he is really sincere
therefore let’s not call him a false teacher! Many verses condemn teaching
false doctrines in the name of Christ: Matt. 7:15, Lk.
6:26, 2 Pet. 2:1, I Jo. 4:1, etc.
To
“ignore” does not imply sincerity but the opposite.
“Ignore” — “To refuse to pay attention to;
disregard” (Am. Heritage Dict.). Synonyms: neglect, blink (at or away),
discount, disregard, fail, forget, omit, overlook, overpass, slight – rel.
avoid, evade.
“Careless: — 1. Not taking sufficient care; negligent.
2. Marked by or resulting from a lack of forethought or thoroughness: a
careless mistake (Am. Heritage Dict.). What did Hillary Clinton ignore?
What did David “neglect”
to do with the Ark in 2 Sam. 6? They made the mistake of putting the Ark on a
new cart. The Ark was at the house of Abinadab in Gibeah for some 20 years (I Sam. 7:1-2) — it is easy to
neglect regulations and think you are pleasing God when you are not! (2
Sam. 6:5). God struck Uzzah dead for his error (2
Sam. 6:6-7) —- he was the son of Abinadab and obviously they never bothered to learn what
Law said about moving the Ark — though it was in his father's house for 20
years. Good intentions did not work here; God is angry when we leave what He
says to do out of the picture. David is angry and afraid and leaves the Ark
in the house Obededom three months (2 Sam. 6:11).
This neglect
in not moving the Ark according to the Law is corrected as preparations are
made to move the Ark again (I Chr. 15). A fuller account of David’s caution
this time is recorded — 1Ch 15:15 “The sons of the Levites carried the
ark of God on their shoulders with the poles thereon, as Moses had commanded
according to the word of the LORD” (Statutes in the Law: Ex. 25:14; Nu. 4:15,
7:9 sons of Kohath carried).
*Consider now some recent political history
in the following article for an illustration of neglect.
“Comey's legal
error undermines law enforcement with 'Clinton Defense’ ” By Ron Sievert, contributor” August 18, 2016.
“As I read the
recent comments of FBI Director James Comey regarding
his recommendation not to pursue criminal charges against Hillary Clinton
over the use of a private email server, I naturally wondered why an
investigator was making final judgments on the interpretation of the law when
that function has always been assigned first to the Department of Justice and
U.S. Attorney.
In doing so, he
ignored one statute (18 USC 793 (f) related to gross negligence … — apparently
disregarded the knowing destruction of government documents, and then, perhaps
of equal legal concern, he added the wrong mental state to the statute
prohibiting knowing removal of classified documents with intent to retain them
at an unauthorized location. (18 USC 1924).”
*Ron Sievert is a Professor at the Bush School of Government and Adjunct
Professor at the University of Texas School of Law.
Headings below are mine.
What Comey required
“Specifically he
required that the government prove “willfulness” or knowing violation of a
specific law under 1924 before he would proceed against the improper
removal of thousands of classified documents to her private Blackberry and
server.”
Ignorance
of the law is not a defense
“Ignorance of the
language of the actual statutes was thus a defense. In his congressional
hearing he seemed to attribute this to DOJ. Although I have no doubt that some
in DOJ, given the Department’s reputation for caution, might have gone
overboard and asked for this mental state, it is not the law and was never
applied that way in my 25 years as a federal prosecutor with the exception of
tax, export and currency prosecutions.
The Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals 2016 pattern Jury Charge states that the use of the word
“willfulness” in indictments when not required by the actual statute or case
law “should be discouraged.” 18 USC 1924 and associated case law, as with most
federal statutes, does not require willfulness. That is, ignorance of the law,
as most people know, is not a defense.”
It is
enough that you acted with knowledge and intent
“It is enough that
you acted with knowledge and intent. Of course it certainly helps with the jury
if the defendant knew they were doing something wrong.
But as Mrs. Clinton
had been briefed on procedures for handling classified documents and government
records and ignored those briefings, and as she repeatedly lied publicly to
cover her actions, there was plenty of evidence to convince a jury that she
knew she was acting improperly. That would be enough for most “reasonable
prosecutors.””
What about
the next time?
“Why is this
important? Well the next time someone makes a false statement to a bank, or
someone they are soliciting by mail, or by email, or a gun dealer, or saws off
a gun barrel or converts a single fire to an automatic, uses a weapon in
technical violation of myriad laws and regulations, inappropriately effects
interstate commerce in countless ways or commits anyone of a host of other
major white collar federal crimes, remember that the logical defense will now
be, “Even if I suspected it was probably wrong, I did not know I was violating
a specific federal law.“
As was the case with
Hillary, because you cannot establish that I 'willfully' violated a known
federal law, you cannot proceed." Proving this mental state would
obviously be almost an impossible burden in many cases.”
Others
tried unsuccessfully the same defense
The author says he
writes as one who battled and won in the courts against wealthy bank, wire and
mail fraud defendants in the 1980s and 1990s who tried unsuccessfully to raise
as a legal defense that in committing their wrongful acts they did not know
they were violating a specific federal law.
“Director Comey has revitalized that old argument and probably
created a new one. By doing so has placed a new burden on federal prosecutors.
Defense attorneys will now not just privately bemoan the fact that their client
did not have Clinton privileges, but publicly argue that their client had never
read and understood the statute under which they have been charged by the
government.
They could actually
start winning in federal court, but the rest of us will still never succeed
arguing before the local JP that we actually did not read the stop or speed
limit sign or never understood the nuances of the state's traffic regulations
and thus never “willfully” violated the law.” <B.L.
Remember when you took the Drivers Test!
———————
To
“ignore” doesn’t imply sincerity but the opposite — this is a large part of
what contributes to “ignorance” in our churches and among brethren
individually.
Ignore: “To refuse to pay attention to; disregard” (Am.
Heritage Dict.).
Think of
the damage done to the enforcement and practice of God’s law.
1. It has to start right in
class with silly or unscriptural statements that are made. Don’t let them
“pass” out of fear of offending someone.
2. One brother here
recently pointed to one these as “There’s no such thing as a wrong answer.” Yes
there is! Ignorant statements must be corrected not ignored. You yourself can
be put to shame when you don’t have the right answer, 2 Tim. 2:15.
3. He mentioned another:
“There’s no such thing as a foolish question.” Wrong again, read Paul’s answer
to “How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?” in I Cor.
15:35-36. He said “Foolish one, what you sow is not made alive unless it dies.”
4. If you need a good way
to tell members they themselves are responsible for heading off apostasy then
give them 2 Tim. 4:1-4. Paul put the onus on the members themselves!
5. Just because someone
is referred to as one of “our” brotherhood’s preachers that doesn’t mean you
can ignore false doctrine if he teaches such.
6. A fellow preacher recently
told me: “The time is coming, and may have already arrived, when a Godly
preacher who stands for the truth will not be welcome in any of the so called
"churches of Christ". Those congregations who stand fast for the
truth are dwindling and disappearing.” I know that one of the greatest concerns
of elderly preachers is that very thing — Christians who move into the
communities look for the other kind of church.
7. You can tell how
ignorant a church is by the elders and men who “outlaw” or “ignore” having
teaching on Brotherhood Issues — one of main being Marriage, Divorce and
Remarriage.
8. Obviously Corinth’s
pride was not sincerity when they ignored discipline in I Cor. 5. Moreover, the
individuals who fall away “know” they are wrong but they “ignore” their fallen
state. There is a difference in knowing you are wrong and ignoring your own
living in sin.
9. In I Cor. 11:19 where
Paul said there must also be heresies among you — he means that the results of
unscriptural thinking and actions often go further and develop into heresies —
"factions" (heresies or sects - is a choice firmly established — a
body of men following their own tenets — brethren can be in the wrong “place”
spiritually before they ever walk out with their false beliefs). Moreover, brethren’s human organizations they
have formed for worship, evangelism and benevolence to saints are like the
Pharisees’ sect in Acts 15:5; the Sadducees in Acts 5:17). They are sects!
To learn more call, visit or visit our website at:
http://yumavalleychurchofchrist.com