Civil Government: Power, Nations, and Constitutional Order: War in the Gates

The Bible and Law Enforcement - Part 1

Transcript: AI Transcript

Professor: John Weaver

Subject: Civil Government

Genre: Sermon

Dictation Name:

Date: 2021-01-10

Synopsis: John Weaver introduces a series on the Bible and law enforcement by examining 1 Samuel 22, where King Saul orders the murder of 85 priests and the destruction of Nob. He argues that the fundamental issue is whether society is governed by God's law (theonomy) or man's law (autonomy), and that all societies require some law system. Using Saul's unlawful command and the soldiers' refusal, Weaver teaches that no one is obligated to obey orders that violate God's law or the U.S. Constitution, and that Christians must be knowledgeable and belligerent in defending their rights.

[John Weaver] I want you to open your Bibles, if you would please, to 1 Samuel, chapter 22. 1 Samuel, chapter 22. 1 Samuel 22, we're going to be reading verses 6 through 20. This is the first message in a short three part series. The title of the message is The Bible and law enforcement. I will explain just momentarily, but let's read the Scripture. 1 Samuel 22, beginning there with verse 6, and we'll read through verse 20.

[John Weaver] When Saul heard that David was discovered, and the men that were with him Now Saul abode in Gibeah under a tree in Ramah, having a spear in his hand, and all of his servants were standing about him. Then Saul said unto his servants that stood about him, Here now, you Benjamites, will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and vineyards and make all of you captains of thousands and captains of hundreds, that all of you have conspired against me? And there is none that showeth me that my son hath made a league with the son of Jesse. And there is none of you that is sorry for me, or showeth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me to lie in wait, as at this day.' Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul, and said, I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, to Himalek, the son of Ahithah.

[John Weaver] And he inquired of the Lord for him, and gave him vittles. and gave him the sword of Goliath, the Philistine. Then the king sent to call Ahimelech the priest, the son of Hithub, and all his father's house, the priests that were in Nob, and they came, all of them, to the king. And Saul said, Here now thou son of Hithub. And he answered, Here I am, my lord. And Saul said unto him, Why have you conspired against me that Thou and the son of Jesse, in that thou hast given him bread and a sword, and hast inquired of God for him, that he should rise against me to lie in wait as at this day. Then Ahimelech answered the king and said, And who is so faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son-in-law, and goeth at thy bidding and is honorable in thine house? Did I then begin to inquire of God for him?

[John Weaver] Be it far from me. Let not the king impute anything unto his servant, nor to all the house of my father. For thy servant do nothing of all this, less or more. And the king said, Thou shalt surely die, Hemelech, thou and all thy father's house. And the king said unto the footman that stood about him, Turn and slay the priest of the Lord, because their hand is also with David, and because they knew when he fled and did not show it me. But the servants of the king would not put forth their hand to fall upon the priest of the Lord. Then the king said to Doeg, Turn now and fall upon the priest And Doeg the Edomite turned, and he fell upon the priest, and stole that day four score and five persons that did wear linen ephod.

[John Weaver] And Nob the city of the priest, smote he with the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, oxen, nasses, and sheep with the edge of the sword. And one of the sons of Ahimelech, the son of Ahitab, named Abiathar, escaped and fled after David. Some time ago, I was recently asked a question by a good friend. The question was, did I have any sermons specifically on the Bible and law enforcement? And my response at that time was, no, I did not have any with the exception of the messages I had preached on the kinsman, redeemer, avenger and also the cities of refuge. Well, his question sparked my thinking. And some time ago, probably two to three months ago, I finished these messages.

[John Weaver] But I delayed in preaching them. And there were many other messages I've developed since then, I thought that the Lord was leading me to preach. But today, looking around and seeing all of the lawlessness that is prevailing, Even among our politicians, I thought, well, now would be the time that these messages need to be taught. I also sent my friend a quote, which I've used before. And I want to use it again by way of introduction. The quote is from Robert Winthrop, who was the U.S.

[John Weaver] Speaker of the House in 1849. And here's what he said. All societies of men must be governed in some way or the other. The less they have a stringent state government, the more they must have of individual self-government. The less they rely on public law or physical force, the more they must rely on private and moral restraint. Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or a power without them, either by the word of God or by the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet. It may do for other countries and other governments to talk about the state supporting religion. Here, under our own free institution, It is religion or Christianity which must support the state, that is, in upholding biblical law.

[John Weaver] But notice what he said. Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or a power without them, either by the Word of God or the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet. Thankfully, when my friend sent this question to me, I was reading through 1 and 2 Samuel. And as I came upon 1 Samuel chapter 22, I thought, well, here is where I should begin. Because when you hear the subject, the Bible and law enforcement, the first question that should pop into your mind is, whose law is to be enforced. There's a vast difference between the law of a king or the law of man and the law of God.

[John Weaver] The issue is, which I've stated previously, between theonomy, which is God's law, and autonomy, which is man's law. You remember I told you the Greek word autos means self, nomos means law. So autonomy just refers to self-law or the law of man. It doesn't matter if some individual is trying to determine the law for himself or if he's following some humanistic organization, it is still an autonomous law. And autonomy is always in contradiction to and in violation of the law of God. Now, I've told you before, I'm going to reiterate right now, a principle that you should grasp, and that is a king rules by his law. And that is true whether it is a literal, physical king, or whether it is a state government, or a federal government, or the sovereign God of heaven and earth. Because the law is nothing more than an expression of the rule and the will of the ruler. In other words, it is an expression of their control and of their dominion.

[John Weaver] Now, I understand that we are supposed to have in this country what is known as a representative government. But I can assure you that that phrase is totally outdated and we've not had any such representation in a number of years. That concept is basically gone. And to understand that, all you have to do is witness the absolute minor differences between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

[John Weaver] Now, it is true that the Democrats are far more open and defiant and demanding that their agenda be adopted by everyone. If you understand that, you can also understand why the Democrats, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, declared Republicans as the enemies of the state. So in her eyes, the state was supreme and in her eyes, She was the state. She had the power. She was the Speaker of the House. And anyone who did not support her position or her agenda happened to be an enemy of the state. Now, we understand, or we should understand, that when you change rulers, there's also a change in law.

[John Weaver] Well, all you have to do is witness what was happening under Obama and what was happening under Trump. may not have been a very, very vast difference, but there was certainly a difference. But if you will turn back in your Bibles to 1 Samuel 8, I referred to this passage last week, only a couple of verses, but this time I want to read the entire 21 verses beginning with verse 7 through verse 21. I want you to look at this because in this passage, Israel, was demanding a man as king. And in doing so, they were rejecting God, but they were not only rejecting God, they were also rejecting God's law. And consequently, when they got a king, they're now going to be brought under a different law. For instance, look in 1 Samuel 8, beginning there with verse 7. And the Lord said unto Samuel, hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee. For they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.

[John Weaver] According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even unto this day wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. Now therefore hearken unto their voice, Howbeit, yet protest solidly unto them and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them. So you want a different king than God? Fine.

[John Weaver] Here is an expression of his law. Watch. And Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people that ask of him a king. And he said, this will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you. He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen, and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties, and will set them to ear his ground, and reap his harvest, and make his instruments of war, and his instruments of his chariots." And He will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And He will take your fields, and your best vineyards, and your oliveyards, and the best of them, and give them to His servants. And He will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to His officers, and to His servants. And He will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodly young men, and your asses, and put them to His work.

[John Weaver] And he will take the tenth of your sheep, and you shall be his servants. And you shall cry out in that day because of your king which you shall have chosen you, and the Lord will not hear you in that day." Nevertheless, the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said, Nay, but we will have a king over us. And so they basically rejected God and His law and chose man and man's law. If you look in 1 Samuel chapter 12 and verse 12, Samuel reiterates the fact that they have rejected God as king. 1 Samuel 12 and verse 12, he said, And when you saw Nahash the king of the children of Ammon came against you, You said unto me, Nay, but a king shall reign over us when the Lord your God was your king." So you cannot understand 1 Samuel chapter 8 unless you understand it as a transition from one law structure to another law structure. So when you change rulers, you basically change law structures, or at least that's the way it was.

[John Weaver] In the Bible, let me give you another illustration. If you will turn in your Bibles to Second Kings chapter 17. Second Kings chapter 17. And notice if you would be getting there with verse 7. Second Kings 17, verse 7. Here's the same principle. For so it was that the children of Israel had sinned against the Lord, their God.

[John Weaver] Now you have to ask your question. How did they sin against the Lord, their God? Here it is, which had brought them up out of the land of Egypt from under the hand of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and feared other gods. Now watch. They sinned against God by fearing other gods. So here's another question. How do we know that they feared other gods? Well, here it is in verse 8.

[John Weaver] And walk in the statutes, that is, the laws of the heathen. whom the LORD cast out from before the children of Israel, and of the kings of Israel which they had made. And the children of Israel did secretly those things that were not right against the LORD their God, and they built them high places in their cities, from the tower of the watchman to the fence city. So they sinned against God, by fearing other gods, and the reason they, it is evidence they feared other gods, they walked in the statutes, they walked in the laws of the other gods.

[John Weaver] So when you trade rulers, you basically trade law systems as well. Now what they began doing secretly in verse 9, if you read the rest of 2 Kings 17, they did it openly and brazenly as well. So let me spell it out for you. When one does not really, truly fear the Lord God, he will not walk in His law. If you truly, genuinely fear the Lord God of heaven and earth, you will obey and you will walk in His law. Now, here's another truth. Every individual, every family, every church, every society is going to have some type of law structure. You cannot live apart from a law structure. It may be an autonomous law system, it may be a humanistic law system, it may be a law system from the state or from the feds, but it will be a law system. You cannot live apart from law. All societies must be governed by some form of law. For instance, each one of us have heard the adage or the words, the law of the jungle.

[John Weaver] We've heard mob law. We've also heard gang law and vigilante law. The point I'm trying to make is, I don't care how corrupt, how depraved, how sinful, how wicked, how rebellious men are. There has to be some law system. And even among thieves, there's an honor among thieves. When I say that, there's a simple system that they follow. And you get thrown in prison. There's a system there in prison. It is a law system.

[John Weaver] It doesn't have to be with the warden. It doesn't have to be with the guards. It is there established by the prisoners themselves. So when you reject God's law, the only alternative is man's law. And inevitably, when you have man's law, you're going to either descend into anarchy or tyranny.

[John Weaver] Now, 1 Samuel chapter 22 is a good illustration of this. Now, before I get to 1 Samuel 22, let me emphasize the fact that Saul is the king of Israel. And Saul has been rejected by God because of his rebellion against God. If you'll look in your Bibles to 1 Samuel chapter 15, God had set Saul on a mission, and that mission was that he was to slay utterly the Amalekites and everything that they had.

[John Weaver] Well, now, you know the story. The Bible says that he spared Agag, the king of the Amalekites, and the best of the oxen and the best of the sheep. And when Samuel came to see Saul, Saul said, Blessed be thou, the Lord. I performed all the words of the Lord. And about that time, something went back. Samuel said, Saul, if you obey God, what made the blading of the sheep and the low and the oxen in mine ear? If you'd obeyed God, everything would be dead. Saul said, But the people spared the best of the sheep and the best of the oxen, that they might sacrifice them to God. And that's when Samuel said, Hath the Lord as great delight in sacrifice and offering, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to hearken is better than sacrifice, and to obey is better than that of rams. And God rejected Saul. Look at it. 1 Samuel 15 at verses 10 and 11. Then came the word of the Lord and Samuel saying, It repenteth me that I've set up Saul to be king, for he is turned back from following me and hath not performed my commandments.

[John Weaver] And it grieved Samuel and he cried unto the Lord all night. Now, note, if you would. God says Saul has turned back from following me. How can we tell? How do we know that Saul turned back? Well, God says, here's the evidence. He has not kept my commandments. It's just that simple. God rejected him. Now skip down to verse 26 through 28, because Saul is trying to get Samuel to worship with him. And verse 26 of 1 Samuel 15, And Samuel said unto Saul, I will not return with thee, for thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, And the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel. And as Samuel turned about to go away, he, Saul, laid hold upon the skirt of his, Samuel's, mantle, and it rent. And Samuel said unto him, The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbor of thine that is better than thyself. Now, the interesting thing is, God has rejected Saul because of his rebellion.

[John Weaver] But here's an interesting thing. Although Saul was rejected by God and basically condemned by God, God did not immediately smite or destroy King Saul. Did you know that King Saul reigned 40 years? After this rejection, all of his reign was basically anarchy and tyranny. So let me just mention this again. And it's important that you understand in verse 10, when he said this, listen carefully, he said, or verse 11, it repented me that I've set up Saul to be king, for he is turned back from following me and he hath not kept my commandments. How do we know that Saul turned back? And the answer is he did not keep God's commandments.

[John Weaver] One of the problems that we've had and do have in this country still is that most people generally believe anything that they hear. And when I say that, especially if someone professes to be a Christian, I just, I just listened to a little broadcast and I think I read it as well. But the man was saying that 86 percent of the Congress of the United States professes to be Christian. Eighty six percent. If we had 86 percent of Congress that were real, genuine Christians, we would not be in the mess that we're in. The problem is this. We believe a profession of everyone, regardless of their lives. And what did God say? God said, by their fruits, you shall know them. Professions are cheap. They are absolutely worthless unless your profession is backed up by obedience. That profession is absolutely worthless, null and void.

[John Weaver] Now, let me tell you something about King Saul. He was the king. So that means he was the chief law enforcement officer in Israel. The Bible says in the book of Ecclesiastes chapter 8 and verse 4, where the word of the king is, there is power. And whom they say of him, what doest thou? Well, a lot of kings used to claim to rule by divine right that God had established them in what they said is law. I hope you understand. That's all. One of the Latin phrases that was used for many, many years. Was Rex Lex. The king is law. Samuel Rutherford wrote the book entitled Lex Rex, the law is king. In other words, he's proving that the king is just as much to be in subjection and submission to the law of God as anyone else is.

[John Weaver] Now, what is song done? And what is Saul doing at this point? When you get to 1 Samuel chapter 22, Saul has been mercilessly chasing David, endeavoring to murder him. Now David was totally and completely innocent. He was not guilty of anything that was worthy of death. And yet Saul was pursuing him relentlessly in order that he might destroy David. So, you want to know, why did Saul want to kill David? Look in your Bibles to 1 Samuel chapter 20, and let's begin there with verse 30. Look what Saul said to Jonathan and what he tried to do. Jonathan is his son. Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan. And he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse, rebellious woman, Do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness? For as long as the son of Jesse liveth upon the ground, thou shalt not be established, nor thy kingdom.

[John Weaver] Wherefore now send and fetch him unto me, for he shall surely die.' And Jonathan answered Saul his father, and said unto him, Wherefore shall he be slain? What hath he done? And Saul cast a javelin at him to smite him, whereby Jonathan knew it was the determinant of his father to slay David. So the reason Saul wanted David dead was to keep his kingdom going, to establish Jonathan in his stead. He wanted to have a lineage. That is not what is going to happen because he knew that in order for Jonathan to be king, he had to slay David.

[John Weaver] He had to murder him. When you get to 1 Samuel chapter 22, Saul has tried to murder David. But David is owned to him and he flees in the night and he ends up at Nob where Ahimelech is the priest, and he gets some food for the few men with him as well as himself, and he also gets the sword of Goliath. So now, when you get to chapter 22, David had escaped into the cave of Adullam, but the prophet told him, don't stay there. Get out, go. And so David went back to Judah. Now, watch this. Let's pick it up again in 1 Samuel 22 and verse 6. When Saul heard that David was discovered, that is, he's back in the land of Judah. Remember, the Benjamites and the Judahites were in the same portion of the land.

[John Weaver] The two tribes dwelt together. OK, so So Saul is in Gibeah under a tree in Ramah, having his spear in his hand, and all his servants were standing around about him. And Saul said unto his servants that stood about him, Here now, you Benjamites, will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and vineyards and make you all captains of thousands and captains of hundreds, that all of you have conspired against me? And there is none that showeth me that my son hath made a league or a covenant with the son of Jesse. And there is none of you that is sorry for me, or showeth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me to lie in wait, as at this day." Now, let me point out the fact that number one, Saul probably already knew that Jonathan and David had entered into a covenant together. Secondly, I want to point out that he's telling his men, look, If David gets on the throne, he's not going to make every one of you a captain of a thousand or captain of a hundred or captain of fifty.

[John Weaver] He's not going to give you lands and fields. He's not going to give you 40 acres and a mule. He's just not going to do it. No, no, no. He's not going to do one thing for you. Look at what I've done. This is what he's saying. You're here now. Look what I've given you. Look what I've done for you. And then he goes into this little rant.

[John Weaver] He said, why is it? Did all of you conspire against me?" Listen, and none of you are sorry for me. You should have told me. But, you know, his heart is broken. His men didn't tell him. You know, come on. Here's a man that is supposed to be a king trying to rely upon the pity of others, and yet, Here he is. He says, why didn't you tell me?

[John Weaver] Well, no one had anything to answer until you get to verse nine. Watch this. Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was sent over the servants of Saul. He was a herdsman. He was the chief herdsman, by the way. Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the surface of Saul, and said, I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, to Ahimelech, the son of Ahitab. And he, that is Ahimelech, inquired of the Lord for him, and gave him vittles, and gave him the sword of Goliath the Philistine. Hmm. Wow. Now, Doeg has just embellished and lied to Saul about what happened in 1 Samuel chapter 21. It is true that Ahimelech gave David and the few men with him some bread. It is true that he gave the sword of Goliath to David. It is false that he inquired of the Lord for David. Even Ahimelech denied doing that. Look in your Bibles. The first Samuel chapter 22 had verses 14 and 15. Then Ahimelech answered the king and said, And who is so faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son-in-law, and goeth it by bidding and is honorable in thine house?

[John Weaver] Did I then begin to inquire of God for him? Be it far from me. Let not the king impute anything into his servant, nor to all the house of my father, for thy servant knew nothing of all this, less or more."

[John Weaver] Now, note if you would, even a Himalayan says, look, David's your son-in-law. Everyone knows how honorable David is. And by the way, David did lie to a Himalayan. Especially when he asked for the sword of Goliath. And Himalaya said, well, where's your sword? Well, he said, I'm on a secret mission from the king, and it required haste. I just left mine at the house. Let me have this one. Yeah. So Himalaya was totally innocent.

[John Weaver] He didn't have any idea what was going on. And like he said, David was honorable in all of his house. Let me tell you something about Doeg. Doeg was a malicious, vicious, ambitious and evil man who is desirous of nothing but promotion. I want you to understand a principle. I believe it's being enunciated here. One that I've told you before, and that is this. You do not owe the truth to someone who's going to abuse the truth. Do you realize if Doeg had kept his mouth shut, it would have saved the lives of an awful lot of people.

[John Weaver] They would not have died. All Saul was doing was having a pity party. He didn't know anything until Doeg stepped forward. By the way, if you want to find out what happened to Doeg, you need to read Psalm 52. Because Psalm 52 is a psalm written by David specifically against Doeg and his lying, vicious tongue. Now, there is another principle that we need to understand, and that is this.

[John Weaver] A lie that is joined to the truth becomes an untruth. Lies are untruths in and of themselves. And when you take an untruth and you join it to truth, Truth then becomes a distortion and a misrepresentation of the facts. And in light of this distortion, when Doeg said, I saw him personally inquire of God for David and give him bread and give him a sword, wow, that led to verse 17, look at it, or verse, yeah, verse 11 it is, look at it, in verse 11.

[John Weaver] Then the king sent to call Ahimelech the priest, the son of Ahitab, and all his father's house. The priests were in Nob, and they came, all of them, to the king.

[John Weaver] Now watch this, he called, he called. All these priests came, there were 85 of them. And Saul asks Himelech, why did you do this? And Himelech denies doing anything. David's your son-in-law. He's an honorable man. Yeah, I gave him food. I gave him the sword. By the way, the sword was his. It belonged to David. He killed Goliath. He took it from Goliath. So Saul then looks at his soldiers.

[John Weaver] Look at it in verse 17. And the king said unto the footman that stood about him, Turn and slay the priest of the Lord, because they are a hand also is of David, and because they knew when he fled and did not show it unto me. But the servants of the king, that is the soldiers, would not put forth their hand to fall upon the priests of the Lord. The soldiers, were far better men than their commander.

[John Weaver] They refused to obey an unlawful order. They refused to murder innocent people just because the king gave them a command to do so.

[John Weaver] Now, let me make a statement. No soldier, no law enforcement officer, is obligated to obey an unlawful order. What is an unlawful order? Let me answer it in two ways. First of all, an unlawful order is one that violates the law of God. God isn't only king and judge and lawgiver. One of the titles given for Him in the Bible is the Lord God of hosts. The word host means armies. He is the Lord God of the armies. So God is not only judge and lawgiver and king, He is the commander-in-chief. He is the one who is on top. No one has the right to violate God's law. No one has the right to murder or steal or commit adultery. There is no such thing as a right to sin. So an unlawful order, first and foremost, would be that which would violate God's law.

[John Weaver] Let me point something else out. Even if Ahimelech did what Saul charged him with, which was not a sin and was not a crime, But even if he did that, and if he was guilty of what Saul thought was treason, only him elect should have died, not the other 84 priests. God says in Ezekiel 18 verse 20, the soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son.

[John Weaver] The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. So God says the soul that sinneth, he shall die. So even if Ahimelech was guilty, he would have been the only one that should have been killed. So, an unlawful order first and foremost is an order or command that is contrary to the law of God. Secondly, an unlawful order is an order that is contrary to the Constitution of the United States. Whether you like the Constitution or not, agree with the Constitution or not is immaterial right now. But Article 6 Paragraph 2 says that this Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land. The President of the United States is not the supreme law of the land. Congress is not the supreme law of the land. The judicial officers are not the supreme law of the land. It is the Constitution. Not the President, not Congress, not judges, no one has the right to disannul or nullify The Constitution of the United States. Every one of those individuals have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

[John Weaver] Now, there are several in here who were in the military. I took the same oath. Here's the oath that every soldier takes. I blank. You have to state your name there. I blank. do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of officers appointed over me, listen, according to the regulations and the uniform code of military justice, so help me God. Now, You just said, well, I'm going to obey the President of the United States. You just said I'm going to obey my officers over me. Yes, that was in that oath. But it also said, according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Here's what the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 809, Articles 90 through 92 says, listen carefully. Article 90 makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the lawful command of his superior officer.

[John Weaver] Article 91, the lawful order of a warrant officer. Article 92, the lawful general order, and also Article 92, a lawful order. In each case, the military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey lawful orders. and they indeed have an obligation to disobey unlawful orders, including orders from the President that do not comply with the Constitution or the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The moral and legal obligation is to the United States Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders. An unlawful order is an unlawful order.

[John Weaver] It is not enforceable and it should not be obeyed. Now, when Saul looked at his soldiers and said, you fall upon the priests, you kill them. No, we're not going to do that. They were not guilty of insurrection. They were not guilty of rebellion. They were not guilty of treason. Saul had no right to issue that order to begin with. It was an unlawful order. It was a violation not only of the law of God, it was also a violation of the covenant that existed between the king and the people. And so the soldiers were absolutely right to disobey that order. Likewise today, all law enforcement officers And all United States soldiers have a duty and an obligation to disobey any order or any regulation that violates the law of God or the Constitution of the United States.

[John Weaver] Just simply because someone has joined the military or someone has become a police officer does not mean that he is now obligated to violate his conscience or his understanding. His right to believe and act accordingly still exists. Yes, there may be a fight to maintain that. But on the other hand, to be truthful, I'd rather have men upset with me than rather than to have the sovereign God of heaven and earth upset with me. The problem is this most military folks, most law enforcement folks. have no idea of the demands and commands of God's law and the regulations in God's law. They also have no idea of the rights that are listed in the Constitution of the United States. Our rights do not come from the Constitution, our rights come from God. Those rights are just simply expressed in the Constitution. Moreover, We have a multitude of other rights that are not listed in the Constitution. When you get to Article 9, it says this, the Ninth Amendment, the enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

[John Weaver] So we have a whole lot more rights than those that are listed in the Constitution. And the truth is, unhappily, That most military men and most law enforcement have been so brainwashed, they tend to think that all laws are just and that any order is an order and it must be obeyed, even if common sense dictates otherwise. So let me just put it to you plainly. We have left the days of Andy and Barney.

[John Weaver] We're not in Mayberry anymore. We've left the days of Adam 12. You remember that old TV series? It had two cops, Martin Milner and Kent McCord, and it just was demonstrating what it was like in the daily life of police officers. That series ran from September 1968 to May 1975. And basically what it did was introduce to the general public police jargon and police procedures is what it amounted to. But Adam 12 was caught on the line of Andy Barney.

[John Weaver] Everything was easy going and kind. So let me try to state this truth another way. Officer Friendly has disappeared. And so is Officer Helpful. We are now In the grip of the attitude, it is us against them. The us happens to be the cops, and the them happens to be anyone who's not a law enforcement officer. It's us against them. We're in the day of no-knock rage. We're in the day, as do as I say, and you will not get hurt. We are in the age and in the day now when it's almost impossible just simply to talk to, communicate with, or reason with law enforcement.

[John Weaver] It all boils down to this. Obey or else anything other than instant obedience to a law enforcement officer today is considered resistance. That's when they start beating you with a baton and tasing you and start saying, stop resisting, stop resisting, even though you may not have even lifted a hand. You just have not rendered immediate obedience to whatever they say. The interesting thing is when the king looked at his soldiers and said, kill those priests.

[John Weaver] They not only hesitated, they refused to jump at the king's command. They knew that command was unreasonable, unwarranted, and unlawful.

[John Weaver] Now, here's another interesting thing. When Doeg stepped forward, Doeg was not a soldier. Doeg was a herdsman. And when the king looked at Doeg and said, kill these 85 priests. Yes, sir. And he turned around and murdered 85 priests. Here's a principle. Regardless of the situation, there will always be someone who is willing to do what is wrong to ingratiate himself with those in power and to appease them for promotion and recognition. And that's what Doeg was doing.

[John Weaver] Look at it, if you would, in verses 18 and 19. And the king said unto Doeg, Turn thou and fall upon the priests. And Doeg the Edomite turned and fell upon the priests and slew on that day four score and five priests that did wear linen ephod." Let me just stop here. Doeg the Edomite, which means he was a descendant of Esau. Esau hated spiritual things. He loved fleshly things. So here, Doeg the Edomite has just murdered 85 priests. But that's not all. Look at verse 19.

[John Weaver] And Nob, the city of the priests, smote he with the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, and oxen and asses, and sheep with the edge of the sword. So he murdered not just the 85 priests, he murdered women and children and animals as well. In other words, he killed the priests. He murdered the priests and their wives and their children, just like he'd butcher sheep.

[John Weaver] It meant nothing to him. And unhappily. There are men just like that today, some are in the military, some are in law enforcement, some are just what you and I would call civilians. Just recently, within the last two months, I read where in Alabama, and I've been through that little town a hundred times, where one black man shot and killed, murdered another black man because The one that got shot, the one who shot him thought he was taking too long in crossing the street. He wouldn't get out of his way, shot him eight times. Shot him eight times because he's too slow in crossing the street. That's where we are today. That's exactly where we are today.

[John Weaver] The problem, you see, is this. Doeg did not hesitate to use force. There are plenty of people who will not hesitate to use force. But it is true that there are some in the military. There are some in law enforcement who still have a little common sense, who understand their oath that they took. Who understand that they are not to violate the law of God and they're not to violate their oath to the Constitution. There are some that still are able to think and to reason, and they're not just going to follow orders just to be following orders. I know that you heard it said and I've heard it said when some cop does something that is just absolutely insane, I'm just doing my duty. I'm just following orders. Yeah. And I tell you what, we have to understand. We have to understand that when people have no respect for God and His law. They have no respect for their fellow man.

[John Weaver] That's where we are today. We understand that our rights come from God. They may be expressed in the Constitution. But they come from God. There are fine folks in the military, there are fine folks in law enforcement, but there are some. Who are just like the way. They will slay you, mutilate you, hurt you for the silliest and the simplest reason. I'll show you some of that next week, it is unbelievable. You remember what God said?

[John Weaver] through the prophet Hosea, in Hosea 4, verse 6, when he said this, My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. And unhappily, most Christians do not have the knowledge of the Word of God. And we do not have the knowledge of the Constitution. We do not have the knowledge of our law. We don't. And consequently, we are easily seduced, easily led astray, and easily destroyed. So let me make just two applications today.

[John Weaver] The first one is this. I want you to understand that the issue is always theonomy or autonomy. That's what it is. It's always God's law or man's law. We're either going to be ruled by God or we're going to be ruled by man. And it's not whether or not we will have a law system. Every society has to have a law system. It's which law system would you have? Will you be ruled by God or will you be ruled by man? No society can exist apart from law. And those who reject God's law condemn themselves to be ruled by humanistic law, which inevitably is going to end up either in anarchy or totalitarianism. Here's the second application, and I want you to listen, because I hope that this application will put a little fight In you, I hope it'll make your blood boil and I hope it'll give you a little steel in your backbone because this quote is going to come from a court case and listen carefully.

[John Weaver] It is the United States versus Johnson 76 fed supplement page 438. And here's what the court said. This is from 1947. Let me begin by saying this, we must not only know our rights, we must engage in combat to maintain our rights. Now, I'm not just saying that. Those are the words of the court. The position that the court said that we must take is the position of a belligerent claimant. You know what a belligerent person is, don't you?

[John Weaver] Someone who's stubborn, someone who's obstinate, someone who's not going to give in, not going to give up, not going to give out. He's just going to stand there. Here's what the court said. Talking about the Fifth Amendment, but it would apply to all. The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor the man who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto.

[John Weaver] It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be sustained and retained only by sustained combat. It cannot be retained by an attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in the flesh. The one who is persuaded by honeyed words or moral suasion to testify or produce documents rather than make a last-ditch stand simply loses this protection. Once he testifies the part, he is waived his right and must on cross-examination or otherwise testify to the whole transaction. He must refuse to answer or produce and test the matter in contempt proceedings or habeas corpus.

[John Weaver] So what did the court say? If you want your rights, you have to be a belligerent claimant. It is a trial by combat. If you are ignorant, tough, you lose. If you're indifferent, tough, you lose. If you're passive and don't care, tough, you lose. The court said, if you are going to have your rights, You must fight for them. May I tell you that is also a principle of Scripture? Because if you don't use the truth, you will lose the truth. And if you do not stand for what is right, ultimately, you're going to fall for anything. So we need to understand, yes, the Bible does say something about law enforcement. But the law that needs to be enforced first and foremost would be God's law. And secondly, we could say in this country, the Constitution of the United States, because it is supposed to be the supreme law of the land.

[John Weaver] And every judge, every officer, every president, every congressperson takes an oath to uphold that constitution. And those who fail to do that are not only oath violators, they are traitors and they are treasonous to the very document that they promised to uphold and to honor. Yes. No one has to obey an unlawful order. Because it is unlawful from the beginning. The Bible does teach a lot about law enforcement.

[John Weaver] Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, we ask for your grace. We ask for your mercy. We pray, Lord, that you would teach us and you'd make us belligerent when it comes to standing for truth and right and righteousness and holiness. Give us grace that we may serve thee acceptably with reverence and godly fear. In the name of Jesus Christ, we ask and pray. Amen.

The Bible and Law Enforcement - Part 1

John Weaver | SermonAudio

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	SermonAudio
Media ID	11121185226433
Subject	Civil Government
Course	Civil Government: Power, Nations, and Constitutional Order: War in the Gates
Genre	Sermon
Date	2021-01-10
Dictation Name
Book	Book 012: The Bible and Law Enforcement — Chapter 1
Source Timed Segments	69

Formatted Transcript

Introduction: The Question of Whose Law Is Enforced

Weaver explains the sermon series was prompted by a friend's question and the current lawlessness. He introduces the central question: whose law is to be enforced?

I want you to open your Bibles, if you would please, to 1 Samuel, chapter 22. 1 Samuel, chapter 22. 1 Samuel 22, we're going to be reading verses 6 through 20. This is the first message in a short three-part series. The title of the message is "The Bible and Law Enforcement." I will explain just momentarily, but let's read the Scripture. 1 Samuel 22, beginning there with verse 6, and we'll read through verse 20. When Saul heard that David was discovered, and the men that were with him—now Saul abode in Gibeah under a tree in Ramah, having a spear in his hand, and all of his servants were standing about him. Then Saul said unto his servants that stood about him,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Hear now, you Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and vineyards, and make all of you captains of thousands and captains of hundreds, that all of you have conspired against me? And there is none that showeth me that my son hath made a league with the son of Jesse. And there is none of you that is sorry for me, or showeth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me to lie in wait, as at this day."

Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul, and said,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, to Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub." "And he inquired of the Lord for him, and gave him victuals, and gave him the sword of Goliath, the Philistine."

Then the king sent to call Ahimelech the priest, the son of Ahitub, and all his father's house, the priests that were in Nob, and they came, all of them, to the king. And Saul said,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Hear now, thou son of Ahitub."

And he answered, "Here I am, my lord.

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

" And Saul said unto him, "

Why have you conspired against me, thou and the son of Jesse, in that thou hast given him bread and a sword, and hast inquired of God for him, that he should rise against me to lie in wait, as at this day?

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

" Then Ahimelech answered the king and said, "

And who is so faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son-in-law, and goeth at thy bidding and is honorable in thine house? Did I then begin to inquire of God for him?"

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Be it far from me. Let not the king impute anything unto his servant, nor to all the house of my father. For thy servant knew nothing of all this, less or more."

And the king said,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Thou shalt surely die, Ahimelech, thou and all thy father's house."

And the king said unto the footmen that stood about him,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Turn and slay the priests of the Lord, because their hand is also with David, and because they knew when he fled and did not show it me."

But the servants of the king would not put forth their hand to fall upon the priests of the Lord. Then the king said to Doeg,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Turn now and fall upon the priests."

And Doeg the Edomite turned, and he fell upon the priests, and slew that day fourscore and five persons that did wear a linen ephod. And Nob, the city of the priests, smote he with the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, oxen, asses, and sheep, with the edge of the sword. And one of the sons of Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped and fled after David. Some time ago, I was recently asked a question by a good friend. The question was, did I have any sermons specifically on the Bible and law enforcement? And my response at that time was, no, I did not have any, with the exception of the messages I had preached on the kinsman redeemer, avenger, and also the cities of refuge. Well, his question sparked my thinking. And some time ago, probably two to three months ago, I finished these messages.

But I delayed in preaching them. And there were many other messages I've developed since then, I thought that the Lord was leading me to preach. But today, looking around and seeing all of the lawlessness that is prevailing, even among our politicians, I thought, well, now would be the time that these messages need to be taught. I also sent my friend a quote, which I've used before. And I want to use it again by way of introduction. The quote is from Robert Winthrop, who was the U.S. Speaker of the House in 1849. And here's what he said: "All societies of men must be governed in some way or the other. The less they have a stringent state government, the more they must have of individual self-government. The less they rely on public law or physical force, the more they must rely on private and moral restraint. Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or a power without them, either by the word of God or by the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet." It may do for other countries and other governments to talk about the state supporting religion. Here, under our own free institution, it is religion or Christianity which must support the state, that is, in upholding biblical law.

But notice what he said: "Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or a power without them, either by the Word of God or the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet." Thankfully, when my friend sent this question to me, I was reading through 1 and 2 Samuel. And as I came upon 1 Samuel chapter 22, I thought, well, here is where I should begin. Because when you hear the subject, "The Bible and Law Enforcement," the first question that should pop into your mind is, whose law is to be enforced? There's a vast difference between the law of a king or the law of man and the law of God. The issue is, which I've stated previously, between theonomy, which is God's law, and autonomy, which is man's law. You remember I told you the Greek word autos means self, nomos means law. So autonomy just refers to self-law or the law of man. It doesn't matter if some individual is trying to determine the law for himself or if he's following some humanistic organization, it is still an autonomous law. And autonomy is always in contradiction to and in violation of the law of God. Now, I've told you before, I'm going to reiterate right now, a principle that you should grasp, and that is a king rules by his law. And that is true whether it is a literal, physical king, or whether it is a state government, or a federal government, or the sovereign God of heaven and earth. Because the law is nothing more than an expression of the rule and the will of the ruler. In other words, it is an expression of their control and of their dominion.

Theonomy vs. Autonomy: Two Opposing Law Systems

Weaver contrasts God's law (theonomy) with man's law (autonomy), emphasizing that a king rules by his law, and changing rulers changes law structures.

The issue is, which I've stated previously, between theonomy, which is God's law, and autonomy, which is man's law. You remember I told you the Greek word autos means self, nomos means law. So autonomy just refers to self-law or the law of man. It doesn't matter if some individual is trying to determine the law for himself or if he's following some humanistic organization, it is still an autonomous law. And autonomy is always in contradiction to and in violation of the law of God. Now, I've told you before, I'm going to reiterate right now, a principle that you should grasp, and that is a king rules by his law. And that is true whether it is a literal, physical king, or whether it is a state government, or a federal government, or the sovereign God of heaven and earth. Because the law is nothing more than an expression of the rule and the will of the ruler. In other words, it is an expression of their control and of their dominion.

Now, I understand that we are supposed to have in this country what is known as a representative government. But I can assure you that that phrase is totally outdated and we've not had any such representation in a number of years. That concept is basically gone. And to understand that, all you have to do is witness the absolute minor differences between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

Now, it is true that the Democrats are far more open and defiant and demanding that their agenda be adopted by everyone. If you understand that, you can also understand why the Democrats, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, declared Republicans as the enemies of the state. So in her eyes, the state was supreme and in her eyes, she was the state. She had the power. She was the Speaker of the House. And anyone who did not support her position or her agenda happened to be an enemy of the state. Now, we understand, or we should understand, that when you change rulers, there's also a change in law.

Well, all you have to do is witness what was happening under Obama and what was happening under Trump. There may not have been a very, very vast difference, but there was certainly a difference. But if you will turn back in your Bibles to 1 Samuel 8, I referred to this passage last week, only a couple of verses, but this time I want to read the entire 21 verses beginning with verse 7 through verse 21. I want you to look at this because in this passage, Israel was demanding a man as king. And in doing so, they were rejecting God, but they were not only rejecting God, they were also rejecting God's law. And consequently, when they got a king, they're now going to be brought under a different law. For instance, look in 1 Samuel 8, beginning there with verse 7.

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 8:7-21

"And the Lord said unto Samuel, 'Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee. For they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.'"

Israel's Rejection of God as King (1 Samuel 8)

Israel demanded a human king, rejecting God and His law. Samuel warned them of the oppressive nature of human kingship.

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 8:7-21

"And the Lord said unto Samuel, 'Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee. For they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.'"

"According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. Now therefore hearken unto their voice. Howbeit, yet protest solemnly unto them and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them." So you want a different king than God? Fine. Here is an expression of his law. Watch. "And Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people that asked of him a king. And he said, 'This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen, and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties, and will set them to ear his ground, and reap his harvest, and make his instruments of war, and his instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your best vineyards, and your oliveyards, and the best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodly young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.'"

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 8:7-21

"And he will take the tenth of your sheep, and you shall be his servants. And you shall cry out in that day because of your king which you shall have chosen you, and the Lord will not hear you in that day."

Nevertheless, the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 8:7-21

"Nay, but we will have a king over us."

And so they basically rejected God and His law and chose man and man's law. If you look in 1 Samuel chapter 12 and verse 12, Samuel reiterates the fact that they have rejected God as king. 1 Samuel 12 and verse 12, he said, "And when you saw Nahash the king of the children of Ammon came against you, you said unto me, 'Nay, but a king shall reign over us,' when the Lord your God was your king." So you cannot understand 1 Samuel chapter 8 unless you understand it as a transition from one law structure to another law structure. So when you change rulers, you basically change law structures, or at least that's the way it was.

In the Bible, let me give you another illustration. If you will turn in your Bibles to 2 Kings chapter 17. 2 Kings chapter 17. And notice if you would be getting there with verse 7. 2 Kings 17, verse 7. Here's the same principle. "For so it was that the children of Israel had sinned against the Lord their God."

The Principle: Trading Rulers Means Trading Law Systems (2 Kings 17)

Israel sinned by fearing other gods, evidenced by walking in their statutes. Rejecting God's law leads to adopting man's law.

Now you have to ask your question. How did they sin against the Lord their God? Here it is: "which had brought them up out of the land of Egypt from under the hand of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and feared other gods." Now watch. They sinned against God by fearing other gods. So here's another question. How do we know that they feared other gods? Well, here it is in verse 8.

"And walked in the statutes," that is, the laws, "of the heathen, whom the Lord cast out from before the children of Israel, and of the kings of Israel which they had made. And the children of Israel did secretly those things that were not right against the Lord their God, and they built them high places in their cities, from the tower of the watchman to the fenced city." So they sinned against God by fearing other gods, and the reason it is evidence they feared other gods, they walked in the statutes, they walked in the laws of the other gods. So when you trade rulers, you basically trade law systems as well. Now what they began doing secretly in verse 9, if you read the rest of 2 Kings 17, they did it openly and brazenly as well. So let me spell it out for you. When one does not really, truly fear the Lord God, he will not walk in His law. If you truly, genuinely fear the Lord God of heaven and earth, you will obey and you will walk in His law. Now, here's another truth. Every individual, every family, every church, every society is going to have some type of law structure. You cannot live apart from a law structure. It may be an autonomous law system, it may be a humanistic law system, it may be a law system from the state or from the feds, but it will be a law system. You cannot live apart from law. All societies must be governed by some form of law. For instance, each one of us have heard the adage or the words, "the law of the jungle."

We've heard mob law. We've also heard gang law and vigilante law. The point I'm trying to make is, I don't care how corrupt, how depraved, how sinful, how wicked, how rebellious men are. There has to be some law system. And even among thieves, there's an honor among thieves. When I say that, there's a simple system that they follow. And you get thrown in prison. There's a system there in prison. It is a law system.

Saul's Rebellion and Rejection by God (1 Samuel 15)

Saul disobeyed God's command to destroy the Amalekites, leading to his rejection as king. His disobedience proved he turned from following God.

Now, 1 Samuel chapter 22 is a good illustration of this. Now, before I get to 1 Samuel 22, let me emphasize the fact that Saul is the king of Israel. And Saul has been rejected by God because of his rebellion against God. If you'll look in your Bibles to 1 Samuel chapter 15, God had set Saul on a mission, and that mission was that he was to slay utterly the Amalekites and everything that they had. Well, now, you know the story. The Bible says that he spared Agag, the king of the Amalekites, and the best of the oxen and the best of the sheep. And when Samuel came to see Saul, Saul said, "Blessed be thou of the Lord. I performed all the words of the Lord." And about that time, something went "baa." Samuel said, "Saul, if you obeyed God, what meaneth the bleating of the sheep and the lowing of the oxen in mine ear? If you'd obeyed God, everything would be dead." Saul said, "But the people spared the best of the sheep and the best of the oxen, that they might sacrifice them to God." And that's when Samuel said, "Hath the Lord as great delight in sacrifice and offering, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to hearken is better than sacrifice, and to obey is better than the fat of rams." And God rejected Saul. Look at it. 1 Samuel 15 at verses 10 and 11: "Then came the word of the Lord unto Samuel saying, 'It repenteth me that I've set up Saul to be king, for he is turned back from following me and hath not performed my commandments.'"

And it grieved Samuel and he cried unto the Lord all night. Now, note, if you would. God says Saul has turned back from following me. How can we tell? How do we know that Saul turned back? Well, God says, here's the evidence. He has not kept my commandments. It's just that simple. God rejected him. Now skip down to verse 26 through 28, because Saul is trying to get Samuel to worship with him. And verse 26 of 1 Samuel 15,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 15:10-11

"And Samuel said unto Saul, 'I will not return with thee, for thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.' And as Samuel turned about to go away, he, Saul, laid hold upon the skirt of his, Samuel's, mantle, and it rent. And Samuel said unto him, 'The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbor of thine that is better than thyself.'"

Now, the interesting thing is, God has rejected Saul because of his rebellion.

But here's an interesting thing. Although Saul was rejected by God and basically condemned by God, God did not immediately smite or destroy King Saul. Did you know that King Saul reigned 40 years? After this rejection, all of his reign was basically anarchy and tyranny. So let me just mention this again. And it's important that you understand in verse 10, when he said this, listen carefully, he said, or verse 11, "It repenteth me that I've set up Saul to be king, for he is turned back from following me and he hath not kept my commandments." How do we know that Saul turned back? And the answer is he did not keep God's commandments.

Saul's Unlawful Order and the Soldiers' Refusal (1 Samuel 22:6-17)

Saul, motivated by jealousy, ordered the murder of the priests. His soldiers refused the unlawful order, demonstrating moral courage.

The two tribes dwelt together. OK, so Saul is in Gibeah under a tree in Ramah, having his spear in his hand, and all his servants were standing around about him. And Saul said unto his servants that stood about him, "Hear now, you Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and vineyards and make you all captains of thousands and captains of hundreds, that all of you have conspired against me? And there is none that showeth me that my son hath made a league or a covenant with the son of Jesse. And there is none of you that is sorry for me, or showeth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me to lie in wait, as at this day." Now, let me point out the fact that number one, Saul probably already knew that Jonathan and David had entered into a covenant together. Secondly, I want to point out that he's telling his men, "Look, if David gets on the throne, he's not going to make every one of you a captain of a thousand or captain of a hundred or captain of fifty."

"He's not going to give you lands and fields. He's not going to give you 40 acres and a mule. He's just not going to do it. No, no, no. He's not going to do one thing for you. Look at what I've done." This is what he's saying. "You're here now. Look what I've given you. Look what I've done for you." And then he goes into this little rant.

He said, "Why is it? Did all of you conspire against me?" Listen, "and none of you are sorry for me. You should have told me." But, you know, his heart is broken. His men didn't tell him. You know, come on. Here's a man that is supposed to be a king trying to rely upon the pity of others, and yet, here he is. He says, "Why didn't you tell me?"

Well, no one had anything to answer until you get to verse nine. Watch this. "Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul." He was a herdsman. He was the chief herdsman, by the way. "Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul, and said, 'I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, to Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub. And he,' that is Ahimelech, 'inquired of the Lord for him, and gave him victuals, and gave him the sword of Goliath the Philistine.'" Hmm. Wow. Now, Doeg has just embellished and lied to Saul about what happened in 1 Samuel chapter 21. It is true that Ahimelech gave David and the few men with him some bread. It is true that he gave the sword of Goliath to David. It is false that he inquired of the Lord for David. Even Ahimelech denied doing that. Look in your Bibles. 1 Samuel chapter 22 at verses 14 and 15. "Then Ahimelech answered the king and said, 'And who is so faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son-in-law, and goeth at thy bidding and is honorable in thine house?'"

"Did I then begin to inquire of God for him? Be it far from me. Let not the king impute anything unto his servant, nor to all the house of my father, for thy servant knew nothing of all this, less or more." Now, note if you would, even Ahimelech says, "Look, David's your son-in-law. Everyone knows how honorable David is." And by the way, David did lie to Ahimelech. Especially when he asked for the sword of Goliath. And Ahimelech said, "Well, where's your sword?" Well, he said, "I'm on a secret mission from the king, and it required haste. I just left mine at the house. Let me have this one." Yeah. So Ahimelech was totally innocent.

He didn't have any idea what was going on. And like he said, David was honorable in all of his house. Let me tell you something about Doeg. Doeg was a malicious, vicious, ambitious and evil man who is desirous of nothing but promotion. I want you to understand a principle. I believe it's being enunciated here. One that I've told you before, and that is this. You do not owe the truth to someone who's going to abuse the truth. Do you realize if Doeg had kept his mouth shut, it would have saved the lives of an awful lot of people.

Scripture Reading — Psalm 52

They would not have died. All Saul was doing was having a pity party. He didn't know anything until Doeg stepped forward. By the way, if you want to find out what happened to Doeg, you need to read Psalm 52. Because Psalm 52 is a psalm written by David specifically against Doeg and his lying, vicious tongue. Now, there is another principle that we need to understand, and that is this. A lie that is joined to the truth becomes an untruth. Lies are untruths in and of themselves. And when you take an untruth and you join it to truth, truth then becomes a distortion and a misrepresentation of the facts. And in light of this distortion, when Doeg said, "I saw him personally inquire of God for David and give him bread and give him a sword," wow, that led to verse 17, look at it, or verse, yeah, verse 11 it is, look at it, in verse 11.

"Then the king sent to call Ahimelech the priest, the son of Ahitub, and all his father's house. The priests were in Nob, and they came, all of them, to the king." Now watch this, he called, he called. All these priests came, there were 85 of them. And Saul asks Ahimelech, "Why did you do this?" And Ahimelech denies doing anything. "David's your son-in-law. He's an honorable man. Yeah, I gave him food. I gave him the sword." By the way, the sword was his. It belonged to David. He killed Goliath. He took it from Goliath. So Saul then looks at his soldiers.

Look at it in verse 17. "And the king said unto the footmen that stood about him, 'Turn and slay the priests of the Lord, because their hand is also with David, and because they knew when he fled and did not show it unto me.' But the servants of the king," that is the soldiers, "would not put forth their hand to fall upon the priests of the Lord." The soldiers were far better men than their commander. They refused to obey an unlawful order. They refused to murder innocent people just because the king gave them a command to do so.

Defining Unlawful Orders: God's Law and the Constitution

An unlawful order violates God's law or the U.S. Constitution. Military oaths require obedience only to lawful orders.

Now, let me make a statement. No soldier, no law enforcement officer, is obligated to obey an unlawful order. What is an unlawful order? Let me answer it in two ways. First of all, an unlawful order is one that violates the law of God. God isn't only king and judge and lawgiver. One of the titles given for Him in the Bible is the Lord God of hosts. The word host means armies. He is the Lord God of the armies. So God is not only judge and lawgiver and king, He is the commander-in-chief. He is the one who is on top. No one has the right to violate God's law. No one has the right to murder or steal or commit adultery. There is no such thing as a right to sin. So an unlawful order, first and foremost, would be that which would violate God's law.

Let me point something else out. Even if Ahimelech did what Saul charged him with, which was not a sin and was not a crime, but even if he did that, and if he was guilty of what Saul thought was treason, only Ahimelech should have died, not the other 84 priests. God says in Ezekiel 18 verse 20,

Scripture Reading — Ezekiel 18:20

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son." "The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

So God says the soul that sinneth, he shall die. So even if Ahimelech was guilty, he would have been the only one that should have been killed. So, an unlawful order first and foremost is an order or command that is contrary to the law of God. Secondly, an unlawful order is an order that is contrary to the Constitution of the United States. Whether you like the Constitution or not, agree with the Constitution or not is immaterial right now. But Article 6, Paragraph 2 says that this Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land. The President of the United States is not the supreme law of the land. Congress is not the supreme law of the land. The judicial officers are not the supreme law of the land. It is the Constitution. Not the President, not Congress, not judges, no one has the right to disannul or nullify the Constitution of the United States. Every one of those individuals have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

Now, there are several in here who were in the military. I took the same oath. Here's the oath that every soldier takes: "I, [blank]," you have to state your name there, "I, [blank], do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of officers appointed over me," listen, "according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, so help me God." Now, you just said, "Well, I'm going to obey the President of the United States. You just said I'm going to obey my officers over me." Yes, that was in that oath. But it also said, "according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice." Here's what the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 809, Articles 90 through 92 says, listen carefully. Article 90 makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the lawful command of his superior officer.

Article 91, the lawful order of a warrant officer. Article 92, the lawful general order, and also Article 92, a lawful order. In each case, the military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey lawful orders, and they indeed have an obligation to disobey unlawful orders, including orders from the President that do not comply with the Constitution or the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The moral and legal obligation is to the United States Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders. An unlawful order is an unlawful order. It is not enforceable and it should not be obeyed. Now, when Saul looked at his soldiers and said, "You fall upon the priests, you kill them." "No, we're not going to do that." They were not guilty of insurrection. They were not guilty of rebellion. They were not guilty of treason. Saul had no right to issue that order to begin with. It was an unlawful order. It was a violation not only of the law of God, it was also a violation of the covenant that existed between the king and the people. And so the soldiers were absolutely right to disobey that order. Likewise today, all law enforcement officers and all United States soldiers have a duty and an obligation to disobey any order or any regulation that violates the law of God or the Constitution of the United States.

Doeg's Willingness to Commit Evil for Promotion

Doeg, an Edomite herdsman, obeyed Saul's unlawful order and massacred the priests and the city of Nob, illustrating how some will do evil to gain favor.

Now, here's another interesting thing. When Doeg stepped forward, Doeg was not a soldier. Doeg was a herdsman. And when the king looked at Doeg and said, "Kill these 85 priests." "Yes, sir." And he turned around and murdered 85 priests. Here's a principle. Regardless of the situation, there will always be someone who is willing to do what is wrong to ingratiate himself with those in power and to appease them for promotion and recognition. And that's what Doeg was doing.

Look at it, if you would, in verses 18 and 19. "And the king said unto Doeg, 'Turn thou and fall upon the priests.' And Doeg the Edomite turned and fell upon the priests and slew on that day fourscore and five priests that did wear a linen ephod." Let me just stop here. Doeg the Edomite, which means he was a descendant of Esau. Esau hated spiritual things. He loved fleshly things. So here, Doeg the Edomite has just murdered 85 priests. But that's not all. Look at verse 19.

"And Nob, the city of the priests, smote he with the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, and oxen and asses, and sheep, with the edge of the sword." So he murdered not just the 85 priests, he murdered women and children and animals as well. In other words, he killed the priests. He murdered the priests and their wives and their children, just like he'd butcher sheep. It meant nothing to him. And unhappily, there are men just like that today, some are in the military, some are in law enforcement, some are just what you and I would call civilians. Just recently, within the last two months, I read where in Alabama, and I've been through that little town a hundred times, where one black man shot and killed, murdered another black man because the one that got shot, the one who shot him thought he was taking too long in crossing the street. He wouldn't get out of his way, shot him eight times. Shot him eight times because he's too slow in crossing the street. That's where we are today. That's exactly where we are today.

The Need for Knowledge and Belligerent Defense of Rights

Christians must know God's Word and the Constitution. The court case U.S. v. Johnson teaches that rights must be actively and belligerently defended.

through the prophet Hosea, in Hosea 4, verse 6, when he said this, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." And unhappily, most Christians do not have the knowledge of the Word of God. And we do not have the knowledge of the Constitution. We do not have the knowledge of our law. We don't. And consequently, we are easily seduced, easily led astray, and easily destroyed. So let me make just two applications today. The first one is this. I want you to understand that the issue is always theonomy or autonomy. That's what it is. It's always God's law or man's law. We're either going to be ruled by God or we're going to be ruled by man. And it's not whether or not we will have a law system. Every society has to have a law system. It's which law system would you have? Will you be ruled by God or will you be ruled by man? No society can exist apart from law. And those who reject God's law condemn themselves to be ruled by humanistic law, which inevitably is going to end up either in anarchy or totalitarianism. Here's the second application, and I want you to listen, because I hope that this application will put a little fight in you, I hope it'll make your blood boil and I hope it'll give you a little steel in your backbone because this quote is going to come from a court case and listen carefully.

It is United States versus Johnson, 76 F. Supp. page 438. And here's what the court said. This is from 1947. Let me begin by saying this, we must not only know our rights, we must engage in combat to maintain our rights. Now, I'm not just saying that. Those are the words of the court. The position that the court said that we must take is the position of a belligerent claimant. You know what a belligerent person is, don't you?

Someone who's stubborn, someone who's obstinate, someone who's not going to give in, not going to give up, not going to give out. He's just going to stand there. Here's what the court said. Talking about the Fifth Amendment, but it would apply to all. "The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor the man who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto." "It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be sustained and retained only by sustained combat. It cannot be retained by an attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in the flesh. The one who is persuaded by honeyed words or moral suasion to testify or produce documents rather than make a last-ditch stand simply loses this protection. Once he testifies in part, he has waived his right and must on cross-examination or otherwise testify to the whole transaction. He must refuse to answer or produce and test the matter in contempt proceedings or habeas corpus."

So what did the court say? If you want your rights, you have to be a belligerent claimant. It is a trial by combat. If you are ignorant, tough, you lose. If you're indifferent, tough, you lose. If you're passive and don't care, tough, you lose. The court said, if you are going to have your rights, you must fight for them. May I tell you that is also a principle of Scripture? Because if you don't use the truth, you will lose the truth. And if you do not stand for what is right, ultimately, you're going to fall for anything. So we need to understand, yes, the Bible does say something about law enforcement. But the law that needs to be enforced first and foremost would be God's law. And secondly, we could say in this country, the Constitution of the United States, because it is supposed to be the supreme law of the land.

Applications: Theonomy vs. Autonomy and the Duty to Fight for Rights

The issue is always God's law or man's law. Believers must be belligerent claimants, fighting to retain their God-given rights.

The first one is this. I want you to understand that the issue is always theonomy or autonomy. That's what it is. It's always God's law or man's law. We're either going to be ruled by God or we're going to be ruled by man. And it's not whether or not we will have a law system. Every society has to have a law system. It's which law system would you have? Will you be ruled by God or will you be ruled by man? No society can exist apart from law. And those who reject God's law condemn themselves to be ruled by humanistic law, which inevitably is going to end up either in anarchy or totalitarianism. Here's the second application, and I want you to listen, because I hope that this application will put a little fight in you, I hope it'll make your blood boil and I hope it'll give you a little steel in your backbone because this quote is going to come from a court case and listen carefully.

And every judge, every officer, every president, every congressperson takes an oath to uphold that constitution. And those who fail to do that are not only oath violators, they are traitors and they are treasonous to the very document that they promised to uphold and to honor. Yes. No one has to obey an unlawful order. Because it is unlawful from the beginning. The Bible does teach a lot about law enforcement.

Study Guide

Major Themes

Theonomy vs. Autonomy

Summary: The fundamental conflict is between God's law (theonomy) and man's law (autonomy). Every society must be governed by some law, and rejecting God's law leads to humanistic tyranny or anarchy.

Evidence: Weaver states: 'The issue is always theonomy or autonomy. That's what it is. It's always God's law or man's law.'

Obedience to Lawful Authority Only

Summary: No soldier or law enforcement officer is obligated to obey an unlawful order. An order is unlawful if it violates God's law or the U.S. Constitution.

Evidence: Weaver says: 'No soldier, no law enforcement officer, is obligated to obey an unlawful order.'

The Danger of Ignorance and Passivity

Summary: Christians are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Ignorance of God's Word and the Constitution leads to being easily seduced and losing rights.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Hosea 4:6 and says: 'Most Christians do not have the knowledge of the Word of God... consequently, we are easily seduced, easily led astray, and easily destroyed.'

The Necessity of Belligerent Defense of Rights

Summary: Rights must be actively and stubbornly defended. The court in U.S. v. Johnson stated that the privilege against self-incrimination is a 'fighting clause' requiring a 'belligerent claimant.'

Evidence: Weaver reads from the court case: 'It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be sustained and retained only by sustained combat.'

The Corruption of Power and Evil Obedience

Summary: Saul's unlawful command and Doeg's willingness to murder illustrate how power corrupts and how some will do evil to ingratiate themselves with authority.

Evidence: Weaver notes: 'There will always be someone who is willing to do what is wrong to ingratiate himself with those in power.'

Key Arguments

A king rules by his law; changing rulers changes law structures.

Summary: Weaver argues that law is an expression of the ruler's will. When Israel rejected God as king, they adopted man's law, leading to oppression.

Evidence: Weaver says: 'A king rules by his law... when you change rulers, there's also a change in law.'

Saul's rejection by God was evidenced by his disobedience to God's commandments.

Summary: Saul's failure to keep God's commandments proved he had turned from following God. Profession without obedience is worthless.

Evidence: Weaver states: 'How do we know that Saul turned back? And the answer is he did not keep God's commandments.'

The soldiers' refusal to obey Saul's unlawful order was righteous.

Summary: The soldiers recognized the order to kill the priests was unlawful and refused, demonstrating that obedience to God supersedes obedience to man.

Evidence: Weaver says: 'The soldiers were far better men than their commander. They refused to obey an unlawful order.'

An unlawful order is one that violates God's law or the Constitution.

Summary: Weaver defines an unlawful order as contrary to God's law or the supreme law of the land, the U.S. Constitution. Military oaths require only lawful obedience.

Evidence: Weaver explains: 'An unlawful order is an order or command that is contrary to the law of God... or contrary to the Constitution of the United States.'

Rights come from God and must be actively defended.

Summary: Our rights are God-given, not granted by the Constitution. The court in U.S. v. Johnson emphasized that rights require a 'belligerent claimant' to be retained.

Evidence: Weaver quotes: 'The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor the man who is ignorant of his rights.'

Scripture References

1 Samuel 22:6-20

Context: The primary text of the sermon, describing Saul's order to kill the priests and Doeg's massacre.

1 Samuel 8:7-21

Context: Israel demands a king, rejecting God as their ruler. Samuel warns them of the oppressive nature of human kingship.

1 Samuel 12:12

Context: Samuel reiterates that Israel rejected God as king when they demanded a human king.

2 Kings 17:7-9

Context: Israel sinned by fearing other gods and walking in their statutes, illustrating that changing rulers changes law systems.

1 Samuel 15:10-11

Context: God rejects Saul as king because he turned from following God and did not keep His commandments.

1 Samuel 15:26-28

Context: Samuel tells Saul that the kingdom is torn from him and given to a neighbor better than he.

Ecclesiastes 8:4

Context: Where the word of a king is, there is power; illustrating the authority of a ruler's law.

1 Samuel 20:30-33

Context: Saul's anger against Jonathan and his determination to kill David to secure the kingdom.

1 Samuel 22:14-15

Context: Ahimelech defends his innocence, stating he did not inquire of the Lord for David.

Psalm 52

Context: A psalm of David against Doeg, condemning his lying and vicious tongue.

Ezekiel 18:20

Context: The soul that sins shall die; the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, establishing individual responsibility.

Hosea 4:6

Context: My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; applied to Christians' ignorance of God's Word and the Constitution.

Historical References

Robert Winthrop, U.S. Speaker of the House (1849)

Context: Quoted for his statement that men must be controlled either by the Bible or the bayonet, emphasizing the necessity of internal moral restraint.

Samuel Rutherford, Lex Rex (1644)

Context: Referenced for the principle that the law is king (Lex Rex), not the king is law (Rex Lex), asserting that rulers are subject to God's law.

U.S. Constitution, Article 6, Paragraph 2 (Supremacy Clause)

Context: Cited to establish that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not the president or Congress.

Uniform Code of Military Justice, Articles 90-92

Context: Referenced to show that military personnel must obey only lawful orders and have a duty to disobey unlawful ones.

Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Context: Cited to argue that rights not enumerated are retained by the people, and rights come from God, not the Constitution.

United States v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 438 (1947)

Context: A court case stating that the privilege against self-incrimination is a 'fighting clause' requiring a belligerent claimant to retain it.

TV series Adam-12 (1968-1975)

Context: Mentioned as an example of a past era when police were portrayed as helpful and approachable, contrasting with today's adversarial climate.

Important Quotes

Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or a power without them, either by the word of God or by the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet.

Significance: This quote from Robert Winthrop encapsulates the sermon's central theme: society must be governed either by internal moral restraint (God's Word) or external force (man's law).

A king rules by his law. And that is true whether it is a literal, physical king, or whether it is a state government, or a federal government, or the sovereign God of heaven and earth.

Significance: Establishes the principle that law is an expression of the ruler's will, foundational to the argument about theonomy vs. autonomy.

No soldier, no law enforcement officer, is obligated to obey an unlawful order.

Significance: A key application of the sermon: obedience to authority is not absolute when commands violate God's law or the Constitution.

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.

Significance: Hosea 4:6 is applied to Christians' ignorance of God's Word and the Constitution, leading to their destruction.

When you reject God's law, the only alternative is man's law. And inevitably, when you have man's law, you're going to either descend into anarchy or tyranny.

Significance: Summarizes the inevitable outcome of autonomy: societal breakdown into chaos or oppressive rule.

Discussion Questions

What does it mean that 'a king rules by his law,' and how does this principle apply to our understanding of God's authority versus human government?

Context: Weaver introduces the concept that law expresses the ruler's will, contrasting God's law with man's law.

How does the account of Israel demanding a king in 1 Samuel 8 illustrate the dangers of rejecting God's law for human autonomy?

Context: Weaver reads 1 Samuel 8 to show that Israel's demand for a king was a rejection of God and His law.

In what ways did Saul's disobedience in 1 Samuel 15 demonstrate that he had turned from following God, and what does this teach about the relationship between profession and obedience?

Context: Weaver argues that Saul's failure to keep God's commandments proved his rebellion, despite his profession.

Why did Saul's soldiers refuse to kill the priests, and what principles can we draw from their example regarding obedience to authority?

Context: The soldiers refused an unlawful order, showing that obedience to God takes precedence over human commands.

According to Weaver, what makes an order 'unlawful,' and how should Christians evaluate commands from government or military superiors?

Context: Weaver defines unlawful orders as those violating God's law or the Constitution, and explains the military oath.

What does the court case United States v. Johnson teach about the necessity of being a 'belligerent claimant' for our rights, and how does this apply to Christians today?

Context: Weaver reads from the case to emphasize that rights must be actively and stubbornly defended.

How does the example of Doeg illustrate the danger of those who are willing to do evil to gain favor with those in power?

Context: Doeg obeyed Saul's unlawful order and massacred the priests, showing how ambition can lead to great wickedness.

Applications

Choose God's law over man's law

Summary: Believers must consciously submit to God's law (theonomy) rather than the autonomous laws of human government when they conflict.

Evidence: Weaver states: 'The issue is always theonomy or autonomy... Will you be ruled by God or will you be ruled by man?'

Refuse to obey unlawful orders

Summary: Christians in military or law enforcement must disobey commands that violate God's law or the Constitution, even at personal cost.

Evidence: Weaver says: 'No soldier, no law enforcement officer, is obligated to obey an unlawful order.'

Be knowledgeable in God's Word and the Constitution

Summary: Ignorance leads to destruction; believers must study Scripture and understand their legal rights to avoid being seduced or oppressed.

Evidence: Weaver quotes Hosea 4:6 and says: 'Most Christians do not have the knowledge of the Word of God... consequently, we are easily destroyed.'

Defend your rights belligerently

Summary: Rights are not retained by passivity; Christians must actively and stubbornly insist on their God-given rights in the face of opposition.

Evidence: Weaver reads from U.S. v. Johnson: 'It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be sustained and retained only by sustained combat.'

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-05T16:40:59Z

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-06T07:44:33Z

Clean Transcript

The Bible and Law Enforcement - Part 1

Clean readable transcript. This view follows the Commentary.net cleaned segment text while preserving timestamps for audio follow-along.

I want you to open your Bibles, if you would please, to 1 Samuel, chapter 22. 1 Samuel, chapter 22. 1 Samuel 22, we're going to be reading verses 6 through 20. This is the first message in a short three-part series. The title of the message is "The Bible and Law Enforcement." I will explain just momentarily, but let's read the Scripture. 1 Samuel 22, beginning there with verse 6, and we'll read through verse 20.
#1 | 0:00 to 0:43 | cleaned
When Saul heard that David was discovered, and the men that were with him—now Saul abode in Gibeah under a tree in Ramah, having a spear in his hand, and all of his servants were standing about him. Then Saul said unto his servants that stood about him, "Hear now, you Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and vineyards, and make all of you captains of thousands and captains of hundreds, that all of you have conspired against me? And there is none that showeth me that my son hath made a league with the son of Jesse. And there is none of you that is sorry for me, or showeth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me to lie in wait, as at this day." Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul, and said, "I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, to Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub."
#2 | 0:43 to 1:36 | cleaned
"And he inquired of the Lord for him, and gave him victuals, and gave him the sword of Goliath, the Philistine." Then the king sent to call Ahimelech the priest, the son of Ahitub, and all his father's house, the priests that were in Nob, and they came, all of them, to the king. And Saul said, "Hear now, thou son of Ahitub." And he answered, "Here I am, my lord." And Saul said unto him, "Why have you conspired against me, thou and the son of Jesse, in that thou hast given him bread and a sword, and hast inquired of God for him, that he should rise against me to lie in wait, as at this day?" Then Ahimelech answered the king and said, "And who is so faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son-in-law, and goeth at thy bidding and is honorable in thine house? Did I then begin to inquire of God for him?"
#3 | 1:37 to 2:29 | cleaned
"Be it far from me. Let not the king impute anything unto his servant, nor to all the house of my father. For thy servant knew nothing of all this, less or more." And the king said, "Thou shalt surely die, Ahimelech, thou and all thy father's house." And the king said unto the footmen that stood about him, "Turn and slay the priests of the Lord, because their hand is also with David, and because they knew when he fled and did not show it me." But the servants of the king would not put forth their hand to fall upon the priests of the Lord. Then the king said to Doeg, "Turn now and fall upon the priests." And Doeg the Edomite turned, and he fell upon the priests, and slew that day fourscore and five persons that did wear a linen ephod.
#4 | 2:30 to 3:17 | cleaned
And Nob, the city of the priests, smote he with the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, oxen, asses, and sheep, with the edge of the sword. And one of the sons of Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped and fled after David. Some time ago, I was recently asked a question by a good friend. The question was, did I have any sermons specifically on the Bible and law enforcement? And my response at that time was, no, I did not have any, with the exception of the messages I had preached on the kinsman redeemer, avenger, and also the cities of refuge. Well, his question sparked my thinking. And some time ago, probably two to three months ago, I finished these messages.
#5 | 3:17 to 4:17 | cleaned
But I delayed in preaching them. And there were many other messages I've developed since then, I thought that the Lord was leading me to preach. But today, looking around and seeing all of the lawlessness that is prevailing, even among our politicians, I thought, well, now would be the time that these messages need to be taught. I also sent my friend a quote, which I've used before. And I want to use it again by way of introduction. The quote is from Robert Winthrop, who was the U.S.
#6 | 4:19 to 4:56 | cleaned
Speaker of the House in 1849. And here's what he said: "All societies of men must be governed in some way or the other. The less they have a stringent state government, the more they must have of individual self-government. The less they rely on public law or physical force, the more they must rely on private and moral restraint. Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or a power without them, either by the word of God or by the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet." It may do for other countries and other governments to talk about the state supporting religion. Here, under our own free institution, it is religion or Christianity which must support the state, that is, in upholding biblical law.
#7 | 4:56 to 6:01 | cleaned
But notice what he said: "Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or a power without them, either by the Word of God or the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet." Thankfully, when my friend sent this question to me, I was reading through 1 and 2 Samuel. And as I came upon 1 Samuel chapter 22, I thought, well, here is where I should begin. Because when you hear the subject, "The Bible and Law Enforcement," the first question that should pop into your mind is, whose law is to be enforced? There's a vast difference between the law of a king or the law of man and the law of God.
#8 | 6:01 to 6:59 | cleaned
The issue is, which I've stated previously, between theonomy, which is God's law, and autonomy, which is man's law. You remember I told you the Greek word autos means self, nomos means law. So autonomy just refers to self-law or the law of man. It doesn't matter if some individual is trying to determine the law for himself or if he's following some humanistic organization, it is still an autonomous law. And autonomy is always in contradiction to and in violation of the law of God. Now, I've told you before, I'm going to reiterate right now, a principle that you should grasp, and that is a king rules by his law. And that is true whether it is a literal, physical king, or whether it is a state government, or a federal government, or the sovereign God of heaven and earth. Because the law is nothing more than an expression of the rule and the will of the ruler. In other words, it is an expression of their control and of their dominion.
#9 | 6:59 to 8:16 | cleaned
Now, I understand that we are supposed to have in this country what is known as a representative government. But I can assure you that that phrase is totally outdated and we've not had any such representation in a number of years. That concept is basically gone. And to understand that, all you have to do is witness the absolute minor differences between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.
#10 | 8:16 to 8:46 | cleaned
Now, it is true that the Democrats are far more open and defiant and demanding that their agenda be adopted by everyone. If you understand that, you can also understand why the Democrats, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, declared Republicans as the enemies of the state. So in her eyes, the state was supreme and in her eyes, she was the state. She had the power. She was the Speaker of the House. And anyone who did not support her position or her agenda happened to be an enemy of the state. Now, we understand, or we should understand, that when you change rulers, there's also a change in law.
#11 | 8:47 to 9:40 | cleaned
Well, all you have to do is witness what was happening under Obama and what was happening under Trump. There may not have been a very, very vast difference, but there was certainly a difference. But if you will turn back in your Bibles to 1 Samuel 8, I referred to this passage last week, only a couple of verses, but this time I want to read the entire 21 verses beginning with verse 7 through verse 21. I want you to look at this because in this passage, Israel was demanding a man as king. And in doing so, they were rejecting God, but they were not only rejecting God, they were also rejecting God's law. And consequently, when they got a king, they're now going to be brought under a different law. For instance, look in 1 Samuel 8, beginning there with verse 7. "And the Lord said unto Samuel, 'Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee. For they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.'"
#12 | 9:40 to 10:50 | cleaned
"According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt, even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. Now therefore hearken unto their voice. Howbeit, yet protest solemnly unto them and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them." So you want a different king than God? Fine.
#13 | 10:52 to 11:15 | cleaned
Here is an expression of his law. Watch. "And Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people that asked of him a king. And he said, 'This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen, and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties, and will set them to ear his ground, and reap his harvest, and make his instruments of war, and his instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your best vineyards, and your oliveyards, and the best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodly young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.'"
#14 | 11:16 to 12:19 | cleaned
"And he will take the tenth of your sheep, and you shall be his servants. And you shall cry out in that day because of your king which you shall have chosen you, and the Lord will not hear you in that day." Nevertheless, the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said, "Nay, but we will have a king over us." And so they basically rejected God and His law and chose man and man's law. If you look in 1 Samuel chapter 12 and verse 12, Samuel reiterates the fact that they have rejected God as king. 1 Samuel 12 and verse 12, he said, "And when you saw Nahash the king of the children of Ammon came against you, you said unto me, 'Nay, but a king shall reign over us,' when the Lord your God was your king." So you cannot understand 1 Samuel chapter 8 unless you understand it as a transition from one law structure to another law structure. So when you change rulers, you basically change law structures, or at least that's the way it was.
#15 | 12:20 to 13:39 | cleaned
In the Bible, let me give you another illustration. If you will turn in your Bibles to 2 Kings chapter 17. 2 Kings chapter 17. And notice if you would be getting there with verse 7. 2 Kings 17, verse 7. Here's the same principle. "For so it was that the children of Israel had sinned against the Lord their God."
#16 | 13:40 to 14:11 | cleaned
Now you have to ask your question. How did they sin against the Lord their God? Here it is: "which had brought them up out of the land of Egypt from under the hand of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and feared other gods." Now watch. They sinned against God by fearing other gods. So here's another question. How do we know that they feared other gods? Well, here it is in verse 8.
#17 | 14:11 to 14:40 | cleaned
"And walked in the statutes," that is, the laws, "of the heathen, whom the Lord cast out from before the children of Israel, and of the kings of Israel which they had made. And the children of Israel did secretly those things that were not right against the Lord their God, and they built them high places in their cities, from the tower of the watchman to the fenced city." So they sinned against God by fearing other gods, and the reason it is evidence they feared other gods, they walked in the statutes, they walked in the laws of the other gods.
#18 | 14:40 to 15:14 | cleaned
So when you trade rulers, you basically trade law systems as well. Now what they began doing secretly in verse 9, if you read the rest of 2 Kings 17, they did it openly and brazenly as well. So let me spell it out for you. When one does not really, truly fear the Lord God, he will not walk in His law. If you truly, genuinely fear the Lord God of heaven and earth, you will obey and you will walk in His law. Now, here's another truth. Every individual, every family, every church, every society is going to have some type of law structure. You cannot live apart from a law structure. It may be an autonomous law system, it may be a humanistic law system, it may be a law system from the state or from the feds, but it will be a law system. You cannot live apart from law. All societies must be governed by some form of law. For instance, each one of us have heard the adage or the words, "the law of the jungle."
#19 | 15:15 to 16:32 | cleaned
We've heard mob law. We've also heard gang law and vigilante law. The point I'm trying to make is, I don't care how corrupt, how depraved, how sinful, how wicked, how rebellious men are. There has to be some law system. And even among thieves, there's an honor among thieves. When I say that, there's a simple system that they follow. And you get thrown in prison. There's a system there in prison. It is a law system.
#20 | 16:34 to 17:10 | cleaned
It doesn't have to be with the warden. It doesn't have to be with the guards. It is there established by the prisoners themselves. So when you reject God's law, the only alternative is man's law. And inevitably, when you have man's law, you're going to either descend into anarchy or tyranny.
#21 | 17:10 to 17:31 | cleaned
Now, 1 Samuel chapter 22 is a good illustration of this. Now, before I get to 1 Samuel 22, let me emphasize the fact that Saul is the king of Israel. And Saul has been rejected by God because of his rebellion against God. If you'll look in your Bibles to 1 Samuel chapter 15, God had set Saul on a mission, and that mission was that he was to slay utterly the Amalekites and everything that they had.
#22 | 17:32 to 18:11 | cleaned
Well, now, you know the story. The Bible says that he spared Agag, the king of the Amalekites, and the best of the oxen and the best of the sheep. And when Samuel came to see Saul, Saul said, "Blessed be thou of the Lord. I performed all the words of the Lord." And about that time, something went "baa." Samuel said, "Saul, if you obeyed God, what meaneth the bleating of the sheep and the lowing of the oxen in mine ear? If you'd obeyed God, everything would be dead." Saul said, "But the people spared the best of the sheep and the best of the oxen, that they might sacrifice them to God." And that's when Samuel said, "Hath the Lord as great delight in sacrifice and offering, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to hearken is better than sacrifice, and to obey is better than the fat of rams." And God rejected Saul. Look at it. 1 Samuel 15 at verses 10 and 11: "Then came the word of the Lord unto Samuel saying, 'It repenteth me that I've set up Saul to be king, for he is turned back from following me and hath not performed my commandments.'"
#23 | 18:11 to 19:27 | cleaned
And it grieved Samuel and he cried unto the Lord all night. Now, note, if you would. God says Saul has turned back from following me. How can we tell? How do we know that Saul turned back? Well, God says, here's the evidence. He has not kept my commandments. It's just that simple. God rejected him. Now skip down to verse 26 through 28, because Saul is trying to get Samuel to worship with him. And verse 26 of 1 Samuel 15, "And Samuel said unto Saul, 'I will not return with thee, for thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.' And as Samuel turned about to go away, he, Saul, laid hold upon the skirt of his, Samuel's, mantle, and it rent. And Samuel said unto him, 'The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbor of thine that is better than thyself.'" Now, the interesting thing is, God has rejected Saul because of his rebellion.
#24 | 19:28 to 20:37 | cleaned
But here's an interesting thing. Although Saul was rejected by God and basically condemned by God, God did not immediately smite or destroy King Saul. Did you know that King Saul reigned 40 years? After this rejection, all of his reign was basically anarchy and tyranny. So let me just mention this again. And it's important that you understand in verse 10, when he said this, listen carefully, he said, or verse 11, "It repenteth me that I've set up Saul to be king, for he is turned back from following me and he hath not kept my commandments." How do we know that Saul turned back? And the answer is he did not keep God's commandments.
#25 | 20:38 to 21:37 | cleaned
One of the problems that we've had and do have in this country still is that most people generally believe anything that they hear. And when I say that, especially if someone professes to be a Christian, I just—I just listened to a little broadcast and I think I read it as well. But the man was saying that 86 percent of the Congress of the United States professes to be Christian. Eighty-six percent. If we had 86 percent of Congress that were real, genuine Christians, we would not be in the mess that we're in. The problem is this. We believe a profession of everyone, regardless of their lives. And what did God say? God said, "By their fruits, you shall know them." Professions are cheap. They are absolutely worthless unless your profession is backed up by obedience. That profession is absolutely worthless, null and void.
#26 | 21:38 to 22:52 | cleaned
Now, let me tell you something about King Saul. He was the king. So that means he was the chief law enforcement officer in Israel. The Bible says in the book of Ecclesiastes chapter 8 and verse 4, "Where the word of the king is, there is power. And who may say unto him, 'What doest thou?'" Well, a lot of kings used to claim to rule by divine right that God had established them in what they said is law. I hope you understand. That's all. One of the Latin phrases that was used for many, many years was Rex Lex. The king is law. Samuel Rutherford wrote the book entitled Lex Rex, the law is king. In other words, he's proving that the king is just as much to be in subjection and submission to the law of God as anyone else is.
#27 | 22:53 to 23:52 | cleaned
Now, what has Saul done? And what is Saul doing at this point? When you get to 1 Samuel chapter 22, Saul has been mercilessly chasing David, endeavoring to murder him. Now David was totally and completely innocent. He was not guilty of anything that was worthy of death. And yet Saul was pursuing him relentlessly in order that he might destroy David. So, you want to know, why did Saul want to kill David? Look in your Bibles to 1 Samuel chapter 20, and let's begin there with verse 30. Look what Saul said to Jonathan and what he tried to do. Jonathan is his son. "Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan. And he said unto him, 'Thou son of the perverse, rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness? For as long as the son of Jesse liveth upon the ground, thou shalt not be established, nor thy kingdom.'"
#28 | 23:53 to 25:06 | cleaned
"Wherefore now send and fetch him unto me, for he shall surely die." And Jonathan answered Saul his father, and said unto him, "Wherefore shall he be slain? What hath he done?" And Saul cast a javelin at him to smite him, whereby Jonathan knew it was the determination of his father to slay David. So the reason Saul wanted David dead was to keep his kingdom going, to establish Jonathan in his stead. He wanted to have a lineage. That is not what is going to happen because he knew that in order for Jonathan to be king, he had to slay David.
#29 | 25:06 to 25:50 | cleaned
He had to murder him. When you get to 1 Samuel chapter 22, Saul has tried to murder David. But David eluded him and he flees in the night and he ends up at Nob where Ahimelech is the priest, and he gets some food for the few men with him as well as himself, and he also gets the sword of Goliath. So now, when you get to chapter 22, David had escaped into the cave of Adullam, but the prophet told him, "Don't stay there. Get out, go." And so David went back to Judah. Now, watch this. Let's pick it up again in 1 Samuel 22 and verse 6. "When Saul heard that David was discovered," that is, he's back in the land of Judah. Remember, the Benjamites and the Judahites were in the same portion of the land.
#30 | 25:50 to 26:55 | cleaned
The two tribes dwelt together. OK, so Saul is in Gibeah under a tree in Ramah, having his spear in his hand, and all his servants were standing around about him. And Saul said unto his servants that stood about him, "Hear now, you Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and vineyards and make you all captains of thousands and captains of hundreds, that all of you have conspired against me? And there is none that showeth me that my son hath made a league or a covenant with the son of Jesse. And there is none of you that is sorry for me, or showeth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me to lie in wait, as at this day." Now, let me point out the fact that number one, Saul probably already knew that Jonathan and David had entered into a covenant together. Secondly, I want to point out that he's telling his men, "Look, if David gets on the throne, he's not going to make every one of you a captain of a thousand or captain of a hundred or captain of fifty."
#31 | 26:56 to 28:07 | cleaned
"He's not going to give you lands and fields. He's not going to give you 40 acres and a mule. He's just not going to do it. No, no, no. He's not going to do one thing for you. Look at what I've done." This is what he's saying. "You're here now. Look what I've given you. Look what I've done for you." And then he goes into this little rant.
#32 | 28:07 to 28:27 | cleaned
He said, "Why is it? Did all of you conspire against me?" Listen, "and none of you are sorry for me. You should have told me." But, you know, his heart is broken. His men didn't tell him. You know, come on. Here's a man that is supposed to be a king trying to rely upon the pity of others, and yet, here he is. He says, "Why didn't you tell me?"
#33 | 28:27 to 29:02 | cleaned
Well, no one had anything to answer until you get to verse nine. Watch this. "Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul." He was a herdsman. He was the chief herdsman, by the way. "Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul, and said, 'I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, to Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub. And he,' that is Ahimelech, 'inquired of the Lord for him, and gave him victuals, and gave him the sword of Goliath the Philistine.'" Hmm. Wow. Now, Doeg has just embellished and lied to Saul about what happened in 1 Samuel chapter 21. It is true that Ahimelech gave David and the few men with him some bread. It is true that he gave the sword of Goliath to David. It is false that he inquired of the Lord for David. Even Ahimelech denied doing that. Look in your Bibles. 1 Samuel chapter 22 at verses 14 and 15. "Then Ahimelech answered the king and said, 'And who is so faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son-in-law, and goeth at thy bidding and is honorable in thine house?'"
#34 | 29:04 to 30:44 | cleaned
"Did I then begin to inquire of God for him? Be it far from me. Let not the king impute anything unto his servant, nor to all the house of my father, for thy servant knew nothing of all this, less or more."
#35 | 30:45 to 30:58 | cleaned
Now, note if you would, even Ahimelech says, "Look, David's your son-in-law. Everyone knows how honorable David is." And by the way, David did lie to Ahimelech. Especially when he asked for the sword of Goliath. And Ahimelech said, "Well, where's your sword?" Well, he said, "I'm on a secret mission from the king, and it required haste. I just left mine at the house. Let me have this one." Yeah. So Ahimelech was totally innocent.
#36 | 30:59 to 31:35 | cleaned
He didn't have any idea what was going on. And like he said, David was honorable in all of his house. Let me tell you something about Doeg. Doeg was a malicious, vicious, ambitious and evil man who is desirous of nothing but promotion. I want you to understand a principle. I believe it's being enunciated here. One that I've told you before, and that is this. You do not owe the truth to someone who's going to abuse the truth. Do you realize if Doeg had kept his mouth shut, it would have saved the lives of an awful lot of people.
#37 | 31:35 to 32:20 | cleaned
They would not have died. All Saul was doing was having a pity party. He didn't know anything until Doeg stepped forward. By the way, if you want to find out what happened to Doeg, you need to read Psalm 52. Because Psalm 52 is a psalm written by David specifically against Doeg and his lying, vicious tongue. Now, there is another principle that we need to understand, and that is this.
#38 | 32:22 to 32:52 | cleaned
A lie that is joined to the truth becomes an untruth. Lies are untruths in and of themselves. And when you take an untruth and you join it to truth, truth then becomes a distortion and a misrepresentation of the facts. And in light of this distortion, when Doeg said, "I saw him personally inquire of God for David and give him bread and give him a sword," wow, that led to verse 17, look at it, or verse, yeah, verse 11 it is, look at it, in verse 11.
#39 | 32:52 to 33:39 | cleaned
"Then the king sent to call Ahimelech the priest, the son of Ahitub, and all his father's house. The priests were in Nob, and they came, all of them, to the king."
#40 | 33:39 to 33:50 | cleaned
Now watch this, he called, he called. All these priests came, there were 85 of them. And Saul asks Ahimelech, "Why did you do this?" And Ahimelech denies doing anything. "David's your son-in-law. He's an honorable man. Yeah, I gave him food. I gave him the sword." By the way, the sword was his. It belonged to David. He killed Goliath. He took it from Goliath. So Saul then looks at his soldiers.
#41 | 33:51 to 34:28 | cleaned
Look at it in verse 17. "And the king said unto the footmen that stood about him, 'Turn and slay the priests of the Lord, because their hand is also with David, and because they knew when he fled and did not show it unto me.' But the servants of the king," that is the soldiers, "would not put forth their hand to fall upon the priests of the Lord." The soldiers were far better men than their commander.
#42 | 34:28 to 35:01 | cleaned
They refused to obey an unlawful order. They refused to murder innocent people just because the king gave them a command to do so.
#43 | 35:02 to 35:15 | cleaned
Now, let me make a statement. No soldier, no law enforcement officer, is obligated to obey an unlawful order. What is an unlawful order? Let me answer it in two ways. First of all, an unlawful order is one that violates the law of God. God isn't only king and judge and lawgiver. One of the titles given for Him in the Bible is the Lord God of hosts. The word host means armies. He is the Lord God of the armies. So God is not only judge and lawgiver and king, He is the commander-in-chief. He is the one who is on top. No one has the right to violate God's law. No one has the right to murder or steal or commit adultery. There is no such thing as a right to sin. So an unlawful order, first and foremost, would be that which would violate God's law.
#44 | 35:16 to 36:31 | cleaned
Let me point something else out. Even if Ahimelech did what Saul charged him with, which was not a sin and was not a crime, but even if he did that, and if he was guilty of what Saul thought was treason, only Ahimelech should have died, not the other 84 priests. God says in Ezekiel 18 verse 20, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son."
#45 | 36:31 to 37:10 | cleaned
"The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." So God says the soul that sinneth, he shall die. So even if Ahimelech was guilty, he would have been the only one that should have been killed. So, an unlawful order first and foremost is an order or command that is contrary to the law of God. Secondly, an unlawful order is an order that is contrary to the Constitution of the United States. Whether you like the Constitution or not, agree with the Constitution or not is immaterial right now. But Article 6, Paragraph 2 says that this Constitution shall be the supreme law of the land. The President of the United States is not the supreme law of the land. Congress is not the supreme law of the land. The judicial officers are not the supreme law of the land. It is the Constitution. Not the President, not Congress, not judges, no one has the right to disannul or nullify the Constitution of the United States. Every one of those individuals have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
#46 | 37:10 to 38:25 | cleaned
Now, there are several in here who were in the military. I took the same oath. Here's the oath that every soldier takes: "I, [blank]," you have to state your name there, "I, [blank], do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of officers appointed over me," listen, "according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, so help me God." Now, you just said, "Well, I'm going to obey the President of the United States. You just said I'm going to obey my officers over me." Yes, that was in that oath. But it also said, "according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice." Here's what the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 809, Articles 90 through 92 says, listen carefully. Article 90 makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the lawful command of his superior officer.
#47 | 38:26 to 39:46 | cleaned
Article 91, the lawful order of a warrant officer. Article 92, the lawful general order, and also Article 92, a lawful order. In each case, the military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey lawful orders, and they indeed have an obligation to disobey unlawful orders, including orders from the President that do not comply with the Constitution or the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The moral and legal obligation is to the United States Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders. An unlawful order is an unlawful order.
#48 | 39:46 to 40:35 | cleaned
It is not enforceable and it should not be obeyed. Now, when Saul looked at his soldiers and said, "You fall upon the priests, you kill them." "No, we're not going to do that." They were not guilty of insurrection. They were not guilty of rebellion. They were not guilty of treason. Saul had no right to issue that order to begin with. It was an unlawful order. It was a violation not only of the law of God, it was also a violation of the covenant that existed between the king and the people. And so the soldiers were absolutely right to disobey that order. Likewise today, all law enforcement officers and all United States soldiers have a duty and an obligation to disobey any order or any regulation that violates the law of God or the Constitution of the United States.
#49 | 40:35 to 41:30 | cleaned
Just simply because someone has joined the military or someone has become a police officer does not mean that he is now obligated to violate his conscience or his understanding. His right to believe and act accordingly still exists. Yes, there may be a fight to maintain that. But on the other hand, to be truthful, I'd rather have men upset with me than rather than to have the sovereign God of heaven and earth upset with me. The problem is this: most military folks, most law enforcement folks, have no idea of the demands and commands of God's law and the regulations in God's law. They also have no idea of the rights that are listed in the Constitution of the United States. Our rights do not come from the Constitution, our rights come from God. Those rights are just simply expressed in the Constitution. Moreover, we have a multitude of other rights that are not listed in the Constitution. When you get to Article 9, it says this, the Ninth Amendment: "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
#50 | 41:31 to 42:52 | cleaned
So we have a whole lot more rights than those that are listed in the Constitution. And the truth is, unhappily, that most military men and most law enforcement have been so brainwashed, they tend to think that all laws are just and that any order is an order and it must be obeyed, even if common sense dictates otherwise. So let me just put it to you plainly. We have left the days of Andy and Barney.
#51 | 42:52 to 43:26 | cleaned
We're not in Mayberry anymore. We've left the days of Adam-12. You remember that old TV series? It had two cops, Martin Milner and Kent McCord, and it just was demonstrating what it was like in the daily life of police officers. That series ran from September 1968 to May 1975. And basically what it did was introduce to the general public police jargon and police procedures is what it amounted to. But Adam-12 was caught on the line of Andy and Barney.
#52 | 43:27 to 44:12 | cleaned
Everything was easy going and kind. So let me try to state this truth another way. Officer Friendly has disappeared. And so is Officer Helpful. We are now in the grip of the attitude, "It is us against them." The "us" happens to be the cops, and the "them" happens to be anyone who's not a law enforcement officer. It's us against them. We're in the day of no-knock raids. We're in the day of "do as I say, and you will not get hurt." We are in the age and in the day now when it's almost impossible just simply to talk to, communicate with, or reason with law enforcement.
#53 | 44:13 to 44:54 | cleaned
It all boils down to this: obey or else. Anything other than instant obedience to a law enforcement officer today is considered resistance. That's when they start beating you with a baton and tasing you and start saying, "Stop resisting, stop resisting," even though you may not have even lifted a hand. You just have not rendered immediate obedience to whatever they say. The interesting thing is when the king looked at his soldiers and said, "Kill those priests."
#54 | 44:55 to 45:27 | cleaned
They not only hesitated, they refused to jump at the king's command. They knew that command was unreasonable, unwarranted, and unlawful.
#55 | 45:29 to 45:41 | cleaned
Now, here's another interesting thing. When Doeg stepped forward, Doeg was not a soldier. Doeg was a herdsman. And when the king looked at Doeg and said, "Kill these 85 priests." "Yes, sir." And he turned around and murdered 85 priests. Here's a principle. Regardless of the situation, there will always be someone who is willing to do what is wrong to ingratiate himself with those in power and to appease them for promotion and recognition. And that's what Doeg was doing.
#56 | 45:42 to 46:42 | cleaned
Look at it, if you would, in verses 18 and 19. "And the king said unto Doeg, 'Turn thou and fall upon the priests.' And Doeg the Edomite turned and fell upon the priests and slew on that day fourscore and five priests that did wear a linen ephod." Let me just stop here. Doeg the Edomite, which means he was a descendant of Esau. Esau hated spiritual things. He loved fleshly things. So here, Doeg the Edomite has just murdered 85 priests. But that's not all. Look at verse 19.
#57 | 46:44 to 47:25 | cleaned
"And Nob, the city of the priests, smote he with the edge of the sword, both men and women, children and sucklings, and oxen and asses, and sheep, with the edge of the sword." So he murdered not just the 85 priests, he murdered women and children and animals as well. In other words, he killed the priests. He murdered the priests and their wives and their children, just like he'd butcher sheep.
#58 | 47:25 to 47:53 | cleaned
It meant nothing to him. And unhappily, there are men just like that today, some are in the military, some are in law enforcement, some are just what you and I would call civilians. Just recently, within the last two months, I read where in Alabama, and I've been through that little town a hundred times, where one black man shot and killed, murdered another black man because the one that got shot, the one who shot him thought he was taking too long in crossing the street. He wouldn't get out of his way, shot him eight times. Shot him eight times because he's too slow in crossing the street. That's where we are today. That's exactly where we are today.
#59 | 47:53 to 48:53 | cleaned
The problem, you see, is this. Doeg did not hesitate to use force. There are plenty of people who will not hesitate to use force. But it is true that there are some in the military. There are some in law enforcement who still have a little common sense, who understand their oath that they took. Who understand that they are not to violate the law of God and they're not to violate their oath to the Constitution. There are some that still are able to think and to reason, and they're not just going to follow orders just to be following orders. I know that you heard it said and I've heard it said when some cop does something that is just absolutely insane, "I'm just doing my duty. I'm just following orders." Yeah. And I tell you what, we have to understand. We have to understand that when people have no respect for God and His law, they have no respect for their fellow man.
#60 | 48:55 to 50:05 | cleaned
That's where we are today. We understand that our rights come from God. They may be expressed in the Constitution. But they come from God. There are fine folks in the military, there are fine folks in law enforcement, but there are some who are just like Doeg. They will slay you, mutilate you, hurt you for the silliest and the simplest reason. I'll show you some of that next week, it is unbelievable. You remember what God said
#61 | 50:08 to 50:48 | cleaned
through the prophet Hosea, in Hosea 4, verse 6, when he said this, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." And unhappily, most Christians do not have the knowledge of the Word of God. And we do not have the knowledge of the Constitution. We do not have the knowledge of our law. We don't. And consequently, we are easily seduced, easily led astray, and easily destroyed. So let me make just two applications today.
#62 | 50:49 to 51:16 | cleaned
The first one is this. I want you to understand that the issue is always theonomy or autonomy. That's what it is. It's always God's law or man's law. We're either going to be ruled by God or we're going to be ruled by man. And it's not whether or not we will have a law system. Every society has to have a law system. It's which law system would you have? Will you be ruled by God or will you be ruled by man? No society can exist apart from law. And those who reject God's law condemn themselves to be ruled by humanistic law, which inevitably is going to end up either in anarchy or totalitarianism. Here's the second application, and I want you to listen, because I hope that this application will put a little fight in you, I hope it'll make your blood boil and I hope it'll give you a little steel in your backbone because this quote is going to come from a court case and listen carefully.
#63 | 51:16 to 52:24 | cleaned
It is United States versus Johnson, 76 F. Supp. page 438. And here's what the court said. This is from 1947. Let me begin by saying this, we must not only know our rights, we must engage in combat to maintain our rights. Now, I'm not just saying that. Those are the words of the court. The position that the court said that we must take is the position of a belligerent claimant. You know what a belligerent person is, don't you?
#64 | 52:25 to 53:08 | cleaned
Someone who's stubborn, someone who's obstinate, someone who's not going to give in, not going to give up, not going to give out. He's just going to stand there. Here's what the court said. Talking about the Fifth Amendment, but it would apply to all. "The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor the man who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto."
#65 | 53:08 to 53:36 | cleaned
"It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be sustained and retained only by sustained combat. It cannot be retained by an attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in the flesh. The one who is persuaded by honeyed words or moral suasion to testify or produce documents rather than make a last-ditch stand simply loses this protection. Once he testifies in part, he has waived his right and must on cross-examination or otherwise testify to the whole transaction. He must refuse to answer or produce and test the matter in contempt proceedings or habeas corpus."
#66 | 53:38 to 54:32 | cleaned
So what did the court say? If you want your rights, you have to be a belligerent claimant. It is a trial by combat. If you are ignorant, tough, you lose. If you're indifferent, tough, you lose. If you're passive and don't care, tough, you lose. The court said, if you are going to have your rights, you must fight for them. May I tell you that is also a principle of Scripture? Because if you don't use the truth, you will lose the truth. And if you do not stand for what is right, ultimately, you're going to fall for anything. So we need to understand, yes, the Bible does say something about law enforcement. But the law that needs to be enforced first and foremost would be God's law. And secondly, we could say in this country, the Constitution of the United States, because it is supposed to be the supreme law of the land.
#67 | 54:32 to 55:44 | cleaned
And every judge, every officer, every president, every congressperson takes an oath to uphold that constitution. And those who fail to do that are not only oath violators, they are traitors and they are treasonous to the very document that they promised to uphold and to honor. Yes. No one has to obey an unlawful order. Because it is unlawful from the beginning. The Bible does teach a lot about law enforcement.
#68 | 55:44 to 56:27 | cleaned
Father, in the name of Jesus Christ, we ask for your grace. We ask for your mercy. We pray, Lord, that you would teach us and you'd make us belligerent when it comes to standing for truth and right and righteousness and holiness. Give us grace that we may serve thee acceptably with reverence and godly fear. In the name of Jesus Christ, we ask and pray. Amen.
#69 | 56:28 to 56:50 | cleaned

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-05T16:40:59Z

The Bible and Law Enforcement - Part 1

John Weaver | Freedom Ministries

John Weaver introduces a series on the Bible and law enforcement by examining 1 Samuel 22, where King Saul orders the murder of 85 priests and the destruction of Nob. He argues that the fundamental issue is whether society is governed by God's law (theonomy) or man's law (autonomy), and that all societies require some law system. Using Saul's unlawful command and the soldiers' refusal, Weaver teaches that no one is obligated to obey orders that violate God's law or the U.S. Constitution, and that Christians must be knowledgeable and belligerent in defending their rights.

Introduction: The Question of Whose Law Is Enforced

Weaver explains the sermon series was prompted by a friend's question and the current lawlessness. He introduces the central question: whose law is to be enforced?

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Hear now, you Benjamites; will the son of Jesse give every one of you fields and vineyards, and make all of you captains of thousands and captains of hundreds, that all of you have conspired against me? And there is none that showeth me that my son hath made a league with the son of Jesse. And there is none of you that is sorry for me, or showeth unto me that my son hath stirred up my servant against me to lie in wait, as at this day."

Then answered Doeg the Edomite, which was set over the servants of Saul, and said,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, to Ahimelech, the son of Ahitub." "And he inquired of the Lord for him, and gave him victuals, and gave him the sword of Goliath, the Philistine."

Then the king sent to call Ahimelech the priest, the son of Ahitub, and all his father's house, the priests that were in Nob, and they came, all of them, to the king. And Saul said,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Hear now, thou son of Ahitub."

And he answered, "Here I am, my lord.

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

" And Saul said unto him, "

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

" Then Ahimelech answered the king and said, "

And who is so faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son-in-law, and goeth at thy bidding and is honorable in thine house? Did I then begin to inquire of God for him?"

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Be it far from me. Let not the king impute anything unto his servant, nor to all the house of my father. For thy servant knew nothing of all this, less or more."

And the king said,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Thou shalt surely die, Ahimelech, thou and all thy father's house."

And the king said unto the footmen that stood about him,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Turn and slay the priests of the Lord, because their hand is also with David, and because they knew when he fled and did not show it me."

But the servants of the king would not put forth their hand to fall upon the priests of the Lord. Then the king said to Doeg,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 22:6-20

"Turn now and fall upon the priests."

Theonomy vs. Autonomy: Two Opposing Law Systems

Weaver contrasts God's law (theonomy) with man's law (autonomy), emphasizing that a king rules by his law, and changing rulers changes law structures.

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 8:7-21

"And the Lord said unto Samuel, 'Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee. For they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.'"

Israel's Rejection of God as King (1 Samuel 8)

Israel demanded a human king, rejecting God and His law. Samuel warned them of the oppressive nature of human kingship.

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 8:7-21

"And the Lord said unto Samuel, 'Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee. For they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.'"

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 8:7-21

"And he will take the tenth of your sheep, and you shall be his servants. And you shall cry out in that day because of your king which you shall have chosen you, and the Lord will not hear you in that day."

Nevertheless, the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel, and they said,

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 8:7-21

"Nay, but we will have a king over us."

The Principle: Trading Rulers Means Trading Law Systems (2 Kings 17)

Israel sinned by fearing other gods, evidenced by walking in their statutes. Rejecting God's law leads to adopting man's law.

Saul's Rebellion and Rejection by God (1 Samuel 15)

Saul disobeyed God's command to destroy the Amalekites, leading to his rejection as king. His disobedience proved he turned from following God.

Scripture Reading — 1 Samuel 15:10-11

"And Samuel said unto Saul, 'I will not return with thee, for thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, and the Lord hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.' And as Samuel turned about to go away, he, Saul, laid hold upon the skirt of his, Samuel's, mantle, and it rent. And Samuel said unto him, 'The Lord hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbor of thine that is better than thyself.'"

Now, the interesting thing is, God has rejected Saul because of his rebellion.

Saul's Unlawful Order and the Soldiers' Refusal (1 Samuel 22:6-17)

Saul, motivated by jealousy, ordered the murder of the priests. His soldiers refused the unlawful order, demonstrating moral courage.

Scripture Reading — Psalm 52

They would not have died. All Saul was doing was having a pity party. He didn't know anything until Doeg stepped forward. By the way, if you want to find out what happened to Doeg, you need to read Psalm 52. Because Psalm 52 is a psalm written by David specifically against Doeg and his lying, vicious tongue. Now, there is another principle that we need to understand, and that is this. A lie that is joined to the truth becomes an untruth. Lies are untruths in and of themselves. And when you take an untruth and you join it to truth, truth then becomes a distortion and a misrepresentation of the facts. And in light of this distortion, when Doeg said, "I saw him personally inquire of God for David and give him bread and give him a sword," wow, that led to verse 17, look at it, or verse, yeah, verse 11 it is, look at it, in verse 11.

Defining Unlawful Orders: God's Law and the Constitution

An unlawful order violates God's law or the U.S. Constitution. Military oaths require obedience only to lawful orders.

Scripture Reading — Ezekiel 18:20

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son." "The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

Doeg's Willingness to Commit Evil for Promotion

Doeg, an Edomite herdsman, obeyed Saul's unlawful order and massacred the priests and the city of Nob, illustrating how some will do evil to gain favor.

The Need for Knowledge and Belligerent Defense of Rights

Christians must know God's Word and the Constitution. The court case U.S. v. Johnson teaches that rights must be actively and belligerently defended.

Applications: Theonomy vs. Autonomy and the Duty to Fight for Rights

The issue is always God's law or man's law. Believers must be belligerent claimants, fighting to retain their God-given rights.

The Bible and Law Enforcement - Part 1

John Weaver | SermonAudio

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	SermonAudio
Media ID	11121185226433
Subject	Civil Government
Course	Civil Government: Power, Nations, and Constitutional Order: War in the Gates
Genre	Sermon
Date	2021-01-10
Dictation Name
Book	Book 012: The Bible and Law Enforcement — Chapter 1
Source Timed Segments	69

Lecture Guide

Outline

Introduction: The Question of Whose Law Is Enforced: Weaver explains the sermon series was prompted by a friend's question and the current lawlessness. He introduces the central question: whose law is to be enforced?
Theonomy vs. Autonomy: Two Opposing Law Systems: Weaver contrasts God's law (theonomy) with man's law (autonomy), emphasizing that a king rules by his law, and changing rulers changes law structures.
Israel's Rejection of God as King (1 Samuel 8): Israel demanded a human king, rejecting God and His law. Samuel warned them of the oppressive nature of human kingship.
The Principle: Trading Rulers Means Trading Law Systems (2 Kings 17): Israel sinned by fearing other gods, evidenced by walking in their statutes. Rejecting God's law leads to adopting man's law.
Saul's Rebellion and Rejection by God (1 Samuel 15): Saul disobeyed God's command to destroy the Amalekites, leading to his rejection as king. His disobedience proved he turned from following God.
Saul's Unlawful Order and the Soldiers' Refusal (1 Samuel 22:6-17): Saul, motivated by jealousy, ordered the murder of the priests. His soldiers refused the unlawful order, demonstrating moral courage.
Defining Unlawful Orders: God's Law and the Constitution: An unlawful order violates God's law or the U.S. Constitution. Military oaths require obedience only to lawful orders.
Doeg's Willingness to Commit Evil for Promotion: Doeg, an Edomite herdsman, obeyed Saul's unlawful order and massacred the priests and the city of Nob, illustrating how some will do evil to gain favor.
The Need for Knowledge and Belligerent Defense of Rights: Christians must know God's Word and the Constitution. The court case U.S. v. Johnson teaches that rights must be actively and belligerently defended.
Applications: Theonomy vs. Autonomy and the Duty to Fight for Rights: The issue is always God's law or man's law. Believers must be belligerent claimants, fighting to retain their God-given rights.

Major Themes

Key Arguments

A king rules by his law; changing rulers changes law structures.

Weaver argues that law is an expression of the ruler's will. When Israel rejected God as king, they adopted man's law, leading to oppression.

Weaver says: 'A king rules by his law... when you change rulers, there's also a change in law.'

Saul's rejection by God was evidenced by his disobedience to God's commandments.

Saul's failure to keep God's commandments proved he had turned from following God. Profession without obedience is worthless.

Weaver states: 'How do we know that Saul turned back? And the answer is he did not keep God's commandments.'

The soldiers' refusal to obey Saul's unlawful order was righteous.

The soldiers recognized the order to kill the priests was unlawful and refused, demonstrating that obedience to God supersedes obedience to man.

Weaver says: 'The soldiers were far better men than their commander. They refused to obey an unlawful order.'

An unlawful order is one that violates God's law or the Constitution.

Weaver defines an unlawful order as contrary to God's law or the supreme law of the land, the U.S. Constitution. Military oaths require only lawful obedience.

Weaver explains: 'An unlawful order is an order or command that is contrary to the law of God... or contrary to the Constitution of the United States.'

Rights come from God and must be actively defended.

Our rights are God-given, not granted by the Constitution. The court in U.S. v. Johnson emphasized that rights require a 'belligerent claimant' to be retained.

Weaver quotes: 'The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor the man who is ignorant of his rights.'

Scripture References

1 Samuel 22:6-20: The primary text of the sermon, describing Saul's order to kill the priests and Doeg's massacre.
1 Samuel 8:7-21: Israel demands a king, rejecting God as their ruler. Samuel warns them of the oppressive nature of human kingship.
1 Samuel 12:12: Samuel reiterates that Israel rejected God as king when they demanded a human king.
2 Kings 17:7-9: Israel sinned by fearing other gods and walking in their statutes, illustrating that changing rulers changes law systems.
1 Samuel 15:10-11: God rejects Saul as king because he turned from following God and did not keep His commandments.
1 Samuel 15:26-28: Samuel tells Saul that the kingdom is torn from him and given to a neighbor better than he.
Ecclesiastes 8:4: Where the word of a king is, there is power; illustrating the authority of a ruler's law.
1 Samuel 20:30-33: Saul's anger against Jonathan and his determination to kill David to secure the kingdom.
1 Samuel 22:14-15: Ahimelech defends his innocence, stating he did not inquire of the Lord for David.
Psalm 52: A psalm of David against Doeg, condemning his lying and vicious tongue.
Ezekiel 18:20: The soul that sins shall die; the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, establishing individual responsibility.
Hosea 4:6: My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; applied to Christians' ignorance of God's Word and the Constitution.

Historical References

Robert Winthrop, U.S. Speaker of the House (1849): Quoted for his statement that men must be controlled either by the Bible or the bayonet, emphasizing the necessity of internal moral restraint.
Samuel Rutherford, Lex Rex (1644): Referenced for the principle that the law is king (Lex Rex), not the king is law (Rex Lex), asserting that rulers are subject to God's law.
U.S. Constitution, Article 6, Paragraph 2 (Supremacy Clause): Cited to establish that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not the president or Congress.
Uniform Code of Military Justice, Articles 90-92: Referenced to show that military personnel must obey only lawful orders and have a duty to disobey unlawful ones.
Ninth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Cited to argue that rights not enumerated are retained by the people, and rights come from God, not the Constitution.
United States v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 438 (1947): A court case stating that the privilege against self-incrimination is a 'fighting clause' requiring a belligerent claimant to retain it.
TV series Adam-12 (1968-1975): Mentioned as an example of a past era when police were portrayed as helpful and approachable, contrasting with today's adversarial climate.

Important Quotes

Men, in a word, must necessarily be controlled either by a power within them or a power without them, either by the word of God or by the strong arm of man, either by the Bible or by the bayonet.

This quote from Robert Winthrop encapsulates the sermon's central theme: society must be governed either by internal moral restraint (God's Word) or external force (man's law).

A king rules by his law. And that is true whether it is a literal, physical king, or whether it is a state government, or a federal government, or the sovereign God of heaven and earth.

Establishes the principle that law is an expression of the ruler's will, foundational to the argument about theonomy vs. autonomy.

No soldier, no law enforcement officer, is obligated to obey an unlawful order.

A key application of the sermon: obedience to authority is not absolute when commands violate God's law or the Constitution.

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.

Hosea 4:6 is applied to Christians' ignorance of God's Word and the Constitution, leading to their destruction.

When you reject God's law, the only alternative is man's law. And inevitably, when you have man's law, you're going to either descend into anarchy or tyranny.

Summarizes the inevitable outcome of autonomy: societal breakdown into chaos or oppressive rule.

Discussion Questions

[Question]

What does it mean that 'a king rules by his law,' and how does this principle apply to our understanding of God's authority versus human government?

[Context]

Weaver introduces the concept that law expresses the ruler's will, contrasting God's law with man's law.

[Question]

How does the account of Israel demanding a king in 1 Samuel 8 illustrate the dangers of rejecting God's law for human autonomy?

[Context]

Weaver reads 1 Samuel 8 to show that Israel's demand for a king was a rejection of God and His law.

[Question]

In what ways did Saul's disobedience in 1 Samuel 15 demonstrate that he had turned from following God, and what does this teach about the relationship between profession and obedience?

[Context]

Weaver argues that Saul's failure to keep God's commandments proved his rebellion, despite his profession.

[Question]

Why did Saul's soldiers refuse to kill the priests, and what principles can we draw from their example regarding obedience to authority?

[Context]

The soldiers refused an unlawful order, showing that obedience to God takes precedence over human commands.

[Question]

According to Weaver, what makes an order 'unlawful,' and how should Christians evaluate commands from government or military superiors?

[Context]

Weaver defines unlawful orders as those violating God's law or the Constitution, and explains the military oath.

[Question]

What does the court case United States v. Johnson teach about the necessity of being a 'belligerent claimant' for our rights, and how does this apply to Christians today?

[Context]

Weaver reads from the case to emphasize that rights must be actively and stubbornly defended.

[Question]

How does the example of Doeg illustrate the danger of those who are willing to do evil to gain favor with those in power?

[Context]

Doeg obeyed Saul's unlawful order and massacred the priests, showing how ambition can lead to great wickedness.

Applications

Format deepseek deepseek-v4-pro structured study JSON | Source Commentary.net transcript enrichment

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-06T07:44:33Z