Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to him, “King Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us from Your Majesty’s hand. But even if he does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.” Daniel 3:16-18
But Jesus remained silent. The high priest said to him, “I
charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the
Son of God.” (Matthew 26:63)
Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather
than human beings!" (Acts 5:29)
If you don’t know the story, King Nebuchadnezzar had built a
statue of himself, and issued an irrevocable command that anyone who didn’t bow
down to it on command was to be thrown in a fiery furnace. Shadrach, Meshach,
and Abednego refused, and when they were brought before the king, the passage
above was their response. When the trio said they didn’t need to defend themselves
before the king, I don’t think they were saying, “You don’t have authority over
us. We don’t have to answer to you!”
Instead, I suspect they were saying, “King, you’ve known us or
known about us from the time we got here. Our conduct over the past __ years
have shown that we are loyal to you, but that we are more loyal to the God we
serve. You may throw us into the fiery furnace if you choose, but we won’t bow
down to the image you’ve set up.”
They were willing to violate man’s law in order to obey God’s law,
but in doing so, they accepted the fact that the man might kill them. This is
the model that I believe Martin Luther King, Jr. followed with his protests –
until Malcolm X and some others took over and set up the model of violence
being used today. Of course, the only reason they could use this statement is
because the king knew them. I couldn’t stand before any government official at
any level and make the same claim. The closest I could come would be to say to
look at my record.
Jesus’ technique when facing the high priest and the governor of
Judea was to remain silent rather than to defend Himself, but He didn’t have
the relationship with them that the trio had with the king and I think He was
not willing to give them any basis on which to not sentence Him to death. In
the Acts 5 passage, the apostles told the Sanhedrin that they must obey God
rather than men. They are the most confrontational of the three but again, they
offered no physical resistance and did nothing that was actually hateful or outside
of the Law. Instead, they went on to make it clear that the Sanhedrin was the
guilty party.
Yes, there are instances in the New Testament of stronger
behavior. In Acts 23:3, Paul says something less than kind to the high priest. He
apologizes, but it’s interesting to note that while the “insult” is mentioned,
the stronger statement (about God striking him) seems to be ignored. And, of
course, Jesus flipped tables and made a scourge with which He cleared the temple.
And, there doesn’t seem to be any legal action taken against Him for that
action. But while some people leap at the chance to claim their actions are in
line with these incidents, the question must be asked whether they are responding
to the events according to Scriptural principles, or are using the events as an
excuse to do what they want to do.
To put it simply, when you’re using the world’s techniques and “fighting
fire with fire,” you need to be very careful. You’re playing with fire, and if
you’re not very careful, you or someone unintended is likely to get burned.
Better that you follow Shadrach, Meshack, and Abednego’s example. That way, God
gets the glory, not you.
Comments
Post a Comment