Many who understand the wickedness involved in murder fail to realize that the scripture also warns “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer.”
At times, God called people to enter into war with the goal of killing their enemies. The Bible clearly distinguishes between this type of killing and murder.
A tremendous spiritual and physical battle wages around the value of life and the determination of when life begins. Unfortunately, Christians have incorporated the unscriptural terminology of the world by allowing the opposition to define these most important matters. This is especially true concerning the birth of a child. According to the Bible, a woman who is expecting is said to be “with child” (Genesis 16:11; Matthew 1:18). Modern terminology removes the direct association of the unborn to life. Sadly, the termination of the unborn life is simply labeled as an “abortion” rather than murder (the ungodly shedding of innocent blood). To abort means the cancellation of a mission. A woman who is “with child” has another living soul “with” her. As time progresses in the child’s development within the womb, the mother becomes “great with child” (Luke 2:5) until she is “ready to be delivered” (Revelation 12:4; see also 1 Samuel 4:19; Isaiah 26:17).
Although one individual may possess both power and authority, the two are not identical. Authority is the right or responsibility to do something whereas power is the ability to do something. Unfortunately, the modern versions missed this truth when they translated Matthew 28:18. Instead of properly expressing that because of the resurrection the Lord Jesus had been given all power in heaven and earth, these so-called bibles suggest that He had been instead given authority. The authority already resided with Him, but the resurrection declared Him “to be the Son of God with power” (Romans 1:4). His resurrection from the dead gave Him the power over death by conquering the one who possessed the power of death (Hebrews 2:14).
With the need so great, Christians frequently wonder why they are not used more in the Lord’s service and work. They fail to realize that their reputations have limited many of their opportunities. Until their reputations are repaired, their opportunities will remain hindered. In the early church, a problem came to the attention of the apostles when the “widows were neglected in the daily ministration” (Acts 6:1). As the apostles gave counsel for a solution, they suggested that the believers look out among them “seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom” (Acts 6:3). Why was it so important to consider the reputations of those men who were potential candidates? The apostles knew that the reputation of man hinders or helps in the service of the Lord.
Men not only develop reputations among other men, but they also develop a reputation with the Lord. A wise individual seeks “favour and good understanding in the sight of God and man.” Fortunately, the path to favour in the sight of God follows the same course as that of finding favour in the sight of the right kind of men. According to Proverbs 3:1-3, these elements include remembrance of God’s law, keeping the commandments, and forsaking not mercy and truth. Before dismissing the importance of this dual favour amongst both God and man, consider that the scriptures inform us that the Lord Jesus increased in wisdom leading to an increase in “favour with God and man.”
For the most part, David’s reputation is one to be admired. That reputation as a servant of God and of Saul was established by his pattern of godly behaviour. According to scripture, David’s “name was much set by.” Why? Because he “behaved himself more wisely than all the servants of Saul.” The way in which David conducted himself even during times of extreme adversity caused the people of God to speak of him often and he became elevated in their minds and hearts. David moved ahead of Saul in popularity not by eloquent speeches of self-aggrandizement, but merely because he allowed God to use his good behaviour to gain a godly reputation among the people. In similar fashion, men today are still not going to develop good reputations apart from the right behavior.
Loyalty is a beautiful trait. Loyalty leads men to do significant things for others although the reasons for doing so could be considered insignificant. The actions of David’s men offer a prime example when David was in exile from his throne. Perhaps David was simply reminiscing when he mentioned his longing for a drink of water from the well of Bethlehem. Why not get a drink from any well? What was so special about the water from Bethlehem’s well? Regardless of these minor details, three of David’s mighty men heard the desire of their king. Their loyalty compelled them to go. These men had to break through the host of the Philistines in order to get the water from the well of David’s desire. They risked their lives and for what? Was it merely a drink of water? To them it was much more than that—it was a special loyalty they each had for their king!
Loyalty to David likely placed a bounty on a man’s head. As David fled from Absalom and the city of Jerusalem, it became increasingly dangerous to offer any type of assistance to David. Barzillai, regardless of the personal danger, chose to risk everything for David (2 Samuel 17:27-29). When it came time for David to travel back to reclaim his throne, Barzillai journeyed part of the way with David. Scripture identifies Barzillai as “a very great man.” Perhaps this description identifies him as materially wealthy, but it no doubt also speaks of his character. His character is further manifested in his final conversation with David (2 Samuel 19:33-38). When David regained his authority, he sought any opportunity to return favour for Barzillai’s loyalty. No matter the accolades or advantage, Barzillai did not help David for personal gain.
Absalom rebelled against king David (his father) by seeking to take over David’s kingdom and end his life. Ahithophel, who had previously served as an advisor to David, gave counsel to Absalom that could have eliminated David and his followers (2 Samuel 17:1-4). The counsel pleased Absalom, but he chose to request a second opinion from Hushai. Yet, Hushai was still a loyal friend of David, unbeknownst to Absalom, who was actually working undercover in Absalom’s kingdom (2 Samuel 15:31-37). Thankfully, Absalom asked for his counsel. Hushai proceeded to tell Absalom the shortcomings of Ahithophel’s counsel and offered his own counsel that would protect king David. After hearing the counsel of both Ahithophel and Hushai, Absalom unwisely determined that Hushai’s counsel was better. Hushai’s loyalty to the king and God conquered Absalom’s rebellion and eventually ended it.
