When two famous preachers died recently, another preacher by the name of C. M. Ward came to mind. As did a puzzle I’ve been wrestling with for a long, long time.
When I was young, Ward was one of the nation’s most famous radio preachers. On his weekly Revivaltime broadcast, he gave crisp, concise messages that pleased the fussiest of listeners. When Ward preached in person at conventions and camp meetings, he regaled audiences with long, hilarious stories and messages that ran an hour and a half. He was as freewheeling off the air as he was focused on.
Known for his quick wit, Ward used to nudge church leaders he thought were getting off track. Though less a prophet than a court jester, his pokes were frequently right on, occasionally even prophetic. He’d cover those off-handed comments by adding, “It’s amazing what you say when you’re under the anointing.”
Ward’s wit aside, it is amazing how God’s anointing gets applied sometimes. It doesn’t help that a few Old Testament passages have had a way of muddying the waters of our understanding of the word “anointing.”
Recently as my wife was reading in 1 Samuel, she remarked on the wisdom of the Old Testament prophet by the same name and how he dealt with King Saul. Saul, the first king of ancient Israel, had gotten in trouble with God, and Samuel let Saul know it. Hearing my wife’s reflections, a story about King Saul came to mind.
One day, the king fell under God’s anointing and lay on the ground prophesying – basically having an ecstatic spiritual experience. People started saying, “Is Saul also among the prophets?”
This wasn’t the first time Saul had had such an experience, the first time being right after Samuel anointed Saul king. Both times, the king was under the influence of divine power, but the two experiences were vastly different.
That first time (1 Samuel 10:6-7), the spirit of God came on Saul, and he prophesied. Samuel said Saul was changed “into a different man” and that whatever Saul did, God would be with him. That’s the good kind of anointing.
The second experience (1 Samuel 19:23-24) may have looked positive. It was anything but. For sure, there was the king lying (literally) under the influence of divine power. But this time God was stopping Saul from doing evil. Again, God wanted to change Saul’s heart, but now Saul resisted.
This time, Saul was on his way to kill the shepherd lad David. David had connected with the king because the king needed David’s singing to soothe his troubled moods – until Saul came to perceive David as a threat to the throne. Then David became a hunted young man.
So, David fled and hid out with the prophet Samuel. When Saul approached Samuel, he found a bunch of prophets having some kind of ecstatic experience. Saul came under that same spirit and lay prophesying among the prophets all day and all night. Truly bizarre!
Not all divine encounters are alike. If the anointing doesn’t involve a changed heart, it acts like a curse.
This time, Saul’s heart didn’t change and everything he did was wrong. He lost it all, including his own life and his dynasty.
***
Which brings up the two famous preachers who died recently within days of each other. One was the Pentecostal evangelist, Jimmy Swaggart. The other was John MacArthur, the pastor who disdained Pentecostals.
At one time, Swaggart was perhaps the world’s most famous preacher, rivaling Billy Graham. But then he began accusing other famous preachers of sexual immorality and hubris, fell off his own high horse, and consorted with prostitutes. When he died years later, he still had many staunch supporters, but also many others accusing him of never fully repenting. Yet, few denied he had had a great anointing as a preacher.
Well, MacArthur denied it. In fact, the pastor from Sun Valley, California, called the whole Pentecostal movement unbiblical, declaring it “strange fire.” Like Swaggart, MacArthur had a huge following and lots of detractors. Besides writing off Pentecostals, MacArthur was accused of abusing power and of viciously attacking victims of abuse. Where some saw a man with the greatest anointing of his generation, others saw a man who harmed others.
I’ll leave it to God to sort these two men out now that they are all together. What I’m concerned with is how sloppily we humans apply the anointing label.
Someone speaks with passion and emotion, and we call it “the anointing.” Someone speaks or acts with a voice of authority and great force in church or society, and we claim that leader is “anointed.” By anointing we mean God has chosen such a man or woman for this very hour, forgetting what God told Samuel: “People look at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.” (1 Samuel 16:7)
Bottom line, God’s anointing is no excuse for bad character or behavior.
Problem is, when we apply that term “anointing” or “anointed” to an individual, we place that person on an untouchable pedestal. Applying certain texts from David’s story, people claim you can’t touch God’s anointed. Whether we’re talking spiritual or political leaders, they say you can’t mess with them if they are anointed by God. You can’t lay a hand on them. You can’t judge them. You can’t speak ill of them. You can’t oppose their leadership.
Now hold on there one long moment. How does this concept work when both the accuser and the accused are considered anointed? Or, how are we to view so-called anointed leaders who are, shall we say, complicated? Well for starters, we use biblical texts appropriately – meaning “in context.”
And the context around not touching God’s anointed? Twice when David flees from Saul, he has a chance to kill Saul. The first time, Saul enters a cave to relieve himself, a cave where David and his friends are hiding. The second time, Saul is asleep in the midst of his army and David sneaks in.
Both times, David’s friends encourage him to kill Saul, believing God has handed him this opportunity. Both times, David replies that it is not his place to do so. He refuses because he cannot lift his hand against “the LORD’s anointed.”
Much later, David writes a song about God’s deliverance and protection. In that psalm, he tells how God protected the nation’s Patriarchs, forbidding kings of other nations from touching “my anointed ones” (1 Chronicles 16:22, see also Psalm 105:15).
Whether or not David was right in linking “untouchable” and “anointing,” it’s a stretch to say that this is a universal principle for all time. For one, David doesn’t uniformly apply this principle himself (see 2 Samuel 19). For another, it’s never used of leadership – spiritual or political – anywhere else in the Bible. Certainly not in the New Testament. Besides, when David was calling Saul God’s anointed, God had already withdrawn his anointing from Saul and David was now “the LORD’s anointed.”
What happens when two people claim God’s anointing, as with MacArthur and Swaggart, and they are attacking each other, no less? Who has rightful claim on God’s anointing?
Or, what makes us think this anointing applies to modern presidents or any other contemporary world leader? Apparently, our nation’s founders didn’t think it applied to King George III. So, why should it apply to George Washington or any of his successors?
Other biblical passages give more specific guidance on how we are to treat one another, including our leaders. Other texts also give better insight on how we deal with “complicated” leaders.
It takes time and distance to define the legacies of larger-than-life leaders such as Swaggart and MacArthur or, for that matter, any of our national leaders. Only time will tell how they will come to be seen in the more refined light of historical and scholarly analysis. As for the workings of the spiritual heart, best to wait for God’s fuller read in eternity.
That said, we all are called to be discerning of those we follow. Let their fruit speak for themselves. While we are forbidden to spread lies and half-truths, we are welcomed to evaluate the merits and demerits of any leader. What is seen in public is open for public discussion.
But if you do call someone anointed, understand this: God’s anointing is no excuse for behavior God declares unrighteous.
***
All this brings up a conundrum I’ve wrestled with my whole life. Permit me to speak from personal experience.
As a boy, I was sexually abused by a man deemed a spiritual giant. To his dying day, I’m not aware he ever repented. Other than the time, that is, when I was 10 and he said we’d both sinned and he made us pray together. Another act of abuse. When later confronted with his sin, he said it was “all under the blood,” meaning he’d repented and didn’t need to talk about it anymore. Meaning he wasn’t responsible for the pain and suffering he’d unleashed on others.
People still talk about the profound spiritual impact of this man’s life and teaching. How to reconcile this abuser’s sin with his apparent anointing? Was all that good he did undone by the evil he spawned? Or was all that evil compensated for by the good he did? These are questions difficult to resolve.
I truly believe God forgives. But receiving that forgiveness requires true and full repentance. Repentance is more than just saying, I’m sorry. Saying you’re sorry may be a necessary first step. But additional steps are required, including renouncing the sin and doing the work of restitution, meaning making amends for the wrong done.
BUT. The restitution is not what erases the wrong.
Back when I was running a food pantry, a local publisher ran a campaign to help nonprofits like ours raise funds. Each year the publisher adopted a new theme for the year-end campaign. One year they came up with most pathetic theme ever: “Done a little bad? Do a little good.”
Pretty pathetic alright. Actually, it was downright wrong.
You don’t pay your way out of bad. You repent of doing bad and God wipes the slate clean.
That God will wipe away the sin of repentant sinners is true for even the vilest of offenders. Just note the testimony of former slave trafficker John Newton, who repented of his ways. Every time we sing the world’s most famous hymn, Amazing Grace, we sing his testimony.
You don’t atone for doing bad by doing good. Only God can atone for your sins. Once you’ve had your sins atoned for, God’s Spirit flows through you to accomplish good, a whole lot of good, not just a little. But that good is never to atone for your sins. That good is simply a response to the amazing good – the amazing grace – God has given you.
God can certainly work through bad people. Bad people can do good things. Donkeys are not necessarily evil, but if God can speak through a donkey (another story, see Numbers 22), then God can speak through anyone, even a person filled with darkness. It doesn’t make their bad good, it just shows the amazing power of God to work through anyone. Just like Saul prophesying.
For years, I’ve wrestled with the awareness that my abuser did a whole lot of good. It splits my brain in two. But all we humans are a mix. Some of the nicest people in this world do awful things. Some of the nastiest people do amazingly good deeds. The good stands on its own.
But the good – the anointing – never excuses the bad.
Whatever others mean by, “Touch not the Lord’s anointed,” you can address the evil in someone regardless how much good they are doing. To think otherwise is to abuse that phrase. The anointing is never an excuse.
Your comments are always welcome. To comment on this post or subscribe for free to this blog, go to Contact us!
Photos: John MacArthur, Jimmy Swaggart
Beautifully put!