As noted in the last couple of messages on Mark, our impulse to defend ourselves against accusations can be overwhelming. Yet Mark shows Jesus declining to defend Himself before both the Jewish leaders and Pilate. Likely, many of us have wondered then if we should follow Jesus’ example in this, refusing to defend ourselves any time we are falsely accused.
To consider this issue, we need to make sure we understand Jesus’ silence appropriately in the context of the rest of Scripture. If we do that, we likely will not adopt a position of automatic silence in every case of false accusation. In fact, silence in the face of false accusation should probably be an exception to the rule of godly, measured, mission-oriented correction of accusations.
When we examine Jesus’ entire ministry, and even the Gospel witness to His trials, we find it is not accurate to say that Jesus never defended Himself. The Gospel of John in particular is filled with encounters in which Jesus seeks to set the record straight about Himself and His work (John 5:18-47; 7:10-24; 8:12-59; 10:22-39). When the high priest implied that Jesus was surreptitiously fomenting revolt, He said things to deny that (John 18:19-21). In fact, in John’s account Jesus has quite a bit to say to Pilate (John 18:33-36; 19:11). Even in Mark, Jesus was not completely silent (Mark 14:48-49, 62; 15:3). It is simply the case that when He had the opportunity to say things that would prevent Him from going to the cross, He said nothing. That is, He said nothing to rebut the official charges brought against Him. Why? He was determined to go to the cross.
So, it cannot be said that Jesus had a blanket policy of silence in the face of false accusations. Jesus refused at a particular time for a very particular purpose. He remained silent when He did so that the mission might continue. The same could be said for those occasions when He did not remain silent. When Jesus did set the record straight regarding His person or works, it was for the purpose of the mission.
Similarly, Paul defended himself. Acts 25:8 reads, Paul argued in his defense, "Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I committed any offense." He then appealed all the way to Caesar. If you know Acts, you know that the rest of the narrative is about the journey to make his way to Rome to do just that - make his defense to Caesar. And as with Jesus, Paul’s motive was not his own personal vindication, but the gospel.
Likewise, Paul contended for himself in 2 Corinthians and to some extent in 1 Thessalonians. Again, not for his own vindication, but for the good of the mission.
Yet, Luke records Paul declining to defend himself when he could have, likely also because in the particular situation it was advantageous to the mission and a blessing to others (Acts 16:16-24; cf 16:37; 22:25-26).
So, following the lead of Jesus and Paul, when we do speak up, it should be…
Godly… That is, our motive should not be personal vindication or saving face. When falsely accused, we should check our hearts before responding. I’ll argue below that we mostly likely do need to respond, but we may need to wait for a short time until we can do so with patience and love and for the right reason.
Measured… Romans 12:18 instructs, If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Upon correcting the wrong thinking of those accusing us, they may or may not believe us. Paul indicates here that we should not pursue the issue to the ends of the earth and heavens. Do what you can do, but trust the Lord with what you can’t.
Mission-oriented… That is, we should move to correct the accusations with a couple of things on our minds:
A good reputation commends the gospel. This is a constant theme in the New Testament epistles, particularly Titus. It is also assumed in the qualifications for the offices of elder and deacon (1 Tim 3:1-13; Titus 1:5-9). To proclaim the gospel while living an ungodly life is to preach two different messages—one with our mouths and one with our actions. Similarly, when people think we are living an ungodly life, it can affect their reception of the gospel we proclaim. This is a main concern for Paul in his second letter to the Corinthians. He wants to prevent them from thinking wrongly about him so that they won’t reject his true teaching. Ultimately, his concern is for their souls. We also should appropriately guard our reputations for the sake of the reception of the gospel.
Misunderstanding is bad for relationships. Living peaceably (Rom. 12:18) will frequently require providing the information necessary for others to think rightly about us. Proverbs encourages one to gather all the information before arriving at a settled position about a person or situation (Pro. 18:13, 17). If we refuse to correct wrong accusations, we inadvertently put the accuser in the position of doing exactly what Proverbs warns against—making ill-informed assumptions. When those assumptions or accusations go uncorrected, they become the starting point for our next interaction, eventually leading to the building of a grotesque caricature in the mind of the accuser. This is deadly for relationships. Out of love for the other person and a desire to maintain godly relationships, we should be willing to correct wrong thinking.
When determining when to speak or when to be silent in response to a false accusation, we should consider, “what is best for the gospel and the relationship?” In my view, in most situations the best thing will be to respond to the accusation in a godly, measured way.
Comments