In Old Testament times, the guilt of a person could be established only “in the mouth of two or three witnesses.” (Deuteronomy 17:6,7; 19:15) The testimony of a single witness was unacceptable. After being properly convicted of a capital crime, however, a guilty person was first stoned by the witnesses (who became murderers if they had borne false witness). “The hands of all the people” then confirmed the actions of the witnesses.
In this way, all participated in the death of the person, and righteous judgement was executed.
No civilised person accepts death by stoning as acceptable punishment these days. However, the principle of “two or three witnesses” is a sound one. especially where innocence or guilt is pronounced by tribunals, rather than courts of law – perhaps on mere hearsay.
The agreement of three witnesses is a powerful force. Jesus had the required three witnesses: the Holy Spirit (who descended upon him), water (his baptism), and blood (his death). (1 John 5:8,9) This united witness testified that Jesus was the Christ. Spiritual life or death is the result of either belief or unbelief: those who believe the testimony, receive life; those who don’t, die in their sins.
The New Covenant is based on these three events, which were witnessed to by those who were with Jesus “from the beginning” (Acts 1:21, 22).
The writer of Hebrews warns his readers – Jewish believers who like their ancestors (Numbers 13) had “tasted” the promises – that if they drew back, they would receive worse punishment than those who died without mercy “under two or three witnesses” in the time of Moses (Hebrews 10:28, 29).
In drawing back — shrinking in fear instead of moving forward in faith — they would (1) tread underfoot the Son of God; (2) count as unholy the blood of the covenant; and (3) insult the Spirit of grace. These three things would bear witness against them.
The Holy Spirit also bears witness to three things: sin, righteousness, and judgement. (John 16:8)
In the church, accusations against “elders” (those in authority) are not to be accepted, unless “in the mouth of two or three witnesses.” (1 Timothy 5:19) The witnesses must agree. If not, their testimony is to be rejected.
The chief priests and elders “sought for witnesses against Jesus to put him to death; and found none. And there arose certain, and bore false witness against him…but neither did their witness agree together.” (Mark 14:55-59)
That is why the high priest insisted that Jesus declare whether or not he was the Christ. When Jesus stated that he was, and added that his questioner would see him “seated at the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26:64), he was accused of blasphemy, and condemned to death.
“What need have we of further evidence?” the high priest shouted, outraged. If Jesus had not confessed who he was, it would have been harder for them to have used the law as a cover for murder. After all, Pontius Pilate had already testified, three times, that he had found “no fault” in Jesus (little knowing that he had declared the Lamb of God to be spotless). (John 18:38; 19:4,6)
The false witnesses were unable to put together a story that would meet the Law’s requirement for the establishment of guilt. Jesus told the truth, but the Jewish leaders rejected the truth, and murdered him on the Cross.
In the matter of personal relationships between Christians, “two or three witnesses” may be called on to testify to a wrong committed, but only after the accused party has been approached privately by the person wronged, and the complaint has been rejected. (Matthew 18:15,16)
But if a later testimony of “two or three witnesses” is also rejected, the offender is to be shunned by the entire church! This is the equivalent of what took place in the Old Testament, when “all the people” confirmed the judgement of the leadership, and followed the witnesses in punishing the guilty person. In the early church, the person was verbally ‘stoned’ by being likened to “a pagan and a tax gatherer”! (Matthew 18:17)
My point is that the willingness of the congregation to fully involve itself in punishing offenders is dependent on the testimony of perfectly agreed witnesses. Then (and only then) can its authority be truly effective in “binding and releasing”! Words spoken by individuals in faith are powerful, but how much more powerful the pronouncements of a church in perfect agreement on vital issues!
The Lord’s teaching on “two or three witnesses” extends beyond church discipline, to prayer. Matthew 18:19 states: “Again I tell you, if two of you shall agree on earth about anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them by my Father in Heaven.”
The Greek word translated “agree” is “symphonia”, from which comes the English word “symphony.” In other words, no matter how different from one another believers may be in personality or gifts, their prayers need to be tuned perfectly, in order to be effective.
The church binds and releases when a minimum of two of its members agree on earth. “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Matthew 18:20)
A graphic example of this promised authority is found in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. Having rebuked the church for its slackness in the matter of a man who was committing sexual sin, the apostle declared that he had already dealt with the matter.
“For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that has so done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” (1 Corinthians 5:3-5)
Note the similarity of Paul’s words to those of Jesus:
“For where two or three are gathered together in my name…” (Matthew 18:20)
“…in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together…” (1 Corinthians 5:4)
The unity of the church and its effectiveness in binding and releasing are directly related. This is the power of agreement. The Israelite witnesses whose agreed testimony secured a conviction were ordinary persons who happened to be eyewitnesses. They testified to what they had seen, and their testimony became the basis of the judgement. That then placed them in the forefront when the sentence was executed. They threw the first stones.
Following them, all Israel joined in stoning the condemned person to death. (Joshua 7:25) No-one stood back and said: “I don’t agree with this.” The witnesses agreed, the person was found guilty, sentenced, and the people then joined them in executing judgement.
The authority of the church is awesome. “In the mouth of two or three witnesses” is the way matters are determined. The church then executes judgement, binding or loosing — retaining or releasing — in the name of Jesus Christ.
Through its united prayers and binding declarations, the church demonstrates God’s authority on earth. It is an authority that cannot be overruled — an authority that works when used properly.
There is a biblical way of dealing with important church issues, and it is not by embedded church regulations or snap personal judgements, but by the Biblical power of agreement!