The rules of engagement have been obeyed and have run the course involving "just two people." These two people, however, have not reached an agreement. There is no consensus and one of three things has gone wrong to create this impasse:

1. The one accused disputes the accusation, sees no need for the accuser's offended stance, and denies that a conflict should be in place. Hopefully, the accused has averred this position in good conscience.

2. The accused may acknowledge some small offense or breach of Biblical principles, but on a scale quite smaller and less egregious than that expressed by the accuser. In effect, the accused is saying, "Why all this fulmination over something so trivial?" Again, it is hoped that this sentiment is an honest one. 

3. The accused tacitly or actually acknowledges being responsible for a substantial personal conflict and does not deny the sin in question. Yet he/she refuses to apologize or permit the Matt. 18 healing process to run its course. This is not a guileless attitude, but the result is the same: failure to heal the fractured relationship. In the case of a obstinate attitude, the accused may be expressing anger at being confronted and resents the intrusion, or this may simply be high rebellion and spite at work. This outcome could be anticipated when the two parties in this conflict are not close friends to begin with.

 

End of the Road

 

The one who has gone, must leave, but may have to go elsewhere. It may be that this is the pivotal point where "the two" must become the three or four. But before we discuss an escalation of participants, there is another option at this juncture: Let the matter drop.  

 

Many aggrieved people, after having gone through the discomfort of confrontation, only to suffer defeat and perhaps humiliation, will decide that this is a sign for them to try and deal with the matter alone with God. This isolation and aloneness must be borne, in that no dissemination of this matter can be made to anyone, ever, if the decision is made not to go on with the Biblical process.

 

This obviously is a difficult decision, since all healing now must happen between the aggrieved person and God, and not the "other person," and not any possible third party. Conflict resolution would now be in the hands of the Lord as a matter of personal prayer and meditation. Therefore to decide to drop the matter is to decide to avoid slander, maintain future possibilities for second chances, and seek only God's peace at this time. 

 

A Turn in the Road

 

If the offended person cannot bear to carry a heavy heart, and determines to seek restoration and peace of mind, but with the help and approval of others, then this is where "the two of you" comes to an end. This is truly veering down another road that may eventually lead back to the accused one, but with consenting "witnesses" in tow. Hear the scripture:

 

Matt. 18:16 (KJV)  But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

 

(NIV) But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.

 

 

Witnesses

 

There is a flawless logic in including others now that the accuser has run into a  wall of disagreement from the accused. Where one has failed, the power of one or two more, giving assent to the validity of the accusation, is meant to be a weightier argument to the accused, possibly inducing him/her to reconsider the situation. The old saying that many eyes will see more than one is in play. It cannot be lost on the accused that these witnesses have heard the story and have concurred, but not only that; they have further consented to be thrown into this cauldron of confrontation, and such a angst-ridden decision cannot be a breezy one. This extra level of participation is the more persuasive if the accused appreciates that the witnesses are sincere, disinterested and impartial and yet, they are here and presumably they would rather be elsewhere, all things being equal.

 

The powerful process of Matt. 18 has justice as well as healing built into its heart and soul. This justice is set up to protect someone from being falsely or capriciously accused of a sin. It is expressed in the many checks and balances along the way for validity and a proper Biblical attitude toward the one who will be accused.

 

Why So Many Checks and Balances? 

 

The short answer is: we all are prone to improper and misguided attitudes especially in the volatile theater of war that is personal relationships. And quite apart from bad attitudes, we all can make honest mistakes, get the facts wrong, or end up being encased in a giant cocoon of misunderstanding. To guard against all of these possible miscarriages of justice, there are reality checks installed in every part of the process.

 

Short-Fused Folk

 

Some troubled people have made an exact science out of becoming offended. They are professional takers-of-offense and seem to enjoy being in the throes of pique much of the time. They perversely like the excitement, attention and emotional turmoil of being in a state of high offense and thus have a hair trigger. This quick-to-offense attitude exponentially worsens when the would-be provocateur is someone they already don't care for. it is unlikely that one can interact with such a precariously balanced person for an hour's time without imparting offense. This kind of person should never succeed in bringing a false accusation to some unfortunate soul, and the checks and balances are geared to filter out the habitual collector of professional offense. 

 

I am reminded of a movie many years ago starring Robin Williams as Popeye. His girlfriend, Olive Oyl, had a father who was continually offended at everything and everybody. Most of his utterances in the movie were: "You owe me an apology!" The checks and balances of Matt. 18 guard against this ilk of person who is offended at the drop of a hat. Such a person will not survive the checks and balances against a case built on such a sinful and selfish attitude.

 

The checks and balances also control our guileless miscues. All of us can go off half-cocked and think we know what we are doing when in fact, we haven't a clue. The vagaries of speech, the inexactitude of language, the lack of proper context, the misreading of intents and purposes, all of these errors are subject to the scrutiny of the biblical checks against such blunders. 

 

The Security of Checks and Balances

 

Before we begin the discussion of the recruitment process to find "one or two others" who will agree and "go" with the aggrieved accuser, we should rightly appreciate the other reason for this admonition to find "witnesses." If the "goer" intends to fight on, as it were, this alternate reason is as important as the task of raising one's own small army: it is a check on reality — one of many along the way.  Let us enumerate the checks and balances that verify that an accuser has a case at all:

 

Check # 1 

 

The first check against abusing the spirit of the healing process of Matt. 18 is a self-check. That person who is of the mind he/she has been offended, slandered, insulted, denigrated, or in some way harmed by another, must look within to conduct a self-examination of the heart. Before this person becomes a "goer," he/she must be an self-examiner. Would-be accusers then, are the first check and balance against themselves, as to the presence of possible errors or untoward attitudes. If this self-examination is honest and prayerfully considered, it is hoped that the would-be accuser will stand down from offense if there is no case for invoking the process of Matt. 18. It is an unfortunate possibility that such self-examination will fail to arrive at truth, and therefore, further checks must come from outside of any subjective opinion, or any conflict of interest on the part of the one who wants to accuse another.

 

Check # 2 

 

This one belongs to the accused. He/she rightfully should have a check on the validity of anyone's accusation, for such is pure justice in the civil arena. Therefore, when the "goer" comes to accuse, the accused can dispute this charge, hopefully, with a good conscience.  As we have seen, two things can happen when the accused raises a dispute: one is, the accuser is convinced that some error or misunderstanding is to blame (or the situation is strongly mitigated to triviality), and the accuser drops the accusation and goes away in peace. The check has worked in this instance to bring justice into play.

 

The second is, the accused will dispute the accusation and come to no consensus with the accuser, who maintains the charge and continues to be in conflict. Again, the check has worked, but in a different direction: it has propelled the accuser on in the process to either drop the matter or seek witnesses. If the accuser continues to seek conflict resolution by approaching potential witnesses, then we race along the path to the next check:

 

Check # 3

 

This check is the alternate reason for seeking witnesses. More people other than "the two" are now being drawn into the drama: to provide a check and balance that is outside the subjective opinions of both the accuser and the accused. The witness(es) are in fact a court of appeals hopefully free of the possible self-serving biases of "the two." Ideally, these witnesses are impartial and honest in their opinion of the validity or seriousness of the complaint. Several other last gasp checks await if the process extends that far.

 

This is the companion purpose behind the admonition to seek "one or two witnesses": These outsiders must first concur that there is a case to be presented, and that some Biblical principles have indeed been breached, and with a sufficient weight to invoke the process. If the witnesses cannot concur that a case exists, or that it has proper gravity, what happens?

 

The Besought Witnesses Cannot Assent

 

This is a crisis point in the process for the would-be accuser. If he/she cannot convince one or two others that there is any reason or sufficient reason to invoke the process of accusation and conflict resolution, this is the end of the line for the accuser. The matter must be dropped, and any lingering offense must then become a personal matter between the conflicted one and God. These conditions now are in place:

 

1. The spirit of the Biblical process strongly implies that the accuser cannot continue to shop for sympathetic ears. After one or two have been made privy to this situation, and have heard a complaint against the ethics, character, or Biblical principles of another person, it cannot happen that even others must hear the complaint until the accuser blunders upon someone who will concur with the accusation. To so continue brings us back to slander and malicious gossip. Whoever the "one or two witnesses" are, they have been chosen by the accuser to be the sole people who can hear this pejorative content said behind the back of the accused. It must be assumed that these witnesses are the ones that God intended to hear and give an opinion on the matter.

2. If these selected witnesses cannot give support to the accusation, it must be assumed by the one-time accuser that he/she has been in the grip of a misguided mindset, or has been exhibiting some unbiblical attitude, such as being too hasty to be offended. In other words, the former accuser must accept with humility and even gratitude the wisdom of the sought-out witnesses in their decision. Even better, the erstwhile accuser now must see him/herself as having been freed from the weight of offense, and must now rejoice that God has shown him/her the truth, and in a way that saves someone from undue and false accusation. This should be viewed as a gift from God and not a setback or a disappointment.  The opinions of the impartial and independent witnesses must rightly outweigh the opinions of either the accuser or the accused. It must be seen as God's justice at work.

3. With the would-be witnesses dissenting, the one-time accuser must now obey all of the commands to tell no other person of this matter. Second chances must be preserved, especially for those who have been deemed by impartial observers to be innocent of any sin in the first place. Full discretion must prevail and the creature must live no more. This includes full discretion on the part of the witness(es). All must be under a vow of silence. All lingering resentment must be confessed to God, and He must be the sole author now of any peace of mind to come. God's witnesses have spoken and it is over.