By: Obed Pineda
In every penal code, there are certain regulations weaved by legislators as boundaries to the law, focused on securing the protection of a defendant’s rights, and simultaneously disallowing any abuse of power by members of law enforcement (police, prosecuting attorney, or judge) with the authority entrusted to them by the state. One such ordinance created with this specifically in mind is the statute of limitations. The way that the statute of limitations works is that a legal time limit on certain crimes are set as an expiration date to the jurisdiction of the courts. If the limit of time as established by statutory law expires, then a claim against the defendant can no longer be filed against him. If it is filed, the defense attorney may request a dismissal, proving that the claim is time-barred because it was filed after the permissible allotted time. Thankfully, these statutory limits are not applicable to all crimes, since serious crimes (i.e. homicide) may be submitted at any time, regardless of when the accused was apprehended. Excluding heinous crimes from this legislation prevents deplorable actions to remain unpunished, but also warns anyone thinking they can practice one of these cruel crimes and simply hideout until statutory law goes into effect. There is no question that a vast amount of controversy surrounds this piece of legislation due to the complexity of choosing which crimes are to be deemed more serious than others. What’s worse, however, is man’s obstinate insistence that this, too, applies to celestial law concerning sin. One must beware not to fall into this pit of self-deceit, for verily there are a multiplicity of ways that this man-made law is constantly invoked in issues of spiritual affairs. We must understand that to adhere to this erred thought is to accuse the Almighty of being both, unrighteous and mutable. The devilish snare attacks at once Holy Writ’s proclamation, “Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with Whom there is no variation or shadow of turning” (James 1:16-17, emphasis added). This false doctrine illegitimately denies as well that “the counsel of the Lord stands forever” (Psalm 33:11a, emphasis added). Therefore, comprehending the severity of buying in to these wicked concepts, it is of the utmost importance to discover how mankind insists on invoking statutory law before the righteous Judge. A model of this practice is the ill advised notion that because the times are different, God, too, “adapts” to them. Upon utilizing this defense, tolerance of sin is sought to be gained. This idea (similar to the statute of limitation) centers around the argument that certain practices that were impermissible to one generation, must be lifted due to the fact that the progress of time brought forth the presence of a new, different generation. It further contests that because of the cultural differences between time periods, it is unfair to subjugate to an outdated yoke meant for a previous people. Yet, Holy Writ quickly dismisses this cunning plot when it reminds us that “whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness. And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin” (1st John 3:4-5, emphasis added). The ineffectiveness of time is immediately illuminated by this Scripture’s resplendent light. It first reveals that sin, no matter in what period of time it is was performed, will always be an act of lawlessness. In other words, sin will never cease to be defined as disobedience and defiance of God’s sacred law, no matter the generational or cultural differences. Second, the Holy Spirit proves His point more poignantly by reminding us that Jesus was sent to the world specifically to take away the sins of humanity, several centuries later, after man first violated God’s holy edict at Eden. If it is to believed that God adapts to the change of times, thus providing an allowance of what for one culture was sinful is no longer true for the other, then two interesting questions arise: 1. For which culture’s sin did Jesus propitiate? and 2. If time did erase the lingering consequences of past sins, then what purpose did Jesus’ sacrifice serve? It is curious to observe that too often a time stamp wants to be placed on the wickedness of sin, but never on the blessings from heaven. Even so, another mistaken doctrine stemming from this belief is that the results of evil actions, if not punished right away, will never catch up with the sinner. The dangerous theory that God can “forget” about a person’s evil is implied in this persuasion. It is wise to never forget God’s words to the Israelites who supported the ten cowardly spies in returning to Egypt: “The Lord is longsuffering and abundant in mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression; but He by no means clears the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation” (Numbers 14:18, emphasis added). Those who contend that because the crime was not immediately punished this must mean that it was overlooked, are ignorant of the beautiful benevolence of God’s mercy. By emphatically declaring that He will not by any means clear the guilty, does not negate His divine grace. Too often God’s precious grace is denigrated by those who want to interpret it as a “free pass” to sin. Sadly, this is not new for verily Paul clarified, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it” (Romans 6:1-2, emphasis added)? This confusion is manifested when it is purposely ignored that sin has consequences. God’s grace is not that sin’s effect will not happen; rather that the full weight of sin’s effect will not be allowed if there is a sincere, penitent heart. It must be noted that the lapse of time provided by heaven can be a double-edged sword. This can either become the instrument that frees a man from the shackles of sin or the instrument that slays him for his reluctance in repenting. Thus, we must understand that persisting to impose this erroneous claim upon God is similar to Balak’s ludicrous endeavor to thrice entreat God to allow Balaam to curse Israel. On his third try, he mistakenly supposed that at “another place; perhaps it will please God that you may curse them for me from there” (Numbers 23:27, emphasis added). He refused to heed that “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? Behold, I have received a command to bless; He has blessed, and I cannot reverse it” (Numbers 23:19-20, emphasis added). This, the Moabite king could not grasp because he insisted on using his carnal eyes and not his spiritual ones. In the end, the irrefutable truth remains that no matter how much the sands of time progress, time will always be ineffective in the presence of the Eternal One.