WHAT DOES IT MEAN BY TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED?
WHAT DOES IT MEAN BY TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED?
Introduction:
The word “anointed” in Hebrew can be written as משוח (pronounced as “mashuach”) using the Hebrew alphabet. The Hebrew word “משוח” is often used to refer to someone who has been anointed or consecrated for a special purpose, such as a king, priest, or prophet.
Psalm 105:15, is a verse that carries significant weight in the context of respecting and protecting those who are anointed by God for specific purposes, particularly the prophets. This verse not only imparts a message of reverence but also reinforces the divine protection that God extends to His chosen ones. In this article, we will explore the deeper meaning of Psalm 105:15, its scriptural support, and its relevance in today’s world.
Psalm 105:15 — A Divine Warning:
The verse from Psalm 105:15 states, “Saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm.” This verse serves as a divine warning, reminding us that God’s chosen messengers are to be treated with utmost respect and reverence. It discourages actions that may cause harm, slander, or undermine the work of these anointed individuals.
Supporting Scriptures:
To gain a comprehensive understanding of the significance of Psalm 105:15, let’s explore some supporting scriptures that shed light on the concept of anointing and the consequences of disregarding God’s chosen ones.
1. Anointing of Kings and Prophets:
In 1 Samuel 16:13, we see the anointing of David as king by the prophet Samuel. This anointing symbolizes God’s divine selection and empowerment for leadership.
In 1 Kings 19:16, Elisha is anointed by the prophet Elijah as his successor. This act signifies the transfer of God’s authority and blessing.
2. Consequences of Opposing God’s Anointed:
In Numbers 12:1–10, we read about Miriam and Aaron opposing Moses, whom God had anointed as a leader. God’s wrath was kindled against them, and Miriam was struck with leprosy as a consequence.
In 2 Samuel 6:16–23, Michal criticized King David’s worship, and she was left barren.
3. God’s Protection of His Anointed:
In 1 Samuel 26:9–11, David spared King Saul’s life despite having the opportunity to harm him, respecting Saul’s anointed status.
In 1 Kings 19:17–18, God assures Elijah that He has reserved seven thousand in Israel who have not bowed to false gods, highlighting His protection over His anointed prophets.
The distinction between physical harm and constructive criticism when it comes to the treatment of God’s anointed individuals.
1 Samuel 26:9–11 indeed illustrates a situation where David had the opportunity to physically harm King Saul but chose not to do so out of respect for Saul’s anointed status. This episode highlights the principle of not causing physical harm to God’s chosen leaders, even if they are in opposition or have acted unjustly.
However, it’s essential to understand that the concept of “Touch not my anointed” primarily relates to refraining from causing harm or injury, especially of a physical nature, to those whom God has anointed for specific roles, such as kings, prophets, or leaders. This principle is often invoked to emphasize the need for respect and restraint in dealings with such individuals.
Constructive criticism, on the other hand, is a valuable and necessary aspect of leadership and accountability, and it can be found in various places throughout the Bible. For instance, Prophet Nathan’s rebuke of King David (2 Samuel 12:1–14) is a classic example of providing constructive criticism to a leader who had strayed from God’s path. Nathan confronted David about his sin with Bathsheba and the murder of Uriah, ultimately leading to David’s repentance.
So, while “Touch not my anointed” emphasizes physical harm and protection, it does not negate the importance of providing guidance, counsel, and even constructive criticism when leaders, including anointed ones, go astray or need correction. In fact, the Bible encourages accountability and righteousness within leadership, and God often sends messengers and prophets to speak His truth even to those He has anointed.
The story of Prophet Nathan’s rebuke of King David is indeed a significant example of how accountability and the principle of “Touch not my anointed” can be understood in the context of leadership and authority.
While it is true that in many cultures and historical contexts, it was generally considered improper or even dangerous to directly confront a person in authority, including a king, Nathan’s approach illustrates a different dynamic. Here’s what we can understand from this situation:
1. Prophetic Authority:
Nathan, as a prophet, held a special and recognized position in Israel. Prophets were seen as messengers of God, and their authority came from their direct connection to God. Their role included speaking truth to power, even when it meant confronting kings with their wrongdoings.
2. Divine Commission:
Nathan didn’t act on his own authority but rather as a vessel of God’s message. He approached David with the words, “Thus says the Lord” (2 Samuel 12:7), making it clear that he was delivering God’s rebuke, not his personal opinion. This distinction was crucial in emphasizing that the rebuke was not an act of personal disrespect or insubordination.
3. Purpose of Rebuke:
Nathan’s rebuke was not intended to harm David but to bring him to repentance and reconciliation with God. It was delivered out of genuine concern for David’s spiritual well-being and the moral integrity of the nation.
4. David’s Response:
King David, despite his great authority, recognized the gravity of his sin and humbly repented in response to Nathan’s message. This highlights the importance of leaders being open to correction and accountability, even when it comes from a subordinate.
In summary, the story of Nathan’s rebuke of David demonstrates that the principle of “Touch not my anointed” does not mean leaders are above reproach or immune to accountability. Rather, it emphasizes the need for respectful and purposeful accountability, particularly when it is carried out in the context of divine authority and to guide leaders back to righteousness. David’s response exemplifies how a leader’s humility and willingness to acknowledge wrongdoing can lead to personal growth and restoration.
In the New Testament, there is a story involving John the Baptist rebuking King Herod Antipas for his immoral act of marrying his brother’s wife, Herodias. This account is found in the Gospels of Matthew (Matthew 14:3–12) and Mark (Mark 6:17–29).
Here’s a Brief Summary of the Story:
1. The Marriage of Herod and Herodias:
King Herod Antipas had taken Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip, as his own wife, which was considered immoral and unlawful according to Jewish law.
2. John the Baptist’s Rebuke:
John the Baptist, a prominent preacher and prophet, publicly rebuked King Herod for this immoral union. He fearlessly condemned Herod’s actions and called him to repentance.
3. Herod’s Response:
Although Herod respected John and found him to be a holy man, he was also conflicted and influenced by Herodias. However, he didn’t harm John initially because he knew he was a righteous and holy man.
4. Herodias’ Grudge:
Herodias held a grudge against John for his criticism and wanted him silenced. She saw an opportunity to achieve this during a banquet.
5. John’s Arrest and Execution:
During a banquet held on Herod’s birthday, Herodias’ daughter performed a dance that pleased Herod, and he rashly promised to give her anything she desired. Prompted by her mother, the daughter requested John the Baptist’s head on a platter. Herod, bound by his oath and influenced by his guests, reluctantly ordered John’s execution.
This story underscores the theme of accountability and the willingness of John the Baptist to speak out against moral wrongdoing, even to a ruler. It also highlights the moral complexities and personal conflicts that can arise in the face of such rebukes.
In this case, King Herod did not heed the rebuke and instead allowed himself to be swayed by personal desires and political considerations. Nevertheless, John the Baptist’s boldness in confronting the king’s immoral actions serves as a testament to the prophetic tradition of speaking truth to power, even when it carries personal risks.
Conclusion:
Psalm 105:15 is a powerful reminder of the divine principle that those anointed by God, particularly prophets and leaders, should be treated with reverence and respect. It emphasizes the consequences of harming or opposing them and underscores God’s protective care over His chosen ones.
This message serves as a timeless lesson for believers to honor and support those whom God has set apart for His work, as doing so reflects our obedience to God’s will and our faith in His divine plan.
