• About
  • Contact
  • Donate
Friday, January 9, 2026

No products in the cart.

  • Login
Future of Christendom
  • Home
  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Events
  • Store
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Events
  • Store
No Result
View All Result
Future of Christendom
No Result
View All Result
Home Article
The Judges Shall Inquire Diligently: Why ‘Pre-Adjudication’ Is Not Permissible in Biblical Law

The Judges Shall Inquire Diligently: Why ‘Pre-Adjudication’ Is Not Permissible in Biblical Law

I recently participated in an informal debate on non-legislative theonomy with Marek Kizer, a fellow Christian and YouTuber. My esteemed and worthy “opponent” (a term used only in the context of the debate) argued in defense of what I call man-made law, stating that these human laws constitute a form of “pre-adjudication” (this section can be found at the 1:55 mark of the video). Our discussion was extensive, lasting over two hours, and we covered a wide range of topics. However, my direct response to his comment about “pre-adjudication” was brief due to the conversation’s flow to other aspects of our disagreement. My response to his pre-adjudication claim was essentially, “That’s wrong.” In this article, I will elaborate on my rejection of “pre-adjudication.”

If I have misunderstood Kizer’s claim, I hope he will have the opportunity to clarify, as I intend to invite him back on The Lancaster Patriot Podcast for many more in-depth discussions (our next one will focus on immigration). However, I will respond based on my understanding of Kizer’s claim. I believe his view is that a “new” human law (i.e., a law not inscripturated in the Bible) is similar to “pre-adjudication” because it allows a civil magistrate to bypass the need for examining a case and instead enables the magistrate (or their agents, such as police officers in a statist system) to preemptively enact or threaten punishment before an accuser brings a charge to a judge, followed by the adjudication process.

Note that this “punishment” might be more of an underlying threat rather than an explicit action. For example, if people believe that breaking one of these new laws (e.g., driving without a license) makes them liable to be harassed by a statist enforcement officer (i.e., police officer) and fined, they may be preemptively intimidated into submission due to the enacted “pre-adjudication.” While it is true that a person could appeal a violation of these new man-made laws, the process is often cumbersome, costly, and, most importantly, not in accordance with biblical law.

Biblical law requires an accuser to bring the charge against the accused (cf. Deuteronomy 17:6-7). The burden of proof lies with the accuser, not the accused. If a man wishes to accuse his neighbor of driving without a driver’s license, he must bring the case before a magistrate and accuse his neighbor of breaking God’s law. Of course, a godly judge would promptly dismiss the case, as God’s law inscripurated in the Bible does not require a man to obtain a license to travel.

After my conversation with Kizer, I discussed the concept of pre-adjudication with Luke Saint, author of The Sound Doctrine of Theocracy. He reminded me that this idea is contrary to the clear biblical command that a magistrate or judge must conduct a diligent inquiry in matters of justice. Man’s law, Saint insisted, cannot account for this need for diligent inquiry.

Some argue that pre-adjudication is necessary to prevent an overwhelming number of cases brought before judges. However, I believe that if we eliminated the numerous man-made laws, we would find that there would be surprisingly few cases to adjudicate compared to our current system. In fact, I contend that even with our present system of pre-adjudication/man-made law, we still have far more court cases, ongoing litigation, and lawsuits than we would have if we eliminated pre-adjudication (man-made law) and simply had magistrates adjudicate cases by referring to the evidence and the inscripturated laws in the Bible. Biblical law places the burden of proof on the accuser (to bring the case) and the magistrate (to conduct a diligent inquiry). In contrast, man-made law (pre-adjudication) places the burden on the accused.

The concept of pre-adjudication, or the creation of laws applied before any dispute arises, stands in contrast to the biblical model of justice. The Bible (God’s special revelation) provides not only laws for the civil realm but also a structure for applying them – through judges adjudicating between disputants. This system underscores the importance of adjudication, a theme that permeates the Bible. Deuteronomy 25:1 highlights this theme: “If there is a dispute between men and they come into court and the judges decide between them, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty…” Similarly, Jeremiah 7:5 emphasizes the practice of justice between a man and his neighbor, and Ezekiel 18:8 describes a righteous man as one who executes true justice between man and man.

The judiciary structure enabling man to pursue “justice, and only justice” in the civil realm is outlined in Deuteronomy 16:18-20: “You shall appoint judges and officers in all your towns that the Lord your God is giving you, according to your tribes, and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment. You shall not pervert justice. You shall not show partiality, and you shall not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and subverts the cause of the righteous. Justice, and only justice, you shall follow, that you may live and inherit the land that the Lord your God is giving you.”

The biblical structure is a system of judges (magistrates), with the standing body of civil law provided in the Bible. The general equity of these laws is applied in adjudication between disputants, not in creating new laws. Proponents of man-made law may argue that the creation of “new” laws is simply a form of pre-adjudication. However, this argument overlooks the biblical requirement for judges to “inquire diligently” in matters of justice/civil cases.

Several verses in the Bible emphasize this requirement, indicating that pre-adjudication does not align with God’s Law. For instance, Deuteronomy 13:14 and 17:4 both emphasize the need for diligent inquiry in cases of idolatry and other serious offenses, demonstrating that God’s justice system is built on thorough investigation and adjudication, not preemptive lawmaking. This process ensures that each case is judged on its own merits, in line with the biblical model of justice. The diligence required to find a man guilty of bearing false witness must also be applied in finding a man guilty of any offense: “The judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother. So you shall purge the evil from your midst” (Deuteronomy 19:18-19). Biblical law requires a magistrate to inquire diligently in every case. Pre-adjudication undermines this divine requirement and therefore must be rejected by those seeking to honor God’s Law-Word. Justice is a weighty matter (Matthew 23:23), and no shortcuts are permissible for us.

Tags: justicetheonomy
Previous Post

Debating Non-Legislative Theonomy with Marek Kizer

Next Post

Dr. Adi Schlebusch’s Article on Lancastrian Theonomy

Chris Hume

Chris Hume

Chris Hume is the host of The Lancaster Patriot Podcast and the author of several books. Like his father and grandfather, Chris is a veteran of the U.S. armed forces. He holds the MA degree in Literature from Clarks Summit University and the MBA degree from Wesley College. Chris currently resides in Lancaster County, with his wife and children.

Related Posts

The Sojourner Is My Neighbor: A Biblical Case Against Statist Immigration Control
Article

The Sojourner Is My Neighbor: A Biblical Case Against Statist Immigration Control

December 9, 2025
To the Law and to the Testimony, Not the ‘Christian Western Legislative Tradition’
Article

To the Law and to the Testimony, Not the ‘Christian Western Legislative Tradition’

December 3, 2025
The Magistrate Does Not Spank Heinies or Give Its Teats to Be Suckled
Article

The Magistrate Does Not Spank Heinies or Give Its Teats to Be Suckled

December 2, 2025
Torba’s Takeover Plan Amounts to Electing a Better Pope
Article

Torba’s Takeover Plan Amounts to Electing a Better Pope

December 2, 2025
Torba’s ‘Economic Patriotism’ Is Just More Statism in a Nationalist Costume
Article

Torba’s ‘Economic Patriotism’ Is Just More Statism in a Nationalist Costume

December 2, 2025
Glenn Ellmers, Doug Wilson, and Theonomy
Article

Glenn Ellmers, Doug Wilson, and Theonomy

December 2, 2025
Next Post
Dr. Adi Schlebusch’s Article on Lancastrian Theonomy

Dr. Adi Schlebusch's Article on Lancastrian Theonomy

Most Popular

Trump Moves on Venezuela and Rigney’s Protestant Political Theory

Trump Moves on Venezuela and Rigney’s Protestant Political Theory

January 6, 2026
I’m Allowed to Be a Statist Because the Confessions Say I Can

I’m Allowed to Be a Statist Because the Confessions Say I Can

December 9, 2025
Natural Law, the Judicial Law, and Why

Natural Law, the Judicial Law, and Why

December 8, 2025
Sign Up for E-Mail Updates

About Us

Future of Christendom is located in southeastern Pennsylvania. Our goal is to promote the Lordship of Christ and the Law-Word of God in all realms of society.

  • Book a Speaker
  • Coalition
  • Literature Distribution Outreach
  • Churches
  • Theonomic Court
  • Resources on Lancastrian Theonomy
  • Book a Speaker
  • Coalition
  • Literature Distribution Outreach
  • Churches
  • Theonomic Court
  • Resources on Lancastrian Theonomy

© 2025 Future of Christendom

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Events
  • Store

© 2026 JNews - Premium WordPress news & magazine theme by Jegtheme.