Who Is the Troubler?

Some actually are troublers, and the prime example involves the man who cost Israel a victory at Ai. Achan violated the command of God to abstain from taking any of the spoils from Jericho. Those were the firstfruits of the conquest of Canaan, and God reserved them for Himself—for the treasury of the Lord (Joshua 6:18-19). God cautioned the nation not to take these spoils for themselves lest they 1) personally become accursed, 2) make the camp of Israel a curse, and 3) trouble it.

Despite the warning, Achan took some of the spoils and hid them under his tent, thus troubling the Israelites—and bringing trouble on himself (Joshua 7:25). 1 Chronicles 2:7 later also mentions that this same man was “the troubler of Israel” (although he is called Achar there instead of Achan).

As best as this writer can discern, this one incident involves the use of the word trouble [5916] four out of the ten times it is used in the Old Testament (other Hebrew words are also translated “trouble,” however). The student of the Word finds the first usage of this word in Genesis 34:30. After Simeon and Levi unlawfully slaughtered Hamor, Shechem, and their kinsmen, Jacob told them: “You have troubled me by making me obnoxious among the inhabitants of the land….”

A sixth usage of the word related to Jephthah’s daughter as she greeted her father on his return from battle. He told her: “You are among them who trouble me!” (Judges 11:35). Jonathan said of his father’s prohibition against eating food on the day of battle: “My father has troubled the land. Look how my countenance has brightened because I tasted a little of this honey” (1 Sam. 14:29).

Although David used other words for “trouble,” he did not use the word under consideration. Solomon, however, did in one verse: “In the house of the righteous there is much treasure, but in the revenues of the wicked is trouble” (Pr. 15:6).

The Accusation

Now we come to the main point, which is found in 1 Kings 18:17, and that is a person can wrongly be accused of being a problem: “Then it happened, when Ahab saw Elijah, that Ahab said to him, ‘Is that you, O troubler of Israel?’” In the eight previous examples, the troubler was correctly identified, but here Ahab is accusing the wrong individual for Israel’s problems.

But wasn’t Elijah the cause of the drought? He had told Ahab: “As the Lord God of Israel lives, before whom I stand, there shall not be dew nor rain these years except at my word” (1 Kings 17:1). James wrote: “Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed earnestly that it would not rain on the land three years and six months. And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth produced its fruit” (James 5:17-18).

It looks like Ahab has a point, but one additional verse sheds more light on the situation. It appears that Elijah was acting in harmony with God’s purpose since He tells the prophet: “Go, present yourself to Ahab, and I will send rain on the earth” (1 Kings 18:1). So, was the drought God’s idea and Elijah went along with it, or the other way around? Or was it a mutual decision? Regardless, the point of the dire circumstance was punishment upon Israel for its devotion to idolatry, which King Ahab permitted.

Therefore, Elijah refused to be mischaracterized as the troubler of Israel; he set the record straight immediately to Ahab’s face: “I have not troubled Israel, but you and your father’s house have, in that you have forsaken the commandments of the Lord and have followed the Baals” (1 Kings 18:18). It was at that point that Elijah suggested the contest between himself and the false prophets.

Later, Jehu would agree with Elijah’s assessment concerning the house of Ahab. The time drew near for Jezebel to be punished for her wickedness. As Jehu raced toward Jezreel, King Joram of Israel and King Ahaziah of Judah came out to meet him (2 Kings 9:21). Joram asked him, “Is it peace, Jehu?” The future king of the northern kingdom responded severely: “What peace, as long as the harlotries of your mother Jezebel and her witchcraft are so many?” (v. 22). Whereas Ahab occasionally experienced a moment of humility, Jezebel never did; she was evil to the end.

These are the ten instances from the Old Testament of someone being described as a troubler. In nine of the verses, the description proved to be accurate, but one was not accurate. Elijah was not the troubler of Israel.

The New Testament

As with the Old Testament, various words are defined as “trouble” in the New Testament, but there are four we are interested in. The main word is tarasso [5015]. This word is paired with the preposition ek on one occasion—the one in which Paul and Silas were “dragged before the authorities” in Philippi (Acts 16:19). These authorities made an accusation against them: “These men, being Jews, exceedingly trouble our city; and they teach customs which are not lawful for us, being Romans, to receive or observe” (vv. 20-21).

The evangelists were beaten without being allowed a defense, bound, and imprisoned. This was totally unfair, but it led to one of the great conversions in the New Testament.

The turmoil began after Paul cast a demon out of a slave girl (vv. 16-19). Those who were making money from the predictions caused the “trouble” [1613] since they lost a profitable commodity. They seized Paul and Silas, causing the turmoil. It is doubtful that the evangelists were teaching anything that violated Roman law. That charge was only alleged—not proven.

Before getting to the verb, we note two nouns associated with it. Tarachos [5017], in its two New Testament appearances, is translated “stir.” The first event refers to Peter’s disappearance when he was chained between two soldiers. The apostle’s unexplained departure occasioned “no small stir” among the soldiers (Acts 12:18). The other event took place in Ephesus where there arose “no small stir” about the Way (Acts 19:23, KJV). That situation almost developed into a riot.

The other noun, tarachee [5016], also appears twice. Mark records Jesus using the word to describe the events preceding the destruction of Jerusalem. Among other things, there would be “famines and troubles” (Mark 13:8). An angel would go down into the pool and trouble [5015] the water; after the “troubling” [5016], whoever stepped into the water would be healed (John 5:4). (The New King James uses stirred and stirring.)

About 13 additional times this verb is used in the New Testament. Zechariah was troubled when an angel of the Lord appeared to him beside the altar of incense (Luke 1:11-12). Herod was troubled that one called the king of the Jews had been born in his dominion (Matt. 2:3). Jesus made a sudden appearance in the midst of His disciples after His resurrection, and He asked them, “Why are you troubled?” (Luke 24:36-38). In John 14:1 and 27, Jesus encouraged His disciples not to let their hearts be troubled.

Another Accusation

Most of the time, when individuals are termed trouble-makers, there is evidence to support the charge, as was the case with the Judaizing teachers. They were teaching that Gentiles needed to be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses (Acts 15:1, 5). In making these demands, they were requiring actions that God had not bound upon Christians. Thus, they had “troubled” the church. The apostles and elders in Jerusalem sent them a letter explaining the truth of the matter (v. 24).

The Judaizing teachers, however, continued in their insistence of keeping the Jewish traditions. Paul wrote to the Galatians that these individuals perverted the gospel of Christ and did trouble the brethren. Paul says that they preached another gospel and were accursed—twice (Gal. 1:6-9)! Later in the letter, Paul expressed confidence that the one who troubled them would bear his judgment (Gal. 5:10). The Jews constantly opposed Paul and those with him, but in actuality they were the ones who “troubled the crowd and the rulers of the city…” (Acts 17:8).

Although a different word is used in Acts 24:5, the NIV (which is often not reliable) and the NET both have Tertullus calling Paul a troublemaker. (The NKJ has “a creator of dissension.”) But as with Elijah, Paul was not the one creating the problem. As he himself says, “And they neither found me in the temple disputing with anyone nor inciting the crowd, either in the synagogues or in the city” (Acts 24:12). The actual troublemakers are those who stirred up the crowd.

Mentioned in the “Pro-Life Students Forced to Leave the Smithsonian” article (4-23-23) was Riley Gaines who recently spoke at San Francisco State University. She and many other female athletes object to men competing in women’s sports. Apparently, these “men” only need to say they are transgender, and they can compete as women. Most sane individuals can see the unfairness of this ploy as men begin to break all the records held by actual women. However, in a woke society, one is not allowed to disagree. And anyone disagreeing can be harassed and punched by other “women.”

San Francisco State University is upholding the “peaceful” protest against Gaines and has publicly praised those who assaulted her. Now who caused the problem—the person making a case for male athletes not competing as females—or those who do not want her to exercise freedom of speech—speech with which most Americans agree?

Of course, this incident is troubling, it involves a secular matter—one that is crucial to the maintaining of our basic freedoms. But in the church, leading brethren have been accused of being troublemakers, as Elijah and Paul were; these modern-day charges are as bogus as they were in the Scriptures.

When, for example, elders began to bring instrumental music into the worship, several members rightfully opposed it. They were accused of being troublers. It did not matter that the actual troublers were those who introduced that which neither Jesus, the apostles, nor any church in the first century used—instruments of music to accompany singing. No authority existed for it (Col. 3:17), but the majority desired to have it and did not care if others could not conscientiously worship with them. They could like it or lump it. Most of them felt compelled to leave and start a new congregation.

The same scenario can be used to describe all the various innovations that some “progressives” want to add or change. Today, brethren claim to have studied and prayed before allowing women to serve as elders, deacons, or preachers. When brethren protest, they are likewise accused of being troublemakers and are invited to leave. The innovators’ efforts will all fall back upon them in the judgment because God knows who created the division and is not fooled by slanted verbiage.

True Christians clothe themselves with love and peace (Col. 3:14-15). Love tries to solve problems—not create them. Neither does love accuse others of that which the accusers stand guilty.