The Sin of Doing Nothing
Text: Judges 5:23
Series: Restoration Sermons
Date:
Speaker: Ed Rangel
Location: Waupaca Church of Christ
Bible Version: NASB 1995
Sermon Type: Expository
Learning Objectives
By the close of this lesson the hearer should be able to:
- Explain the historical background of Judges 5 — who Deborah, Barak, Sisera, and Meroz were — and identify what Meroz did and did not do.
- Explain the specific logic of the curse on Meroz: not that they did something wrong, but that they did nothing, and why this is cursable.
- State the principle the outline draws: that Jehovah did not need Meroz's help, but Meroz needed the blessing that would have come through helping.
- Identify at least four New Testament texts that condemn idleness or require active service, and apply them to the contemporary Christian.
- Explain the judgment scene from Matt. 25 as it applies to this sermon's theme — the specific reason one class was cursed.
Thesis
The curse fell on Meroz not for what it did but for what it failed to do. Jehovah was victorious without them; the battle was won; the enemy was destroyed. Meroz was not needed for the outcome. But Meroz needed the blessing that would have come through helping Jehovah, and they did not receive it because they did not come. The principle extends to every Christian: God does not need you to accomplish his purposes. But you need the formation, the blessing, and the accountability that comes through doing the work he has assigned.
Burden
Idleness is an abomination to God — but the abomination is not obvious to the idle person. The person who is doing nothing has not selected the wrong thing to do; they have simply not done anything. The absence of wrong action feels neutral. The burden is to establish, from Judges 5:23 and from the judgment scene of Matt. 25, that the absence of action is itself an act — and that the absence of good action is judged by the same standard as the presence of wrong action.
Introduction
The historical setting of Judges 5 is a period of bondage. The Israelites were under the domination of Jabin, king of Canaan, whose military commander was Sisera. Deborah was a prophetess who also served as judge of Israel. She commissioned Barak, from the tribe of Naphtali, to lead the military campaign against Sisera. Barak's condition — that he would go only if Deborah went with him — appears in Judges 4:8. The result of the campaign was decisive: Sisera was killed not by Barak but by Jael, a woman who drove a tent peg through his head, and the Canaanites were routed.
Judges 5 is the Song of Deborah — the victory song that celebrates the campaign. In the middle of the song, one note of bitterness appears: the curse on Meroz.
"Curse Meroz," said the angel of the Lord, "Utterly curse its inhabitants; because they did not come to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the warriors" (Judges 5:23). Meroz was a village whose location is no longer known. What is known about Meroz is exactly what the verse records: they did nothing. The battle was fought nearby; the call came; they did not respond.
I. The Song of Deborah
The context of the curse is a victory song — which makes the bitterness of Meroz's mention all the more striking.
Deborah commands Barak to go against Sisera. The commission comes through the prophetess — through the word of God delivered to Barak. The battle is not his idea; it is the assignment given to him.
Barak refuses to go unless Deborah goes with him. The refusal does not prevent the victory — it only prevents Barak from receiving the full honor of it. Deborah tells him: "The journey that you are about to take will not be for your glory, for the Lord will sell Sisera into the hands of a woman" (Judges 4:9). The victory will come with or without Barak's full commitment; his hesitation costs him the credit.
The result: Sisera killed by a woman; Canaanites defeated. The victory is total. The oppressor is eliminated. The song that follows is a song of thanksgiving for the Lord's intervention — and in the middle of the celebration, the curse on Meroz.
II. Curse Ye Meroz
The curse on Meroz is specific, and its logic deserves careful examination.
By whose authority? The angel of Jehovah. The curse is not Deborah's personal grievance or a human judgment about loyalty — it comes from the Lord himself. The standard by which Meroz is condemned is not a human expectation but a divine one.
What has Meroz done? Nothing. The entire indictment is contained in two words: they came not. There was an opportunity to help Jehovah; they did not take it.
Why curse Meroz? Because they did nothing. The curse is not for doing the wrong thing — it is for doing nothing. This is what makes the passage so searching: Meroz was not an enemy of Israel; they were not fighting for Sisera; they were not actively opposing the work of God. They simply did not come. And for that absence, the curse was pronounced.
What should Meroz have done? Helped Jehovah. The opportunity was present; the need was apparent; the call had come. The response required was simple: come.
Did Jehovah need Meroz's help? No — Jehovah was victorious without them. The battle was won; Sisera was dead; the enemy was routed. Meroz's absence did not change the outcome. This is the piercing point of the text: Meroz was not needed, and yet Meroz was cursed. The reason is in the next point.
Meroz needed the blessing that would have come through helping Jehovah. The opportunity to participate in God's work is not primarily for God's benefit — it is for the benefit of the one who participates. The person who helps Jehovah receives what the person who stands aside does not receive: the formation that comes from being used, the blessing that attaches to faithful service, the account at the judgment that includes what was done rather than the empty account of what was not done. God did not need Meroz. Meroz needed God — and the way to have the need met was to answer the call.
III. Will Christians Be Cursed for Doing Nothing?
The application from Meroz to the Christian is direct.
Idleness is an abomination to God. The principle is not limited to the occasion of warfare; it is a characteristic of the Lord's expectations of the people who bear his name.
Christ had to work (John 9:4). "We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work." The urgency is in the "must" — not obligation imposed from outside but the inward compulsion of the person who knows the time is limited and the work is real.
Timothy did the work of the Lord (I Cor. 16:10). "Now if Timothy comes, see that he is with you without cause to be afraid, for he is doing the Lord's work." The Lord has work; it is done by specific people; Timothy was one of them. Every person in the church has been assigned a place in the Lord's work, and the question is whether they are doing it.
We are to bear fruit in every good work. The branch that does not bear fruit is taken away (John 15:2). The expectation is production — not the appearance of connection to the vine, but the actual bearing of fruit that the connection is designed to produce.
We must abound in the work of the Lord (I Cor. 15:58). "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord." The standard is not minimal compliance — it is abounding. The person who does just enough to avoid the curse on Meroz has not yet met the standard of I Cor. 15:58.
"Cursed is the one who does the work of the Lord negligently" (Jer. 48:10). The negligent servant is as subject to the curse as the absent one. The person who is present but performing their service without care, without attention, without the investment of genuine effort, has not escaped the principle that condemned Meroz.
IV. A Scene at the Judgment (Matt. 25:31-46)
The judgment scene of Matthew 25 resolves the sermon's central question.
One class is blessed. Why? They did something. "For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me" (Matt. 25:35-36). The blessing is specific: for each thing that was done, the account was opened and recorded. The acts were small — a meal, a drink, a visit, clothing — not spectacular achievements but the ordinary responses of a person who had learned to see the need and act.
This class is cursed. Why? They did nothing. "For I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me" (Matt. 25:42-43). The indictment is the mirror image of the blessing: for every act of service the blessed did, the cursed have a corresponding absence. They did not do what was available to be done. Like Meroz, they did not come.
Application
The question the sermon leaves is simple: what is the call you have heard and not answered?
Every person in a congregation has been assigned work. The assignment may be formal — a teaching role, a service role, a leadership role — or it may be informal: the opportunity to feed, to visit, to clothe, to welcome. The judgment scene of Matthew 25 suggests that the informal assignments are at least as seriously evaluated as the formal ones.
Meroz was cursed not for a dramatic sin but for a missing response to an available opportunity. The person who has been sitting in the congregation, aware of needs that are available to be met, available to meet them, and not meeting them — has been sitting in the position of Meroz. The blessing that would have come through helping is available; it requires coming.
Conclusion
"Curse Meroz... because they did not come to the help of the Lord." The battle was won without them. God was not defeated by their absence. But they were diminished by it — they missed the blessing that service would have produced, they forfeited the account at the judgment that action would have opened, and they received the curse that inaction earned.
"Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord" (I Cor. 15:58). The work is not in vain. It is recorded. It produces fruit. It will be accounted for. Come.
Invitation
The one who calls you to come is the same one who called Meroz. He does not need you — his purposes are not defeated by your absence. But you need what the coming provides: the formation that service builds, the blessing that participation in God's work brings, and the account at the judgment that is opened only by those who did something.
Believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. Repent. Confess his name. Be baptized for the remission of your sins (Acts 2:38). Enter the Lord's work. Come to the help of the Lord.
Word Study
| English Term | Greek Term | Basic Meaning | Usage in This Sermon | Sermon Significance | Key Texts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abound / Abounding | perisseuō | To exceed what is necessary, to overflow — to have or do more than the minimum required. | Used in I Cor. 15:58: "always abounding (perisseuontes) in the work of the Lord." | The standard is not meeting the minimum — it is overflowing. The person who does just enough to avoid the curse on Meroz has not yet met the standard of perisseuō. The work of the Lord calls for more than minimum compliance; it calls for the investment of the full person. | I Cor. 15:58 |
| Negligently | (Hebrew rĕmiyyâ) | Deceit, slackness, negligence. | Used in Jer. 48:10: "Cursed is the one who does the work of the Lord negligently." | The Hebrew word suggests the quality of work that appears to be done but is not being done wholeheartedly. The negligent servant is not absent — they are present but not invested. Meroz was absent; the negligent servant is present but functionally equivalent. | Jer. 48:10 |
| Fruit / Bear fruit | karpophorēsai | To produce fruit — the actual output of the living connection. | Used in John 15:2 and Col. 1:10 for the expected production of the branch connected to the vine. | The connection to the vine is not the goal — the fruit is the goal. The branch that is connected but producing nothing has not fulfilled the purpose of the connection. The Christian who is attending but not serving is in the same position. | John 15:2, 8; Col. 1:10 |
| Come to the help | (Hebrew 'āzar) | To help, to assist, to come to the aid of. | Used in Judges 5:23: "they did not come to the help of the Lord." | The word is simple and active — it is the word for showing up when the help is needed. Meroz failed the 'āzar test: the help was needed; they did not come. Every subsequent text in the sermon's development is a variation on this failure: the person who did not come when the hungry needed feeding, when the sick needed visiting, when the work of the Lord needed doing. | Judges 5:23 |
Scripture Interlock Table
| Theme | Boles' Outline | Supporting Scripture |
|---|---|---|
| "Curse Meroz... they did not come to the help of the Lord" — governing text | Text | Judges 5:23 |
| "We must work the works of Him who sent Me" — Christ worked | III.2 | John 9:4 |
| "He is doing the Lord's work" — Timothy's example | III.3 | I Cor. 16:10 |
| "Always abounding in the work of the Lord" | III.5 | I Cor. 15:58 |
| "Cursed is the one who does the work negligently" | III.6 | Jer. 48:10 |
| Blessed: "you gave Me something to eat... visit Me" — did something | IV.1 | Matt. 25:35-36 |
| Cursed: "you gave Me nothing... did not visit Me" — did nothing | IV.2 | Matt. 25:42-43 |
| Baptism for remission — entry into the Lord's work | Invit. | Acts 2:38 |
---
Converted from H. Leo Boles, Outline 153. Primary text: Judges 5:23 (stated by Boles). OCR corrections: "fabin" → "Jabin"; "WlLL" → "WILL"; "N f eroz" → "Meroz"; "lll." → "III." Doctrinal audit: the theological insight that Jehovah did not need Meroz but Meroz needed the blessing preserved exactly — this is the central and most searching point of the sermon; Jer. 48:10 used to extend the principle to negligent (not just absent) service; Matt. 25 judgment scene developed as the New Testament counterpart to the Meroz curse — the cursed class is condemned for the same reason as Meroz: absence of action; invitation retains full obedient response (Acts 2:38).
