Introduction
As
some of you know, I post my lessons on a variety of public bulletin boards
every week. Most are generally friendly but some are not; the latter are the
ones who challenge me on a regular basis. A few weeks ago I posted a lesson
titled: The Worst Of Sinners (http://seredinski.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-worst-of-sinners.html).
The subject text for the lesson was taken from Paul’s first letter to Timothy
where he described himself as “The Worst Of Sinners.” The lesson was intended
to demonstrate God’s power to reach even the worst sinner and use that person
to accomplish His will. The lesson included an interview with a former mob boss
of the Colombo crime family, Michael Franzese, who walked away from the mob
after accepting Christ and described himself as the worst of sinners. After
posting the link for the lesson on one particular public bulletin board with
the title to the lesson and an excerpt from the interview with Michael
describing some of his mob activity, I was admonished by someone about passing
judgment on others. This particular critic read the title and the excerpt from
the interview with Michael but neglected to actually read the lesson in order
to understand the context. Then, in a case of profound irony, my critic used
Jesus’ words out of context about judging others in order to judge what I had
written, which the person also took out of context, to be inappropriate. Yup,
that confused me too! The point I want to make is not specifically about this
critic, I know that’s just part of the package of being a pastor. No, the point
I want to make as part of this lesson is the false notion that, as believers,
we are not permitted to make judgments; judgments about right and wrong;
judgments about good and bad. I want to demonstrate that not only is this
notion unbiblical, it is a logical absurdity because it does not conform to the
“law of non-contradiction.” This law states, for example, something cannot
exist and not exist at the same time. When we say someone is wrong for passing
judgment, we are passing judgment that passing judgment is wrong (a circle of
contradiction in desperate need of the “law of non-contradiction”). We cannot
call ourselves followers of Jesus Christ and then not follow his ways. This
does not conform to the “law of non-contradiction.” Nevertheless, we must seek
to understand what Jesus meant when he said that we are not to judge others
given the context of the overall biblical text, Jesus’ own example and some of
Paul’s teachings and actions that clearly contradict the idea that we are not
permitted to pass judgment. If we fail to properly understand what Jesus was
and was not saying, then when the culture screams: “Jesus says, ‘don’t judge!’”
faithful believers are Silenced when
they should actually speak out.
Subject Text
Luke 6:37-42
37“Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do
not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. 38Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed
down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” 39He also told them this parable: “Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall
into a pit? 40A student is not above his teacher, but everyone who is fully
trained will be like his teacher. 41Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no
attention to the plank in your own eye? 42How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of
your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You
hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly
to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”
Matthew 7:6
6“Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to
pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear
you to pieces.”
Context
This text appears in both Luke and
Matthew’s Gospel with a few differences. I’ve selected Luke’s version as the
subject text primarily because the text immediately preceding it provides some
important context that seems to have precipitated this particular teaching by
Jesus. The version recorded by Matthew is part of Jesus’ larger teaching known
as the Sermon on the Mount. However, Matthew doesn’t record the daily events in
the same way as Luke. Nevertheless, the two texts are essentially the same with
the exception of verse 6 in Matthew’s Gospel which I have included in our
subject text because it too adds to a better understanding of Jesus’ teaching
on this particular matter.
Taking a closer look at Luke’s
Gospel account of Jesus’ teaching we can see that beginning in the middle of
chapter 5 and continuing until our subject text, Jesus is regularly confronted
by the Pharisees and the teachers of the law about either something Jesus says
or does. In Lk 5:20-26 Jesus forgives a paralytic’s sins and the religious
leaders are incense because only God can forgive sins. To prove that he has the
authority to forgive sins, Jesus miraculously heals the man of his paralysis. In
Lk 5:27-32 Jesus calls Levi (Gk. “Matthew”) to follow him. The religious
leaders, of course, question Jesus’ judgment because no respected religious
leader would ever associate with a hated tax collector. Jesus reminds the
religious leaders that his objective was to reach those who seemed beyond God’s
reach. In Lk. 5:33-35 the religious leaders question Jesus as to why his
followers didn’t fast in the same way that John the Baptist’s followers fasted.
Jesus reminds them that while he was still with them, there was no reason for
them to fast. In Lk. 6:1-11 the religious leaders question why Jesus’ followers
fail to abide by the strict laws governing that no work whatsoever be done on
the Sabbath. Jesus reminds the religious leaders that the Sabbath was created
for the benefit of humanity not the other way around. To further illustrate his
point, Jesus goes so far as to heal a man on the Sabbath who was disabled with
a crippled hand. Jesus reminded the religious leaders to consider if it is
lawful to do good or do evil on the Sabbath. The religious leaders were looking
for a way to trap Jesus into doing something or saying something they could use
against him. Unable to do so and being humiliated at the same time, the
religious leaders were furious with Jesus. It is through the lens of this
overall context that we must view our subject text.
Text Analysis
I assume you read through the
context for our lesson before you begin reading the analysis. If you haven’t,
go back and read it and see if you don’t see a trajectory pointing to our subject
text. Do you see it? It’s a little subtle so let me try to show you.
1)
Is there anything wrong with insisting that only God forgives
sin? (Lk 5:20-26)
2)
Is there anything wrong with insisting that we are to be concerned
with our personal integrity? (Lk 5:27-32)
3)
Is there anything wrong with the discipline of fasting? (Lk
5:33-35)
4)
Is there anything wrong with revering the Sabbath? (Lk
6:1-11)
The
answer is “no.” The problem was not that the religious leaders did not have a
biblical foundation for their complaints to and about Jesus. The problem was
their failure to recognize or acknowledge their own need for God’s mercy and
grace and the true motivation behind their judgments and condemnations. They
weren’t interested in honoring God or caring for others. They were looking for
a way to trap Jesus and condemn him. This is the reason for Jesus’ teaching in
v. 37. “Since there is no one-to-one correspondence between deeds and motives,
one must be extremely cautious in deducing others’ motives merely from
observing their actions. Jesus rebukes the disciples for jumping to
inappropriate conclusions about people and their deeds after observing only
their actions (Mt 26:6-13)…It is this difficulty in discerning motives that
lies behind the extensive warnings against judging others.”[1]
There cannot be an absolute
prohibition against passing judgment. Let me demonstrate: During World War II,
Hitler orchestrated the extermination of 6 million Jews while the Church stood
by largely silent. Today, neighboring nations seek to annihilate Israel and all
its people—should the Church remain silent for fear of passing judgment on
those who would seek to harm a special people once chosen by God? On September
11, 2001, radical Muslims hijacked four commercial airliners, crashed two of
them into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York, one into the
Pentagon while the suicide plans of the fourth was thwarted by a group of brave
passengers that overpowered the hijackers and forced the plane to crash before
it reached its intended target. Today, radical Islam vows to destroy all those
who don’t believe what they believe. Should the Church remain silent for fear
of passing judgment on those seeking to murder all those who don’t conform to
their beliefs? In 1973 the United States Supreme Court ruled in Roe vs. Wade
that abortion would be legalized while the Church was largely impotent to stop
it. Recently, Kermit Gosnell of Philadelphia, PA was convicted of multiple
murders of children in late and post birth abortions. The abortion facility
where Gosnell practiced was described as a “House of horrors.” When his
operation was closed and investigators searched the abortion facility, they
found, on his desk, a jar of baby feet! Should the Church remain silent for
fear of passing judgment on the grotesque murder of innocent babies? I
certainly hope the answer to these questions is obvious. I recognize that they
are extreme cases but our subject text does not qualify Jesus’ instruction so
we must understand it in the full biblical context and the reality of sin and evil
in our present day.
Instead, the prohibition against
judgment in v. 37a should be understood in parallel with the prohibition to
condemn in v. 37b and both should be held in comparison with the proper
attitude of forgiveness in v. 37c. “Mercy expresses itself in terms of a
hesitation to hold another down in condemnation. In a real sense the four
imperatives of this sub-unit need to be taken together. In fact, the
imperatives come in two pairs followed by a promise. The judgment in view does
not refer to a refusal to engage in appropriate ethical evaluation, as numerous
NT passages show (in the same sermon: Matt. 7:1-2, with 7:6, also Luke
11:42-44; 20:46-47; John 7:42, 51-53; Rom. 1:32; 1 Cor. 5:5, 11-13; Gal. 1:8-9,
Phil. 3:2; Titus 3:2; 1 John 4:1). The idea is rather a judgmental and
censorious perspective toward others that holds them down in guilt and never
seeks to encourage them toward God. What is commanded is an attitude that is
hesitant to condemn and quick to forgive. What is prohibited is an arrogance
that reacts with hostility to the worldly and morally lax, viewing such people
as beyond God’s reach. What is condemned by Jesus is an attitude like that of
the Pharisee in Luke 18:11-14.”[2]
Jesus continues with the
quid-pro-quo theme in v. 38. This continues to build on what is more popularly
known within Christianity specifically and within secular society more
generally as “The Golden Rule.” The rule generally states that we are to treat
others the way we ourselves want to be treated and to give to others what we
wish to receive ourselves. Luke’s description, however, seems bizarre when he
describes what we receive in return for what we give as being “pressed down,
shaken together and running over.” To understand this, it is important to
remember that Luke is writing in an agrarian culture so, like Jesus, he is
using an agricultural illustration. “The measuring of corn is a process which
is carried out according to an established pattern. The seller crouches on the
ground with the measure between his legs. First of all he fills the measure
three-quarters full and gives it a good shake with a rotatory motion to make
the grains settle down. Then he fills the measure to the top and gives it
another shake. Next he presses the corn together strongly with both hands.
Finally he heaps it into a cone, tapping it carefully to press the grains
together; from time to time he bores a hole in the cone and pours a few more
grains into it, until there is literally no more room for a single grain. In
this way, the purchaser is guaranteed an absolutely full measure; it cannot
hold more. This is the full measure that comes from God into the lap of the one
who gives.”[3]
Jesus tells a parable along with
this teaching in the form of a rhetorical question in v. 39 with the query of
whether a blind person can properly lead another blind person. In relation to
Jesus’ instruction on judgment, condemnation and forgiveness, Jesus is saying that
we may not always be qualified, because of our own sin and impure motives, to
guide someone in a life of righteousness. This is directly related to Jesus’
teaching about students who become just like their teacher in v. 40. As a blind
person follows another blind person and together they fall into a pit, a
student, when fully trained becomes just like his or her teacher—for good or
for bad. Therefore, combining vv. 39-40, Jesus is warning against “Leadership
which presumes to guide [judge] others in matters that the leader has not
personally understood, believed, or appropriated. Disciples who follow such
blind and hypocritical leaders can expect to be no different.”[4]
This is precisely Jesus’ point when he refers to the Pharisees as “blind
guides” (Mt 23:16, 24). The Pharisees were not motivated by truth, they were
motivated to keep the status quo and insure that the people continued to rely
on them and their religious systems and requirements. Jesus insisted that the
religious leaders were leading the people astray much like a blind person would
lead another blind person to their mutual peril.
Jesus sets up our entire lesson with
his question in v. 41 when he ask why a person is overly concerned with moral
trivialities in another’s life as represented by a speck of sawdust in the eye
while at the same time ignoring grotesque and overt sin in a person’s own life
represented by a massive plank in the eye. Nothing seemed to irritate Jesus
more than religious leaders who had ulterior motives attached to their
religious actions or when they condemned the sin in others while pretending
that they didn’t need God’s mercy and forgiveness like everyone else. Jesus
regularly condemned the religious leaders as hypocrites! “Central to Jesus’
admonition is his own rebuke of those who see the faults of others but not of
themselves…In parlance contemporary with Luke, a ‘hypocrite’ might refer to
someone whose behaviors were not determined by God or someone who is playing a
role, acting a part (Roman theater)…Jesus indicts persons who attempt to
substantiate their own piety through censuring the shortcomings of others as
acting inconsistently. Their hearts and actions are inconsistent. While they
themselves posture for public adulation, their behavior is not determined by
God.”[5]
Unfortunately, people who want
faithful Christians to be Silenced by
using Jesus’ instruction not to judge, seem to neglect v. 42 of our subject
text because it conflicts with either their ignorance or their hidden agenda.
Of course, these same people will affirm Jesus’ instruction in v. 42a that
people should first seek to remove the plank from their own eye. Stripping away
the language of the metaphor, Jesus is insisting that people are to deal with
their own sin first and foremost. But this is not the end of Jesus’
instruction. There is a reason why people are to deal with their own sin first:
When we have an honest and proper perspective on our own sin, then, and only
then, can we have the proper perspective on another’s sin according to v. 42b. You
see, Jesus’ prohibition to judge others is not a blanket and absolute
prohibition. Instead, it is a conditional prohibition against judging others’
sins until we have first dealt with our own sins. “Not judging others does not
mean that one does not evaluate and use discrimination; Jesus is speaking
against a superior and self-righteous attitude, not against careful evaluation.
One who is humbly aware of his own sin can help in removing the speck from
another person’s eye. Verses 43-45 are a call to self-examination. Good conduct
issues from a good heart, and evil conduct springs from an evil heart. The
behavior of a person is not an accident; it is a revelation of the innermost
motives of the heart.”[6]
I’ve included Matthew 7:6 as part of
our subject text because it picks up Jesus’ final thought on this particular
teaching that Luke does not record in his account. I have read Matthew’s
account as many times as I’ve read Luke’s but this particular verse in Matthew
has always seemed like a non-sequitur. However, Jesus is saying something very
important in light of his initial instruction not to judge. Jesus is making a
clear distinction between judgment for the purpose of condemnation versus
judgment for the purpose of correction and/or instruction. “While believers
were not to judge others, Jesus warned against a complete lack of discernment
about people’s attitudes toward the gospel—what
is holy. These unholy people are
those who, when presented with the gospel, treat it with scorn and contempt.
The futility of teaching the gospel to people who do not want to listen is as
futile as giving pearls to swine. Such
people will only tear apart what we say. Pigs do not realize the value of
pearls; all they know is that they cannot eat them, so they spit them out and
they trample them into the mud.
Contemptuous, evil people cannot grasp the value of the gospel, so they
scornfully cast it away.”[7]
Referring to people who reject the holy and sacred things of God as dogs and
pigs necessarily requires that we judge who would and who would not be
considered a dog or a pig—two of the most pejorative references that could be
made about another person at that time. Therefore, it seems imminently clear
that Jesus’ instruction against judgment is not intended to be an absolute
prohibition against wise judgment with a heart of sincere humility.
Application
There are certainly countless
examples when our subject text has been and continues to be an appropriate
admonition against judging others. However, in my experience, people use the
subject text as a diversion or subterfuge or slight-of-hand so that Christians
will be Silenced. Like the Pharisees
who were constantly looking for ways to trap Jesus, they used an issue, like
healing on the Sabbath, as a diversion for their real purpose. However, the
real issue had nothing to do with the Sabbath. In fact, the real issue, when
they weren’t trying to condemn Jesus, was that the Pharisees were more
interested in portraying themselves as religiously superior and pious while
pointing out the inferiority of everyone else (cf. Lk 18:11). In doing so, the
people remained dependant on the religious system and institution constructed
by the religious leaders who cared little about the actual needs of the people
or about their own spiritual poverty.
I don’t know much about magic but
what little I have witnessed usually involved flashing lights, or mirrors, or
smoke, or loud noise, or some other kind of diversion that forced me to shift
my attention away from what was actually happening. This is often how our
subject text is used. For those who use it, they are screaming: “Don’t look at
my life; don’t look at my sin; don’t evaluate my actions against my words! You
are only allowed to consider your own life; your own sins; you can only
evaluate your own actions against your own words!” They scream: “Jesus says,
‘don’t judge!’” And if they scream it loud enough and often enough, we have a
tendency to be Silenced. Let me
illustrate:
I had a wonderful discussion with my
daughter this week about an event that occurred in one of her theology classes.
In a discussion about Paul’s letter to the Romans, the topic of homosexuality
came up and the professor attempted to open a discussion about same-sex
marriage, which seems to be one of the hot topics of our present day. It seemed
like a perfectly natural discussion topic considering Paul’s instruction
against sexual immorality which includes homosexuality—except that no one in
the class said a word. Finally, my daughter looked around and spoke up (I’ll
take the blame for that). She explained that she disapproved of same-sex
marriage generally because it contravenes nature, but disapproved specifically
on the basis that homosexuality is a sinful behavior according to the Bible.
The professor commented to the class that the topic had historically generated
a lively discussion and he didn’t understand why no one was saying anything. Eventually
the other students in the class confessed that they were afraid of offending
anyone if they spoke up about what they believed; they didn’t want to be
accused of being judgmental. It worked! The culture screamed loud enough: “Jesus
says, ‘don’t judge!’” and smart students who knew better were Silenced.
So how do we respect Jesus’
instruction on judgment without being Silenced?
As always, the answer is not easy but we must find the narrow path between the
two. I hate checklists when it comes to spiritual matters because they are so
easily abused but there are a few distinct matters to consider if we are to
successfully navigate the narrow path between being judgmental and being Silenced.
Self-Examination
What is your attitude toward your
own sin? Can you readily acknowledge your own sin? How often do you confess
your sins? How often to you seek forgiveness? Does your own sin grieve you
because it damages your relationship with God and with others? Your answer to
these questions and other self-examination questions will determine whether you
are qualified to confront someone else about their sins. If you are dishonest
about your own sin; if you rarely see the need to confess your own sins; if you
rarely seek forgiveness from others for your conduct; if your sin does not
grieve you; if you are ambivalent about your sins, then you have absolutely no
business confronting anyone else about their sins specifically or sin in
general.
Motivation
If you determine that you have the
correct attitude and posture toward your own sin, you must still determine the
“why?” for confronting someone about their sin? This is no more and no less
important than our attitude toward our own sins. Why are you compelled to
confront someone about their sin? Is it out of love for that person or is it a
way to prove you are better in some way than that person (cf. Lk 18:11)? One of
the most powerful witnesses is personal experience. Some of the lessons I try
to teach my two daughters are lessons I have learned directly from the Bible.
However, many of the lessons I teach them are lessons learned from my own
stupid mistakes and I don’t want them to make the same mistakes. I know the
damage my sin has caused to my own life and the pain it has brought to those
around me. So, out of my love for them, I want to spare them the same damage
and pain if possible. If we confront others out of love for their well being
and/or the well being of others, then it is likely that we have the proper
motivation to confront someone about their sin(s).
Prayer
Even though we have properly
examined our own sins and are motivated out of love and not out of pride or
self-interest, we must always remember that our self-examination and
motivations may still be somewhat distorted by the sin that will always be part
of our lives. Therefore, it is important that we bathe matters of confrontation
and judgment in prayer so that God would grant us the proper wisdom to proceed
with humility and knowledge that we too need God’s forgiveness for our own sins
and confidence that we are motivated with the same love for humanity that allowed
Jesus do die on a cross for the forgiveness of the sin(s) we are confronting.
An unbelieving world around us will
continue to race headlong along the path of destruction as a result of sin if
we don’t point them toward a different way. First and foremost, that means
pointing people toward Jesus Christ. However, second is providing people with
an honest understanding of the destructive nature of sin. In both of these
cases, people will hate you; reject you; abandon you; persecute you; ignore
you; attack you and even use Jesus’ own words against you. Do not be deceived!
With profound acknowledgement of your own sin and confidence that you are
acting in a spirit of love and not a spirit of superiority, dig in your heals
and stand up for the Truth! Do not be Silenced!
[1]
Walter A. Elwell, Baker Theological
Dictionary of the Bible, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996), p. 543.
[2]
Darrell L. Bock, Luke 1:1-9:50—Baker
Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books,
1994), pp. 605-606.
[3]
Ibid., pp. 607-608
[4]
Fred B. Craddock, Luke—Interpretation,
(Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1990), p. 92.
[5]
Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke—The New
International Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI: William
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997), p. 279.
[6]
Walter A. Elwell, ed., Baker Commentary
on the Bible, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1989), p. 814.
[7]
Bruce Barton, Philip Comfort, Grant Osborne, Linda K. Taylor, and Dave Veerman,
Life Application New Testament Commentary,
(Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publisher, 2001), p. 35.
No comments:
Post a Comment