Wednesday, September 28, 2011

How Grace Is Best Understood

Okay, so I made it through the entire New Testament and looked (and noted) each verse or passage that talked about, or referred to, either directly or indirectly, the topic of predestination and the doctrine of election. It’s been a great lesson. Aside from the specific things that I learned, it just helps to have something specific to be studying because I end up looking forward to when I can sit down again and study the Bible. We all want to say that, right? We all want to be able to want to study, but we tend to have a hard time making the time. Don’t worry, I get there, too, from time to time, which is exactly why I continue giving myself something to specifically study.

Since I had a hard time consistently staying in the Word, I would come up with something that I really didn’t know much about (which is a lot, we will come to find out) and dedicate myself to just flip through the Bible looking for answers. Man, I can’t tell you enough how this is such a great way to study. You really get to know your Bible. I share this as an encouragement to anyone trying to find a way to get in and get deep.

Now, the topic at hand is one that will give us plenty to look at. We’ll take each book as it was chronologically written and go from there. To start this wonderful topic I’m going to give an overall look at how much the New Testament is saturated with God’s willful choice in our salvation. For a look at how we can reconcile human responsibility and God’s calling and electing, take a look at a post I posted earlier this year, titled “Free Will & The Attributes of God”. I covered some work from Calvin who really does a fantastic job of illustrating how all of these things can work together. We are responsible for our rejecting God, yet we rely solely on Him for wanting Him as well.

For the time being, we can take a look at how clearly the NT works together to make God’s choosing known, in many aspects. When I went through the NT I looked for specific words like: calling, elect, predestination, chosen, appointed, etc. I also kept track of how many times each book had references to God’s plan in election. Additionally, I noted where God’s clear and purposed sovereignty was at play in other issues besides salvation because it further validates that God is in fact in control of all things.

By my count, there are approximately 157 references to this doctrine. The word called is used about 44 times; chosen is used about 14 times; elect about 12 times; predestine, 8 times; appoint, about 5 times. The word called is clearly the favorite and it always refers to God’s effectual calling, meaning that when he calls, we will respond. It is not a hopeful and wishful calling, it is a meaningful and authoritative calling that will lead to someone’s salvation. Calvin refers to this as Irresistible Grace.

Here’s some other interesting stats on which books had the most to say about election:

Not surprisingly, Romans came in with the most references, numbering at 24. John and Acts both had 16; Luke had 15; 1st Corinthians had 14; Matthew had 13; and almost every other book had anywhere from 3 to 8 references. The only books that really didn’t speak about, or reference this topic, was 2nd Corinthians, Hebrews, Philemon, and 1st and 3rd John. Basically, about 80% of the books in the NT speak of God’s effectual calling and predestination. Wow. Being that these are various authors at various times in history is remarkable.

Aside from all of that, we haven’t even touched the OT, either, and there is plenty there as well. This doctrine is difficult to grasp and it makes many people angry, but the more you study it and realize what it really means to believe it or not, then you develop an understanding of the paradox and a faith that God is in control and not everything can be broken down to a science. However, there is plenty in the Bible to show us how it works and what it means.

The best thing we could probably take away from this doctrine is that God has chosen His elect, but we do not know who the elect are. Therefore, we preach that whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved. We are called to preach the Gospel to all nations and to make sure we are making the Gospel clear and correctly handling the word of truth as indicated in 2 Timothy 2:15.

God is in charge of who comes to Him, ultimately. This reduces our need to be creative in filling churches and getting people to conform to outward acts of piety. This allows us to focus on nothing more than getting the message of the Gospel right: we are a depraved and sinful people headed for Hell, in need of a Lord and Savior to rescue us from our sins and for us to be obedient to Him. Without Christ we are nothing. With him we live and move and have our being and it is His grace working in us that allows us to will and act for His good pleasure (Acts 17:28 & Phil. 2:13).

The sovereignty of God in salvation is so remarkable and unfathomably gracious, that it is in fact the only way that grace can be rightly understood. I hope you’ll find some encouragement to dig deep yourself and find the richness of this doctrine of election that is at work behind the scenes of what we, as the Church, do.

The first book I'll be looking at is James and we'll see what he had to say about God's calling us to Him. Stay tuned!

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Conservative Reformed Theological Cussers


Yep, you read that title right. I see an issue in the young “reformed” generation today. Namely, that they love the label, but they don’t know what it means. How can I say that? By the methodologies and lifestyles that are employed and encouraged from behind some of the pulpits themselves.

Here’s the contradiction that I see in its simplest definition: People are oftentimes professing to be reformed in their theology and proponents of biblical teachers such as Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Spurgeon, C.S. Lewis, etc., yet have a terribly shallow and oftentimes crude lifestyle. Now, the emphasis here is not on whether or not they are approving of the right scholars that I just mentioned, although that can reveal a lot, but the emphasis is that it is not enough to read them and be able to talk about them. Anyone who knows just what these great theologians taught will know that it was the doctrines of grace and the entire revelation of the Bible as set forth from the Bible. Their desire was to see God glorified and understood in His Word. Their desire was for people to understand the grace of God as revealed in Scripture.

Martin Luther started the Great Reformation by nailing his 95 Theses to the wooden door of the Wittenberg Church in Wittenberg, Germany. Someone started passing out copies and the rest is history. Then John Calvin articulated the very things that the Bible taught and how it stood in stark contrast to the traditional Roman Catholic Church, affirming Luther’s stance on unmerited grace. He penned out his Institutes of the Christian Religion, which has been a major source of reformed theology to this day. The teachings of these men were based on the unmerited grace of God and not on the works of men in order to merit any form of forgiveness or salvation, which is what the Roman Catholic church teaches to this day. In an age where the true church and true doctrine were obscured and misused, they were the forerunners in teaching and preaching the Bible solely and clearly.

Reformed theology has become more and more popular with the younger generation because of its solid foundation, clear teachings and academic nature. Going back to the source is always a good way to find out whether someone is truly a biblical teacher. This is exciting to see, yet at the same time it is sometimes confusing because while there is excitement to learn about what these men taught from Scripture, there also seems to be a heightened desire to find comfort and "redeeming value" in worldly passions and sometimes sinful, cultural lifestyles. What do I mean by that?

In a nutshell, I sense a desire for knowledge, but a lack of desire for holiness. I have noticed an interest in theology, but a disinterest in purity. I see reformed theological language and jargon being used along with profane, irreverent language and jargon. I see people living by the motto, “How close can I get without touching it”, versus, “How far can I get away from it”. As the apostle Paul would often say…my brothers, this should not be.

To boil this down even more, I see a misunderstanding of Christian freedom being used all over the place. 1 Peter 2:16 says, “Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God.”

So, why is there this greater interest in old Reformers along with greater interest in cultural and wordly activites that are supposedly used as tools to reaching the lost? There is this funny blend of philosophically-bent, missional-minded outreach stuff that are methods used by the popular church planters nowadays that are really undermining what they claim to believe...reformed doctrine. How so? Read on.

What I would like to do by starting this topic is to show how studying reformed theology and knowing church history does not make you a better Christian just because you know it. If you can’t live in a way that honors the Lord Jesus before others and even in secret, then you may have a head full of knowledge that is no better than a Pharisee’s…hypocritical. That is the issue. The fame of Jesus Christ is at stake in our conduct, so it needs to be honoring and glorifying to Him.

Second, as John MacArthur has recently started posting on the Grace To You blog on this same topic (unbeknownst to me when I started writing this) he has made the same important points that being reformed means you are constantly reforming, or becoming more like Christ. Additionally, it is inconsistent when you say you are reformed, which means believing the doctrines of grace that involve God’s sovereign plan in election, and then write books about how cool and hip you need to be in modern culture in order to effectively reach people for Christ. So, which is it? What really draws people to Christ? God’s efficacious call, or our tactful use of cultural paraphernalia? Inconsistencies abound in this young, missional-minded church-planting movement. Not all, but largely.

Aside from the essential understanding of the doctrines of grace, reformed theology is nothing more than biblical theology. With that comes a demand for obedience to Christ in all aspects of life. Having right doctrine is foundational and crucial, but living a pure life is just as important. You don’t pick one or the other. Plus, the doctrines that reformed leaders often taught were oftentimes centered on certain things like unmerited grace, as I already pointed out. This doesn’t mean that the rest of the Bible was not as important to them.

In a period where the Roman Catholic Church was the only recognized church and clearly irreverent and unbiblical in its existence as a majority, people like Luther and Calvin had to show how the Catholic’s view of salvation was inherently wrong. That was what they fought for so much. They wanted people to take the Bible as their only source of divine revelation because that’s what it is. Only God could forgive sins and only God could cause someone to have the faith to trust in Him. Sola Scriptura.

So, while they specifically challenged things like the Roman Catholic’s belief in justification and salvation, they also taught that the Bible needs to be loved and studied in order to know it and learn how to be obedient to the God of the Bible that demands it.

What we don’t want to do is talk about intellectual and theological topics concerning God’s grace and how loving he is, but fail to see how that actually gets fleshed out. God’s grace is not to be used as a crutch or a scapegoat. God’s grace is what calls us to Him when we wouldn’t have come to Him ourselves. It is our salvation. When we are regenerated by the Holy Spirit, then we are now living for Christ and not for the flesh. Freedom in Christ is still meant to exist within the realm of obedience to his commands as 1 John is so good to lay out. Just take a quick browse through that book. You won’t come out the same.

Regarding the study of reformed theology, we should never take it as taught by the great reformers as some kind of philosophical or philological knowledge that provides us with intellectual stamina. We shouldn’t study it just to look as though we are more knowledgeable of the Church and have more wisdom in the things of God. This would be Pharisaical.

We should study the Bible for what it is and see what it was that the reformers fought for, so that we have an understanding and appreciation for the church we have today. The Bible then helps us learn what God’s perfect and pleasing will is. It teaches us how to be obedient to him and how to live a life of holiness and purity that stands out in a world full of corruption. It teaches us about our original depraved nature and how to repent of our sins and call upon the name of the Lord for salvation.

I have to constantly remind myself that I will only be effective for Christ if I am humble and willing to learn and willing to be corrected. I have certain friends in my life that have literally asked me, “What were you thinking?!” They keep me accountable to my conduct at all times and whether or not I am a good reflection of God’s grace in the life of a redeemed sinner. We all need these reminders.

I also write from a personal perspective on this issue of studying reformed theology because I DO like to study it. I like to know how history went down and who did what. I like to know just what caused the splits in the church back then and how we have denominations today. The more I know about it, the more I appreciate what we have today and how available the Bible is. It helps me understand what people like Augustine, Luther and Calvin actually taught when I read their actual material. I love to study the doctrines of grace and understand them to where I can teach them. It changes you when you really grasp the depth and breadth of grace.

I do this so that I am not building a belief or argument based on something I have heard someone else say. I read their books so I know that I understand for myself what they taught and then I can compare that with what the Bible teaches to see if it lines up. This is not to say that I am the final authority on their accuracy, but I must allow the Holy Spirit to work in me as I discern these writings. It is especially important that I stay in the Word and study it just as much (and more!) while I read these other sources because the Bible is what nurtures our soul and teaches us discernment and has final authority in all matters.

With that said, let me address the first issue I stated at the beginning. Oftentimes, people may have a right understanding of doctrine, but a wrong motivation for knowing it, thus leading to a bad understanding of our responsibilities as Christians. I won’t go into a full break down of Calvin’s five points that he belabored in his Institutes because that is not what this is necessarily about. I will say that if you know them and believe them, then that’s great (I do, too!), but do we also focus on the holiness that God has called us to?

Do we think that knowing and affirming the doctrine of election and predestination and perseverance of the saints is enough? Do we think that using phrases like ‘unmerited grace’ and ‘substitutionary atonement’ is something that trumps our need to know how to hold back our tongue or live in a way that doesn’t cause someone else with weaker faith to stumble? Do we think that by quoting old reformers and puritans and pastors in our sermons will make us better at holding sway with people?

If anything, I want this blog post to remind people about the seriousness of purity in all aspects of life, especially language. I have seen a large disregard for purity in language by many believers and it makes me sad because it certainly does go against what we’re taught in Scripture.

As I looked up BibleGateway.com today I saw their verse of the day on the home page. It was James 1:21 and it is a great way to start this topic: “Therefore put away all filthiness and rampant wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.”

We should put away the wickedness and receive the Word, which can save our souls. The things we say are so revealing in who we are as people. Luke 6:45 says that out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. It is the fruit that reveals the root of our heart.

Are we full of grace and seasoned with salt? Our words will tell. Are we full of carelessness and seasoned with impurity. Our words will tell that, too. Colossians 4:5-6 says: “Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.”

James 3 also talks about the danger of the tongue and how serious it is. It addresses the issue of people who bless the Lord with their language and then curse someone else with it. Pay attention to the language used here in James 3:5b-12:

“How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell. For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and sea creature, can be tamed and has been tamed by mankind, but no human being can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so. Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water? Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? Neither can a salt pond yield fresh water.”

Just before this passage, it starts with saying that not many people should presume to be teachers because the tongue is such a delicate area that many people stumble in controlling. Think about it, there are some things (sins) that some people will struggle with that others maybe won’t. There are certain things that are harder for some people to deal with than others, but every single one of us has said something we regret, or said things that have been inherently sinful, or evil. Verse 2b says, “If anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body.” We all know it is hard to say the right things at times, but there is an expectation of purity we are to maintain.

Since leaders will be judged with a higher level of strictness, then someone should not want to be a leader if they can’t bridle their tongue (James 3:1). Why? Because we will be misrepresenting Christ and his call to be holy as He is holy (1 Peter 1:15-16).

Look at Ephesians 4. In verse 17 it starts talking about how we have new standards as new creations living for Christ in a new life. It makes this clear by emphasizing how the old way of life was anything but living for Christ. In verse 17 it says that we must no longer live like the Gentiles do because they are futile in their minds. Let’s look at what else Paul says here:

“They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity.”

He then shows us the difference of how we should be:

“But that is not the way you learned Christ!— assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”

The common comeback I have heard from people who do not feel that swearing is necessarily a bad thing is: How could one or two measly words offend Christ when there are such bigger issues at stake? How do we know what a swear word really is? Hey, even the apostle Paul used language that is equivalent to the s-word!

Really? He did? Let me help you understand that it wasn’t exactly the same. Paul wouldn’t write here in Ephesians that corruptive talk should not come from our mouths and then use it in another letter to someone else. This is the Holy Bible we’re talking about here. The words of Paul were inspired by the Holy Spirit, Himself! For someone to use that excuse to excuse their own profanities is at a whole new low in Christian living.

The verse that I am mentioning here is Philippians 3:8: “Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ.”

I haven’t done the word study on it myself, but the common answer you find when you do a preliminary search on it is that the word can be associated to cow manure, so people say “Oh, boy! Paul was practically saying the s-word!” No. No he wasn’t. Notice that the words ‘cow manure’ are much different than the word you are trying to excuse. Please get over yourself and place more concern in the Lord’s standards and not your own. Capisci?

Now that that’s settled, let’s move on in Ephesians. Continuing in verses 29 and 30, he says:

Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.”

Here’s a question for you: Does not the very nature of things tell you that certain four letter words are more offensive than others? Is it not obvious that even the unbelieving world will sometimes apologize for their “french” because they know it is harsh language they sometimes use? Doesn’t the fact that a public school system who runs the “Dare Not To Swear” campaign tell you that there is a corruptive nature to certain language that should not be seen among school children, let alone the body of Christ? Come on!

“If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless.” –James 1:26

The first thing that people notice about us and make impressions by is how we appear and then how we speak. Remember the old joke?

“Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright ... until you hear them speak.”

This translates perfectly into our Christian living as well. We can often appear pure, but once we speak we reveal the true nature of our spirit. This is how we communicate. We speak in order to articulate what is being felt and conjugated within us. Language is no light matter. It reveals something.

If you still aren't convinced that you can effectively label certain words as "swear words", then let me set the standard based on what the Bible says is appropriate or not. Consider the name of God, Himself. Consider the name of Jesus. Now consider Exodus 20:7, "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain."

It depends on how we evoke and use the name of God that classifies it as reverent, or in vain. And it is a big deal.

Do you want another example? The KJV says in six different places this phrase: "pisseth against the wall". It is referring to King Saul when he was in a cave and searching for David and it is referenced in a number of ways. This particular word, though, is considered a swear word by many. I, for one, never use this word because it carries that cursing weight to it (in my opinion), but is it any better for me to say that someone "ticked me off"? I am still using the word in vain, which has a negative and sinful connotation to it, grieving the Holy Spirit no doubt.

That is the standard. Are we speaking in vain in any way? Look, some words can only be used as swear words and we certainly should not be using them. They are offensive to believers and non-believers alike and it is even culturally abohorred in most public settings where decency and a moderate level of professionalism is expected. We need to be careful how we use our every word, for we will certainly be held accountable for every careless word we speak (Matt. 12:36).

Considering all of this leads me to make certain decisions about leaders I may have listened to in the past. I hate to pick on just one person, but Mark Driscoll has, unfortunately, made many crude and profane jokes in his sermons out of Mars Hill Church in Seattle, WA. To his credit, he has given good sermons as well. Being from the Seattle area, I have been able to go there before and listen for myself.

Unfortunately, he has certainly fell short of the basic qualifications of a real pastor, which is to be pure in conduct and above reproach. A pastor or an elder are required to have certain characteristics that set them apart as leaders of God’s people. Why? So the people resemble them, who resemble Christ, and are more obedient to God.

Titus 1:9 says, “He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.”

Look, if a pastor purposely swears from behind the pulpit and makes crude jokes, then he has failed his purpose in setting an example for the body of believers in his good conduct. If he can’t take seriously what the Bible says about the tongue, then how do we know he will accurately view the rest of the Bible? These are tough questions that need to be asked.

This verse in Titus says that “he must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine.” Ironically, Mark just wrote a book called Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe. I haven’t read it, so I have no comment on the book, but for someone who purports that he knows what doctrines we should believe, I would certainly expect a better proof in his use of language, which the trustworthy Word we have been taught says to keep pure.

His past use of loose language shows immaturity, lack of tact, and irresponsibility at the most fundamental and basic levels. For this reason, I don’t look to Mark for other spiritual help in understanding the Bible because he has proven that he doesn’t understand simple things, so how can he take me deep? There are plenty of other teachers out there that can help me in understanding the Bible, so why bother with a loose-lip?

For those who don’t know, this pastor was dubbed “Mark, the cussing pastor” and I believe it was after a particular sermon he gave that lasted only a few minutes and went something like this:

“You know that if right now the earth ended, there would be billions upon billions of people on this earth who would go to hell and nobody here gives a s***. In fact, you probably care more about the fact that I said the word s*** than about those people.”

This was just stupid. He was trying to make a point about how we can make the wrong issues too big or too little. So, now we’ll rate sins and say that swearing is no big deal compared to the fact that billions of sinners will go to hell if the world ended today. That doesn’t make sense. Will you convince the world they need forgiveness of sins by sinning in your gospel presentation? This was an incredibly immature and irreverent way to make a point that people are going to hell. We already know that people will. He accomplished nothing but getting a devastating title for someone who is supposed to be above reproach as a pastor of God’s Church.

He also gave credence to the fact that swearing is okay, by doing that. Mark is certainly not the example that people need for their life, at least in this area. Since then, swearing has been a joke among many young evangelicals who think they have a faith that honors God and that scares me. I personally know of people, however, who have been changed by his teaching in general and for that I am thankful, but I have a valid fear that in the process they will also degrade in these matters I just mentioned.

To his credit, Driscoll has apologized for his lack of humility and cursing from behind the pulpit and many people seem impressed by this. I am also glad he has taken some of those things back. Again, though, people should not presume to be leaders because they are called to a higher level of accountability. We cannot escape the call to be pure in speech and conduct. This kind of behavior legitimately disqualifies himself and others as pastors. I know he’s not perfect and he admits to it, but if Paul didn’t think there was a reason to have certain standards for preachers, then he wouldn’t be so specific to Titus and Timothy and other churches about the issue. Pastors are not to be irreverent, left and right, and then get to move on if they apologize for it, while being heralded as being humble when they do. It doesn't work that way. Sure, let him teach on the side and encourage people in areas that he is strong in, but being a pastor of a church is another ballgame that he doesn’t measure up to, biblically, from what we have seen in the past and what he has written in some of his books.

Remember, Paul told the Colossians that in order to walk in wisdom towards outsiders you need to always be gracious and have your speech seasoned with salt…not swearing. The world doesn’t need to hear us swear to know that we are like them. That’s the exact opposite of what they need from us (Col. 4:5-6). Driscoll and the new young “reformed” generation thinks that the more you know about pop culture and media, then the better you can evangelize. Again, for someone who claims to know and uphold reformed theology, which includes God’s electing in salvation, he sure does place a lot of weight in extra biblical knowledge (worldly knowledge) in order to capture the imaginations of the unsaved. Truly, they contradict themselves and deceive themselves if they really think they are reformed in their theology.

Look at what Paul told his young understudy, Timothy: “Let no one despise you for your youth, but set the believers an example in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity.” (1 Timothy 4:12). Enough said.

Here’s a few other reminders from King Solomon’s works in Proverbs:

Proverbs 10:31: “The mouth of the righteous brings forth wisdom, but the perverse tongue will be cut off.”

Proverbs 21:23: “Whoever keeps his mouth and his tongue keeps himself out of trouble.”

Proverbs 15:2: “The tongue of the wise commends knowledge, but the mouths of fools pour out folly.”

I cannot say enough about how important it is to consider everything you say and make sure that it is something that people recognize as being abnormally seasoned with salt, compared to the world. A house divided against itself cannot stand, so do not use evil language as a way to try and spread light. It doesn’t work. It only spreads confusion and a lack of spiritual integrity and depth that this world needs…inside and outside the Church.

Do you consider yourself reformed? Then prove it by your actions that produce a hundred times the fruit in other lives. Show it through your pure speech and conduct. Affirm it by your understanding of Scriptures, which leads to Godly character and obedience.

In John MacArthur’s most recent blog post on GTY.org he said in regards to the young and immature actions of ‘reformed’ Christians:

“Those who exhibit such behavior are out of their element claiming to be Reformed. Maturity is a necessary virtue for those who would be truly effective in ministry. "Solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil" (Hebrews 5:14). That is a desirable—and honorable—goal: Strive for it.”

Let us not be like the Pharisees who were shut up with Jesus’ powerful and humbling words: “Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God?”

God bless! Now zip it.

Monday, June 6, 2011

Avoid Neglecting and Rejecting God's Electing

Catchy title, I know. Probably on the verge of being annoyingly easy to remember. I seem to keep coming back to this topic because the more I study the Bible on any given topic, or the more I just read through Paul’s letters to the various churches and church leaders, I can’t help but realize just how foundational this whole issue of election, or God’s sovereign plan in salvation, works. I mean, when you want to get brutally honest with yourself and allow yourself to be changed by the Holy Spirit, then you have to be ready to face up to the fact that accepting what the Bible says about salvation affects your view on almost everything else.

Recently, we dissected Matthew 7:6 and how we shouldn’t cast our pearls to pigs. We found out that evangelizing does have its limits and that we are not always supposed to pursue someone who rejects the truth of God’s word. That particular passage only makes sense when considered in the light of God’s electing purpose in salvation. When God is in control of who accepts or rejects his message, then it completely removes the necessity of all human effort of convincing stubborn people. This doesn’t mean we don’t put forth any effort, which should be obvious as we should be willing to do the work of an evangelist as Paul instructed Timothy (2 Tim. 4:5), but we do need to realize that it isn’t us that does the real convicting and persuading.

You see, our understanding of this issue will completely change our approach to evangelism and our level of effort involved in making the Gospel something that people can accept. There is a very strange, twisted concept that seems to prevail in evangelical Christian thinking in that we want to “do the right thing” by sharing Jesus with people and in so doing, find a way (any way!) to “reach through to people” who normally wouldn’t ever have anything to do with God. Bear with me and think through this for a second… We can tend to get so excited about the possibility of the end (seeing someone place their faith in Christ, if even that), that we completely disregard the means of salvation altogether (how they get to a genuine, saving faith).

It’s like there exists this subtle philosophy that the average Christian mind has bought into, that the Gospel needs our help in order to make itself something that unregenerate people will warm up to and get excited about. It’s almost like all we do is trick people into “accepting” Christianity as viable. We have to find a way to make people want it, right? Again, we get this silly notion that all along, people of every other century has gotten it wrong and that Christianity really is pretty hip and cool and we refuse to draw lines in the sand that define what a Christian really is. We’re supposed to engage our culture, right?

After all, what could be better than seeing someone who has always rejected the Church and the Gospel, actually show up to church and sing our songs and play in our worship band? What could be better than seeing people who felt like outcasts and sinners because of their loose lifestyles, become embraced and finally welcomed and worthy enough to join the church as they are? What could be better than the church seeing growth and the Gospel finding new ways to be presented to people who hate it? What could be better than selfish people suddenly wanting to change the world and eradicate world hunger and reduce the local homeless population?

Let me ask you this: What could be worse than a false conversion? The answer? Nothing.

The truth is this: Only God can effectually bring someone to the point of articulating their desire to place their faith in Christ and submit themselves to being obedient to Him. This is called regeneration. If we write books, run programs and give lectures and seminars on how to evangelize without acknowledging God’s exclusive role in actually making it entirely possible to draw someone in the first place (John 6:65), then we are guilty of misunderstanding and misapplying Scripture and in danger of (if not already guilty of) pushing a shallow, or entirely false, gospel.

However long it takes, I’m going to look at each book in the New Testament, starting with Paul’s letters, and see if they mention anything about God’s sovereignty in salvation. This would include anything about election, predestination, calling the elect, etc. By the way, this is what the real definition of grace is. Grace is only completely and best understood when you come to grips with election. A lot of people throw grace around like a “get out of jail for free” card, or use the terms mercy and grace interchangeably, but it’s more than that. Grace is not just forgiveness of sins. That is primarily God’s mercy. God’s grace is only defined in his initiating act of drawing his elect to Him when they had no chance or hope of doing it on their own.

For a thorough look at how to reconcile human responsibility and God’s acting in election, see “Free Will and the Attributes of God” which I wrote earlier this year. I, in no way, want to give the impression that people are not responsible for their rejecting the Gospel just because they aren’t elected. We do have our own decisions to make and we are responsible for them, but we are never outside of God’s control at the same time.

I hope you’ll come back to see just how much the apostle Paul spoke about this topic of unmerited grace and what it means for us. Please feel free to post questions and arguments if you feel I have not grasped Scripture entirely in an area regarding this. As always, use tact and try to take the personal stings out of this sensitive topic. As my favorite verse says in Proverbs 27:17, “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.”

See you soon!

Friday, May 13, 2011

Evangelizing: When Not To


Recently, we dug into the implications of Matthew 7:1-5 and how there is a command not to judge people based on superficial and hypocritical judgments. It was also clear that we are to judge only in a way that is correct and right and not just on mere appearances (John 7:24). We saw how the whole point of removing the log from our own eye was so that we could actually remove the speck from our brother’s eye. Correction is always needed in the Church. Shallow critiquing is another story. This is vital to the spiritual health of the Church and the growth of the individual Christian. We should always be ready to edify and be edified, or corrected, if need be.

The passage directly after this one is another one that I have honestly never really understood in the past. I kind of thought that I had an idea of what it could mean, but that was the extent of my confidence. Sometimes, passages like these ones give us the best opportunities to learn. Certain metaphors and key words rang some bells as to the possibilities behind this passage, but nonetheless I wanted to know for sure. Hopefully, it provides some insight to you as well and is helpful in some real areas in your life as it has to do with evangelism and handling of the Word of God among non-believers.

To start, let’s think about what evangelism is. It is sharing and proclaiming the Gospel to those who need it, right? Some people are better at evangelism than others. This should be clear given that evangelism is a gift given to us from God, along with other forms of Church edification, found in pastors, teachers, etc. Some are called by God to a specific function. On a general level, though, we should all be willing to share the Gospel when given the opportunity. As Peter says in chapter three of his first book, “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.”

As Christians, there should be no doubt that we are to share the Gospel to anyone and everyone. Not everyone is called to make a full time “career” out of it, but everyone should be an obvious ambassador of Christ through their words, actions and character.

Paul says in 2 Corinthians 5: “We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”

We represent Christ and should always be doing so. Paul says this and then gives a quick shot at what the Gospel entails…that Christ became like someone who had sinned, even though he hadn’t. He did this so he could replace us on the cross and declare us righteous. Of course, all throughout Scripture this comes with repentance of sins and calling upon Christ as Lord in faith and obedience.

So, while we may not be able to travel around and evangelize the countryside, or go to another country as some people are called, we are most definitely called to be an ambassador of Christ, ready to share the good news. In fact, we already are ambassadors, so let’s not slough the implications of what that means when we behave or misbehave. It’s vital that we remember who our Master and Shepherd is.

With that in mind, what is the passage in question that we’ll dive into? Matthew 7:6. One verse. Lots to unpack.

Jesus warned us, “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 turn and tear you to pieces.”

What does this passage mean? Interestingly enough, it will be a great way to come off of the back of Easter Sunday, remembering what Christ accomplished on the cross. It will help put some of this in perspective. Christ was ministering in a period when the Mosaic Law ruled and Jews were very careful to do all that the law commanded. Unfortunately, many Jews were so particular about it that they ended up creating their own system of how the law should and should not be executed and upheld. They ended up creating a law apart from the law…rules of men, not of God. Many exemplified the epitome of legalism. This created hearts that were far from God, while their lips flapped with their long, glamorous, public prayers (Isaiah 15:8-9 & Mark 12:38-40).

Without going on too much of a tangent, let’s consider the Gentiles, essentially non-Jews, who made up the other crowd in Jesus’ day. To the Jews, they were considered dogs. They were unclean and unfit for anything holy. They were not a part of the chosen nation of Israel and they certainly did not live by the law of Moses, which made them clear scoundrels in the eyes of decent Jews. This is a common thought process that both the Jews and the Gentiles were aware of. The Gentiles knew that the Jews considered them dogs. It was a degrading term.

Another degrading term that could have been used was “pig”. Even today, if you called someone a pig, it wouldn’t have a positive, uplifting meaning to it, would it? Pigs in the Bible were typically referenced to in unclean, spiritually deprived conditions, like when Jesus sent the demons into a herd of pigs, or when the prodigal son ended up in the humble position of feeding a stranger’s pigs and then desired their slop because he had squandered his father’s inheritance and had no food or money (Luke 8 & 15). Pigs are dirty, sloppy, unclean animals. Additionally, Jews were not allowed to eat the meat of pigs because of its designation of being an unclean animal (Deut. 14:8). Again, the law ruled and pigs were off limits for anyone who knew the basics of Moses’ Law. To eat pork would have been a gross, egregious sin.

On the flipside, Jews were constantly referred to as sheep in Scripture. The Israelites were God’s chosen nation (Deut. 7:6) and He was their Chief Shepherd. Isaiah and Jeremiah referred to the nation of Israel as sheep who had gone astray and turned to their own way. They had listened to other shepherds (pastors and teachers) who had led them away from God’s commandments (Isaiah 53:6 & Jeremiah 50:6).

Again, the Jews understood themselves as sheep and God as their Shepherd. David’s famous Psalm, chapter 23, alludes to this type of relationship, clearly, “The Lord is my Shepherd…He makes me lie down in green pastures…He leads me beside still waters…Your rod and your staff, they comfort me.”

During Jesus’ ministry, this parallelism was not forgotten. John 10 gives us a great passage of Jesus talking to the Pharisees and other people standing around, relating himself as the Master Shepherd that oversees His sheep. Now, while the Old Testament prophets would often refer to Israel as a whole when using the sheep metaphor, Jesus now gets a little more specific with his use of the sheep metaphor and who His sheep really are. Since He is teaching the fulfillment of the Mosaic Law, which seemed blasphemous to many of the legalistic Jews, He is showing who his true sheep are. We will see this as we read into John 10 to set the scene for Matthew 7:6.

Jesus says in the first six verses in John 10:

Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger’s voice.” Jesus used this figure of speech, but the Pharisees did not understand what he was telling them.”

There is a ton here that an entirely different sermon could be based on, so I will do my best to keep it short and simple, without filtering the richness of the text out of it. Jesus says a few things about himself. He is alluding to Himself and to others and to the sheep in a way that the Pharisees did not understand: 1) He is the shepherd of the sheep; 2) The sheep listen to His voice; 3) He calls His own sheep by name and leads them; 4) He goes before them and leads them because the sheep know his voice.

He says about anyone else who tries to get into the fold, other than through the gate, that they are a thief and a robber. Think about it if you were in their shoes. They all owned sheep more than likely. Owning animals was the way of life and survival. It was practically a form of currency back then. They all knew that robbers and thieves, like nowadays, do not usually walk through the front door, especially if there is someone standing there watching it. They will do whatever they can to sneak in from the back. They climb through bathroom windows and cut through the screen doors that don’t have lights on the back porches, right? Thieves and robbers are not invited. Alternatively, the shepherd is the authorized one that can enter through the gate and do what he pleases. The invitation is always open to him because it is his sheep pen.

He says about the sheep that are a part of his fold: 1) They listen to the Shepherd; 2) They follow him because they know the Shepherd’s voice; 3) They will never follow a stranger, but will run away from them because they do not recognize the stranger’s voice.

Since the Pharisees did not understand what Jesus was alluding to, or what he meant by this picture, he explains:

Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep. All who have come before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep have not listened to them. I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.”

What do we see here? Jesus is the way to salvation. This is the constant teaching throughout the entire Bible. He is the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father, but through Jesus Christ, as recorded so clearly in John 14:6.

He continues:

I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.”

Again, the parallelism is clear here, too. Jesus is the Shepherd that laid His life down for the sheep…us! The hired hand is there to watch over the sheep, too, but he does not have a perfect interest in the sheep. Why? Because he is more concerned with his own interest. When he sees a wolf coming he is not willing to lay his life down for the sheep and fight it, or be taken in the sheep’s place. He runs! This could be a lazy or selfish pastor that is not ready for a serious attack on his flock, and, so, becomes disheartened and takes off at the first sign of adversity. This is precisely why the call to the pastorate is not just a job that people should consider with all others. It is a serious and specific call from God that comes with many difficulties. Only one called by God will be able to withstand the pressure of wolves and be able to discern the wolves in sheep’s clothing from the sheep (Matt. 7:15-20).

He ends with a statement that show that the sheep fold is not meant for Jews of national descent only: “I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.”

This is good news for us! John 6:44 says, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them […]” Jesus has sheep that are not of the fold of Israel, but also of the Gentiles, which would be us! If you think about this for a moment, we should be completely humbled at the realization that not only were we lost creatures by default, but we would have normally been the outcasts of the chosen nation of Israel had Christ not come to offer himself to all people of every nation.

The other sheep not of this fold already were Gentiles that now had access to eternal life by placing their faith in Christ and repenting of their sins. The law was being fulfilled when Jesus came, just as the Abrahamic covenant was also being changed. The heart of the law, which was to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength was found in obedience to Him. John MacArthur was keen to point out that this passage found in Matthew 22:37 is based on the law recorded in Deuteronomy. Multiple passages support it, but look at Deuteronomy 10:12-13:

And now, Israel, what does the LORD your God ask of you but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in obedience to him, to love him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to observe the LORD’s commands and decrees that I am giving you today for your own good?

This basis of the law, to walk in obedience to the commands of God, has never changed. What God requires for external acts has changed, however. Circumcision is now no longer required, which was paramount since its conception at the covenant between God and Abraham in Genesis 17. Abstaining from pork and other animals that were off limits is now no longer prohibited. These were external issues that the Pharisees were good at, so while Jesus came with a new covenant, He did not come with a new law. If you look at the Ten Commandments you will see that those are still the very basis of most of the laws we see today.

Gentiles now had access to the Messiah, just as the Jews did. Romans 1:16 says that the Gospel “is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile.” What Jesus was teaching was the way to salvation, which was by repenting of sins, placing faith in Christ alone and being obedient to him as Lord and Master. What he condemned was hypocritical and shallow works of righteousness that were far from honoring God in obedience.

King Saul learned this the hard way when Samuel asked him: “Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams.

Jesus came to fulfill the law and make a way for the sheep of the other fold to be with him in his unified fold. Where we can really see this symbolism of dogs and sheep and Jews and Gentiles come to a head is in the interaction Jesus has with the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15. This woman came to Jesus in a panic. She needed His help desperately and apparently knew about Jesus’ power. She says in verse 22:

“Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.”

Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”

He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”


This part may be difficult to understand at first as to why Jesus ignored her, but He knew exactly what He was doing. Remember, He knows people’s thoughts, which is how he knew exactly how to answer the Pharisees whenever they questioned Him. He also knew what this woman really needed to understand. Thus, he guides the conversation with his lack of words and then with his poignant words…

The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.

He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

“Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”

Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.


What is going on here? First Jesus says that he was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel (Jews, as indicated in Isaiah and Jeremiah). The woman persisted and knelt before the Messiah and begged for help. The next few lines perplex us the most, but knowing the symbolism now should help.

“It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

He is suggesting, rhetorically, that it wouldn’t be right to take what rightfully belonged to the Jews and just give it people who had no regard for the preciousness of the Jew’s God-given law. Digging deeper… The Jews, the chosen nation of Israel, were entrusted with God’s law. They were the recipients of God’s grace and mercy and his sacred commandments. Why would Jesus, or any Jew for that matter, just give some of the blessing to a dog who normally disdained Jewish law and had no regard for it?

The woman knew exactly what Jesus was saying and responded in a way that we would think clever, but really shows that Jesus had nailed the heart of the issue again by leading her to her response:

“Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”

The bread symbolizes the truth of God, or the sacred, holy things of God. Normally meant for the Jews, this woman admitted that she was indeed a dog and didn’t deserve to be fed the bread, but that even willing dog’s would eat what they could get from the table of the Master and His children. She placed herself in the humble position of admitting her place in a Godless society, but also admitted that she would still do what it took to get what she could from the truth of God. She also properly called Jesus, Lord. Jesus’ response seems to confirm her proper response: “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.” The translation here indicates that it was that very hour.

So, then, what about Matthew 7:6? If the sheep that Jesus laid down his life for are now no longer only Jews, but all who repent and place their faith in Christ, then who are the true pigs? Who are the true dogs? If Gentiles used to be the dogs and pigs, but are now potential sheep, then who is Jesus referring to when he says not to throw your pearls (or bread) before pigs and dogs, or else they will trample on them and turn and attack you? The results are being narrowed since it is no longer as broad as the whole group of Gentiles. These are specific types of people that Jesus warns us about.

First, the pearl. The pearl, like the bread, represents value. In the story of the Canaanite woman, the bread was life because it nourished the body. Jesus is the Bread of Life, right? He nourishes our spiritual life because he is the Word (John 1). The pearl is extremely valuable.

Matthew 13:45 says, “The kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls. When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it.”

The Gospel, the Good News of Jesus Christ, the pearl, is something that should never be treated like some old story or just another part of your collection of philosophy. If that’s all it is to you then you don’t really have a love for the truth and an understanding of salvation that moves you to repentance and faith in Christ. The kingdom of God, the salvation of your soul, is so precious and so beautiful that you do everything you can to live for it, to be obedient to God. When you finally come to a saving faith, you will be willing to give up everything for it. Many people in history and even today, lose their families and homes and means of survival for the sake of the Gospel…but it is worth it. When we die, we really just start living don’t we?

So, understanding the meanings behind who dogs are and what sheep are can help us understand Matthew 7:6. “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 turn and tear you to pieces.” The ESV says they may turn and attack you.

In John MacArthur’s commentary on this passage he is good to point out that the idea behind this passage is not to show contempt for the dogs and pigs; rather, it tells us to be wise in how to handle what is holy. He goes on to say that this was the very reason that Jesus did not perform miracles in his hometown in Matthew 13:58: “And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith.”

You see, he didn’t spend his time performing miracles (throwing the pearls) for people who didn’t believe him in the first place. Their minds were made up about him. They had rejected Jesus as the Messiah, so Jesus was not going to carelessly share His power with them only to be rejected more. We shouldn’t constantly suggest Biblical principles to people who we know will only use that chance to tear the Bible and yourself to pieces. If they have already and clearly rejected the God of the Bible and infallibility of God’s Word, then why put the holy things of God on the table to be purposely chopped up and attacked.

I remember specific times in elementary school as a young kid where I felt like I needed to correct someone who used God’s name in vain. I knew that the person was not a believer and that they were purposely swearing. When I told them that they shouldn’t use the Lord’s name in vain, do you think they allowed themselves to be corrected? Nope! They would oftentimes just swear louder and more often just to spite me. They were mocking God on purpose. I almost expected it, but it still hurt and I thought I had to “stand up for the right thing”. While my heart was in the right place, it was not necessary for me to try and correct an unbeliever when they don’t even have a saving faith in the first place. It doesn’t even make sense, does it?

Remember the context of Matthew 7:6. It comes right after we learn that we need to remove the log from our own eye in order that we can remove the speck from our brother’s eye. Correction is a must. If we heard another professing Christian take the Lord’s name in vain, then you better believe we should say something. That’s like not correcting a calculus professor when he tells you that 1+1=3. The fruit of a person will reveal whether they are true believers or not and the Holy Spirit will help us know how to handle these different situations.

Let’s also be clear of one thing… Just because Gentiles were typically referred to as dogs, that doesn’t mean that they were never to have the Gospel shared with them. Philippians 3:2 says “Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh.” These evil dogs were actually the Judaizers who still had no faith in Christ for salvation. They taught a works-based salvation. They still taught that circumcision was necessary for salvation, hence the mutilators of the flesh picture. These were the people that Jesus is warning us about to not throw pearls to. The dogs were now considered the God-rejecters that could be in any nation. They were not just Gentiles anymore. Interesting how the true sheep and the true dogs have different meanings now, isn’t it?

Let me illustrate a point. Would it make sense to tell a bunch of drunks that drunkenness is a sin because the Bible says so? Of course not. Even when they’re sober it won’t mean a thing to them if they haven’t first placed their faith in Christ and repented of their sins. That is when living a life of holiness becomes important to us.

This doesn’t mean we never share the Bible with anyone and help someone see their need to repent of sins and place their faith in Christ, but it does show us that we need to be discerning in who we continue to share with. Sometimes we are just to shake the dust off of our feet because we have done our part in evangelism and the rest is the work of the Holy Spirit, whether or not they come to a saving faith.

If you think this sounds strange, that we would ever come to a point where we should slow down or stop pursuing someone in the desire to see them get saved, then look at Jesus’ specific commands to the disciples right before He ascended to Heaven. He was commissioning them to go evangelize to the world. In Matthew 10 and Luke 9 we have a fascinating glimpse of what he wanted it to look like.

Both gospels say that the disciples were told not to bring anything on their journey…not any money (gold, silver, or copper), bags, extra sandals, extra tunics, or extra staffs. Since their only means of travel was by foot or by boat, this was an incredible commission that would require a lot of faith on the part of the disciples. It would require nothing but belief in the one who sent them…and that’s exactly the point. They were going to go only with the power of the Holy Spirit that was to come, their knowledge of the Old Testament and the teachings they were given from the Lord Jesus Christ that fulfilled it all.

Notice what Jesus tells them about how to handle people, found in Luke 9:5: “If people do not welcome you, leave their town and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.

Shaking the dust off of your feet was a visible way of ridding yourself of the problem or responsibility of a situation, just like when you “wash your hands” of something. The most poignant example of washing hands of responsibility was when Pilate washed his hands in front of the people, regarding the condemnation of Jesus, saying, “I am innocent of this man’s blood; see to it yourselves” (Matt 27:24). To him, the concern was no longer his, although it was really a cheap way out of his own political condemnation of a raucous crowd if he didn’t do what they wanted.

Let’s go to Matthew’s account of what Jesus told the disciples. He said that if they found a house that was worthy then they should stay there until they left. Then:

As you enter the home, give it your greeting. If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

Wow! Well, in case you’re wondering if the apostles or disciples actually did this…they most certainly did. Acts 13 is an incredible passage that details Paul giving a very compelling sermon, sharing the Gospel and Jesus’ resurrection with the town of Antioch, in Pisidia. There are a few vital things that need to be noticed. Vital.

Notice the various reactions of the crowds to Paul’s message. The first reaction is that of great rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord. These were the Gentiles! Notice the end of verse 48: “as many as were appointed to eternal life believed”. This is perhaps one of the most clear texts of Scripture revealing God’s sovereignty in salvation. It is always from His initiation and calling. His plan of predestination and election is also a constant theme throughout Scripture and we simply cannot avoid it. Whether or not you believe the doctrine of election will completely change your view and philosophy of evangelism to the core, which I will touch on briefly in a moment.

The second reaction we see is that of certain Jews who stirred up a bunch of influential people in the city and drove them out of the district. Obviously, they were not among those who were appointed to believe that day, maybe forever, maybe just not yet, but salvation was not meant for them that day. They rejected the Gospel message with a vengeance.

Now, Paul is very aware of the doctrine of election and God’s sovereignty in it. He did not dumb down his message and make it easier to believe or easier to understand. He didn’t leave out any offensive parts that are hard to accept. If people are meant to believe it, then they will. Paul’s job, as is ours, is to teach and preach the Gospel as it is, withholding nothing, and then let the Holy Spirit do its thing. Paul and Barnabas did what Jesus instructed and “shook the dust from their feet against them and went to Iconium.”

What is extremely rampant among our very own churches today is the constant acquiescing to culture and non-believers for the way the preaching is formed in our churches. What does that mean? We are so determined to “reach the world for Jesus” in our attempts at being “missional” that we do whatever it takes to help them understand and accept it. If we see a slight hint of interest from someone about something related to God or the Bible then we call it salvation. If they are willing to say they want to love the way Jesus did and help make the world a better place then we think they are finally a Christian. Missions is important, but there are far too many churches that seek to be missional, while doing nothing more than what the seeker-sensitive churches do, which is cater to the unbeliever by making the Gospel palatable. This is dangerous, wrong and only makes someone who is headed for destruction, comfortable. It’s one of Satan’s classic tricks. Unfortunately, I feel that many people do this without realizing it.

Look, it is counter intuitive, in light of Scripture, to do what EVER you can to convince people to “love God”. Shallow views, easy-believism, false converts and stagnant churches are all products of getting this whole concept wrong. People often mistake moralism for a saving faith. The unadulterated Gospel will produce fruit and it will turn people away in disgust. That’s why 1 Peter 2 explains how Jesus is precious to some and a stumbling block to others. He is a precious cornerstone to those who believe and a rock that causes some to fall because they disobey the message.

Why can’t we accept this? Why can’t we stop taking it personally that people don’t like our church because we preach repentance of sins and salvation is found in Christ alone? A faithful church, pastor, laymen, student of the Bible, or whoever, will get both rejoicing believers and cynical God-haters when they present the un-watered down Gospel. Any pastor or believer who thinks that they can contend for the faith without hurting anyone’s feelings and without causing people not to like them is just plain wrong and their ministry has a huge hole in its theology.

For those who reject the message of Jesus Christ and want to continue wallowing in the mud, returning to their vomit (2 Peter 2:22)…stop casting your pearls to them.

We must be willing to share the Gospel as we have the chances to do so, but we must be careful not to dumb it down to a palatable, bite-sized, sugar-coated candy drop. God works through the preaching of the word, of which faith comes by hearing it (Romans 10:17).

For those who reject the word and the God of the Bible, don’t be personally offended or afraid that you didn’t do something right just based on their rejection. Not everyone is appointed to eternal life and not everyone will believe. For those who aren’t, they are willingly so, and thus, held responsible for their rejection. While we should be sad by this rejection, we shouldn’t continually put the holy word of God up in a vain attempt to convince them over and over again. As Titus 3:10 says: “Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned.

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 turn and tear you to pieces.

As with anything, the Holy Spirit will give us discernment as we spend time in His word, as to who the pigs and dogs are in our life who we shouldn’t be throwing our pearls to. Some people will be worth pursuing because they haven’t outright rejected the Gospel, but some may need to be left alone. Some people will resist the Gospel and then come to accept it later. We don’t know how God is working in everyone’s life exactly. Always be ready to share the Gospel. Always be willing to move on if the Holy Spirit prompts. We don’t know who God’s elect are, so we need to be ready, either way, to be used as the Lord intended, for His glory.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

You Be the Judge. I think.


One of the things that never cease to amaze me about the Christian church is the continual dismissal of accountability and the need to be confrontational. If we really think about the implications of this we should come to a point where we fear for the fidelity of the Church. Accountability is the very thing that keeps us in check when we are either ignorant of some shortcoming in our lives, or even purposely sinful, with full knowledge of what we’re doing. If we had no one to be accountable to or no one to ever be willing to stop us and exhort us in the faith, then we would be cresting the mountain of “I know it all”, which then takes us down the slippery slope of Pride. This most plays out in the way that people tend to react when they are confronted with a sin or challenged in their thinking when it comes to the Bible. We don’t want to be corrected; we don’t want to be told; we don’t want to be doubted; and we don’t need to hear that we are wrong, or in sin. After all, didn’t Jesus himself say, “Judge not, lest ye be judged”?

I have personally seen this verse misused time and time again. This verse is a favorite of Christians and non-Christians alike. It’s a card that they play when they feel convicted or made to feel guilty of something that someone is challenging them in. While there is an appropriate way to confront a brother or sister and, if need be, exercise church discipline, what I will be focusing on is what this judging business is all about. Should we really never judge? Is there ever a time when “judging” is appropriate? What does it mean to judge anyway? Why can’t everyone just leave everyone else alone and stop pointing fingers and finding faults in each other’s ministries? What do these verses mean?

I am inspired to write this because of all the hoopla that has come from Rob Bell’s promotional video for his new book “Love Wins”. It was such a provoking and controversial video that people, including myself, thought him heretical (of which a whole other topic exists), while others were quick to defend Bell and wished that people would leave him alone and let God do the judging.

When I kept seeing Matthew quoted for “judge not, lest ye be judged” and when he talks about the hypocrite who pointed out the speck in his brother’s eye, as the reasons as to how and why people are in the wrong for challenging someone that suggested something contrary to Scripture…I was motivated to write. Should we never “judge” even if someone seems to be teaching something contrary to Scripture? Is it divisive to disagree and challenge them on that?

First, for Christians there should never be any doubt as to what we are ultimately accountable to; that is, God, the ultimate Judge. In Genesis 18:25 Abraham acknowledged God as the Judge of all the earth when talking about the soon-to-come destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. God has spoken to us through his word as penned out through the prophets, apostles and other writers of the Bible. It is divinely inspired and without error. Jesus Christ is the foundation of the Church and the Bible is the source of truth that nurtures it. It is, in itself, our clear source of direction that we are accountable to. Hebrews 4:12 says that “the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.”

So, what does it mean to be judged by someone? Why do people feel that way when they are confronted with something? Well, first of all we aren’t avoiding judgment by shutting up people that try to call us to accountability when it comes to our lives and doctrine. The Bible has already judged us because it speaks about our heart condition, which is depraved apart from the Holy Spirit’s regeneration. Let’s clarify this from the get-go.

Romans 3:19, 20 says, “We know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.”

Paul, in this case, is specifically talking about the law of the Jewish customs that were being held as necessary for salvation, however this also plays into how people can tend to be legalistic in their righteousness today, which is precisely where that stems from. The Pharisees were the worst when it came to legalistic righteousness. The Apostle Paul is giving a case for how the law was established to show us our sins. Paul says later in 5:12 that sin entered the world through one man, Adam, and death through sin. Because of this, death came to all people because all sinned. Then in verse 18, “Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.”

You see, it is through the law that we become conscious of sin, which then judges or condemns us by default. God does not randomly and whimsically choose people, as time endures, to send to Hell. We are all deserving of Hell and we all need a savior to be our Lord. God has, however, predestined and established the plans for the whole of eternity since before the creation of the world. From the fallen human race he has chosen his elect to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit when they place their faith in the Lord Jesus [See: Free Will & the Attributes of God at ]. That is where Jesus comes in to make up for us what we could never have done. It took the spotless Lamb of God to be the substitutionary atonement for our sins.

A favorite verse of people who are against any kind of judging is John 3:17, “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”

Notice, however, what the very next few verses says, which places John 3:17 in the right light: “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.”

So, his purpose was not to condemn, per se, but that does not mean that we are not condemned because indeed we already are. He came to rescue us from that condemnation. Remember what Romans 8 says? “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death.”

Our defaulted position to God upon entering this world is depraved and condemned. Jesus Christ has given us life through His name, by his graciousness, mercy and love.

Now, is it ever okay for a brother or sister to approach us and confronts us about an area they feel is of spiritual concern in our lives? To judge is often meant to discern. If someone is discerning sin in our life then should we feel judged by that? What does the Bible say about this whole business of correcting a wayward Christian or challenging them if they are heretical?

The only thing that a faithful brother or sister should be doing when they are questioning an area in our life, is pointing us to Scripture to show us where we are not lining up to it. The people don’t do the judging, God does through His Word. This is the most difficult thing to get past for us, though, isn’t it?

This is such a sensitive area for both the believer being confronted and the believer doing the confronting because it all feels very personal. We are tempted to call the confronter a self-righteous hypocrite or even an over-zealous fundamentalist. This is so sad and should never be the case. Granted, being confronted by a hypocrite would be nothing short of frustrating or upsetting, however we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that God may be teaching us something through the whole ordeal. In fact, I’ll say He is teaching you something. Nothing happens to us randomly. Nonetheless, there is an appropriate way to handle wrongdoing and sin.

To be fair, no decent friend will want to question our integrity because they don’t want to hurt us and make us feel bad; however a faithful friend will confront us if they see an error in our lives because they have a deep understanding of the potential, eternal significance of unrepentant sin. It is a true love that moves a friend to question an area in our life or to question the doctrines that we may teach. This is essential to the vibrant growth in the church. Don’t get me wrong, the Holy Spirit does the convicting and changing in our lives, but God uses his children to spur one another to grow in love and good deeds and to encourage each other in the faith (Hebrews 10:24, 25).

From the other perspective, it is equally sensitive for the person being confronted because the tendency is to put our guard up and defend ourselves, or ignore the confrontation altogether. We automatically question the confronters as to who they think they are that they can go around calling people out on the carpet. We only look skin deep and see just another human made of flesh and bones, suggesting to us that we are doing something wrong. We don’t look past the physical presence and consider the difficulty it must have been for our friend to confront us in the first place. We don’t consider that God, in His sovereignty, has brought us together for a time of growth and repentance that could dramatically change us for our benefit and God’s glory.

Do you know where this issue lies at? It is a lack of humility. Selfishness at best. A lack of humility, though, can be so extremely devastating in so many ways. From that, wells up pride, arrogance, hardened hearts, spiritually blind eyes, multiple and various sins, hurt relationships, ignored fallacies, etc. It is devastating, especially when it happens to someone in ministry. Being prideful gets us nothing, but a great big fall. We all know the verse in Proverbs 16 that says, “Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall”. David wrote about this throughout his Psalms as well.

When I really felt led to write on this whole topic was when I read some of the critiques by supporters of Bell in different blogs across the web, or those who felt that a critique of his book was premature since it hasn’t been released. While the critiques made by Justin Taylor and Kevin DeYoung were based solely on Rob’s own words in his video, they are faced with a barrage of Rob Bell defenders with responses sounding like:

1) “All I have to say is don’t judge lest ye be judged. I am a conservative Christian. I went to a conservative Bible School and now I go to a conservative Christian college. You guys just need to calm down and pray for Rob. If you are really that concerned then pray for him. If he is a wolf then he is your enemy and Jesus told us to pray for his enemies.”

2) “Wow, judging a book before it even comes out. Now that’s a new low!”

3) “[…] The real heretics are the ones who present false information against his brother in order to put him down. True judgment should come only from God. We are in a lot more trouble if we assume God’s role and start judging others. Especially judgment without love. We are not supposed to just go through life finding wrong in others, we are to love them. That is all we’re called to do is to LOVE and yet we keep fighting and keep slandering our brothers and sisters.”

4) “In my opinion, it’s a pretty big risk to post this blog post [regarding Justin Taylor’s blog found at TheGospalCoalition.org]. And in my opinion, I think it’s wrong – especially because none of us have read the book and we are judging and condemning this man.”

Thus, a very important issue rises to the surface when we read responses like this. 1) Should we never judge, but only pray for people we disagree with? 2) Is being loving, without critiquing, the only thing we are called to do, as Christians? 3) Is it wrong and condemning to tell someone they’re wrong when it comes to their doctrine? These questions must be addressed, for even as Kevin DeYoung mentioned in a follow up blog post regarding this issue, which is also found at

“I know many young evangelicals barely have any stomach for controversy, let alone strong words about a serious topic. But if there is no way to be simultaneously bold and humble; if there is no way to be a gentle, caring person while still speaking in clear tones about hurtful error; if there is no way to correct those who oppose sound doctrine without being a moral monster; if there’s no way to love truth and grace at the same time, then there’s no way to be a biblical Christian. Judgmentalism is a sin and Calvinists can be jerks. But not every judgment is sinful and not every truth is cruel just because Reformed people teach it.”

The best way for me to make this issue clear is to explain what the verses mean and what they are saying in Matthew 7. There are a few parts that people leave out, which ends up stripping the appropriate meaning and context of the message. The common misconception is that we are not to judge at all, which is often translated into saying that we should never challenge a professed Christian in their belief or doctrine when they are in the wrong, or seem to be in the wrong. At least that is much of what the responses were to the concerns expressed about Rob Bell. This could not be further from the truth…literally.

Matthew 7: 1 and 2 says, “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.”

The first part we all know. That’s the only part that people usually quote in their defense, or someone else’s. Upon reading the rest, however, the context changes the common perceived meaning…For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. This is saying that by the same standards you are judging someone, you will also be judged, meaning if you are judging, or confronting someone, in an area of sin or questionable doctrine, then you will also be held accountable to that. Even if you are pointing them to Scripture and you may be on to something when you are confronting a brother or sister in the Lord, you will also be judged according to the measure that you use.

This is not telling us NOT to judge, it is saying that we must be careful that when we do, we are not approaching them as a self-righteous hypocrite who also has a problem. If we were approaching someone in that way then you better believe that we have our time coming when we will also be confronted and probably even more humiliated. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.

The idea in saying “judge not, that you be not judged” is a warning that if you don’t want to be spiritually audited to reveal your own hypocritical faults in this area, then don’t point out the same fault in someone else. Again, these verses do not advocate a complete silence of accountability. They do not tell us not to care if someone who professes Jesus Christ as their Lord is in sin. They do not tell us that we should put up with unsound doctrine. This can be easily shown with other passages of Scripture, like Titus 1:9. It is talking about the characteristics of good church leaders, but is applicable to all: “He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.”

You see, there is a great danger to the fidelity of the church if everything was to go unchecked. Dr. John MacArthur rightly said in a sermon on Matthew 7:

“If we don’t confront sin, then leaven is never put out of the lump, right? And the church is going to get corrupted. And if we don’t discriminate the true from the false, we’re all going to go waltzing down the line into heresy. So the two dangers are that we would fail to deal with a brother in sin, and we would fail to deal with a heretic, or one who would corrupt the faith, or one who would mock the faith or blaspheme the faith, and we must do that.”

Upon further reading through Titus, we see quite a few clear commands to challenge what is standing in opposition to God, especially if within the Church. Verses 10 through 16 speaks about some people who were teaching things that they ought not teach as well as mentioning people who were living in ways that were contrary to Scripture. It says the deceptive teachers should be silenced because they disrupt whole households (v. 11). It says of those who are believing in unscriptural commands that they must be rebuked sharply, so they will be sound in the faith.

Look, I cannot emphasize enough how extremely irresponsible and false it is to consider for a second that we ought to leave everyone alone and just “pray for them” if they are in sin or if a teacher is teaching something that challenges the Bible’s authority. This is in direct defiance and disobedience to the God of Heaven and Earth that we are to be glorifying. The whole idea to love, love, love, is often misapplied to mean that we NEVER disagree with anyone. I would defy someone to show me how that is biblical. From Genesis to Revelation, we are shown that the truth is not to be trifled with.

Kevin DeYoung wisely discerned some of the passages we’re talking about when he stated the following:

“Judgmentalism is not the same as making judgments. The same Jesus who said “do not judge” in Matthew 7:1 calls his opponents dogs and pigs in Matthew 7:6. Paul pronounces an anathema on those who preach a false gospel (Gal. 1:8). Disagreement among professing Christians is not a plague on the church. In fact, it is sometimes necessary. The whole Bible is full of evaluation and encourages the faithful to be discerning and make their own evaluations. What’s tricky is that some fights are stupid, and some judgments are unfair and judgmental. But this must be proven, not assumed.”

MacArthur, in his exposition of these verses in Matthew 7, is good to point out what it says in Leviticus 19:17, “You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him”. If you truly love your brother, you would rebuke their sin, so they don’t continue in it. Don’t we want to see our brothers and sisters grow in their walk with the Lord? We would be hating them if we didn’t confront their sin because we would be allowing them to think that their sin doesn’t matter, which may be the fruit of unregenerate lives.

Furthermore, for those who like to quote 1 Corinthians 13 and how the greatest of faith, hope and love, is love…let them realize that just a few verses before it comes to this conclusion it tells us what love is in a nice little list, one of which is not delighting in evil, but rejoicing in the truth. To suggest that love trumps faith and hope is another irresponsible defense mechanism of the biblically untrained. Romans 16:19 says to be excellent in what is good and to be innocent in what is evil. 2 Thessalonians 2 says that the people who are perishing are doing so because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Love is much more than agreeable Christless moralism. It is a deep biblical understanding of what God reveals to us through his entire Word and part of it is contending for the faith and the truth it rests in…not allowing our brothers and sisters to believe a lie (Jude 3).

All throughout Scripture we see how the truth must be upheld and we must hold our pastors and teachers accountable to it if they are preaching something otherwise. Titus 2 starts with, “You must teach what is in accordance with sound doctrine” and ends with, “Encourage and rebuke with all authority”. His emphasis is clear.

I mention all of this with the assumption that we know that being loving and respectful is always of utmost importance. We must remember all along what Paul said to Timothy when rebuking an older man: “Do not rebuke an older man harshly, but exhort him as if he were your father”. We do need to remember who we’re speaking to, but we should never let the age difference allow us to feel inferior if we are defending the truth, at the same time (1 Timothy 4). The Holy Spirit will help us in these sometimes awkward situations.

Clearly, an appeal to Matthew 7:1 as a standalone defense to a disagreement on doctrine is unsound in itself. We need the accountability and we need to hold people accountable to the Bible if they are teaching something contrary to it. In regards to some of the bloggers I quoted just recently, they do not understand what the Bible says about judging and contending for the faith. Like Kevin DeYoung said, many modern evangelicals just don’t have the stomach for controversy or a serious and deep, biblical topic.

The last half of this passage in Matthew 7 talks about the speck in our brother’s eye and the log in our own. What do these verses mean? And why do people also use this as a rebuttal to someone who is challenging someone’s teaching as heretical? Is it hypocritical for us to contend for the faith and challenge others since we are also sinners? This can be easily put to rest with a careful look at the passage and a careful understanding of the false dilemma that is presented when someone uses this verse in defense of a false teacher.

“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

First, I think that people tend to stop right after it says, “You hypocrite”. They read the part about the person pointing out someone’s fault and then they see that they are called a hypocrite and assume that all speck-noticers are hypocrites. For someone to do this is to be the worst kind of Bible cherry picker. It is no less than distortion because the actual meaning is changed. Look at what it says: “You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

Understand that the result and resolution to this passage is that both people are without their sin. Both people are essentially reconciled to the truth. This passage is not about telling people to stop pointing fingers, per se; it is about confronting someone in sin so that their sin will be removed. You can’t do this if you yourself are sinning, however. You need to be right with the Lord before you can be an effective minister to someone else who is in error.

Look at what David said in Psalm 51. We all know it: “Create in me, oh Lord, a clean heart. Then will I teach transgressors thy ways and sinners shall be converted to thee.” Even David knew that in order to be a teacher and someone who was able to help other people avoid sin and correct it, he had to be right with God, first. This is especially important for all teachers in ministry.

In either case, as long as you are not being hypocritical, then we need to help our brothers and sisters if there is a speck in their eye and are not seeing clearly themselves. After all, we don’t hate them do we?

The major issue at heart with “judging” is that it is done rightly and not arrogantly. Where there is biblical confrontation and discernment, there is love. We are called to be discerning and to test everything and to discern the fruits of teachers to know if they are of the Spirit of God or not. We are supposed to be ready to rebuke those who purposely twist the gospel into something that is less than what God says in his Word (1 John 4).

Being judging is not the same thing as judgmentalism. In Matthew 7 the greek word that is used for judging is krino, to judge, which means: to separate; put asunder; to be of opinion; to determine, resolve, or decree; announce an opinion concerning right or wrong; to contend together. When it talks about how we will be held to the measure of judgment we have used, the word for measure is metron: to judge according to any rule or standard.

So, then, we should not judge or condemn unfairly or hypocritically as it warns that we will also be judged for our hypocrisy. The flip-side of this judging is told by Jesus himself in John 7:24 when he says “Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” You don’t here this verse very often. Jesus did not say “Do not judge…period.” He said that when we judge, do it correctly. Discern the heart of truth from a surface level effrontery.

I’ll leave you with some verses that lay out the importance of being discerning (judging correctly). It should be our constant state of mind, which only comes from sharpening ourselves in the Word of God. This is not to be hypercritical or hypocritical, but to judge correctly. Discern the spirits. Correctly handle the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).

Hebrews 5:14, when talking about spiritual truth, says, “But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.”

Paul says to the Philippians in 1:9, 10, “And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ.”

James 5:19, 20: “My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.”

When we help someone see their need for repentance and the grace of God that is offered through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross, we help them in attaining a love that covers all sins: the love of God. Stakes are high when it comes to eternal destination. The reality of a true and literal Heaven and Hell should motivate all Christians to not take lightly the false teachers in the church or wayward brothers or sisters.

To say that judging is sinful is unwarranted and unbiblical. We must judge, but rightly so, as Jesus said himself. We must also never be hypocritical in our judging so that we don’t reap the same judgment, or slander the name of Christ in our arrogant position.

Judge not, lest you also be judged, but judge rightly and not on mere appearances.