Don't let hypocritical Christians ruin your li...

why does it have to be hypocritical Christians? there are all kinds of hypocrites. the title should be do not let hypocrites ruin your life not hypocritical Christians

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I guess what I find disconcerting is that, from what I can tell, Christians are no better at following the ways of Jesus than the general population. Maybe you missed it, but I don't think I've ever known any Christians who actually deny themselves - that humbly obey. I don't know any who even come close. From what I can tell, they are all influenced by p ...[text shortened]... that he be praised or worshipped or simply to be followed? What defines a true Christian?

We shouldn't confuse hypocrisy with imperfection.

Imperfection is a given; all people are imperfect. Hypocrisy, on the other hand, is a false piety arising from empty religious practice: "For you are like whitewashed tombs—beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people’s bones and all sorts of impurity. Outwardly you look like righteous people, but inwardly your hearts are filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness" (Matt. 23:27).

No way am I an exception to the rule of imperfection. Like all men and women, Christian or otherwise, I am subject to temptation. The main difference between Christian and non-Christian on the issue of temptation is that a Christian is at war with his own flesh, while the non-Christian is not.

'Flesh' in the Christian sense denotes everything under the metaphysical umbrella of mind, emotions and body. The born-again person is resurrected in the spirit, indwelt by the Spirit of God, and has begun a life-long battle with the flesh. Simply speaking, God's will vs. self-will. Whereas the non-Christian is ruled by the flesh, that is, by the variegated desires and influences of the mind, emotions and body. The non-Christian's spirit is enslaved to their flesh. While the born-again, knowing the will of God through their resurrected spirit, can now choose God's way instead of the way of their flesh (deny themselves, carry their cross, and follow Him). That is the essential difference between a natural person and a born-again person.

My question to you would be, what exactly would a Christian denying themselves look like? What does humble obedience look like? Can you see into the hearts of men? Do we witness every act of obedience? Or are some done in secret? Do you know what people sacrifice for the Lord in their heart of hearts, day in and day out? I assure you, those offerings aren't broadcast for everyone to see. Are you expecting conspicuous Mother Theresa's lining every pew? But the Lord sees in secret and rewards in secret.

Again, hypocrisy is not the same as imperfection. The Christian life is a maturation process with a definite goal: becoming as obedient as Jesus. Imperfection is assumed. However, hypocrisy is outer religiousness without inward obedience, where imperfection is not tolerated. One is the way of love, while the other is not. As an example, consider this story told by Christ to his disciples:

"Two men went to the Temple to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a despised tax collector. The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed this prayer: ‘I thank you, God, that I am not a sinner like everyone else. For I don’t cheat, I don’t sin, and I don’t commit adultery. I’m certainly not like that tax collector! I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.’

“But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, ‘O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.’ I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted" (Luke 1:10-14).

Where do I draw the line of hypocrisy? People are capable of fabricating faith and can be expert eye-pleasers, so of course it may be difficult at first to spot a disingenuous heart. It's a matter of spiritual discernment. When a person is quickened in their spirit by the Spirit of the Lord, he or she can sense something is amiss. It's an intuition of a constriction, crowding in on one's inner freedom in the Spirit. Other times its pretty easy to notice: attitudes and actions betray the state of a person's soul quickly. I guess there's not really a clear line to draw, because people and circumstances can be so different.

Definitely, no, I would not consider a person who doesn't confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to be a Christian. Definitely not. If they do not confess that Christ is Lord, then the Spirit is not in them. If the Spirit is not in them, they cannot follow the Lord. No matter how commendable and righteous that person's deeds may be, it is nothing to the Lord. "It is impossible to please God without faith" (Hebrews 11:6).

During Christ's earthly ministry His main mission was to glorify His Father. I don't know off hand any scripture where Jesus asked His disciples to worship Himself, and I can only think of those where He praised His Father in Heaven. Actually, there is one scripture that comes to mind right now, where Jesus asks His Father to glorify His Son. I can't think of where it is. Jesus didn't seek the glory of men, just His Father. However, as a Christian I do feel a great deal of gratitude for what Christ did for me on the cross. It's the Holy Spirit's job to glorify Christ, and it is the Spirit Who inspires such praise and worship in the believer. This brings up a whole other issue I don't have the time or wherewithal to address right now, being the Triune nature of God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit).

What defines a true Christian? Born-again in spirit, walking in love, dedicated to spiritual discipline (prayer, fasting, meditation, solitude, contemplation, generosity, confession, etc.), bearing fruit (joy, peace, long-suffering, loving-kindness, etc.), and glorifying God.

That's all for now, I'm pooped. Hope that answers your questions.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
why does it have to be hypocritical Christians? there are all kinds of hypocrites. the title should be do not let hypocrites ruin your life not hypocritical Christians

Good point. However, regular hypocrites can drive you to the Truth, while Christian hypocrites can drive you away from it. I specify Christian hypocrites here because I consider them the more insidious of the two.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I guess what I find disconcerting is that, from what I can tell, Christians are no better at following the ways of Jesus than the general population. Maybe you missed it, but I don't think I've ever known any Christians who actually deny themselves - that humbly obey. I don't know any who even come close. From what I can tell, they are all influenced by p ...[text shortened]... that he be praised or worshipped or simply to be followed? What defines a true Christian?

We shouldn't confuse hypocrisy with imperfection.

Imperfection is a given; all people are imperfect. Hypocrisy, on the other hand, is a false piety arising from empty religious practice: "For you are like whitewashed tombs—beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people’s bones and all sorts of impurity. Outwardly you look like righteous people, but inwardly your hearts are filled with hypocrisy and lawlessness" (Matt. 23:27).

No way am I an exception to the rule of imperfection. Like all men and women, Christian or otherwise, I am subject to temptation. The main difference between Christian and non-Christian on the issue of temptation is that a Christian is at war with his own flesh, while the non-Christian is not.

'Flesh' in the Christian sense denotes everything under the metaphysical umbrella of mind, emotions and body. The born-again person is resurrected in the spirit, indwelt by the Spirit of God, and has begun a life-long battle with the flesh. Simply speaking, God's will vs. self-will. Whereas the non-Christian is ruled by the flesh, that is, by the variegated desires and influences of the mind, emotions and body. The non-Christian's spirit is enslaved to their flesh. While the born-again, knowing the will of God through their resurrected spirit, can now choose God's way instead of the way of their flesh (deny themselves, carry their cross, and follow Him). That is the essential difference between a natural person and a born-again person.

My question to you would be, what exactly would a Christian denying themselves look like? What does humble obedience look like? Can you see into the hearts of men? Do we witness every act of obedience? Or are some done in secret? Do you know what people sacrifice for the Lord in their heart of hearts, day in and day out? I assure you, those offerings aren't broadcast for everyone to see. Are you expecting conspicuous Mother Theresa's lining every pew? But the Lord sees in secret and rewards in secret.

Again, hypocrisy is not the same as imperfection. The Christian life is a maturation process with a definite goal: becoming as obedient as Jesus. Imperfection is assumed. However, hypocrisy is outer religiousness without inward obedience, where imperfection is not tolerated. One is the way of love, while the other is not. As an example, consider this story told by Christ to his disciples:

"Two men went to the Temple to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a despised tax collector. The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed this prayer: ‘I thank you, God, that I am not a sinner like everyone else. For I don’t cheat, I don’t sin, and I don’t commit adultery. I’m certainly not like that tax collector! I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.’

“But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, ‘O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.’ I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted" (Luke 1:10-14).

Where do I draw the line of hypocrisy? People are capable of fabricating faith and can be expert eye-pleasers, so of course it may be difficult at first to spot a disingenuous heart. It's a matter of spiritual discernment. When a person is quickened in their spirit by the Spirit of the Lord, he or she can sense something is amiss. It's an intuition of a constriction, crowding in on one's inner freedom in the Spirit. Other times its pretty easy to notice: attitudes and actions betray the state of a person's soul quickly. I guess there's not really a clear line to draw, because people and circumstances can be so different.

Definitely, no, I would not consider a person who doesn't confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to be a Christian. Definitely not. If they do not confess that Christ is Lord, then the Spirit is not in them. If the Spirit is not in them, they cannot follow the Lord. No matter how commendable and righteous that person's deeds may be, it is nothing to the Lord. "It is impossible to please God without faith" (Hebrews 11:6).

During Christ's earthly ministry His main mission was to glorify His Father. I don't know off hand any scripture where Jesus asked His disciples to worship Himself, and I can only think of those where He praised His Father in Heaven. Actually, there is one scripture that comes to mind right now, where Jesus asks His Father to glorify His Son. I can't think of where it is. Jesus didn't seek the glory of men, just His Father. However, as a Christian I do feel a great deal of gratitude for what Christ did for me on the cross. It's the Holy Spirit's job to glorify Christ, and it is the Spirit Who inspires such praise and worship in the believer. This brings up a whole other issue I don't have the time or wherewithal to address right now, being the Triune nature of God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit).

What defines a true Christian? Born-again in spirit, walking in love, dedicated to spiritual discipline (prayer, fasting, meditation, solitude, contemplation, generosity, confession, etc.), bearing fruit (joy, peace, long-suffering, loving-kindness, etc.), and glorifying God.

That's all for now, I'm pooped. Hope that answers your questions.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
We shouldn't confuse hypocrisy with imperfection.

Imperfection is a given; all people are imperfect. Hypocrisy, on the other hand, is a false piety arising from empty religious practice: "For you are like whitewashed tombs—beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people’s bones and all sorts of impurity. Outwardly you look like ri ...[text shortened]... That's all for now, I'm pooped. Hope that answers your questions.

'Flesh' in the Christian sense denotes everything under the metaphysical umbrella of mind, emotions and body. The born-again person is resurrected in the spirit, indwelt by the Spirit of God, and has begun a life-long battle with the flesh.

Surely all of the “flesh”—at least as you have seemed to define it—isn’t bad or evil. Our minds and emotions and sensing bodies serve a purpose. We are incarnate beings. The message of the incarnation of the logos is that the sarx itself is sanctified. The logos became sarx. (It’s interesting that the same verb, egeneto—a verb of engendering and begetting—is used in John 1:3,4—and in 1:14 both logos and sarx are in the nominative case, indicating an identity or identification, exactly the same as the identification of logos and theos in 1:1.)

Spirit-versus-flesh, as in “a battle,” seems to be a loose expression that can lead to a false asceticism—even a perverse yearning for physical death. I don’t deny that there is such talk in the NT. I might suggest that either (1) sarx, in such passages, means something more narrow than how you have defined it, or (2) that the “battle” is not one of pneuma-versus-sarx, but one of pneuma for the sarx.

I’m interested in your view here on resurrection, which you seem to take as a this-worldly affair (I’m not saying you exclude resurrection into an after-life, just that you seem not to limit it to that)—just curious to hear your thoughts on that. Also, that resurrection is concerned not just with spirit (pneuma), but with “body” (soma) as well...

The non-Christian's spirit is enslaved to their flesh.

A Buddhist would certainly dispute this; not the concept, but the restriction to Christians. Not asking you to agree—just pointing out that most religions deal with the pneuma/sarx question.

Originally posted by vistesd
Surely all of the “flesh”—at least as you have seemed to define it—isn’t bad or evil. Our minds and emotions and sensing bodies serve a purpose. We are incarnate beings. The message of the incarnation of the logos is that the sarx itself is sanctified. The logos [b]became sarx. (It’s interesting that the same verb, rrection is concerned not just with spirit (pneuma), but with “body” (soma) as well...[/b]

You're right about the flesh. 'The flesh' contains the most base and evil parts of our nature, but also the loftiest. Not all categorically bad, of course. As buddhist monks demonstrate, and others, the flesh is capable of a high degree of asceticism, capable of uncovering in its own power and persistence certain hidden depths of strength and enlightenment. On the flip side, the flesh is capable of the most heinous crime and perversity imaginable as well.

Biblically speaking, the issue God has with the flesh is that it has gone its own way. Whether that way leads to Buddhist asceticism or mass murder, philanthropy or mail bomber, doesn't matter - the flesh by itself doesn't go God's way, and therefore, in God's eyes, it is utterly corrupt.

I disagree somewhat with your conclusion that the message of the Incarnation is that all flesh is now sanctified. Yes, the Word became flesh, but only Christ lived a sinless life. Whereas Christians, those who have received the empowerment of the Holy Spirit, live out the process of the sanctification of the flesh.

Definitely, the Spirit is in a battle for the flesh, I'd agree with that, but in its battle for the flesh the Spirit must battle with the flesh. Not only battle, but defeat and subdue. I suppose errors can be made in any endeavor, spiritual disciplines being no exception. The error in false asceticism is when the flesh seeks to subdue itself without the agency of the Spirit. The Spirit imparts life, and does not destroy, but the flesh (ourselves) can only imagine defeat as annihilation.

I'll address the resurrection issue in an hour or so... Over and out.

Originally posted by vistesd
I’m interested in your view here on resurrection, which you seem to take as a this-worldly affair (I’m not saying you exclude resurrection into an after-life, just that you seem not to limit it to that)—just curious to hear your thoughts on that. Also, that resurrection is concerned not just with spirit (pneuma), but with “body” (soma) as well....

"God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved--and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:4-7).

That about sums it up.

Jesus Christ teaches that the Kingdom of Heaven is already here. Everybody is going to be resurrected bodily for the final judgement, but his faithful are resurrected--in spirit--now. Those whose spirits have been resurrected will not be punished for their sins nor come into condemnation: "There is no judgment against anyone who believes in him (Christ). But anyone who does not believe in him has already been judged for not believing in God’s one and only Son" (John 3:18). Therefore, a born-again person has a present victory and a future hope:

"For we know that all creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. And we believers also groan, even though we have the Holy Spirit within us as a foretaste of future glory, for we long for our bodies to be released from sin and suffering. We, too, wait with eager hope for the day when God will give us our full rights as his adopted children, including the new bodies he has promised us. We were given this hope when we were saved" (Romans 8:22-24).

God's resurrection of the spirit is a 'foretaste of future glory'.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I guess what I find disconcerting is that, from what I can tell, Christians are no better at following the ways of Jesus than the general population. Maybe you missed it, but I don't think I've ever known any Christians who actually deny themselves - that humbly obey. I don't know any who even come close. From what I can tell, they are all influenced by p that he be praised or worshipped or simply to be followed? What defines a true Christian?

If you're interested in the specifics concerning Christians and sin, I'd recommend finding a modern bible translation (ESV, NRSV, NLT, NIV, etc) and studying the book of Romans, chapters 7 and 8. It is quite fascinating. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask, I'll oblige you as best as I can.

God bless.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
We shouldn't confuse hypocrisy with imperfection.

Imperfection is a given; all people are imperfect. Hypocrisy, on the other hand, is a false piety arising from empty religious practice: "For you are like whitewashed tombs—beautiful on the outside but filled on the inside with dead people’s bones and all sorts of impurity. Outwardly you look like ri ...[text shortened]... That's all for now, I'm pooped. Hope that answers your questions.

You also mention the "Holy Spirit". I believe that all individuals are born with the "Holy Spirit" inside them. They are also born with desires for the "self". Perhaps a good definition of maturity is giving up the "desires for the self" for "God's will". I also believe that the ability to truly mature is not the exclusive domain of Christianity. The concept appears to be at the center of all religions that I'm familiar with. Certainly Buddhism and Hiduism are and Islam seems to be.

I believe you are sincere in seeking to follow God's will, yet there seem to be indications that you have much you've yet to understand. If you remain sincere and humble, you'll no doubt come to do so.

Take for example your hatred of "hypocritical Christians". You speak of a "maturation process". Should one hate another because they have not reached a level of maturity in an area that you have? I would think that the loving thing to do would be to approach those individuals and share your understanding. You speak of "imperfection", yet do you not understand that most if not all the "hypocritical Christians" dismiss their transgressions, no matter how egregious, against their fellow man and the will of God as an "imperfections"? Consider raising the bar for yourself. If you come to truly understand that it is in fact a maturation process, your heart will change. You will understand that you too are being hypocritical, just in a different way.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
[b]Don't let hypocritical Christians ruin your life...

It's not 'follow my religion' or you'll suffer eternal torment; it's 'repent and believe in Jesus' or you'll suffer eternal torment. The point you're missing, that's causing your hostility, is that Christ's way of salvation is not man-made. Faith is produced and upheld by the power of God.

...[text shortened]... ep you out of contact with the Truth, which is Jesus Christ Himself, the Lord.[/b]

"I used to be a rabid atheist "

This was presumably before the labotomy.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
You also mention the "Holy Spirit". I believe that all individuals are born with the "Holy Spirit" inside them. They are also born with desires for the "self". Perhaps a good definition of maturity is giving up the "desires for the self" for "God's will". I also believe that the ability to truly mature is not the exclusive domain of Christianity. The con nderstand that you too are being hypocritical, just in a different way.

You believe that people are naturally born with the Holy Spirit, and that's your prerogative. However, it is completely contrary to the teachings of scripture. FYI.

I agree, there is much I've yet to understand. Right on to that.

I see what you're saying about hypocrisy as just another step on the ladder leading to spiritual maturation in Christ. And I appreciate your concern for my own maturation. However, I don't believe hypocrisy is consistent with the spirit of a truly born-again person. The hypocrite hasn't even set out yet on the road to Christ-likeness, in my opinion. Actually, they may have already traveled a long time in the opposite direction. Time and again Christ spoke of how the ax is waiting at the root of the tree which bears no fruit. Hypocrites bear no fruit.

"I do not sit with deceitful men, nor do I consort with hypocrites" (Psalm 26:4).

"These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me" (Matthew 15:8).

"Hypocrites! ...you shut the door of the Kingdom of Heaven in people’s faces. You won’t go in yourselves, and you don’t let others enter either" (Matthew 23:13).

"Hypocrites! ...you cross land and sea to make one convert, and then you turn that person into twice the child of hell you yourselves are" (Matthew 23:15).

Hypocrites aren't in a phase. That is who they are. Even the Lord Christ Himself couldn't convince them with either His miracles or His understanding. What makes you think I could do any better?

For example, try approaching a man like Fred Phelps and rebuking him with God's word. 🙂

I'm not being hypocritical by speaking about hypocrites. They're judgment and punishment is in God's hands. The reason I began this thread was because I despise the fact that atheists use the words of hypocrite Christians in order to blaspheme the name of God. In such a way, hypocrites truly do shut the door on the Truth for many, many people.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
You're right about the flesh. 'The flesh' contains the most base and evil parts of our nature, but also the loftiest. Not all categorically bad, of course. As buddhist monks demonstrate, and others, the flesh is capable of a high degree of asceticism, capable of uncovering in its own power and persistence certain hidden depths of strength and enlighte ...[text shortened]... annihilation.

I'll address the resurrection issue in an hour or so... Over and out.

Just wanted to say thanks for your considered response. I want to let it percolate for a bit, but I’m not saying that I disagree.

It’s interesting that the “process of sanctification” seems so in line with the general soteriological view of the Eastern Orthodox churches, who, taking their cue perhaps from the root meaning of the word soterias (“salvation” ) as healing or curing, do see it as a process.

Originally posted by howardgee
"I used to be a rabid atheist "

This was presumably before the labotomy.

That's the best you could come up with? The 'faith = brainless' routine just shows your atheist training wheels haven't come off yet. Keep on riding, big guy, someday you'll have something insightful to contribute. 😉 I'll be gunning for ya.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
"God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, [b]made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved--and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of ...[text shortened]... (Romans 8:22-24).

God's resurrection of the spirit is a 'foretaste of future glory'.[/b]

Jesus Christ teaches that the Kingdom of Heaven is already here. Everybody is going to be resurrected bodily for the final judgement, but his faithful are resurrected--in spirit--now. Those whose spirits have been resurrected will not be punished for their sins nor come into condemnation: "There is no judgment against anyone who believes in him (Christ). But anyone who does not believe in him has already been judged for not believing in God’s one and only Son" (John 3:18).

Your very first sentence here I absolutely agree with.

Just thinking “out loud” about this, but I don’t think that “judgment” (krisis) in this passage is the same as “condemnation.” I think that it could almost be translated as “diagnosis.” Again, there is some difference (perhaps a great one) depending on whether you view the whole model in a juridical sense, or a healing sense (both are in the texts, but I tend to think that the second is more prominent—and again, it is more prominent in, say, the Greek Orthodox Church).

But, as I say, I have to let it percolate for a bit. Thanks again.

Originally posted by vistesd
Jesus Christ teaches that the Kingdom of Heaven is already here. Everybody is going to be resurrected bodily for the final judgement, but his faithful are resurrected--in spirit--now. Those whose spirits have been resurrected will not be punished for their sins nor come into condemnation: "There is no judgment against anyone who believes in him (Christ). reek Orthodox Church).

But, as I say, I have to let it percolate for a bit. Thanks again.

"There is, then, now no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit; for the law of the Spirit of the life in Christ Jesus did set me free from the law of the sin and of the death" (Romans 8:1-2).

Put that right alongside John 3:18:

"He who is believing in him is not judged, but he who is not believing hath been judged already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

'Belief' is more than just right-thinking. The Greek word for believe is pisteuo, it means not only to believe in, but also to cleave to, trust in, and rely on Jesus Christ.

So, it's easy to see how John 3:18 is really saying the same thing as in Romans 8:1-2 above, where 'no condemnation' is conditional upon walking 'according to the Spirit.' Believing, cleaving, trusting, and relying on Jesus Christ (believing in Him) is how one walks 'according to the Spirit'.

Furthermore:

"I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, the person whose ears are open to My words [who listens to My message] and believes and trusts in and clings to and relies on Him Who sent Me has (possesses now) eternal life. And he does not come into judgment [does not incur sentence of judgment, will not come under condemnation], but he has already passed over out of death into life" (John 5:24).

Again in this instance krisis is used, referring to that which believer's in Christ are exempt from. Let me ask you, what is the sentence of Christ's judgment? According to John 5:24, the sentence of Christ's judgment is death. He judges who He knew (who believed in Him) and who he didn't know (who didn't believe in Him). Consider these passages:

"I tell you, I don’t know you or where you come from. Get away from me, all you who do evil.’ “There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, for you will see Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the prophets in the Kingdom of God, but you will be thrown out'" (Luke 27-28).

And:

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord... And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" (Matthew 7:22-23).

This is the basis of judgment day, when Christ judges the world: whether He knew you or not (whether you believed in Him or not). There is no gray area where Christ's judgment is concerned.

P. S. I don't know how you justify krisis as 'diagnosis'. It's meaning is pretty straight forward:

1. a separating, sundering, separation
1. a trial, contest
2. selection
3. judgment
1. opinion or decision given concerning anything
1. esp. concerning justice and injustice, right or wrong
2. sentence of condemnation, damnatory judgment, condemnation and punishment
4. the college of judges (a tribunal of seven men in the several cities of Palestine; as distinguished from the Sanhedrin, which had its seat at Jerusalem)
5. right, justice

(Source = crosswalk.com)