Judge not lest you be judged

I was talking to someone the other day about judging other people. When Christ said not to judge lest you be judged, what was he really getting at? After all, when he made railing accusations to the religious leaders of his day that they were hypocrites and a bunch of vipers, was he not being judgemental?

It is my interpretation that what he was really getting at was not the inability or prohibition of identifying "bad" behavoir, rather, he was targeting an attitude of self righteousness in regards to "bad" behavoir. Case in point was the woman caught in adultery. He identified the "bad" behavoir, but did not take a postion of holier than thou towards her. In fact, he showed mercy to her. Conversely, the religious leaders of the time of Christ looked down on "sinners" in such a fashion that they saw themselves as better than they. When they saw "bad" behavior they did not look upon it with an attitude of compasion towards the lost soul in the act, rather, they looked upon it with an attitude of disdain which inflated their own bloated opinions of themselves. Of course, when I say disdain, I do not mean disdain for the "bad" behavoir, rather, I am referring to disdain towards the person commiting the act. That is the difference.

For those who are not religious, it is my contention that such an attitude need not be intermingled with religion. In fact, arrogance and a "better than thou" attitudes can be seen rampant in the world around us. Usually the reasons for such snobery is due to economic status as well as educational status from what I have observed.

Originally posted by whodey
I was talking to someone the other day about judging other people. When Christ said not to judge lest you be judged, what was he really getting at? After all, when he made railing accusations to the religious leaders of his day that they were hypocrites and a bunch of vipers, was he not being judgemental?

It is my interpretation that what he was really g is due to economic status as well as educational status from what I have observed.

Believe it or not, there are many "Christians" today who are particularly judgemental towards homosexuals. Somehow they don't see anything wrong with judging homosexuals as unfit to attend their church. Some even proudly declare that they would "confront" any "openly gay" individual about their "sin". What's particularly pathetic is that they wouldn't confront "openly greedy", "openly gluttonous", etc. individuals about their "sin" and be oblivious to the double standard. Bigotry has a way of blinding them to how blatantly judgemental they are. Is it possible to be more "holier than thou" than to ostracize a class of people from one's church? Especially when it is unclear that it's a "sin" to begin with.

Judgement and therfore confrontaton of sin is like charity; i.e. it begins at home.

Originally posted by whodey
I was talking to someone the other day about judging other people. When Christ said not to judge lest you be judged, what was he really getting at? After all, when he made railing accusations to the religious leaders of his day that they were hypocrites and a bunch of vipers, was he not being judgemental?

It is my interpretation that what he was really g ...[text shortened]... is due to economic status as well as educational status from what I have observed.

Perhaps he meant that YOU are not meant to judge, but that it was OK for him (being free from sin and all). After all, he did say, "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her."

Originally posted by whodey
I was talking to someone the other day about judging other people. When Christ said not to judge lest you be judged, what was he really getting at? After all, when he made railing accusations to the religious leaders of his day that they were hypocrites and a bunch of vipers, was he not being judgemental?

It is my interpretation that what he was really g ...[text shortened]... is due to economic status as well as educational status from what I have observed.

To Judge or Not To Judge? That Is The Question

There is some good input here....

http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=589

Originally posted by rwingett
Perhaps he meant that YOU are not meant to judge, but that it was OK for him (being free from sin and all). After all, he did say, "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her."

Christ said that he came into this world so that one might recieve conviction of sin rather than condemnation. This is in the third chapter of John. I believe this to be the difference. One can confront another in either of the two ways. In short, is love the motivating factor in such confrontation? If not, then it is not of God.

Another way of looking at it is confronting a drunk or a junkie. Such confrontations are often done in an attitude of love because those who love them are concerned about them and do not wish to see them destroy themselves. It is either confront them, in the hopes of getting them to change their ways, or let the continue on going down a path of assured self destruction. Conversely, one may be confronted by a stranger on the street who is a drunk and then be turned away in an attitude of condemnation or a holier than thou attitude simply because they do not want to be troubled by them or have anything to do with them.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Believe it or not, there are many "Christians" today who are particularly judgemental towards homosexuals. Somehow they don't see anything wrong with judging homosexuals as unfit to attend their church. Some even proudly declare that they would "confront" any "openly gay" individual about their "sin". What's particularly pathetic is that they wouldn't con ...[text shortened]... 's church? Especially when it is unclear that it's a "sin" to begin with.

I agree that homosexuals are often confronted in the church with a holier than thou attitude. They simply do not want to be associated or "tainted" with someone who does those kind of things. However, know that there are also those out there who lovingly approach them in an attitude of concern because they believe that such a lifestyle will lead to destruction.

You are then left with a quandary in such situations. Do you judge those who are seemingly judging these types of behavoirs?

Originally posted by whodey
I agree that homosexuals are often confronted in the church with a holier than thou attitude. They simply do not want to be associated or "tainted" with someone who does those kind of things. However, know that there are also those out there who lovingly approach them in an attitude of concern because they believe that such a lifestyle will lead to destruct ...[text shortened]... ry in such situations. Do you judge those who are seemingly judging these types of behavoirs?

Do those "who lovingly approach them in an attitude of concern" also approach the "openly greedy", "openly gluttonous", etc. with the same zeal? I've never heard of ANYONE confronting those who are guilty of the above sins and JUDGING them UNFIT to attend or be members of their church, so I have to assume the answer is "no". If they don't, then they are simply bigots who have a double standard. Furthermore, if they "are not without sin" then they are exactly what Jesus spoke against no matter how "loving" they deem themselves. They are "ravenous wolves in sheep's clothing."

You seem to have missed THE key points:

Somehow they don't see anything wrong with judging homosexuals as unfit to attend their church....What's particularly pathetic is that they wouldn't confront "openly greedy", "openly gluttonous", etc. individuals about their "sin" and be oblivious to the double standard....Is it possible to be more "holier than thou" than to ostracize a class of people from one's church? Especially when it is unclear that it's a "sin" to begin with.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Believe it or not, there are many "Christians" today who are particularly judgemental towards homosexuals. Somehow they don't see anything wrong with judging homosexuals as unfit to attend their church. Some even proudly declare that they would "confront" any "openly gay" individual about their "sin". What's particularly pathetic is that they wouldn't con ...[text shortened]... 's church? Especially when it is unclear that it's a "sin" to begin with.

Some Christians will do as you suggest, but so will many non-Christians. Muslims would shun a homosexual more quickly than Christians don't you think? They may even "stone" him/her to death. Christians don't even do that. As a Christian, I would welcome a gay person into my church and NOT proselytise to him/her. My philosophy is to love the sinnner and hate the sin. I don't think of myself as any better than any other human being. God will judge in the end. We must love our neighbor as we love ourselves. If a gay person were to ask me how I felt about homosexuality, I wouldn't "sugar-coat" my response either. I would tell them how God sees the sin of homosexuality as an abomination, while at the same time explaining that God still loves that person, regardless. Each person must establish their own agenda with God and either accept His laws and change, or refuse to change and face the consequences at judgement day.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Do those "who lovingly approach them in an attitude of concern" also approach the "openly greedy", "openly gluttonous", etc. with the same zeal? I've never heard of ANYONE confronting those who are guilty of the above sins and JUDGING them UNFIT to attend or be members of their church, so I have to assume the answer is "no". If they don't, then they are s ...[text shortened]... cially when it is unclear that it's a "sin" to begin with.
[/b]

With this response it seems you think that judging is OK in some circumstances.

Originally posted by whodey
I was talking to someone the other day about judging other people. When Christ said not to judge lest you be judged, what was he really getting at? After all, when he made railing accusations to the religious leaders of his day that they were hypocrites and a bunch of vipers, was he not being judgemental?

It is my interpretation that what he was really g is due to economic status as well as educational status from what I have observed.

Just a few thoughts...

Christ said, "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment" (John 7:24). God's wisdom always turns the world upside down. Instead of hating our enemies, we are to love them; in return for cursings, blessings, etc. I don't think it is any different in this case.

How is it possible not to judge according to appearance? Isn't that how one goes about judging, by gathering the relevant information? Everybody judges, and everybody judges according to how something appears to be, whether immediately or after much deliberation. Yet Christ commands that we cease doing so altogether.

I gave twenty bucks to a stranger last night. I was delivering a pizza and this black gentleman ran up to me saying something about needing some money and a ride. Having been extended the hand of grace myself and therefore always ready to carry out my Lord's command of never turning away those who would ask something of me, I did not hesitate to give him a little money. He said, "Jesus love you." I said, "Ah, you're a Christian; it's always good to be able to help out a brother in Christ." As we embraced I caught a whiff of alcohol on his breath. He started explaining the situation he was in and, honestly, it sounded fishy to say the least. I drove him to where he needed to go, pretty much convinced that most of what I was being told was b.s. For a moment I regretted giving him money since he'd probably just spend it on alcohol, but then it struck me: would I seriously not obey Christ's command simply because this individual engages in sinful behavior? Would I ask him to stop drinking before I help him out? No way. But that's what judging according to the appearance does, it keeps us from obeying God in the Spirit of Christ.

Loving, giving, blessing, helping, etc., without strings attached, is always right. This is the basis, I think, of righteous judgment: knowing what is more important - the letter of the Law, or mercy and love. Charity will always disregard the law, because it is greater than the law.

God cannot look upon sin, so why should we? A sinner's conscience is burden enough. What use is there in pointing out someone's sin, in an effort to make them feel sufficiently guilty about it, if their conscience already does so unceasingly? There's nothing we can do to replace an individual's conscience! When and if that sinner seeks rest from the burden of a guilty conscience, then he or she will seek the Lord. Whether or not that happens is out of everyone's hands. And so it always amazes me how many Christians are eager to take responsibility for the souls of sinners. Christ gave us no such charge. Instead, he commanded us to love everyone and share the Gospel. That, and nothing more.

All over America, Christian congregations are obsessed with homosexuality. Never before have so many people in the name of love given such weight to the prejudices of bigots. Forget for a moment the questionable application of scripture to justify singling out homosexuals as abominable in the eyes of God, let's say for a moment that the accusers are right. Let's say that all homosexuals are really just perverted heterosexuals and that God's wrath is upon them because of it. I say, even in that case it would be wrong to judge the gay man or woman. Even in that case it is not wrong to love them and shower them with kindnesses without strings attached, i.e., kindnesses unsullied by an eye on "curing" the homosexual.

Even if a person's judgment about someone else is right, he is wrong, because people invariably judge according to appearance. Exactly what Christ said His followers should not do. Doing so nullifies the sincere expression of love, and thereby abrogates love's intended effect also, which is reconciliation with God. If the sole purpose of the Christian in this world is to be a conduit of grace, what need for the ability to judge might he or she then have? Absolutely none, of course. Everyone has the ability to judge, but only Christians have the Gospel.

I digress...

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Just a few thoughts...

Christ said, "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment" (John 7:24). God's wisdom always turns the world upside down. Instead of hating our enemies, we are to love them; in return for cursings, blessings, etc. I don't think it is any different in this case.

How is it possible not to judge acc ...[text shortened]... bility to judge, but only Christians have the Gospel.

I digress...

I bow🙂

...although there are many ways to go there with or without the Gospel of the Christians😵

Originally posted by whodey
With this response it seems you think that judging is OK in some circumstances.

I don't know if you're really that dense or so bigoted that you can't see clearly. So I'll put it as simply as possible. Who are you, or anyone else, to judge someone as unfit to attend a given church?

How you can say the following on one hand, yet have such a bigoted attitude toward homosexuals is beyond me:
Conversely, the religious leaders of the time of Christ looked down on "sinners" in such a fashion that they saw themselves as better than they. When they saw "bad" behavior they did not look upon it with an attitude of compasion towards the lost soul in the act, rather, they looked upon it with an attitude of disdain which inflated their own bloated opinions of themselves.

Such an attitude as yours is in lock step with those you cited above. You judge homosexuals as not being "good enough" to attend your church.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
[Christ said, "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment" (John 7:24). God's wisdom always turns the world upside down. Instead of hating our enemies, we are to love them; in return for cursings, blessings, etc. I don't think it is any different in this case.

How is it possible not to judge according to appearance? Isn't ...[text shortened]... immediately or after much deliberation. Yet Christ commands that we cease doing so altogether.

I agree that judging upon appearance is problematic. After all, we can't look at the motivation of the heart like God can. However, are we not also called to correct brethren within the faith? Paul often did so and Christ also with the religious leaders of his day. Again, what we do we should do in love and I think that is the dividing line. For Paul, he cared about those in the church and was concerned when they seemed to run astray. Additionally, Chirst was concerned for his sheep and came down hard on the supposide Shepherds of his flock. Although his speech was severe, it was done in a spirit of love. Such judgement was needed otherwise more harm than good would have come from ignoring the situation for all parties involved.

So was Christ not walking in love with the religious leaders who he proclaimed publically as hypocrites and vipers? I say he was. I say that at times love must be tough. I think it is a matter of the condition of ones heart as well as the wisdom from God on how to approach some matters. For example, without the example of Christ picking up a whip in the temple and chasing out the money changers, would you consider such action as loving? Were they not judged beforehand by Christ?