Originally Posted by PaleRider
Context wolf. In typical liberal fashion, you love bringing up the bible, and in typical liberal fashion, you don't understand it in the least. "Do not judge, lest you be judged" (Matthew 7:1).
Jesus' comment is almost universally misunderstood (or mischaracterized) because of an inherent conflict in the condemnation of judging that goes unnoticed to almost everyone but Him.
The problem is that judgment always requires evaluation. Taken out of context, the statement poses a problem. The statement "You shouldn't judge" is self-refuting, being itself an example of judgment.
Jesus qualified His comment though.
And why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?...You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. (Matthew 7:3, 5)
Jesus didn't say that we have no right to judge, he only condemned hypocritical judgment. Not all judgments fall into that category. In fact, even in this passage Jesus actually enjoins a different kind of judgment once the hypocrisy has been dealt with ("first take the log out of your own eye, then...").
There are a couple of other kinds of judging descibed in the bible that are not condemned, but rather are, in fact, commanded. Some judgments are judicial, proper when done by proper authorities. Judges judge. They pass sentence. That's their job. (Matthew 18:15-20, 1 Corinthians 5:12-13, Galatians 6:1).
If you study the bible in context, you will see that Jesus did not come initially for this kind of judgment. He offered mercy, not sentencing (John 3:17, 12:47) - but He will certainly return with this kind. Appointed by the father as final judge (John 5:22, 27; Acts 10:42, 17:31), He will spare no one.
All sorts of judgments are advised. Appraisals of right or wrong, wise or foolish, accurate or inaccurate, rational or irrational. Those sorts of judgments are not forbidden; and in fact, are commanded. Jesus' instructions "Do not give what is holy to dogs" (Matthew 7:6) require this kind of judgment.
Some judgements are moral. Paul charges us with this kind of judgment: "Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them" (Ephesians 5:11). This is to be done not "according to appearance," but by "righteous" standards (John 7:24)
A judicial action, a factual assessment, a hypocritical arrogance - each is a type of judgement. Only the hypocritical arrogance, that is, pointing out the speck in your brother's eye when there is a log in your own) is disqualified by Jesus. The first two are actually virtues in their proper settings, and therefore commanded by Scripture.
Intellectual dishonesty doesn't serve your purpose wolf. If you are going to argue using the bible, then you could at least try to get it right and save me all this typing.
Yes it is wolf and you are guilty of it to an extreme that few on this board are. In spite of the overwhelming evidence that unborns are living human beings at any stage of development, you, in your proclivity for absolutes, still claim that they are not only not alive, but are not human beings and then you state that unless someone accepts what you say as true, that you won't even discuss the subject with them. Talk about hubris. We can't even get into the discussion of whether or not it is OK to kill them until we get past your hubris.
|