Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye. Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. (Matthew 7:1-6, the words of Christ)
Within Christ’s glorious Sermon on the Mount, one particular passage has become the defining principle for some Christians: Judge not that ye be not judged. There is no doubt that Christ is warning against a genuine sin. There is also no question that this sin has to do with how we practice judgment. The question is whether this is a universal injunction against judgment or if the text gives us reason to believe that the injunction is meant to be limited.
One reason this matters is because a universal injunction would not only be contrary to the pattern established by in the Old Testament, but also by Christ and His apostles in the New Testament. Furthermore, the curtailing of all judgment would necessitate that Christ-followers refuse to participate in any kind of justice (like being a judge, writing laws, or participating in a jury).
There are two noteworthy aspects to this text, and both come from the principle of Bible interpretation (formally called hermeneutics) that requires all Scripture to be understood within its own context. Out of this principle, we should first notice that the injunction against judgment is the opening sentence in an entire paragraph, and so we would want to make sure that our interpretation of this passage needs to fit not just the first sentence, but the entire paragraph.
The second thing to notice is that within the larger context of the sermon on the mount, Jesus uses recurring patterns as He teaches about various issues. Staring in chapter 6, each paragraph is introduced by a broad prohibition which is then followed by a series of explanatory statements which clarify the broad prohibition. So the text breaks out to something like this:
(6:1a) Prohibition against ostentatious alms-giving followed by explanatory statements (6:1b-6:4)
(6:5a) Prohibition against ostentatious prayer followed by explanatory statements (6:5b-15)
(6:16a) Prohibition against ostentatious fasting followed by explanatory statements (6:16b-6:18)
(6:19a) Prohibition against accumulating wealth followed by explanatory statements (6:19b-24)
(6:25a) Prohibition against anxiety followed by explanatory statements (6:25b-34)
In each case, the prohibition has an element of hyperbole as a strict adherence to the prohibition would be nearly impossible. For example, do we take the prohibition against giving alms in front of others to mean that Christ-followers are to disguise themselves if they want to give a homeless man a hot meal, or are we to use Christ’s explanatory statement to understand that He is admonishing us to ensure that our motive in giving is not to receive the praise of men? Clearly the latter is in view. Similarly, is gaining wealth a universal sign of rebellion towards God, or is the pursuit of wealth above the pursuit of righteousness what is being condemned?
With this in mind, we can return to the text at hand and look at the prohibition against judging others. To read this woodenly would require us to refrain from passing judgment of any kind. Does the text demand that? If the pattern of teaching stays consistent, we would expect that the broad injunction would be clarified in greater deal by successive statements, which is exactly what we find. In fact, Christ indicates that he fully expects that his hearers will engage in passing judgment, but his clarifying statements help us understand how we can exercise judgment in a way that is not destructive to ourselves or to others. There are three factors that limit our judgment of others.
First, the force of Christ’s initial statement requires us to only engage in the judgment of another person when necessary. It should not be our past-time or hobby. In a highly religious setting such as ancient Israel, with its emphasis on an outward morality, the atmosphere could become positively stifling. And it certainly was when Pharisees were present. Numerous examples exist in the New Testament of times when Pharisees stated or signaled their sense of superiority over others (John 8, Luke 18:11, Luke 7:39, etc…) We could call this the spirit of judgmentalism that permeates certain people and societies, including at times the Christian church.
It is possible for a local congregation to be so conscious of their own outward righteousness that they forget that they are sinners in need of grace, and so when someone without any of those outward markers attends church, there is a spirit of judgement. But this could be equally true in a non-religious setting where certain behaviors and dogmas are held so fervently that anyone who refuses to abide by the rules is judged. One example would be in the entertainment industry, where refusal to celebrate progressive values, or alternately promoting conservative values, can result in a huge backlash of vicious judgementalism. In the absence of a strongly religious context, we should expect that sinful man’s heart will manifest itself in judging others for issues that are not explicitly religious, but are nonetheless held with religious fervor. Whatever the case, at minimum we should ask ourselves whether or not it is any of our business to judge this particular person in this time and this place.
Second, Christ explicitly warns that the criteria and spirit by which we judge others will be the same criteria and spirit by which God judges us. Already in the text Christ has warned that if we do not forgive men their trespasses, God will not forgive our trespasses (Matthew 6:15) This does not mean that God changes or alters His righteous standard, but is a reminder that were we to be unforgiving towards others, we would not be worthy of God’s forgiveness. Or maybe to put it better, to be cognizant of God’s grace of forgiving us results in a forgiving spirit towards others.
This second restriction on judgment allows for judgment, provided it is according to standards by which we are willing to be judged. If I have any sense about me, I want to be judged according to standards that exemplified by the Scriptures. I want to be judged for what I have done, not what my family has done. Therefore, I will not judge someone because her mom is a drug addict or his dad is a bum. I want to be judged according to my actions, not according to my station in life. Therefore, I will not judge someone because she is poor, or because he comes from an uneducated family. I want to be able to speak for myself and not be judged according to what others say about me. Therefore, I will not judge someone until I have given him the opportunity to present his own case. I don’t want to be judged based on assumptions people think about me, therefore I will not make assumptions about the inner workings of another person’s heart. And so on and so forth. This refraining from unjust judgment not only results in a benefit to others, but also in my own just treatment.
Thirdly, Jesus requires proper judgement by reminding us that proper judgment requires clear vision. We cannot see clearly to fix someone else’s splinter when we have a problem the size of a two by four sticking out of our own eye. Jesus does not prohibit using judgment to determine that someone has a sin or a problem that needs to be addressed. What he prohibits is using judgement on others that we are unwilling to use on ourselves. First take the beam out of your own eye before you try and take the splinter out of someone else’s eye. This may refer to behavior of which we are guilty, but it may also refer to attitudes of which we are guilty. Before I condemn the rich, am I willing to acknowledge that the reason I don’t like them is because I am covetous? Before I condemn the unwed couple that is living together, am I willing to address the lust of my own heart? Before I tell my friend what a terrible friend she is, am I willing to see whether I have been a worse friend?
With that all being said, the end result is that the judgmentalism that characterizes a legalistic religiosity is condemned. If we practice judgment the way Jesus teaches in this passage, we will do it at the right time, in the right way, and for the right reason. This passage does not advocate for turning a blind eye to sin, but rather for focusing a healthy eye upon it.
Those who try to use this verse to teach that Christians should ignore sin do not understand the text and are twisting the words and testimony of Christ. As evidenced by the Lord and His apostles throughout the New Testament, we are to be clear about sin and righteousness. Jesus taught against adultery and fornication and divorce and avarice, among other sins. The apostles taught against sexual immorality and bitterness and witchcraft, among other sins. The Christian Church would be a strange and impotent institution if she did not express moral clarity in these matters.
It is not “unloving” or “judgmental” to call homosexuality a sin or transgenderism a perversion. It is not judgmental to tell that brother who looks at pornography that it is a sin and he needs to stop. It is not against the spirit of Matthew 7:1 to tell that sister that you don’t want to hear the gossip and that if she has a problem with that person, she needs to go talk to her one on one. Jesus’ warning against judgementalism is not an assault upon truth, but an assault upon the self-righteousness lurking in the hearts of those whose confidence is in the flesh.
Nathan Writes 