Political Activism, Serving the needy, etc. Are we doing enough?

[sgtmattbaker]

As Christians are we really doing enough? It is common thought that in the Bush administration there have been several attempts to remove some of our civil liberties through the use of wiretapping, bills that allow the President to declare a state of emergency, etc. Why aren't we out rallying against government corruption? Why aren't we rallying against torture and cruel treatment of prisoners like what goes on in Guantanamo Bay?

Another big political issue is abortion. I think this is a much larger issue than say same-sex marriage because same-sex 'marriage' would be a government sanctioned marriage and would not (or at least should not be) be performed by Christian leaders like a real Christian marriage between a man and a woman would. With abortion it is life or death. The Bible makes it clear that life begins at conception and science proves that life begins at conception. The argument for many is at what point is that little zygote considered a human being. I do not claim to know for sure, but I think I would be safe in saying that lots of abortions are not done because the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest but because someone got pregnant and just didn't want to be, e.g. married couple where contraceptive fails, promiscuous teenagers, etc. Why aren't we out there letting people know that it isn't a choice whether or not to kill an unborn child, that it is murder? Both Obama and McCain are for stem-cell research. McCain is pro-life, but then why is he for stem-cell research? Obama is pro-choice.

What about the poverty stricken, or anyone else that is in need? Why aren't we out there making a significant difference in the lives of others? Do we think that what we do might make so little of a difference that we would be wasting our time? Are we too busy with our normal lives to get out and help? Are we too selfish with our time and/or resources?

It greatly concerns me to see such things going on, and it concerns me even more that we, who are supposed to be salt and light, could (probably, actually most likely) be doing more. I am to blame too; I do some things, but then there are other things that I probably could do that I don't. Sometimes it is because I don't think it would be very helpful in the end, sometimes it is my selfishness that makes me want to stay at home and look at my own interests, e.g. being able to entertain myself between shifts instead of going to Mexico to build a school or going to Louisiana and work for hours a day to rebuild after a hurricane, or that I would feel lonely if I didn't have anyone I knew well to go do these things with. I often feel bad that I could be doing more, but don't know how to go about it. Are we supposed to be doing service during any free time we have or is there any room for our own personal entertainment?

 

[Angus_Og]

First off let me start with an easy subject, same sex marriage. Let me say that I do not believe that life style is right and I do not condone it. But it is not my place to judge them and would have no problem with having friends that practice it.

Just because you are not attracted to the opposite sex does not make you a bad person or someone I would not like. I know there someone will say that I could like a mass murderer or something. Wrong, there are things in this world that someone could do that once I found out about it would cause me to reevaluate the friendship.

There are currently two institutions of marriage, the Church and the Government. Everyone says separation of church and state here in the US. That is a myth, there is no mention in the official documents about it. I do believe that "marriage" should be separate. The Church binds us in the eyes of God, the state binds us paperwork. Marriage allows you certain rights in the eyes of man. Property and benefits are two things marriage allows people to share. I have heard of cases of couples being together for 50 years and one not being allowed to visit or make medical decisions for another because they were not "married", were not allowed to be "married". One did not get the support that a partner would have when one passed away. If you spend 50 years of your life with someone and loved them through the good times and bad you should be allowed in the eyes of man to the same benefits and privileges as a "married" couple.

People need to remember that we, the children of God, have NO right to judge someone when they break the laws of God. We can only judge people that break the law of man.

As far as activism, the only thing I can say is society now days have turned into a "me" society. If it does not directly affect "me" then why should I get involved with it. Is it right, for the most part no. If more people thought about others first, we would not have as many people starving or homeless and not as many wars. But that is not the case.

 

[ppar3566]

text

Hey Im not part of forgiven so I hope you don't mind me posting. I just wanted to say I thought this post was great. . I have lots of friends who are gay and I am frequently embarrassed by my Christians who give them a hard time and yet they gossip, etc all the time.

We are not the moral police of the world. We should be more focused on living our lives in a way that makes Christianity appealing rather than trying to make everybody think the way we do.

 

[Hescominsoon]

Hey Im not part of forgiven so I hope you don't mind me posting. I just wanted to say I thought this post was great. . I have lots of friends who are gay and I am frequently embarrassed by my Christians who give them a hard time and yet they gossip, etc all the time.

We are not the moral police of the world. We should be more focused on living our lives in a way that makes Christianity appealing rather than trying to make everybody think the way we do.

I have a real problem with the SIN of homosexuality in general and everything about it. Homosexual marriage and anything like it is an anethema to the Lord..it is condemed very strongly in BOTH the NT and OT. I ahve known homosexuals and i do not hate the person..but i most assuredly strongly disagree with and will not suport the act of homosexuality and any of it's resulting actions. I think many Christians don't want to take a firm stand out of hte misguided belief that if you go aganst homosexuality you are judgin or condeming homosexuals. This is not correct. I routinly go against homosexuality and it's results..if the persons who practive it feel convicted..that's the point.

 

[sgtmattbaker]

Marriage under God between two same-sex couples is not ok by any means but a marriage under the government of man shouldn't be such a huge issue. Give them the rights of married couples. Why should they not be able to visit their partner in a hospital? Why shouldn't they be able to get tax breaks because they aren't recognized as being married by the government?

It is clear that the United States is not a theocracy. A government sanctioned marriage is not a true Christian marriage. The issue is that your children could think that those actions are acceptable, which they are not. But for people that know it is wrong it is a question of whether or not to allow these couples certain rights. Am I for church-honored same-sex marriages? NO. Am I for government honored 'marriages' that have no ties to Christianity at all? Yes, if the reasoning behind them involves tax breaks, medical decisions, etc. Homosexuality IS wrong, but so is restricting their rights as individuals. You know a way to restrict this would be to just have certificates stating that couples are members of a "same-sex partnership" that would give them the same rights as a married couple.

For the other issues, sometimes I just feel like I wouldn't do much good. Sometimes I would like to do something but don't want to go to it alone without anyone I know to do it with me.

 

[Neirai the Forgiven]

I should mention (I'm strongly pro-life) that not all stem-cell research is done on aborted fetuses. Stem cells are found in other parts of the body as well. One large source of stem cells is, interestingly enough, belly fat. Stem cell research is often plugged by pro-choice people because using it on fetal matter helps "validate" their positions by making abortion "useful."


To answer your question "Are we as Christians doing enough?" My response is "Are you listening to the Holy Spirit in your life?" If so, and you are striving to follow his lead, then my response is yes. Many Christians may never join a demonstration, never vocally oppose homosexuality or abortion, and may just spend time in praying for their own family... and because they are following the Spirit's leading, they are doing exactly what he wants them to do. Not all Christians need to be missionaries, or to be activists -- some are called to business, politics, and to serving the Lord in many different capacities.

As believers, it is common for us to feel a desire for the Kingdom of God to come on Earth in an immanent manner -- for everything to come into place the way the Bible says it one day will. Unfortunately, until God himself decides to do so, it will not happen... but in the mean time, the Kingdom of God is doing a sort of "stealth infiltration" through the work of Christians who do the Spirit's bidding. These people accomplish what it is that God wills and empowers them to do (and no more.) This does not give us a license to sit back and wait for it to happen without us, but does imply that if we try to accomplish the things of God in the flesh and without his leading, we're just going to fail (or worse, create a demagogue of the flesh.)

As an officer of The Forgiven, I truly believe that TF is part of this "stealth incursion" of the Kingdom of God. We strive to do what the Spirit leads us to do in World of Warcraft. Sometimes I feel like we're not doing enough and I start champing at the bit, wanting to be more confrontational/in-your-face than the Spirit has led me to be. However, looking back, those times were temptations to do things my way and not his. And, looking back, I'm convinced that we've had a greater impact on the people involved than we would have if I had used my own methods.

So, are we doing enough? The only Christian you can really know that about is yourself. Ask the Spirit. If he says yes, then rest assured that you are a faithful servant. If he says no, then ask what more you can do for him. And knowing that, do it.

 

[Wend]

Well said John!!

 

[Woven]

It's really very simplistic. If you condone, attempt to justify destructive behavior you are not "Loving" your neighbor. There is a reason God abhors destructive behavior and reveals boundaries for mankind: For our own good. You don't break those boundaries without breaking yourself. It's impossible to make a wrong right through legislation. The consequences are fixed. Mankind can, and has legalized immorality (From slavery to murdering Jews) That only made it legal, not right.

People who are not willing to "Judge" when it's appropriate are not loving their neighbor. Typically it's because they don't want to be judged in their own lives for the things they already know are outside of God's will and or they lack the emotional security in Christ to tell someone the truth and be disliked because of it. No loving parent who puts their kids best interest above the child's immediate approval of them, would ever simply sit by and not say anything when that child engages in immoral behaviors.

I would add to what John has said by pointing out that the way you test whether or not it's of God (His spirit leading or our flesh) is by the Word of God. Maybe it's not God at all. If the leading is of God, it will be consistent with what God has already revealed, by word or actions. In general it's always right to protest the very things that destroy others.., to appose them. How that manifests itself can vary. All of God's Biblical men, including God (In all three forms) were protesters of the wickedness of their day. How can we say we "love" others and not disapprove of the unloving things they are doing to self and others?

The goal is to do no *unjustifiable* harm. So how does that specifically translate into the issues raised here?

Abortion is murder. It's the shedding of innocent blood. It's the devaluing of human life. And while our media loves to show animal cruelty and the horrors of war..where are the pictures of dismembered babies in the trash dumps, with head, legs, arms ripped off? No..we get euphemisms and the gross truth is covered up. No one ever implies that planned parenthood kills kids for cash..but they are quick to suggest the immoral motives of big business..

Homosexuality is unhealthy and destructive. The media ignores the consequences of this behavior, covers up the facts and at least in America..this behavior is not only "normal" it's something to aspire to..It's praised. And this movement is so "tolerant" of it's opponents that they are trying to make speech against them a "Hate" crime. How ironic.. The hate crime is the behavior itself.. Every time they gain a victory they hurt themselves that much more..

Welfare can be destructive and do more harm than good. There is healthy welfare and destructive welfare.. "There are 2 kinds of people in this world"... cliché And I will add yet another in that long list of examples : 1 type "helps"? others to make themselves feel good (or to purchase political power.) and another type helps others help themselves so they can feel good. If my neighbor is going to feed and clothe me when I can work..what incentive is that for me to get a job and provide for myself?

"If a man doesn't work, he shall not eat" ~Paul.

If you want healthy welfare..go out and help someone who is hurting, find a job so they can take care of themselves and their families. Help a single mom and her kids find a Godly husband..and do not (As our Gov does) reward them for having 12 kids with 12 different fathers. Do not steal money from me and my wife to buy votes from the poor addicting them to the Gov handouts.
There is no "Free from the Gov" stuff. Someone is paying for it. My prediction is that if our medical care is further socialized over here, one thing that will result is more criminality and even more people will be unhealthy. We keep removing or pushing back the consequences of destructive behavior to the point where ppl just are not as fearful of making bad choices..anymore..Why? Because my neighbor will be forced to deal with the consequences.

So..if destructive welfare, abortion, homosexuality is right I can easily concede as Christian I should support it, foster it etc etc.. but if it's wrong..can those who support such things recipricate and agree it would be unloving to do so?

Danny
Ps: By the way..John the Baptist was a "political" activist at least in as much as he openly rebuked king herod for his sexual immorality. It only cost him his head, but for us today..not nearly that risk..(yet) and remember...Jesus said John was "Greatest" born amongst women.. So he had God's approval. Typicaly today you have ppl, sadly even believers, who would never rebuke Clinton for sexual immorality, but they will rebuke another believer for rebuking HIm...

 

[FiremanThul]

I would just like to say it is first not our place to judge, and this is mentioned SEVERAL places in scripture.

The second point I'd like to make is that the bible also tells us that no one sin is greater or worse than another, we are all equally as guilty in the eye's of God, and we are all equally saved through the sacrafice of Jesus

Matthew 7:3-4 tells us - 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.

We cannot hate these men and women, for we are no better or worse.

 

[Woven]

The second point I'd like to make is that the bible also tells us that no one sin is greater or worse than another

The Bible doesn't say this. Please show me the verses, biblical argument that says no sin is greater or worse than another. Jesus said to Pilate, "He who hath turned me over to you hath the greater sin" John 19. God's criminal justice system does not punish all sins equally. (Some criminals should be flogged, some put to death, some pay back double in restitution) It depended on how great..the sin/crime. Jesus also spoke of "Greater" damnation..for some..who did certain things.."devour widows houses"..Mat 23. It's wrong to lessen the crime of child molestation..by comparing it to someone who steals a pack of gum.. Jesus on the other hand..said it would be better for such a person to be drown in the sea..

we are all equally as guilty in the eye's of God, and we are all equally saved through the sacrifice of Jesus

Equally sinful? No, Equally in need of salvation? Yes.

Luk 7:41 There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. Luk 7:42 And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most? Luk 7:43 Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged.

One owed more, had more sin..than the other, but both were equally in need and could not pay this debt..so God forgave them both. With regards to their need for forgiveness..they are both in the same boat. None of this suggests we should not judge the wickedness of our day and appose ungodly behavior. That's what love does.

I would just like to say it is first not our place to judge, and this is mentioned SEVERAL places in scripture.

Where? Verses please. And if you are right why are you judging?
Jesus said to judge. "Rightly" with "Righteous" judgment. John 7:24. But not as a hypocrit Matt 7.

Matthew 7:3-4 tells us - 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 left some off.. We need to let Jesus finish his thoughts on this.. Step one in judging rightly 1) First, remove the plank from your own eye and then you shall see clearly how to remove from your brothers eye. The verse in context is a teaching on how to judge..rightly.

This "Thou shalt not judge" is a cliché. That actually becomes guilty of what Jesus warns about in that very verse..:hypocritical judging. Your saying to others, "thou shalt not judge" is judging them... You are doing the very thing you say is wrong.
Matthew 7 (Read it all please) teaches how to judge effectively.
I do not kill kids, so I'm not a hypocrite to judge those who do and tell them, rather re-enforce what they already know, it's wrong.
No more than Nathan was a hypocrit for rebuking King David for murder & adultrey.

Judging someone doesn't mean "condemning them to hell"...for John tells us that Jesus did not come to comdemn the world, "..but that it might be saved through me.." John 3. It was already condemned...He just pointed it out and that He is the way to be free from it..
In Romans 13 we are told by Paul that God wants the Gov authorities to exercise "Terror, wrath and vengeance" on evil "doers". Not possible if it's wrong to judge.

Those are just a few of the many proof text, examples, but should suffice.
So I will encourage you to do what Jesus encouraged the disciples to do, "Judge with righteous judgment".."love your neighbor".

We cannot hate these men and women, for we are no better or worse.

Paul said, "Let your love be without hypocrisy, hate evil"
Telling people the truth, rebuking etc is not hate. Truth is hate, to those who hate the truth. I'm sure you don't think Nathan was being hateful for rebuking King David for murder and adultery or John the Baptist for rebuking King Herod for sleeping with his brothers wife.

Those who are saved are in a better state than those who are not.
There is no moral equivalency in the eyes of God between those who blaspheme the holy spirit, for example, (utterly reject the sum total of who He is) and those who drive 65 in a 55 zone. In fact John 3:36 says God's wrath is on those who do not believe in Christ. Should we attempt to tell people this or keep it a secret? (Not that they don't already know..to some extent..)

Take care,

Danny

 

[FiremanThul]

I think that you and I have very different interpretations of the bible, so rather than beginning what appears to be a heated, and potentially angry debate, I will simply bow out now.

 

[Woven]

I think that you and I have very different interpretations of the bible, so rather than beginning what appears to be a heated, and potentially angry debate, I will simply bow out now.

Yes we most definitely interpret the Bible differently. Your interpretation of Matt 7 is wrong. Anger is not always from a lack of spirituality, but the presence of it. This is not a trivial matter, but a foundational issue.

So to sum up and conclude this talk 1)Matt 7 teaches how to judge rightly. 2)It's not possible to have this discussion without violating your interpretation of Matt 7, because it requires you to judge me, as you have been.

Matt 7 in it's full context:

Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Mat 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Mat 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Mat 7:4 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?
Mat 7:5 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.


Is Jesus teaching how to judge rightly or forbidding all judging? (rhetorical)
If he is teaching how to judge rightly, then I have rightly judged your interpretation as wrong, without hypocrisy.
If he is teaching one should not judge period, then we would both be hypocrites for judging each others interpretation. (or emotions on this matter)

Take care,

Danny

 

[FiremanThul]

Danny I love you as a Brother in Christ, and I won't argue with you. Let's please just let this drop as I doubt we will ever come to a middle ground on this issue.

 

[Woven]

It's not always wrong to "argue" with other believers. Paul and Peter argued over doctrine.

The love I have for you is why I'm asking you to defend your interpretation of Matt7 (Or the judging issue itself). Because that interpretation is clearly wrong and why so many believers have been manipulated by non-believers and unfortunately other believers to stay silent and out of the political arena. Hilary Clintons favorite verse is Matt 7 taken out of context. I don't want you going around telling people it's wrong for them to judge period, because it would render you an instant hypocrite and lead naive believers into a false sense of guilt, when they should rather be praised for, as Jesus said, "Judging Rightly". And it's not unloving of me to point this out to you.

You entered this discussion rebuking those of us who are judging, using scripture to back it up.
I challenged your interpretation and now you don't want to defend it. If I'm wrong on Matt 7, you should have enough love, to at least attempt to correct me so I don't go around misinforming people about Jesus Christ.

Take care,

Danny

 

[FiremanThul]

Matthew 7 Starts out with "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured against you".

Luke 6:37 - Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and yo uwill be forgiven. Give and it will be given to you. A good measure, presed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For the measure yo uuse, it will be measured to you. He also told them this parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit?"

John 8:3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultry. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultry. IN the Law Moses commanded us to stone such woman. No what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

I tell you Danny, that you are not without sin any more than I, or the adultress. Because we are sinful people, we strive to be Christlike and forgiving. Because we are not without sin, we cannot cast judgement on those who are living in sin. You maintain that my initial post was a judgement, it was more of a plea, a hope for love over anger, lest we forget, anger is as bad as murder in God's eyes.

 

[FiremanThul]

I thought of one other thing I would like to add. I shouldn't need to post scripture to defend that the living Word of God teaches love and kindness to everyone, sinners and righteous alike. You will argue that showing love involves outward and agressive rebuking, whereas I believe that showing love involves forgiveness and prayer. I think this is where our biggest hangup will be, as it seems your theology and my theology are just a little different in that regard.

 

[FiremanThul]

Is Jesus teaching how to judge rightly or forbidding all judging? (rhetorical)
If he is teaching how to judge rightly, then I have rightly judged your interpretation as wrong, without hypocrisy.
If he is teaching one should not judge period, then we would both be hypocrites for judging each others interpretation. (or emotions on this matter)

Take care,

Danny

I'm sorry I just caught this and wanted to reply. Again, I'm not judging your opinion, in fact I believe I humbly stated that our interpretations were simply different. My interpretation of Matt 7 is that you may judge, provided you are without sin, which obviously none of us are.

 

[ppar3566]

At the risk of getting into a heated discussion in a forum I am not a meber of, i wanted to make a few points.

First the easy one: Welfare can be destructive . Yes it can but this is a political position and should not be confused with christian moral positions. To wrap political positions in christian retoric, where different positions can equally and justifiably be taken by different chrisitans, is i believe to misrepresent the gospel. On a side note we have had government funded health care, psychology care, welfare, and teriary education for decades and we have among the highest life expectancies, quality of life, GDP, and economic strength of any country in the world.


Abortion is murder.
Homosexuality is unhealthy and destructive.

On these points i don't nessicarily disagree but I do disagree with confronting non-christians with this in a judgemental and unloving manner. We need to take into account that non-chrisitans do not share the same basic beliefs that we do and thus to tell them these things are wrong without a context, may make us feel good "that we have stood up for God" but it is hardly effective. For many non-christians abortion and homosexuality are not indorsed because it is easy, because it is convinient, or because they want to be liked by others. They generally believe that supporting such actions is right in a deeply moral sense. For such people I believe judgmental arguments against these beliefs are futile.

Thus i believe that it is more important to focus on spreading the Gods gospel of unconditional love. It is worth noting that if you take a narrative reading of the bible rather than a systematic view that Christ and others in the New Testament repeatedly confronted the religious leaders who had the law and thus should have held similiar moral beliefs to Jesus. On the other had the New Testament is full of stories of Jesus loving the sinners and the down-and-outers not with messages of judgemental condemnation but of unconditional love.

Again I am not discounting your moral beliefs Woven but rather the efficacy of pushing those beliefs on others who equally and pasionately believe they a morally correct.

Anyways that is my 2 cents worth.

 

[Woven]

Your verses:

Matthew 7 Starts out with "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured against you".

Luke 6:37 - Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and yo uwill be forgiven. Give and it will be given to you. A good measure, presed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For the measure yo uuse, it will be measured to you. He also told them this parable: "Can a blind man lead a blind man? Will they not both fall into a pit?"

Ok, you quoted part of Matthew 7 and part of Luke 6. Both times you left out the part about "hypocritical" judging. And so far you have ignored the full immediate context.
Both chapters say essentially the same thing: "Matthew 7 stats out with" You said, but what does it finish with and conclude? That all are hypocrites and equally sinful without the ability to overcome? Nope. It concludes with and encouragement from Jesus to judge ones self first and then you can judge others effectively (Judging is not void of love through) I think you have it in your head that judging is the opposite of love rather than flowing from it) and there are degrees of judging. It needs to be measured..appropriately.

Matthew 7 (All of it..once again)
Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Mat 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Mat 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Mat 7:4 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?
Mat 7:5 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.

Now Luke 6 (All of it)
Luk 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: Luk 6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again. Luk 6:39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch? Luk 6:40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master. Luk 6:41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Luk 6:42 Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye.
They are about "measured" judgment. "appropriate" judging. He makes a statement "Judge not" then he expounds on it. "Here is what I mean".. Judge with appropriate measure, in sincerity and not with malice.

Now for John Chapter 8:3, "He amongst you who is without sin cast the first stone"

Joh 8:3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, Joh 8:4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Joh 8:5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? Joh 8:6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. Joh 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. Joh 8:8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. Joh 8:9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. Joh 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? Joh 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

How far should we take the words of Jesus Christ or any of the biblical writers. For a disobedient child can repeat all of the verses you raised in this discussion in rebellion towards their parents proclaiming, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first rod" or "Judge me not mommy, for you are a sinner to" "We are all equally sinful and blind" What's a parent to do? For God commands parents to discipline their kids out of love/concern for them...And Paul then was wrong when he stated in Romans 13 that our Criminal Justice system should be modeled after Godliness (Terror, wrath and vengeance) on evil doers. Because what he should have said, if your interpretation on this judging issue is correct, is, "Forgiveness, mercy and tolerance, for as Jesus said, "Judge not" and "Cast no stones"..

Having said that lets look at John Chapter 8:3

John 8 Deals with whether these hypocrites, Pharisees and scribes were judging rightly and had the moral authority to execute her for adultery.
He doesn't rebuke the Pharisees for judging, but the measure of the judgment considering 3 things. 1)They are hypocrites for trying to hold Christ to the mosaic law, when they are not obeying it themselves and in so doing trying to expose him as opposed to Moses. 2) Where is the man that was caught with her? If the Pharisees were being true to the law of Moses both should have been brought. They let the man off the hook and 3)she is repentive. Jesus agrees with them that she is an adulterer "Go and sin no more" but he doesn't agree with the punishment in this case and forgives her, warning her to sin no more. Remeber, He was upset with all of Israel that had turned away from God. Cheifly the rulers who were not judging rightly, but misusing their athority. He rebuked them often for not judging after a Godly manner.

Your interpretation:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woven

Is Jesus teaching how to judge rightly or forbidding all judging? (rhetorical)
If he is teaching how to judge rightly, then I have rightly judged your interpretation as wrong, without hypocrisy.
If he is teaching one should not judge period, then we would both be hypocrites for judging each others interpretation. (or emotions on this matter)

You said,

"I'm not judging your opinion, in fact I believe I humbly stated that our interpretations were simply different. My interpretation of Matt 7 is that you may judge, provided you are without sin, which obviously none of us are."

That's not what Matthew 7 says though. It says you can and should judge ,but not while you are in the same or worse sin then the person you are judging, So first...stop sinning the same sin you are judging others over. And secondly your judgments need to be measured, if you hope to be effective at helping them. Your belief is that all sins are equal and we are all committing them continuously and can't stop. Or that's what I'm hearing.. If that's true Nathan was as guilty as David and had no moral authority to rebuke him for adultery and murder. Now we know that's false, because God was Nathan's authority.

And my understanding, like yours, is either right or it's wrong. There is no gray area here. So you are judging my understanding as wrong and trying to establish your own as correct. Because if I am right, you would, should not oppose it. You can change the terms of what you are doing or add terms to it, but you can't get away from the fact that you are judging. Your very first response is obviously a judgment against what myself and perhaps others have written in this forum. In fact it's impossible for one to divorce themselves from making judgments about others to some extent. You seem to believe that judging can only be sinful and is always void of love when men do it.

Please explain your interpretation from 7:2 to 7:5.
Jesus expounds on Matt 7:1 He doesn't just leave that verse hanging out there all alone.

My interpretation flows well with the entire OT and NT. Your interpretation runs into extreme difficulty with a massive amount of scripture. (Paul scolds the Corinthian Church for not judging, tells them he is ashamed of them. He kicks a man out for committing incest, he warns believers to disfellowship with other believers who are walking disorderly, committing certain sins) and on and on and on. And yet you say rebuke and judging is wrong. You are actually arguing that good judgment is wrong. That all judging is equally wrong because we are all equally sinful hypocrits. That would be like a parent advertising for a baby sitter and not making and judgments against child molesters who apply. Hey, we are all equally sinful..what difference does it make? Just pull an application out of a hat..Jesus did not argue this. His argument as well as others in the Bible is that we should not be hypocrites in our judging. That it should be measured, equitable, and in sincerity (right motives)

Mopping up.

You said, "

You maintain that my initial post was a judgment, it was more of a plea, a hope for love over anger, lest we forget, anger is as bad as murder in God's eyes"

I assume you are quoting a combination of verses here.

Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. & 1Jn 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

First, you most certainly were judging others (as you continue to do now) as being wrong. Saying it's a plea for love over anger doesn't negate that fact
Secondly hating, wanting to murder your brother and being angry with him are 2 different things.

You will notice in Mat 5:22 the exception.., and it's an important one, angry "without cause". Without getting into a long expository of Mat 5:22 and all it's implications..It should be apparent that Jesus is not speaking against rebuking or anger, but unjustifiable, malicious anger and rebuke. "Without a Cause" a justifiable one. For it was Jesus in Luke 17:3 who said, "If they brother sin against you rebuke him and if he repent, thou shalt forgive him".

With regard to John 3:15 In Lev 19:17 we have this verse: Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbor, and not suffer sin upon him.
So here..hate is defined as apathy and or forgiveness without rebuke. A person who doesn't have enough love for his neighbor to correct him, appose the sin that is destroying him and others is likened to one who hates his neighbor. It really should be self evident that love manifests itself in rebuke, correction, dissention, opposition.

I'm not sure why you brought up these verses. I don't hate my brothers and I'm not angry with you or any believers without a justifiable cause.

I thought of one other thing I would like to add. I shouldn't need to post scripture to defend that the living Word of God teaches love and kindness to everyone, sinners and righteous alike

.
Thul, this assumes you are right and the truth is self evident to all. It assumes your definition of love is correct. It's true every believer here should know that God is love, however your argument that His love is always manifested the same way has not been proven by you..or that we should simply forgive everyone. so yes..you do need to back it up scriptural. It's like me saying...I shouldn't have to point out to you that scriptures often shows God and his people rebuking one another and unbelievers. And that Jesus came preaching "Repent" not "You are already forgiven". Jesus said in Luke 17:3 "If a brother sins against you rebuke him and IF he repents forgive". Forgivness is conditional upon repentence, turning towards God. If not Jesus would not preached "Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand". He would have preached, "You are already forgiven and here is your kingdom"

For example you write the following:

You will argue that showing love involves outward and aggressive rebuking, whereas I believe that showing love involves forgiveness and prayer. I think this is where our biggest hang-up will be, as it seems your theology and my theology are just a little different in that regard.

The truth is, love involves both outward aggressive rebuke, forgiveness and prayer. It's not one or the other.. Our biggest hang-up, the one I have with Christians like you is that you think it's an either or where as I know that one has and can lead to the other: Righteous anger-> Rebuke -> Repentence. God expressed it all as did the prophets and diciples. His followers were sometimes confrontational..and rebuked others. Peter called his listeners "Murderers" Steven called his listeners "Stiff necked" and rebuked them for "Persecuting and Killing " those sent to Israel..Paul blinded a man for attempting to lead someone away from Christ and the result was that "the deputy believed". Paul kicked one out of church and rebuked that church for being so .."Loving" "Forgiving..and "Tolerant"... He also warned Christians to not even eat with other believers who were walking disorderly, committing certain sins. Were they being unloving and hateful?

I tell you Danny, that you are not without sin any more than I, or the adulteress.

Well, you got part of it right..I know I'm not without sin. But you are not without hypocracy here...because you are judging me again..regardless of what euphamism you use.. But I'm not a murderer, nor a child molester. All sins are not equal. If they were, Jesus would not have talked about greater sins, unforgiveable sins, nor various degrees of earthly punishments for crimes commited.

Because we are sinful people, we strive to be Christlike and forgiving. Because we are not without sin, we cannot cast judgment on those who are living in sin. You maintain that my initial post was a judgment, it was more of a plea, a hope for love over anger, lest we forget, anger is as bad as murder in God's eyes.

You could not be more wrong here..Being Christlike In His character means more than just forgiving. That is one aspect. Jesus was not apathetic to the evil of His day. And he did more than just pray about it. He protested it. Jesus was often harsh. He called some people fools, he warned others that they would suffer from his wrath..if they did not repent. He called some,, "Of your father the Devil."."Dogs" and said he was hated because he told the world that what it does is evil.. Some repented, some did not. Your statment condemns Peter, Paul..and every Godly man that warned, judged unbelievers or believers. And your initial post as well as your continued judgment against me here is what it is. I realize it can both be a "plea and a hope" but that doesn't negate the fact that it's also a judgment. The difference between you and I is: I don't mind when people judge me rightly..No..it doesn't feel good, but I respect it..2) I don't divorce love from anger or rebuke as you seem to do. One flows from the other when it's appropriate. 3) I don't feel ashamed or guilty when I judge rightly.

Take care,

Danny

 

[FiremanThul]

You pretty well lost me when you said "Christians like me".

I didn't want this to turn out this way, and I'm sorry.