ARE YOU READING?

For more than fifty years, brother V. E. Howard asked repeatedly in his radio sermons, “Are you listening?” I would like to rephrase that question slightly and ask similarly, “Are you reading?” How many of you have ever read the Bible through from cover to cover? How often do you read the Bible?

Do you bring your Bible to class with you on Sundays and Wednesday nights? Have you noticed how few have their Bibles in these classes? If you have ever taught such a class and have made an effort to get the students in your class to bring their Bibles, you know how difficult this task is. I wonder how many of us in the church today are reading our Bibles outside of the church buildings.

I wonder how many of us read the Bible even when we prepare for class and how much we rely on supplemental material instead of the Bible even when we teach. I want to ask you, “Are you reading (the Bible)?”

The Bible must be read diligently by every member of the church. “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (II Timothy 2:15).

Nothing threatens the church today more than Bible ignorance! When we begin to rely on the writings of men (e.g. commentaries, workbooks, teacher’s guides, and other books) more than on the Book of God, we can easily be led astray. We need to be like the Bereans “in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11). Let us look at four reasons why we should read the Bible diligently.

1. It is our Owner’s Manual. Every product comes with an owner’s manual which tells how the product is to be used. God made man. God breathed into man and he became a living soul (Genesis 2:7). God inspired (breathed into) a book, the Bible, which “is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (II Timothy 3:16-17).

When we violate our owner’s manual (I John 3:4), we will cause problems for ourselves (Galatians 6:7-8) and will ultimately be destroyed (Romans 6:23).

2. The Bible satisfies our hunger and provides for our spiritual health. Jesus stated, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4). A person who gives attention to food for the body and neglects his soul has deprived himself of that which is most important. When a person is born again (John 3:5), he has a natural hunger for spiritual food (I Peter 2:2). The Bible promised that this natural hunger will be satisfied (Mattjew 5:6). As Irving Jensen stated, “Hunger is a sign of health.

When we neglect the Bible, it is because we are not hungry for the things of God. Not being hungry, we cannot, therefore, be healthy, spiritually” (Enjoy Your Bible, 13).

3. The Bible is needed because of our responsibility to teach. Parents are supposed to teach their children about God and His Word (Ephesians 6:4; Deuteronomy 6:7). We cannot teach that which we do not know. Further, the faithful have the responsibility of teaching others “who shall be able to teach others also” (II Timothy 2:2). In addition, we are responsible for teaching the lost what they must do to be saved (Mat. 28:19-20). To teach we must study the Bible ourselves (II Timothy 2:15).

4. The Bible is the Book by which we will be judged. We know in advance the standard of our judgment (John 12:48). Our eternal destiny will be determined by whether or not we have lived by that standard (II Corinthians 5:10). We can prepare ourselves for judgment by reading the Bible and following its instructions.

The Bible is important to every child of God, “his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night” (Psalm 1:2). The psalmist realized the importance of God’s Word. He wrote:

O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day. Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts. … How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth! Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way (Psalm 119:97-104).

Are you reading?

Lester Kamp

BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION

I recently read the following comments in The Patriot Post Digest dated July 7, 2006:

“Judge not, lest ye be judged.” It’s notable that this text from the Bible has replaced John 3:16 as Americans’ favorite scriptural quotation–but what does it actually mean? Is this ageless admonition really a call to unmitigated tolerance over discernment between right and wrong? Is it really a biblical nod of the head to the virtues of postmodern morality and multicultural society?

Of course not. As Christ’s imperative against judgment appears in the Gospel accounts, a different picture emerges. With the Pharisees clearly in view, in the Sermon on the Mount account of Matthew 7, and again in Luke 6, “judge not” appears in the context of the proverbial man who perceives the speck that is in his brother’s eye, but not the log that is in his own. The context, then, suggests a warning against hypocrisy, not moral discernment. Indeed, the full imperative of the passage encourages righteous judgment: “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.”

Then, in John 7:24, taking aim at the Pharisees once again, Jesus makes another extraordinary statement: “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” So, does Jesus really call his followers to “judge not”? Not really. In the vocabulary of theologians, this practice of isolating and thereby misinterpreting a phrase or passage from its context is called isogesis.

Other common examples of isogesis – which we’ll leave to your own exegesis – include the imperative “care for orphans and widows” (James 1) to sanction a social, and thereby governmental, responsibility; “Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man” (I Corinthians 11) as an affirmation of male chauvinism; and “Love keeps no record of wrongs” (I Corinthians 13) as a get-out-of-jail-free card for habitual sin (http://archive.patriotpost.us/pub/06-27_Digest/).

The title of the article in which these comments appeared was “Constitutional isogesis…” The point of the article was that “The same fallacies that affect biblical interpretation also affect our interpretation of the Constitution.” The conclusion of the article was as follows: Just as the problem of biblical and constitutional isogesis is essentially the same, so too is the solution. For centuries, a fundamental guiding principle has directed proper scriptural exegesis: Scripture interprets Scripture. That is to say, the primary lens for understanding a text is the text elsewhere in the Bible – thus, we interpret the Bible through what the Bible says.

The author of the article is a conservative. He would also claim to be a Christian although the Bible would judge him to be a non-Christian. Yet, even non-Christian conservatives know and recognize the improper practice of isogesis (isolating a phrase or passage from its context) and that it results in misinterpretation. They also know and recognize the proper practice of exegesis (that Scripture interprets Scripture) and that the primary lens for understanding a text is the text itself. Especially is this true with the text: “Judge not, that ye be not judged” (Matthew 7:1). There is a judgment that is condemned and there is a judgment that is commanded. The judgment that is condemned is hypocritical judgment (Matthew 7:3). The judgment commanded is righteous judgment (John 7:24).

May we all learn and apply these truths to our lives in every realm, including both the religious and the political.

David B. Watson

Beacon. Bellview Church of Christ. July 21, 2008.

WHO IS RADICAL?

Some time ago a friend of mine (though we differ religiously) in conversation about the Bible, said to me: “You take the radical view.” Sometimes the word radical is given a meaning that is uncomplimentary, that the radical one is an extremist, goes to excesses, is immoderate, his judgment is poor, he is eccentric, unduly narrow, etc. That my friend meant none of these things, I’m sure. But let us note a definition of radical: “Proceeding from the root; original; fundamental; reaching to the center of the ultimate source; thoroughgoing.” A radical change is “one that is so thoroughgoing it effects the fundamental character of the thing involved.” In view of these definitions, if the position occupied by the church of Christ affects the character of error, then you might say we “take the radical view,” but as pertaining to the character of truth, no, for we believe in standing squarely on the truth of God’s word, and in the following paragraphs the reader can see why.

SOME EVERYDAY “RADICALS”

1. The Doctor. When the doctor diagnoses our case and prescribes a course for us to follow in order to avoid disease and death, do we look upon him as “radical,” unduly narrow, in insisting upon our following his instructions to the letter? Suppose he shows us that to vary from the prescribed course means death?

2. Medical Examiners. When the medical authorities set up medical standards are they radical? Is the law radical in upholding the standards? Suppose the doctor gives you a prescription; you take it to the pharmacist for filling and he tells you it makes no difference how it is filled; it won’t hurt you if you are honest. What if six different druggists say it makes no difference what ingredients they put into the medicine? What would you say? If the law demands that all prescriptions be filled exactly as they are written by all druggists, is the law radical? Are you radical, eccentric, unduly narrow when you insist the druggist fill the prescription exactly as the doctor has written it?

3. The Merchant. When you go to buy a pound of beans and the grocer gives you six-teen ounces for a pound, is he radical if he re-fuses to give you twenty ounces? If you purchase a piece of goods, and the merchant insists that the correct measure is thirty-six inches to the yard, do you consider him radical if he won't make a yard forty-six inches?

4. The Farmer. Suppose you were to insist that the farmer could raise a good crop of corn in zero weather, in the bleak winter time, would he be radical in saying it is impossible in view of the laws of nature? Suppose you insisted he could raise a crop of crimson clover from alfalfa seed, and he said it could not be done, would you consider him radical? Is he radical if he in-sists there is no variation from the laws of nature, but that every seed brings forth after its own kind?

IS GOD RADICAL?

1. Was God Radical in Old Testament Times? In Genesis 4 we read about Cain’s substituting in his worship to God. Was God radical in rejecting Cain’s worship because he did it not as God had commanded? Nadab and Abihu offered strange fire in burning incense in worship to God. Nowhere had God said “Thou shalt not get fire from another source,” but he had told them where to get fire for this purpose. Was God radical for consuming them when they did not do exactly as God commanded?

When God smote Uzzah for putting his hand on the ark when God’s law was contrary to this, was He radical? Was not Uzzah honest? his heart right? did he intend only good? Yes, but he violated a positive command and suffered for it (2 Sam. 6:6-7).

In 1 Samuel 15 we read that because Saul did not utterly destroy the Amalekites and all that pertained to them, God dethroned him. Was God radical in punishing Saul for saving alive a few cattle and the king of Amalek?

When the young prophet of Judah kept God’s law implicitly, until he listened to the lying lips of the old prophet of Bethel, and being deceived by his lie disobeyed God, was God radical when he allowed the lion to take the young man’s life in punishment for his disobedience (1 Kings 13)?

2. Is Christ Radical in His New Testament Law? The foregoing examples serve as warnings to us. Note a few things in the law of Christ. The promise of salvation is not to those who merely with their lips, or in their minds, call upon Christ, but those who do his will: “Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Mat. 7:21). The Holy Spirit teaches in Revelation 22:14 that those who obey God are the ones who will enter heaven. Paul teaches in Hebrews 5:9 that Christ is the author of salvation to those who obey him.

Christ forbids any changes in His word. This has been God's law always. Deuteronomy 4:2 forbids addition or subtraction. Deuteronomy 5:32 forbad the Jews to turn either to the right or to the left, but to keep God’s commands. In Mark 7:1-7 Christ condemned the traditions and doctrines of the Pharisees. If we may make changes, have any doctrines and organizations we want, why did Christ forbid and condemn them in his day?

In 2 John 9-11 we are told that those who transgress, go beyond, what God has commanded have not God or Christ, therefore lost. In view of the fact that those who take liberties with the word of God are lost, tough they may think otherwise, we have only one motive in op-posing denominations and their error―to save the souls of people in them. Friends, when you wear a name in religion, have a doctrine God does not authorize, you are lost according to John. Revelation 22:18-19 forbids addition or subtraction. Those who do so are lost. No de-nomination can exist without addition or subtraction, hence the Bible says all who partake of them are lost. Do not find fault with me for pointing this out to you; appreciate it and turn to the truth before it is too late.

If we may vary from God’s word, why did God warn us about the doctrines of men (Col. 2:8; Eph. 4:14)? Paul says to preach a different doctrine from what he preached makes one accursed (Gal. 1:6-9). No denomination can exist without preaching a different gospel from what Paul preached. If all religious bodies were to preach and practice what the apostles taught in the New Testament, there would be an immediate removal of denominationalism and unity among us would prevail.

What is the standard? Christ said we would be judged by His word (John 12:47-50). Seeing that we shall be judged by the law of Christ, and that he forbids any variation from His will, we should live as close to His word as we possibly can, for those who will not hear (obey) Christ will he destroyed (Acts 3:22-23).          

ARE WE RADICAL?

Are we radical, or do we take the radical view, when we object to substitution in worship to God? God would not accept the substitutions of Cain, Nadab and Abihu. Why do people think He will accept them now any more than then? Do we take the radical view when we insist upon strict and complete obedience, lest we be rejected like King Saul? Are we radical when we insist upon pure seed instead of adulterated gospel? Luke 8:11 says the seed is the word of God. If one plants wheat seed, will it bring forth anything but wheat? If we want to raise a crop of corn, would we plant cotton seed and expect to grow corn? Neither can we plant the seeds of denomination-al doctrines and expect to raise Christians. It won't work; your commonsense will tell you that. The only way to raise Christians, and be pleasing to God, is to plant nothing but the seed of the kingdom, the unadulterated word of God.

Are we radical in insisting upon strict compliance with God’s word? Note Proverbs 30:6: “Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.”

Suppose a man has cancer of the liver and thinks he is all right? Does that make it so? Like-wise in religion: “There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Pro. 14:12).

Roy J. Hearn

Judging Righteous Judgment

Jesus said, “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Have you ever tried to convince someone that the religious position he/she held was incorrect? If so, you probably received an answer somewhat like this: “You are judging me, and that is wrong.” While we are never to presume to judge one’s motives, a certain amount of judging is absolutely necessary to pleasing God. We cannot judge what is beyond our ability to perceive, but that which is before us and regulated by His Word, we must judge.

We are not, according to our text, to judge “according to appearance,” or only based on externals when the matter pertains to the inner man. I cannot see whether your secret thoughts are right with God unless you manifest your motive incontrovertibly by your actions. I cannot perform a cursory review based on my own preferences or rules. These things are strictly forbidden.

But notice that in our text there is a judging that we are compelled to engage in, and it is called “righteous judgment.” We consider the works of an individual, compare them with the standard of righteousness (God’s Word—John 12:48), and arrive at a conclusion as to the propriety of those works. It is not wrong to engage in this kind of judgment; in fact, it is wrong not to engage in this kind of judging!

How can we oppose a man like Hitler without judging righteous judgment? How can we say that Saddam Hussein was or the devil himself is wrong without comparing their deeds with the Bible? And is not such a comparison judging? Indeed. It is judging righteous judgment.

Someone who says, “You are wrong for judging,” has engaged in the very activity he condemns. He has judged you for judging. He condemns you for condemning. Where is the consistency? To judge righteous judgment is to preach the Truth. To judge righteous judgment is to determine what is required of God on a given matter and then to pronounce His requirements to one in danger of Hell-fire.

Heed His Word: “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24).

Tim Smith

Are We to Judge?

Every false teacher and every one whose behavior is sinful tries to hide behind Matthew 7:1-4, actually behind a partial quotation and a misapplication of these verses. When these verses are cited by these workers of evil, usually all that is stated is: “Judge not.” In short, they say that any sort of criticism is contrary to God’s Word because Christ here condemned all judging. The only thing wrong with this is that it is totally self-contradictory and totally false.

First, as with many false doctrines it is self-contradictory. Here stand the false teachers and the impenitent sinners stating that all criticism is sinful, and yet they seem not to realize that they are self- condemned by the very principle that they advocate. They criticize and condemn those who would criticize or condemn them. They violate the very principle that they advocate. This is not unusual. Those who violate God’s Word try desperately to avoid the condemnation of that Word by seeing a different application and interpretation of that Word when it comes to themselves. Paraphrasing Peter in II Peter 3:16, these false teachers and sinful “wrest” this Scripture and others to their own destruction.

Second, neither the text before us, its context, or any other Scripture teaches what they want. The Lord does not condemn all judging either here or elsewhere in Scripture. It should be obvious from the text itself that Jesus here has a special kind of judgment under consideration which He condemns. Jesus describes this judgment as coming from someone who is in a worse condition than the one he condemns. Using the terminology found in the New King James Version, the one condemned has a “speck” in his eye while the one who is doing the condemning has a “plank” in his own eye. The Lord condemns the person who is unconcerned about his own sin while being more than eager to point out and condemn the sin in others. The Lord here condemns the judging done by the hypocrite and the double standard of hypocrisy. The self-righteous hypocrite is wrong because he magnifies the sin of others while ignoring the glaring sins of his own life.

Notice the verse which follows our text: “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” (Matthew 7:5). In this statement, Jesus makes it clear that He is not condemning all judging for in this verse He tells us what we must do regarding the sin we observe in the lives of those around us. Jesus says that we must first deal with our own sin, and then we will be able to see clearly enough to help others rid themselves of sin. The lesson before us is: sin must be dealt with in our own lives before we can help others deal with their sins. Do not ignore our own sins and then concentrate on the sin of others. The same standard, God’s Word, applies to all.

In Romans 2:1, Paul calls attention to this same sin among the Jews which Jesus identified and condemned in Matthew 7. “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.”

Further, Paul admonishes the “spiritual” who see a brother overtaken and overcome in sin to look to themselves when trying to bring the sinner back to faithfulness (Galatians 6:1). Sin in the lives of others should not be ignored. The presence of sin unrepented of brings death (Romans 5:12). Recognizing sin and its consequence is necessary to obey the instructions of Galatians 6:1. In other words, judging is required to obey this passage. Yet again, those that obey this command are cautioned not to overlook their own sin and/or ignore it, “considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.”

Looking again at Matthew 7, notice that Jesus in this very context rather than condemning all judgment required judgment of those who would obey Him. For example, He commands, “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” (7:6). Jesus is not talking here about literal dogs and swine. The pearls to which He refers are not literal. He is teaching us that we need to discern (i.e., distinguish, or judge, between those who will recognize the worth of the Word of God and those who will reject it, abuse it, and try to destroy it). To obey this command we must be able to judge others so we can tell who are the “dogs” and “swine.”

Jesus also warns us about false prophets in this same chapter of Matthew. “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves” (7:15). We must, therefore, be able to discern who these false teachers are. Jesus tells us how to make this judgment when He said, “Ye shall know them by their fruits” (7:16). In this passage judgment is far from condemned; it is absolutely necessary!

As we expand our view of God’s Word to include the remote context of Matthew 7:1-4, we observe that judging is again required. Those who would have us believe that Jesus condemned all judgment would have Jesus is contradicting Himself. In John 7:24 Jesus states, “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.” Note that in the latter part of this statement Jesus said, “judge righteous judgment.” Righteous judgment is commanded.

It is, therefore, not optional. If we obey Christ, we will judge righteous judgment. The judgment Jesus requires of us is not according to outward appearance; things are not always how they appear. The judgment Jesus requires is righteous; that is, according to God’s Holy Word, the Divine Standard of right and wrong. “All thy commandments are righteousness” (Psa. 119:172).

Jesus commended the Ephesian church for their ability to make judgments regarding who were and who were not apostles. He said of them, “thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars” (Revelation 2:2). Jesus would not have commended them for what He previously had condemned. When Peter sinned, Paul rebuked him to his face (Galatians 2:11-14). This behavior on the part of Paul was the right thing for him to do. Nevertheless for this to be done necessitated judgment, the ability to know that what Peter had done was wrong. Peter’s behavior was sinful, and Paul rightly condemned it. In his discussion with the Corinthian church regarding the fornicator in their midst, Paul poses the question: “Do not ye judge them that are within?” (I Corinthians 5:21). According to the way this question is stated the correct answer is: “Yes, we are to judge those that are within the church.” The inspired solution for the sin in the congregation at Corinth required judging. Judgment was necessary to discern the sin and the sinner so they could be dealt with appropriately.

The truth is that Jesus does not condemn all judging in Matthew 7, or elsewhere. What is condemned is hypocritical, self-righteous judging that overlooks sin in one’s own life and concentrates on the sin of others. When the Word of God is obeyed and taught, sin will be reproved and rebuked and the way of righteousness will be commended. “Preach he word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (II Timothy 4:2). Righteous judgment is necessary to recognize and expose sin and to recognize and obey the Truth. Try as some might to protect their sinful practices and doctrines by twisting the meaning of God’s Word, one day we will all stand before God in judgment. All will be held accountable for their behavior according to the standard of God’s Word (John 12:48). It behooves us all to begin now making the right application of that Word to our lives.

When sin occurs in our lives we need to deal with it in the way that God tells us in His Word. When others care enough about us that they condemn the sin that exists in our lives, we should be grateful and apply the remedy demanded by God’s Word so we might be saved. Rather than looking for a way to avoid what God has said, we need to be willing to turn from our sin and obey God to have the forgiveness that He offers. Condemning those who would help us identify sin in our lives so we might remove it is foolish indeed. “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (I Thessalonians 5:21).

However, “He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, Even they both are abomination to the Lord” (Proverbs 17:15). Someone has well written, “Refusing to warn a person about his sin is just as unloving as refusing to warn him about a serious disease he may have. A person who does not warn a friend about his sin cannot claim love as his motive.”

When one runs to Matthew 7:1-5 to protect the false teacher and impenitent sinner in the body of Christ, he either does not understand the passage or he deliberately perverts it.”

Lester Kamp