The Biblical Writers Were Judgmental

Mike Leake

Today, you get to call someone judgmental when they have an opinion on something. Even if that opinion isn’t really an opinion but is backed up by facts and truth. To declare anything—of a negative value—is to be deemed judgmental. Unless of course you crush some of our cultural idols. Then bring out the pitchforks. It’s okay to have a very strong opinion against someone who has a strong opinion. It’s fine to make the judgment of calling someone a judgmental hypocrite.

I understand it when those with a non-Christian worldview take this posture. It still doesn’t hold up logically, but I’m not shocked to see this inconsistency. What baffles me is when Christians adopt a mushy view of truth. Now granted we can all be a bit quick or too sharp in our application of Christian principles. While our culture can be a bit quick to take the posture of 2 Pac (“Only God can judge me) the church can be a bit quick in taking up the mantle of Job’s friends—those miserable counselors who said right things at wrong times. Yet, we must acknowledge that if we’re going to dismiss folks who make declarations about the state of another person soul, then we’re going to be hard-pressed to keep many portions of are Bible. Consider this from the apostle Peter about Simon the Magician:

“May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have neither part nor lot in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. Repent, therefore, of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.” –Acts 8:21-23

Notice how “judgy” Peter is of the state of Simon’s soul. Can you imagine how Simon’s twitter feed would have been torched if he wrote these words of Simon?

“How dare you Peter! Only God can judge. We don’t know Simon’s heart. We don’t know his motivations. He was just doing what came from his Gentile culture. It was custom to pay for magic tricks. Give the guy a break!”

And this isn’t just the case with Peter. You’ve got several places all throughout Scripture where either a figure in a biblical story will say things as Peter did, prophets will make sharp judgments, or even the biblical writer will say of a king that he was “exceedingly wicked”. Those are judgments. And they are inspired. So as we think through making judgments and issues of discernment we have to have a place in our theology for language like Peter’s.

I understand that we are not inspired. Our words and our judgments are not holy writ. But when we use and accurately apply the Scriptures we do have authority on which to speak and make judgments. It isn’t our judgment. It’s the Lord’s. We cannot surrender this to our culture. Because if we do what you end up with is a culture of outrage where every opinion (and that’s all it is) carries equal weight. We need words like those of the apostle Peter. And we need to know how to accurately and lovingly use them.

And just to be clear, I don’t believe the biblical writers actually were judgmental. I think we’ve hijacked that term. There is such a thing as been wrongly condemnatory and having judgmental attitudes. But making truth claims doesn’t fall into that category. As those indwelled by the Spirit of the living God we really truly can make accurate and discerning judgments—even those like Peter made of Simon the Magician. And that’s not being judgmental. It’s applying the Scriptures.

Let’s not surrender this.

Read This! 12.04.18

Mike Leake

Preacher, Study the Text—But Also Study Your People

Sound advice.

The Book C.S. Lewis Was Dying to Write

Interesting.

How to Tell the Difference Between a Prophet and a Crank

This is a question I’ve been asking for awhile now.

Should Christians Abandon Christmas?

After all, we aren’t told in the Scriptures to celebrate it.

Why Does Church Membership Matter

Willingness to join a local body communicates something.

How to Love People You Don’t Like

Jesus calls us to love even the people we don’t like.

Why You Should Consider Reading the Bible Chronologically

Might be a good project for 2019.

Apostasy and How it Happens

Sometimes its helpful to see the steps along a path you don’t intend to take.

Personally, I still love listening to vinyl over digital but apparently that’s not a scientific opinion:

Biblical Sexuality Isn’t a Stump You Can Mow Around

Mike Leake 4 Comments

I read a helpful illustration somewhere about the nature of pastoral ministry. The illustration likened ministry to mowing around a troublesome stump in your yard. Ultimately things would be easier if the stump were removed and you could just mow a straight path. But uprooting the thing might cause more trouble than it’s worth and so you just learn to mow around the stump. People and preferences are like this. There are hills to die on and there are stumps to mow around.

I thought of this illustration when I read a recent interview with Lauren Daigle on the topic of homosexuality. She was asked whether or not she felt that homosexuality is a sin? Here is her response:

You know, I can’t honestly answer on that, in the sense of I have too many people that I love—that they are homosexuals…“I don’t know. I actually had a conversation with someone last night about it. I can’t say one way or the other. I’m not God,” she continued. “So, when people ask questions like that, that’s what my go to is. Like, I just say, ‘Read the Bible and find out for yourself. And when you find out, let me know because I’m learning too.’

Now, I’m not Lauren Daigle so I don’t her motivations. I’ll admit that I’m reading between the lines a bit and trying to fill in some gaps. It’s possible that Lauren Daigle truly doesn’t fully know her own stance on homosexuality. Or it’s possible that she does have a position but she is uncomfortable with the implications of that position. In other words she knows that if she affirms homosexuality she’ll lose a swath of her Christian audience, but she’ll also lose followers if she is unequivocal in saying that homosexuality is a sin.

And I can understand the motivation for this. The gospel of Jesus Christ is the good news that God saves sinners. It’s the beautiful story of His redemption of rebellious, sinful, and broken rebels. The gospel is the God of the universe adopting His enemies as His own children and bestowing on them all the riches of heaven. Our sexuality certainly has a part in the gospel message but it’s not really central. So, it’s understandable that one wouldn’t want to sacrifice a platform for the spread of the gospel in order to make a stance on a minor issue.

There is only one minor problem with this. We don’t mow around a denial of biblical truth. The doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture means that we are not to call something a sin which the Bible doesn’t. Nor are we required to do something unless the Scripture requires this of us. That gives us the freedom to mow around stumps when it comes to personalities, preferences, and disputable matters. But it doesn’t give us the freedom to not take a biblical stance when the Bible is clear. When Scripture does speak we passionately stand on what it says…especially when it comes to defining sin.

The reason we do this is not because we have to maintain a list of sins in order to take a judgmental posture towards others. No, we do this because it actually is attached to the gospel. Trying to redefine our rebellion and our brokenness isn’t going to lead to gospel healing. It’s going to lead to destruction and a further plunge into idolatry and pain. So we lovingly refuse to mow around the stump of human sexuality. Yes, even if it means our platform suffers. We are called to be witnesses of Christ. As ambassadors we don’t get to change the message in order to make it more palatable.

A better response would have been to affirm what the Scriptures say about homosexuality, but to also extend it to include pride and a host of other things which are an abomination to God. And then to use this as an opportunity to proclaim the sufficiency of Christ for any and every sin. The gospel truth is that all of us are far worse than we could ever imagine. But in Christ we can have far more substantial healing and grace and relationship with the God of the Universe than we could ever dare to dream. That message will offend some. But it’ll be life to others.

Sinners (like myself) do not need our equivocation. They need our gracious truth-telling. This isn’t a stump you can mow around.

—

Photo source: here

What I Learned When My Position Was Mocked

Mike Leake 2 Comments

It was my favorite class. At least for the first half of the semester. I loved the passion with which the professor destroyed the arguments of opponents. His words helped to deepen my faith and my convictions. And I appreciated his humor and wit. He had a special way of pointing out the ignorance of those who disagreed with us theologically.

Then I became a them instead of an us.

The class wasn’t as fun anymore. His wit wasn’t humorous it was biting. His arguments weren’t air tight they seemed over confident, silly, and as if they weren’t presenting my side in the best light. He didn’t change his tactic, just his topic. And it changed my view of the professor. When I experienced the way he treated my arguments it caused me to not only question his integrity on this issue but to even cast doubt upon his other positions as well.

I learned much in that class. I agreed with the professor on about 90% of the material. But it was that 10% and the experience of being on the “other side” which shaped me more than any of the 90% which I agree upon. It wasn’t the content which bothered me. It was the way in which he interacted with my position. And what I felt emotionally as he did this. It created in me a few added hurdles I had to overcome to take him seriously in his other statements—even when I agreed.

This experience has caused me to always pursue understanding the other side. As best as I can I want to listen and accurately present their side. At the end of the day I may not win the argument, but I’m convinced I’ll have gone further in winning the person. It’s helpful to think about our interactions on social media—and probably more importantly face to face interactions. If someone I am witnessing to were likely to listen to my arguments and the way I’m interacting, would they be more or less likely to listen to me in the future?

When this professor pummeled straw-men he had a chorus of amen’s from those who already agreed with him. You can criticize President Trump to a group of Never-Trumper’s and get a chorus of amen’s, but if you aren’t being fair in your critique what are you doing to future conversations with those who don’t agree? And especially what will happen as you try to interact on different and more important topics like the gospel? You might have just absolutely exposed the foolishness of socialism and liberals and secular thinking, but have you now forfeited a hearing on the kingdom of Jesus? If your argument isn’t fair, gracious, and Christ-like then you probably have. So what’d you win?

Here is a very simple way to apply this. Put yourself in a position where you hold a minority position. Take note of the way you feel when you are dismissed, mocked, and derided. Consider how likely you are to respect and listen to the person who has unfairly represented your position. Don’t pick a fight. Don’t try to win another argument. Just listen. Listen to what is going on in your mind and heart. Feel the defensiveness rising. Feel the hurt.

And now remember that the next time you interact with someone (especially if it’s a faceless group of people) who disagree with you. And don’t be that guy. Fairly represent your opponent. Don’t attack straw-men. Refuse red meat speeches. I don’t know, maybe treat someone else the way that you’d like to be treated. I feel like I’ve heard that somewhere before.

—

Photo source: here